Outrage will not bring back Syria’s children

There’s Only One Way for the Catastrophes in Syria to End, and It’s Not Through Violence

by Vijay Prashad

( August 25, 2016, Boston, Sri Lanka Guardian) Pictures of children, dead and alive, from the embattled city of Aleppo are heartbreaking. Whether it is Omran Dagneesh, who survived Syrian air strikes, or his brother Ali, who died, or Mohamad Tha’er Taher, who was killed by rebel shelling in June, the killing of children continues to rankle the world.

Nobody in this battle has clean hands. The fate of hundreds of thousands of people rests on the brutality of guns. Diplomats until now have been unable to create a peace to save them.

Bewilderment is the general sensibility among Syria’s neighboring countries and in Syria itself. Where is the exit from this madness? Hundreds of thousands of people trapped inside and around Aleppo. Bombs, shells, gunfire—that is the soundtrack for the people of this great city. It has been reduced to this meagerness, this brutality.

Aleppo, for the past few years, has been cut in half – West Aleppo controlled by the government, while East Aleppo is with various rebel groups. Both sides have been hit hard by the violence. The Old City, a UNESCO world heritage site, is the frontline. It is in ruins.

Nothing pains us more than death or injury to children. Images of Aylan Kurdi’s body lying dead on a beach in Turkey rattled large numbers of people. Now comes images of those who remained, for security is not given to these children either in flight or at home. Estimates of the dead suggest that of the half a million killed in this five-year conflict about 50,000 were children.

UNICEF’s chief Anthony Lake watched images of Omran Dagneesh and said, “Empathy is not enough. Outrage is not enough. Empathy and outrage must be matched by action.”

Action?

But what action is possible? Lake was Bill Clinton’s National Security Adviser in the 1990s. It was Lake, with the urging of U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Madeleine Albright, who proposed a military plan to go after Serbia. Lake and Clinton’s hawkish team pursued a policy of military intervention that culminated in the 1999 NATO bombing and dismemberment of Yugoslavia. Is this the action that Lake would like to see?

What would U.S. or NATO armed action look like in Syria today? Washington insider Dennis Ross (with Andrew Tabler) asked the U.S. to “punish the Syrian government for violating the truce by using drones and cruise missiles to hit the Syrian military’s airfields, bases and artillery positions where no Russian troops are present.” The U.N.-brokered truces have held here and there and have been crucial to the delivery of humanitarian goods into many towns. These truces are crucial.

U.N. Under-Secretary for Humanitarian Affairs Stephen O’Brien said recently that if the U.N. cannot secure a truce in Aleppo then the world will witness “humanitarian catastrophe unparalleled in the over five years of bloodshed” in Syria. Ross and Tabler suggest it is Assad’s forces that break the ceasefire and therefore punishment of his assets will secure the ceasefire. But this is not the case at all. Ceasefire violations and inhumane sieges have been general across Syria. The point is not the “red line” for the strike, for the warfare liberals such as Ross have sought several such “red lines” to urge a strike on Syria, whether attacks on civilians, use of chemical weapons or now violations of the truce.

If Assad and the Russians withdrew from the Aleppo battlefield, what would be the outcome? Aleppo would then be overrun by rebel formations. Those with the most muscle, who have demonstrated that they would drive an agenda are the least appealing: the newly renamed al-Qaeda affiliate (Jabhat Fateh al-Sham), Turkish and Saudi proxies as well as the Islamic State. Civilian-run groups will be unable to hold off this onslaught.

When the al-Qaeda affiliate – Jabhat al-Nusra – took Idlib last year, it set aside its less militarily powerful allies. In Ma’arat al-Nu’man, other forces tried to assert themselves with protests, but Nusra shut them down. Nusra went to battle against the 13th Division of the Free Syrian Army, just as it had done in southern Idlib against Jamal Marouf and the Syrian Revolutionaries Front. None of these groups could withstand the ferocity of Nusra. If the Syrian army withdraws, it is the new incarnation of Nusra that will seize Aleppo. Any expectation that liberal or left forces will be able to assert themselves – given the balance of forces – is dangerously naive.

The sensibility of the dominant rebels is provided by one of its sheikhs, Abdallah al-Muhaysini from Saudi Arabia’s heartland. Al-Muhaysini has recently called for the unity of all fighters under the flag of the new Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, anointed by al-Qaeda. His enormous influence is outsized and dangerous. When the group – in its earlier incarnation – seized the Abu al-Duhur Air Base in Idlib, al-Muhaysini was there. He egged the fighters to kill the Syrian army captives (they executed 60 Syrian soldiers). He used harsh, prejudicial words to describe these fighters – Nusairi and Rafida, nasty words used against Alawites and Shiites respectively. This is the tenor of what commands the opposition – Saudi sheikhs with a temperament of poisonous hatred.

Divided Syria

What about the Syrians themselves? Many of those among the liberals and the left who urge Western military intervention assume that Syrian society is easily identifiable – the mass on one side and Assad on the other. But this is a false sense of reality. Syria is deeply divided, not only along lines of sect, ethnicity and class, but also along lines of politics. It is this divided Syria that is not being heard – for what it says is a mirror of the war itself. “Listen to Syrians,” goes the refrain. But which Syrians? There is no homogeneous Syrian public opinion; it is fractured. As Syrian economist Omar Dahi told me, “the din of war silences all reasonable voices on all sides.”

