Crisis and foresight analysis

Thursday, 22 June 2017

The dawn of the Fourth Industrial Revolution brings with the promise of further human advancement. And yet, while humanity should be aspiring for a better life, disturbing events like the terrorist attacks in Manchester, London, and the Philippines, and the recent white phosphorus attack in Raqqa, Syria, point to humanity’s burial of its own journey toward a better world.

The 17th century philosopher Pascal rightly explained, “Humanity is great, because it knows itself to be wretched.” Is there then, with advance human intellect, still hope of creating a better world and preventing or minimising the loss of human life? Machiavelli (The Prince, Chapter III) has said, “It is necessary not only to pay attention to immediate crisis, but to foresee those that will come and to make every effort to prevent them.”

In Sri Lanka, this year, over 200 lives were lost and half a million affected from the torrential rainfall that caused floods and landslides; it was the same cycle of rain with a different magnitude than last year. The nation’s vulnerability to such natural disasters in the near future and years ahead should be taken into highest consideration. The attitude of a reactive response to crisis situations should change.

A proactive methodology designed to minimise casualties should be considered. When asked about the vision for 2050, the 100 ministries within Sri Lanka and the newly created ones, indicate vagueness and uncertainty.

Sri Lanka’s future will depend on the choices that are created today for a better tomorrow. For this, it is important to question the reference template used to make such choices – is it outdated or still a relevant template? For example, in the last budget, the Sri Lankan government increased taxes of electric vehicles.

However, at the UNFCCC COP 21 in Paris, the President pledged to the sustainability project, followed by supporting remarks by the Prime Minister in New York. This is a relevant template. The question then is how to bridge the gaps in policymaking?

Sri Lanka could play a significant role in the next few decades due to pivotal geo-strategic positioning. Therefore, it is very important to identify and discuss the national challenges for the next 25 to 50 years, and even beyond. Demographic shifts, urbanisation, population ratios and the challenges that Sri Lanka could face from within and from outside powers are some salients to be considered.

For this there is a need to prepare foresight maps for the nation, its institutions and ministries for a long-term 50 year time horizon and with correct methodology, so that the nation can be easily steered from regime to regime and mandates could be identified in a scientific method. This does not happen in Sri Lanka at present.

In Sri Lanka, ministries have been connected and the Government claims that this has been done scientifically. For instance, Education and Highways have been clubbed; similarly, Finance and Media have been clubbed. There is no connection among the subject areas of these ‘scientifically’ clubbed ministries. Additionally, the ministries› mandates are spread in an ad hoc manner. Sometimes they overlap or duplicate the process. When institutes are created or reset this way, they lose their strategic direction and focus.

It appears that the quality of governance has been replaced by quantity. In a country, the grand strategy is spelled out by its leaders and the strategy has to be adjusted justifiably to accommodate changes in the context. If it cannot be justified, the government should not create new entities that will burden its budget and could even derail the grand vision.

As per to the Millennium Project, “The decision support software and foresight systems are constantly improving: for example, big data analytics, simulations, collective intelligence systems, indexes and e-governance participatory systems.” Integrating foresight systems to a society is a priority and many governments have already included it years ago. In 2016, the Sri Lanka Foresight Initiative was launched by this author with the Millennium Project which operates in over 60 countries to improve policymaking and strategic narrative on key priority areas by engaging government and all others in important stakeholders in the society.

Unfortunately since its launch in May 2016, till now there has not been a single inquiry or request to implement this methodology. The powerful Delphi platform that is used has benefited many countries and the Sri Lankan Millennium Node could visit ministries and institutes and assist and train the officers to develop the foresight map.

According to futurist Dr. Puruesh Chaudhary who operates the Pakistan node for Millennium Project, “Futures thinking facilitate the process of institutionalised decisions amongst the leadership corridors improving learning faculty and increases the quality of policy inputs and strategic outcomes.” She eloquently explains the importance of inculcating future study to government policy making in her latest book ‹The Big Idea: Next Generation of Leadership in Pakistan needs a ‹New-Think’.

For a country like Sri Lanka which aspires to be the ‘Miracle’ or ‘Wonder of Asia’, its leaders should craft the foresight map that takes the country to the aspired destination.

[Views expressed here are personal and do not reflect those of the Government of Sri Lanka or the Institute of National Security Studies (INSS). Asanga Abeyagoonasekera is a visiting lecturer at Colombo University and the Director General of INSSSL the National Security think tank of Sri Lanka, this article was initially published by the IPCS, New Delhi for ‘Dateline Colombo’ http://www.ipcs.org/article/south-asia/crisis-and-foresight-analysis-5302.html.]

Why The Mahanayake’s Statement Is A Disgrace?