I ask Dahi about the urgency of action, the need to do something, the call to arms. “All the main sides and their backers should acknowledge there is no military solution,” Dahi says. “Not because it isn’t possible or even because the price of victory is too steep, but precisely because the society is divided.” Syrians are “unhappy with the choices they have been offered,” says Dahi. Calls for further military intervention, he says patiently, are not going to help. They will “further inflame the war and militarization.”

Diplomacy

Ross and the warfare liberals ignore the ugliness on the ground. For them, Syria is a chessboard. A weaker Assad, they feel, would put more leverage in the hands of the U.S. against the Russians. They see Syria (and Ukraine) as merely the battlefield for a large confrontation with Russia. Such an outlook is narrow and it shows little concern for the terrible situation in the country.

Inside Syria and in its neighborhood the situation is dire. Even Turkey has now come to recognize the uncomfortable reality: namely that a peace process that is as expansive as possible is more important than the immediate defeat of Assad (which was Turkey’s position in 2011). Turkey’s Prime Minister Binali Yildirim has said that Assad’s removal is not a prerequisite for serious talks toward peace. The new relationship between Turkey, Iran and Russia – however fractious – is indicative of the frustration with the stalemate and the dangerous spiral of violence this policy had created. Assad, the Turks say, could have a “transitional” role in the process. As part of this new arrangement, Turkey has also said that it would more forcefully close its border, shutting off supply lines for the rebels. Turkey’s entry into Syria to seize Jarabulus to fight ISIS – with both Western and Russian assent – cements this new direction. It provides Turkey with what it wants – namely to block the creation of a Kurdish enclave – and it puts Turkey directly against ISIS.

What the Russian intervention did was to embolden the Syrian government. Western aerial bombardment against Damascus could no longer happen (Ross and his warfare liberals tried to argue around this, to no avail). With that off the table, the Syrian government and its allies moved to break the siege of government-held West Aleppo from Homs. That battle could not have taken place without the sword of aerial bombardment off its neck. Assad’s armies might have swept up the western edge of Syria, but they are not any more confident now than they were a few years ago. Morale remains low and recruits are not easy to come by. Reinforcements from Iran and Lebanon continue to make the difference in hard-fought encounters with the rebels. Aerial bombardment by Russia has been essential.

Now, if the Turks close their border, the rebels will have a hard time resupplying themselves. It would mean that even an exhausted Syrian army could make gains against the rebels. It is unlikely that Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf Arab states would be able to come to the rescue of their proxies – Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen is also at a stalemate. Its enemy there – Abdullah Saleh – has made his own noises about relations with Russia.

What does this mean for the Syrian people? No good news is on the horizon. The fighting will continue. The new rebel platform – anchored by the al-Qaeda affiliate – refuses to come to the table. Pragmatism is not its mood. The Syrian government will continue to batter at East Aleppo and elsewhere, hoping to break the confidence of the Islamist rebels. More blood will be shed and more refugees will try to flee the country. Anthony Lake is right in one respect: outrage will not make this war end. Action is needed. But the question remains: what kind of action?

Syria’s government has shown that it is willing to come into a peace process. Russian and Iranian pressure is essential to ensure that it takes the negotiations seriously. Turkey’s indication that it will now close its border is a very good sign. It means that resupplying of the Islamist rebels – many Turkey’s proxies – will be harder to do. U.N. Resolution 2178 calls upon member states to no longer fund “foreign terrorist fighters,” which should put some pressure on countries such as Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia – from where funds to the Islamist rebels come. The ground is now slowly being set for the U.N. to call for a new dialogue to build on the humanitarian truces. These have been the only effective way to bring relief to a worn-out population and to rebuild trust in a divided society – which is, after all, the basis of peace.

---

Vijay Prashad is professor of international studies at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut. He is the author of 18 books, including Arab Spring, Libyan Winter (AK Press, 2012), The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South (Verso, 2013) and The Death of a Nation and the Future of the Arab Revolution (University of California Press, 2016). His columns appear at AlterNet every Wednesday.

ANALYSIS: Iran coordinating between Turkey and Assad during incursion

Sources tell MEE closer ties between Ankara and Tehran helped pave the way for the Turkish incursion into Syria

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (R) shakes hands with his Iranian counterpart Hassan Rouhani 16 April, 2016 (AFP)

Jonathan Steele-Thursday 25 August 2016 

TEHRAN - As Turkey increases its tank force inside northern Syria, the Iranian government is preserving a conspicuous but significant silence. News of the incursion is being widely covered in Iranian media but there has been no reaction from officials.

Iran’s relations with Turkey have been warming up dramatically in recent weeks and analysts suggest there is some embarrassment in Tehran over how to handle the incursion publicly. 

The Iranian media have reported the Syrian government’s condemnation of the incursion as aggression but have not yet quoted any statements from their own government.

Iranian relations with Turkey are at a delicate stage. Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Hossein Jaberi Ansari, was in Ankara on Tuesday a few hours before Turkey sent the first tanks into Syria and it is not known whether he was warned in advance. 

His visit followed a surprise stop-over in Tehran by Turkey’s foreign minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, last week on his way to India. This, in turn, followed a meeting by Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, with Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara on 12 August.

The unprecedented flurry of visits since the abortive Turkish coup is not just confined to bilateral issues. Ansari’s visit was officially billed as centering on the future of Syria and Middle East Eye has learned that Iran has become the main conduit for contacts between Erdogan and Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad. A source close to the Iranian leadership told MEE: “The Turks and Syrians are co-ordinating through the Iranians”.

Turkey has insisted on Assad’s resignation for more than four years of the country’s civil war but it started to change its stance on Syria before the abortive coup on 15 July. Since the coup, these moves have accelerated with several statements from the Turkish Prime Minister, Binali Yildirim, saying that Assad could remain during a transition period. 

The future of Syria’s Kurds is clearly part of the emerging new equation. The attacks by the Syrian army and air force on the Syrian Kurdish people’s defence militias (YPG) in the town of Hasakah in recent days look like a signal from Assad to Erdogan that he understands Erdogan’s concerns about the growing strength of the Syrian Kurds along a long section of Turkey’s southern border. Until recently, the Syrian army ignored the YPG and even saw them as potential allies in the war against the Islamic State (IS) group.

Assad’s ultimate aim is to persuade Erdogan to stop allowing arms supplies to cross from Turkey to non-IS opposition groups fighting him in Idlib and Aleppo.   

“Turkey won’t immediately halt its arm supplies to the rebels but gradually there’ll be a quid pro quo for Assad’s strikes on the YPG in Hasakah,” the leadership source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told MEE. 

He also revealed details of Iran’s quick reaction to the Turkish coup while it was still evolving. It has been widely reported that Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif tweeted solidarity with Erdogan and condemnation of the coup before it collapsed, a move which impressed the Turkish leader and differed markedly from the US and European reaction, which Turkey has said has been muted and only came after the outcome of the coup attempt was clear. 

According to the source, Zarif’s midnight tweets were prompted by the office of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 

“Zarif and Rouhani were cautious and initially hesitated how to react to news of the coup attempt. They had to be pressed by the supreme leader’s office more than once before the tweet went out,” he said.

Iran’s quick condemnation of the coup attempt was based on one of Iran’s basic foreign policy principles, according to Foad Izadi, a professor in Tehran University’s Faculty of World Studies. 

“Military coups are unacceptable,” he told MEE. “A second principle is that you don’t send forces across international borders without the agreement of a country’s government.”

However, Iran has stayed silent on Turkey’s incursion into northern Syria, with only its allies in Damascus issuing a statement denouncing the incursion into their sovereign territory.

Inside Donald Trump’s new strategy to counter the view of many that he is ‘racist’

At a rally in Fredericksburg, Va., on Saturday, Aug. 20, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump made a special appeal to African American voters, telling them that the GOP party "must do better" in its outreach to them. (Reuters)

By Philip Rucker, Robert Costa and Jenna Johnson August 23

Donald Trump is rapidly trying to turn around his presidential campaign with a vigorous and at times strained effort to shed a label applied to him by a substantial portion of the electorate: racist.

Guided by his new campaign leadership, the Republican nominee has ordered a full-fledged strategy to court black and Latino voters and is mobilizing scores of minority figures to advocate publicly for his candidacy.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump repeated his pitch to minority voters in Ohio on Aug. 22, asking them "What do you have to lose?" and promising to "straighten it out" in inner cities. (The Washington Post)

Read More

Leftists For Trump

in Imperialism — by Thomas C Mountain — August 25, 2016

I am a leftist for Trump. As an alumni of “Leftists for Bush” and living these past 10 years in the Horn of Africa, I cant help myself. I am irresistibly drawn to “Leftists for Trump”.

Of course if I was living in the good old U-S-of A I would be in the streets demonstrating against The Trumpster. But then I would be in the streets marching against Lady Hillary as well.

Since I live in Africa and having seen what evil mi’Lady has wrought here I find myself rooting for Senor Trump. God knows what he would really do, but at least in his more lucid moments he has the courage to declare that what the Queen of Chaos wrought in Libya is an ongoing unnatural disaster.

This unnatural disaster called “NATO vs Libya” is one that just keeps on giving, as the residents of Tunisia or the hapless denizens of North Eastern Nigeria have learned thanks to ISIS and Boko Haram’s Libyan weaponry.

Of course there are the US supplied cluster bombs being dropped on Yemeni children, all part of an agenda supported by Madame Clinton. Bush barely came close to any such crimes against my adopted continent of Africa, from whence we were all migrants in times most ancient.

Hillary scares us, especially out here in the Horn of Africa. We are living abreast the strategically critical Ba’ab Al Mandeb, so aptly named “The Gate of Tears” by the Arabs, through which passes the commerce carried out between the worlds largest trading partners, Europe and Asia. The day the USA loses control of the Ba’ab Al Mandeb marks the beginning of the end of Pax Americana’s world empire.

The USA has lost its economic domination and is left with its military as its only claim to super power status. So as the critical choke point Ba’ab Al Mandeb goes so goes Pax Americana. This should explain the War in Yemen and the War in Somalia. What’s left, the War Against Eritrea?

As war torn as our region is, with Hillary in charge we can only expect an escalation of the most brutal forms of gun boat diplomacy, as in US aircraft carriers bombing all recalcitrant natives, be they Christian or Muslim.

Its so awfully true that Lady Hillary never met a war that didn’t lift her spirits and with all to many wars bringing joy to our presumptive President. Be it the USA backed rebel army in South Sudan, the slaughter of demonstrators by America’s Ethiopian gendarmes or drones and cluster bombs against the Somali and Yemeni people, Trump has claimed to be against such disasters as a matter of principle. Were as Mrs. Clinton is foaming at the bit, raring to bringing us rebellious Africans to heal.

We can only imagine Madame President Clinton’s rage when Eritrea, a small socialist country founded on the motto “Never Kneel Down” is faced with her legendary imperial wrath for refusing to do just that, kneel down or be destroyed.

Remember Sirte? Where while trying to escape, Gaddafi met his death, and that while on his knees? “We came, we saw, he died” Madame Clinton cackled. This horrific brainchild of Secretary Clinton foretells what will be Africa’s fate under her Imperial Rule.

So “Leftists for Trump” is my cry, brought to you by the remainents of “Leftists for Bush”. Though I have to admit that this election has stirred a unique interest in a die hard “democracy-phobe” like myself what with the likes of the billionaire Koch Brothers backing the Democrats against the almost Libertarian utterances of Donald Trump, he of what used to be the Party of the “New Jim Crow”.

Honestly, out here in the climate disaster wracked Horn of Africa, we really don’t give a shit how bad you’all in AmeriKKKa have it. If having Trump elected President means less of your murder and mayhem in our part of the world, then here’s to “Leftists for Trump”, if that is what it takes.

Thomas C. Mountain is an independent journalist in Eritrea, living and reporting from here since 2006. He can be reached at thomascmountain on Facebook or at thomascmountain at g mail dot com

China expresses concern about Indian missiles on border

A man walks inside a conference room used for meetings between military commanders of China and India, at the Indian side of the Indo-China border at Bumla, in Arunachal Pradesh, November 11, 2009. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi/Files

A signboard is seen from the Indian side of the Indo-China border at Bumla, in Arunachal Pradesh, November 11, 2009.REUTERS/Adnan Abidi/Files

Thu Aug 25, 2016

China's Defence Ministry said on Thursday that it hoped India could put more efforts into regional peace and stability rather than the opposite, in response to Indian plans to put advanced cruise missiles along the disputed border with China.

Indian military officials say the plan is to equip regiments deployed on the China border with the BrahMos missile, made by an Indo-Russian joint venture, as part of ongoing efforts to build up military and civilian infrastructure capabilities there.

The two nuclear-armed neighbours have been moving to gradually ease long-existing tensions between them.

Leaders of Asia's two giants pledged last year to cool a festering border dispute, which dates back to a brief border war in 1962, though the disagreement remains unresolved.

Asked about the missile plans at a monthly news briefing, Chinese Defence Ministry spokesman Wu Qian said maintaining peace and stability in the border region was an "important consensus" reached by both countries.

"We hope that the Indian side can do more to benefit peace and stability along the border and in the region, rather than the opposite," Wu said, without elaborating.

China lays claim to more than 90,000 sq km (35,000 sq miles) ruled by India in the eastern sector of the Himalayas. India says China occupies 38,000 sq km (14,600 sq miles) of its territory on the Aksai Chin plateau in the west.

India is also suspicious of China's support for its arch-rival, Pakistan.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi will meet Chinese President Xi Jinping when he visits China next month to attend the G20 summit.

Modi's government has ordered BrahMos Aerospace, which produces the missiles, to accelerate sales to a list of five countries topped by Vietnam, according to a government note viewed by Reuters and previously unreported.

Modi visits Vietnam, which is embroiled in a dispute over the South China Sea with Beijing, before arriving in China.

(Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Simon Cameron-Moore)

ICC to War Criminals: Destroying Shrines Is Worse Than Rape

The international tribunal is about to convict a Malian jihadi for destruction of cultural heritage. It’s staying silent about his alleged responsibility for horrific sexual violence.



BY MARIE FORESTIER-AUGUST 22, 2016

TIMBUKTU, Mali — When the first-ever trial of a jihadi at the International Criminal Court (ICC) began this week in The Hague, the charges were of the destruction of historic Muslim shrines in this ancient city on the edge of the Sahara. What won’t be litigated are the more than 100 allegations of sexual violence and rape that occurred during the same 10-month reign of terror in 2012 and 2013, when al Qaeda-linked militants overran parts of northern Mali and declared their own state.

Yet the man on trial, Ahmad al-Faqi al-Mahdi, is allegedly responsible for both sets of crimes. As a top police official during the jihadi occupation of Timbuktu, Mahdi not only supervised the razing of religious shrines; he oversaw the systematic torture, rape, and sexual enslavement of women under the militants’ control, residents and independent investigators say.

Thirty-three victims have already come forward as part of a complaint filed last year before the High Court of Bamako, in the Malian capital. Their testimony, as well as the results of an extensive investigation by the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), was shared with Hague officials.

Yet ICC prosecutors chose to focus solely on the destruction of cultural heritage. Mahdi was caught on video tearing apart the door of a mosque and encouraging his men to demolish shrines that were protected UNESCO World Heritage sites. From an evidentiary perspective, it’s a slam-dunk — indeed, Mahdi will plead guilty in what is expected to be a rare win for a court whose reputation has suffered in recent years. But by building its case exclusively around the shrines, some feel that the ICC is missing a symbolically important opportunity to punish more heinous crimes.

“The office of the [ICC] prosecutor should have continued its investigation to establish all the facts,” said Florent Geel, the Africa director at FIDH. “Since its first proceedings, the ICC has chosen to prosecute cases based on charges it can defend and prove.… This is unfortunate since a FIDH investigation indicates that these sexual crimes have probably been the most massive crimes committed in Timbuktu.”

Alimata, whose name has been changed to protect her identity, will never forget the day in 2012, during the city’s Islamist occupation, when armed men dragged her away to a police station that was likely under Mahdi’s command. She was 15 at the time, and the jihadis detained her for two days before declaring her married to one fighter. Alimata’s designated “husband” kept her prisoner in a house for a month, where he raped her on a daily basis. Sometimes he allowed other armed men — as many as five at a time — to gang-rape her as well.

“He was beating me all the time. Especially when I tried to resist him, he punched me and kicked me,” Alimata recalled in an interview at the home of a local activist in Timbuktu.

Alimata’s ordeal was not an isolated case. Dozens of other women and teenage girls recounted similar stories to FIDH investigators of abduction, forced marriage, and rape by Islamist occupiers.

Timbuktu’s descent into chaos began in January 2012, when nomadic Tuaregs from the north joined forces with several Islamist groups, including the al Qaeda-linked organization Ansar Dine, to launch a rebellion against the Malian government. They declared an independent state in much of the northern part of the country and imposed a strict version of sharia, or Islamic law. Music was outlawed, unmarried men and women were forbidden from speaking to each other, and shopkeepers could be arrested for selling tobacco. The jihadis imposed cruel punishments on those who broke their rules, including public floggings and amputations.

But while the jihadis enforced their uncompromising moral code in public, they engaged in all manner of horrific abuses in private. According to a U.N. official in Timbuktu who spoke on the condition of anonymity, roughly 100 women have come forward with allegations of sexual violence by jihadis since French forces liberated the city in January 2013. Given the stigma attached to such allegations in Mali’s conservative Muslim society, the real number of victims is almost certainly higher.

At the time these abuses took place, Mahdi was one of the most powerful men in the city. He served first as the head of the Hisbah, or morality police, and later, the jihadis’ main police force, known as the Islamic Police, according to FIDH. In both positions, he was partly responsible for enforcing the jihadis’ strict rules. Mahdi appears in videos of sessions of the Islamic Court, the jihadis’ highest judicial authority, which validated forced marriages, among other Islamist impositions. (As head of the Islamic Police, Mahdi implemented the Islamic Court’s decisions.) It is therefore difficult to argue that he didn’t know about the sexual violence perpetrated by police officers who served under him.

Yet the ICC chose not to make these allegations a part of its case against Mahdi. Because they were able to rely heavily on video evidence of the destruction of monuments, prosecutors never conducted a thorough on-the-ground investigation of other crimes alleged to have taken place in Timbuktu during the occupation. They didn’t even interview victims of sexual violence, despite having been handed evidence gathered by FIDH, according to a source with knowledge of the investigation.

Richard Nsanzabaganwa, an advisor to the ICC prosecutor’s office, said a broader investigation that encompasses other alleged crimes, including sexual violence, “is still in progress.” But he admitted that the ICC prosecutor doesn’t have evidence that is solid enough to broaden the charges against Mahdi. And now that the trial is underway, any subsequent charges would need to be brought as a separate case.
Building a case around sexual violence is not easy, especially given the ICC’s limited resources. “It’s difficult to prove sexual violence,” said Kevin Heller, a professor of criminal law at SOAS University of London. “You have to investigate, to get witnesses. It’s not like cultural monuments that people saw. This is time-consuming and expensive.”

Moreover, ICC prosecutors have long emphasized the potential deterrent effect of prosecuting those who destroy cultural heritage. “It’s important to send the message that this is a grave crime that must be punished and that attacking the identity of people and their values cannot be left as a secondary crime,” Nsanzabaganwa said.

Still, there are those who see an element of self-service in the ICC’s prosecutorial strategy. The international tribunal has suffered a series of embarrassing setbacks in recent years. Not only did its case against Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy, William Ruto, fall apart because of what some have argued was an unwise prosecutorial strategy, but it has also watched its most high-profile indictee, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, evade arrest even in countries that are bound by the Rome Statute, which created the ICC.

The ICC’s reputational slide began during the tenure of chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo, whose term ended in 2012. His successor, former Gambian Justice Minister Fatou Bensouda, has a shot at a clear victory with this trial, which is expected to last only a week because Mahdi is pleading guilty in the face of overwhelming evidence. Yet some critics allege that she has been overly focused on getting a quick conviction.

“The prosecutor has it upside down. She established an accusation from a political opportunity,” said Juan Branco, who served as a liaison officer in the ICC prosecutor’s office in 2010-2011. “In a context of a tight budget and long procedures, [the prosecutor] reduced the charges to shorten the proceeding.”

The emphasis on speed and decisiveness has arguably come at the cost of the ICC’s own commitment to bring perpetrators of sexual violence to justice. It’s been a little more than two years since the office of the ICC prosecutor adopted a new policy regarding the prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes.
According to this policy, the prosecutor must offer explicit justification for failure to prosecute such crimes when convincing evidence points to them. Yet in the case of Mahdi, prosecutors have offered no such justification, saying only that the investigation is ongoing. In fact, the new policy has yet to translate into a single new case.

In Timbuktu, Alimata longs for justice. Like others who survived sexual violence during the Islamist occupation, she wants her rapists to be punished and her suffering to be acknowledged.

“I want reparation, and I want to open a shop,” she said. “I need to be self-sufficient because no one wants to marry me since I was married by force to a jihadi.”

She says she would even testify before a court — either in Mali or in The Hague — if only one was willing to hear her.

Image credit: ROBIN VAN LONKHUIJSEN/AFP/Getty Images 

Philippines: Duterte releases ‘matrix’ showing senator’s alleged drug ties

Former Justice Secretary and now Senator Leila De Lima, right, talks to Philippine National Police Chief Ronald "Bato" Dela Rosa prior to the start of the Senate probe on the rising number of deaths related to President Rodrigo Duterte's "War on Drugs". Pic: AP

 25th August 2016

PHILIPPINE President Rodrigo Duterte on Thursday released a “matrix” chart that he claims reveals Sen Leila de Lima’s alleged links to the country’s narcotics trade.

The senator is among the harshest critics of the Duterte administration’s war on drugs, which has resulted in nearly 1,800 deaths in seven weeks.

According to the Philippines Star, the chart details De Lima’s alleged involvement in the drug trade behind the walls of Mutinlupa city’s New Bilibid Prison in a network that includes other politicians and senior officials, such as Pangasinan Rep. Amado Espino Jr.

View image on Twitter

 

Follow

People's Television

 

✔@PTVph

BREAKING: #PresidentDuterte releases 'NBP drug link matrix' | via@lalaababilonia

2:30 PM - 24 Aug 2016

•  
  2727 Retweets
•  
  2929 likes

De Lima’s driver Ronie Dayan, former Justice Undersecretary Francisco “Toti” Baraan III, Pangasinan Provincial Administrator Rafael “Raffy” Baraan, retired Gen. Franklin Bucayo and Pangasinan Board Member Raul Sison, were also named in the chart.

Duterte had earlier alleged that De Lima was having an affair with Dayan, who he said had been involved in moving drug money to fund her election campaign. Dayan was mentioned as a “case fixer” of prominent politicians in Urbiztondo, Pangasinan in the matrix.

SEE ALSO: Philippines: Nearly 1,800 drug suspects slain in 7 weeks, inquiry hears

The president also said De Lima was the highest-ranking official involved in the syndicate.

De Lima, who had supervised the facility during her time as justice secretary under the administration of former president Benigno Aquino III, has denied the claims, saying she had been the one who ordered raids on the prison.

She also pointed out that Congress had already investigated the alleged prevalence of drugs at the prison in 2014.

“I never benefited with anything from drugs. I am not a protector, coddler or drug lord. Maybe others will not believe, but later they would. And those who know me, they know I will never do that,” she said.

SEE ALSO: Duterte: Drug ‘matrix’ will show De Lima’s involvement

De Lima headed the Senate committee leading the investigation into widespread killings amid Duterte’s crackdown on drugs in the country.

Meanwhile, Former Pangasinan administrator Rafael Baraan said he was shocked about being included in a “drug matrix”, the Inquirer reported.

“This is the biggest and most fantastic joke I’ve ever encountered in my whole life,” he was quoted as saying.

Microplastics should be banned in cosmetics to save oceans, MPs say

Environmental audit committee calls for ban after hearing that microbeads harm marine life and enter the food chain

 Close-up of microplastics and microbeads found in river water samples. Photograph: Fred Dott/Greenpeace

John Vidal Environment editor-Wednesday 24 August 2016

Cosmetics companies must be banned from using plastic microbeads in scrubs, toothpaste and beauty products because of the marine pollution they are causing, say a group of MPs.

Members of the environmental audit committee have called for a ban within 18 months after hearing that trillions of tiny pieces of plastic are accumulating in the world’s oceans, lakes and estuaries, harming marine life and entering the food chain. About 86 tonnes of microplastics are released into the environment every year in the UK from facial exfoliants alone, they were told.

Microplastic pollution comes from the fragmentation of larger pieces of plastic waste, small synthetic fibres from clothing and the microbeads used in cosmetics and other products. The microbeads in scrubs, shower gels and toothpastes are an avoidable part of this plastic pollution problem. A single shower could result in 100,000 plastic particles entering the ocean, said the committee chair, Mary Creagh.

“We need a full, legal ban, preferably at an international level as pollution does not respect borders,” she added. “If this isn’t possible after our vote to leave the EU, then the government should introduce a national ban. The best way to reduce this pollution is to prevent plastic being flushed into the sea in the first place.”

Plastic microbeads. About 86 tonnes of microplastics are released into the UK environment each year from facial exfoliants alone, MPs were told. Photograph: Hennel/Alamy

Many large cosmetics companies have made voluntary commitments to phase out microbeads by 2020. But the committee said a national ban, preferably starting within 18 months, would have advantages for consumers and the industry in terms of consistency, universality and confidence. It is a significant and avoidable environmental problem. Addressing it would show commitment to reducing the wider problem of microplastics.

Microbeads are part of the wider issue of microplastics. Their small size means that they can be ingested by marine life and have the potential to transfer chemicals to and from the marine environment.

Between 80,000 and 219,000 tonnes of microplastics enter the European marine environment a year. 

Opportunities to capture microplastics through enhanced washing-machine filtration systems and improved waste and water sewage treatment processes must also be explored.

The committee called for urgent research, saying: “If someone eats six oysters, it is likely they will have eaten 50 particles of microplastics. Relatively little research has been done on potential impacts to human health or the marine ecology.”

Most of the world’s ocean plastics by weight are large pieces of debris (eg fishing equipment, bottles and plastic bags). However, the dominant type of debris by quantity is microplastics. It is estimated that 15-51tn microplastic particles have accumulated in the ocean, with microplastics reported at the sea surface and on shorelines worldwide. They are also present in remote locations including deep sea sediments and arctic sea ice.

Richard Thompson, director of the international marine litter research unit at Plymouth University, said: “Microbeads in cosmetics are an avoidable source of microplastic to the environment and so legislation would be a welcome step.”

Tamara Galloway, at the University of Exeter, agreed. “Pollution from microbeads is a truly global problem,” she said. “Tides and currents can carry pollution across oceans to countries a long distance from where they were originally released. Ideally, any legislation to control them should be on an international level.”

Buddhism has made co-existence possible

DR.Vickramabahu Karunaratne-2016-08-25

However, after the democratic revolution started with the January 2015 Presidential Elections, Sri Lanka is considered by some, as a good role model of peaceful co-existence, where unity, peace and harmony among the people take the foremost place. Of course, still there are many issues here that need to be addressed in nationality relations. But the good thing is the government is aware of them, though some sensitive issues require careful attention.

Many say Buddhism is the religion of 70% of the people of this country. It is incorrect; that is really the percentage of the Sinhala people. Of course Buddhism is the largest and the Buddhist vision, of meththa, karuna, muditha and upekkha, has played a pre-eminent role in the lives of the people here. Many pundits say this has helped sustain a tolerant society. In spite of fascistic tendencies that challenge minority groups, it is a popular belief that the peaceful co-existence of all faiths and their followers in Sri Lanka, is primarily because of the inclusive and accommodative qualities of Buddhism. They say, intrinsic values that it had nurtured amongst its practitioners have undoubtedly established peaceful co-existence as a hallmark of its culture.

The majority community
However, there had been a substantial group within the majority community which had attempted from time to time to hijack religion for communal and sometimes for corrupt commercial purposes. Leaders of all religions preached that religious ideals cannot co-exist with racism. This is voiced over and over again. However, there were many groups with parochial and racist objectives which had contested even the elections. Almost all such racist attempts had been rejected at the polls by the majority Sinhala community itself. At the last General Election held in August last year, one such extremist group, the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) contested and lost in all the seats. Furthermore, the former government was defeated and chased home by the people, because of its continued fascistic politics! Though there are communal politicians in all the political parties in Sri Lanka, the ordinary masses, have never endorsed religious or communal divisions amongst the people. The over-all prospects for co-existence and unity in Sri Lanka are, therefore, quite promising and could be further strengthened.

The present government headed by President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is working to strengthen national integration and unity, while respecting diversity. In fact a separate Ministry of National Integration and Reconciliation has now been created with the country's President as the Minister in charge and A. H. M. Fowzie as the State Minister. This Ministry has already commenced several programmes through schools and sports aimed at fostering closer interaction and unity. Many point out those vast sections of the Western media are guilty of committing the greater crime of continuous baseless attacks on the Muslim communities. Muslim youths are accused by sections of the Western media of getting radicalized. But the media do not blame those who are invading Muslim countries on false pretexts, as exposed by the Chilcot inquiry, as the root cause of possible radicalization.

SAMPANTHAN TELLS GOVT TO WALK THE TALK RE PTA AND POLITICAL PRISONERS

25/08/2016

“Government has consistently undertaken to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act in view of the several obnoxious provisions contained in the said Act.

Several Tamil persons are held in custody under the provisions of the said Prevention of Terrorism Act for various offences arising out of the armed conflict.

It is seven years since the armed conflict came to an end. Though much time has lapsed, there is no finality to the issue of these Tamil prisoners in custody and several persons are in custody for long periods. These prisoners have been staging various protests and demonstrations from time to time demanding their release.

Several others who should have faced charges for much graver offences, have not been brought before the law while very many others have been released. This has happened recently and also after the insurrections in 1971 and 1988-89. The prisoners in custody genuinely complain that the treatment meted out to them is discriminatory and unequal. They have thus been denied equal treatment under the Law.

It is compulsory that the Government states its position on this matter and takes action to release the said prisoners. Their continuance in custody causes immense harm and harassment to their families, and impedes the process of reconciliation. The Government is seen as being insensitive to the genuine grievances of these prisoners.”

As this House is aware, this is a matter which has been pending for a long time. This is a matter we have discussed with His Excellency the President and his views in regard to this matter have always been positive. We have discussed this matter with the Hon. Prime Minister and his views in regard to this matter have always been positive. There seemed to be some difficulty with the Attorney-General’s Department earlier on. Now, there is a change in the Attorney-General’s Department. The third person in command who may bring this matter under his control is the Minister of Justice. We have been talking to him quite frequently. He has not been negative, but I do not know whether action taken by him is not positive enough to bring about the desired and a desirable result to this issue.

What are the obstacles?

We need to know, Sir, what the obstacle is to an acceptable decision being arrived at in regard to this matter. His Excellency the President pardoned his assailant and that man has been given his freedom. That really indicates his thinking.

I want to pose the question as to why others should be treated differently. It is seven years since the conflict ended. Persons have been in custody for long periods of time; some for about 10 – 15 years. There seems to be a justification for their release.

It is accepted widely that the Prevention of Terrorism Act is an obnoxious law and needs to be repealed. I want to, Sir, refer to certain matters which have been decided upon before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. Paragraph 12 of the Resolution adopted on the 1st of October, 2015 states, I quote:

“Welcomes the commitment of the Government of Sri Lanka to review the Public Security Ordinance Act and to review and repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act, and to replace it with anti-terrorism legislation in accordance with contemporary international best practices; ”

So, the Sri Lankan Government has given a commitment to the UN Human Rights Council that the Prevention of Terrorism Act would be repealed. Why? Because the law is obnoxious. The law contains provisions under which there cannot be a fair trial. The rules of natural justice cannot be ensured under this law. That is why the Sri Lankan Government has given this commitment to the UN Human Rights Council.

Recently, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights made a statement in June, 2016 and what did he have to say? He said, “The fate of remaining security detainees held under the PTA remains a major concern for the Tamil Community.”

“In December 2015, the Government released on bail 39 individuals detained without charge, but around 250 detainees are believed to remain in detention. The Government has made indictments in 117 of these cases and in January, created a special High Court Bench to expedite proceedings. The Government had promised that the Attorney-General’s Department would make decisions by the end of March, but there have been no further charges or releases this year. This situation is not only traumatic for the individuals concerned. Some of whom resorted to hunger strikes and for their families but a source of growing frustration among Tamil political parties and the community at large.”

“At the end of his visit in February 2016, the High Commissioner urged the Government to quickly find a formula to charge or release the remaining security-related detainees.” You will see, Mr. Deputy Chairman of Committees, even the Human Rights Council and the High Commissioner have quite clearly expressed grave concern in regard to the situation of these detainees and they say that it is a matter of concern not merely to the detainees or their families but also to the Tamil people and to the Tamil political parties. The High Commissioner is aware that the political parties have also taken up this issue not merely with the UN Human Rights Council and the High Commissioner himself but also in this august Assembly on several occasions.

PTA: Please walk the talk

There was a Statement made by the Sri Lankan Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Hon. Mangala Samaraweera also in June, 2016 at the UN Human Rights Council, where he said, “A Committee is now putting the final touches to the first draft of the new counter-terrorism legislation that will replace the much criticized and the much abused Prevention of Terrorism Act, in keeping with Sri Lanka’s commitments and obligations to human rights and countering terrorism.” Even the Sri Lankan Minister of Foreign Affairs described the Prevention of Terrorism Act as the much criticized and the much abused Act. He has said this in his Statement before the UN Human Rights Council. How can anyone be held in lawful custody under such a law? I want to pose that question. It is a law which you say is obnoxious, it has been criticized by everyone, not merely by people in this country, by the international community, and it is a law which has been abused. How can anyone be held legally in custody under that law? How can anyone be charged under that law? How can anyone be convicted under that law? It is our submission that all persons taken into custody under the Prevention of Terrorism Act must be released because your Government concedes that the law is unjust, is obnoxious and is not a law that should remain on statute books in this country. This is a law that must be repealed. So, I think the time has come for all these people who were taken into custody under this law, whatever their present status maybe, whether they have been charged, they have not been charged, and even if they have been convicted, it would be my very strong submission that all persons taken into custody under an obnoxious law must be released. Sir, it is sometimes said that some of these persons have committed grave offences. Most of them have not been convicted of having committed such grave offences up to now. But, if the law under which they are being charged, the procedure under that law in regard to arresting a person, in regard to investigating a person, in regard to prosecuting a person and in regard to coming to a finding in respect of such person is deficient, then surely such persons must be released. Does that law conform to principles of natural justice? What does it matter, whether the offence is grave or not?

It maybe a grave offence. It may not be such a grave offence. But the fact of the matter is that the provisions of the law under which that person is dealt with are unacceptable. And if the law is unacceptable, it would be my submission Sir, very strongly, that those persons must be released and that there is a compulsory need to look at this matter objectively.

Is KP a favourite fo the government?

What is worst, Sir, is different people have been treated differently. I normally do not refer to persons by name, I do not like to do so. But the prisoners pose the question, “Why has KP not been charged?” He was a favourite of the former Government. Is he a favourite of the present Government? Why is the Government not taking action against him? He is a person who is believed to be on the wanted list of the International Police, Interpol. He is a person who has not merely smuggled arms to this country, he was the chief arms procurer. What has happened to other persons who had held Ministerial office in the former Government – the person who held the position of Chief Minister in the Eastern Province? Have they not committed grave offences? Why do you not charge them? You pick up some youth or people from weaker sections of society and you hold them in custody under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

I do not think, Sir, this should continue any longer. These prisoners want to know, “Are the offences that we have committed graver than the offences committed by the other people?” In 1971 there was an insurrection. In 1988 and 89 there was an insurrection. A large number of persons were taken into custody. They were eventually released. They were sent home. They were pardoned. They took to arms against the State. They conducted an armed insurrection against the State. But you pardoned and sent them home. How can you justify keeping these persons in custody any longer, particularly when you admit that the law under which you are holding them in custody is not a law which conforms to principles of natural justice either by domestic norms or by international norms? Therefore, Sir, I would very strongly urge that these persons must be released. It is our duty to raise this issue on the Floor of this House on behalf of these prisoners.

This government has even lagging behind Rajapaksa

The Tamil people as a whole look upon the reluctance of the Government to act firmly in regard to this matter as a severe impediment to the process of reconciliation. Even the Mahinda Rajapaksa Government released over 11,000 persons in custody. They gave them rehabilitation and released them. But this Government in the course of the past almost 18 months or more than that has not been acting in this matter as expeditiously as we expected them to.

I wish to also record, Sir, that this afternoon, I and my Colleague, Hon. Sumanthiran, had a meeting with the Hon. Prime Minister which was also attended by the Hon. Minister of Justice and the Hon.Deputy Minister of Justice and we discussed this matter fairly extensively with the Hon. Prime Minister. Then, there is a meeting to be held by the Hon.Minister of Justice this Friday with the Attorney-General and other relevant authorities to examine the question of how this issue can be addressed without further delay. We would very strongly urge, Sir, in the context of these persons being charged under a law which you, yourself concede as being unfit to remain in the statute books of this country, that all these persons are entitled to be released irrespective of whether they have not been charged, they have been charged or even those who have been convicted. It would be my submission, that if you accept that basically, your law is not a just law that entitles them to their release.
I thank you, Sir.

– Adjournment motion presented by Hon. Sampanthan in Parliament  with regard to the Tamil political prisoners on 23rd August . Heading are from SLB.