By Shyamon Jayasinghe –JUNE 22, 2017

Shyamon Jayasinghe

“I think that hate is a feeling that can only exist where there is no understanding.” ― Tennessee Williams, Sweet Bird of Youth

Let me not mince words. Our Mahanayake Thera of the Asgiriya Chapter, Ven Warakagoda Shri Gnanarathana, made a statement to the media which was a disgrace. I know, he does not like anyone disgracing monks or even calling them by their names. He said so in this very statement while objecting to our addressing Galagoda Atte Gnanasara simply as ‘Gnanasara.’ The Most Revd Mahanayake  must realise one thing. The days of honouring anybody and everybody merely because they don a Sivura are fast dying.  To deserve public respect one must earn it. Even the Buddha advised his followers only to respect Arya Sanga or monks on the Path. Gnanassara is far away from the path. He is in hell.

Besides, doesn’t the Mahanayake understand that the public behaviour of bad monks would harm our age-old Sasana and destroy its reputation?  If the BBS monks have total disregard about their bringing disgrace to the Sanga why on earth should we genuflect before them and honour them? Honour them for disgracing Buddhism and the Sanga? This is not merely illogical; it is madness.

Didn’t Gnanasara have a history of alcoholism? Didn’t he, sometime ago, call the elderly monk, Ven Watareka Vijitha, a dog and a villain and address him as ‘yako.’?  Our government has been too benign to this rascal in yellow robes. Too timid and too cowardly to act swiftly. Now, with the statement of the Mahanayake, I wonder if President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe would be having loose motions when contemplating bringing Gnanasara to book. The Mahanayake made that statement giving his brains a holiday. He was trapped in a conspiracy to safeguard the dishonourable monk by lending his status to a status-zero man.

To give Mahinda Rajapaksa credit, I remember how the latter wouldn’t give a damn when even all Mahanayakes condemned the jailing of our Army Commander, Sarath Fonseka. That was an occasion when I respected these Mahanayakes. The Mahanayakes  subsequently moved to form an all-sanga Council and issue a proclamation when they received threats. They folded up. The same Sanga has no fear or shame about defending Gnanasara. These are ironies of human behaviour.

The Court Charge

For one thing, with regard to the current action being taken the government has not done anything that a government shouldn’t be doing. Sri Lanka had only one person constitutionally recognised as above the rule of law and that was the President. After the 19th Amendment that is no more-mercifully. Similarly, the monk Gnanasara cannot be allowed to muck around and mug around as a law unto himself. He, like all other religious personnel of all faiths must face court if charged with legally offensive behaviour.

Gnanasara has one charge pending in court and that is serious. He went into hiding evading arrest, which is also both unethical and illegal. He was ordered to be arrested by the Magistrate of an independent judiciary; not by any politician in the government. He had entered a Magistrate’s Court and (reportedly) verbally abused and threatened a woman who had appeared to defend her lost husband over a Habeas Corpus application. The husband was famed missing person Prageeth Ekneligoda, who had gone missing like many other activists and journos under the regime of the Rajapaksa’s. It was all legitimate business and Gnanasara was allegedly acting in contempt of court. Nobody in a civilised and law abiding social order can be permitted to obstruct Court and threaten people.

What offends our ethical sense is that in this particular case, it was a woman grieving for her husband. Leave alone the law; where was the monk’s Metta, Karuna, Upeksha and Upadana? Aren’t these the four noble values or Brahma Viharas that the Buddha wanted his followers to practice? Didn’t Gnanasara realise he was trampling on a vulnerable and grieving woman?

Another question: What was Gnanasara’s business in invading the court on a matter like this? Was he acting as an agent of political forces responsible for the dastardly treatment of Ekneligoda? There was no Muslim involvement here at all. Then how come he went there?

A False Man in A False Robe

Read More

Gnanassara the curse of the country and century granted bail in all 3 cases ! Govt. abjectly capitulates to hooligan monks and Asgiriyathreats !!

(Lanka-e-News -21.June.2017, 11.30PM)  Following a notification issued yesterday  (20) by Ven. WarakagodaGnanarathaneThera , the mahanayake of Asgiriya chapter that if the laws are enforced against GalagodaAttheGnanassara ( the lawless robed hooligan monk who has become notorious as a scourge of the country and the century)  is arrested, that will trigger tension and unrest in the country , the government abjectly capitulated to  the threat.

Gnanassara  on whom a warrant has been issued was produced before the court by the police . He was  thereafter released on bail based on the grounds that there was no B report against him, and no objection was raised against his release on bail. 

Gnanassara surrendered to the Fort magistrate court this morning  ,based on  a warrant issued against him in the case in which Gnanassara was charged with storming into  a media briefing held by Ven. WatarekaVijithaThera, and blaspheming Islam and Quran. 

The court after withdrawing the warrant , released  him on bail while postponing the case until the 10 th of August .

Thereafter following another  notification , Gnanassara appeared at the prevention of organized crimes unit where he was summoned to  record a statement of his. The police which recorded his statement pertaining to the charges against him of forcibly obstructing the police officers in the execution of their duties , again produced him before court .

While releasing Gnanassara on a personal bail in a sum of Rs. 100.000.00 , and two surety bails Rs. 100, 000.00 each , the Colombo additional magistrate Buddhika Sri Ragalaclearly made it known to all ‘ the courts are not responsible for whatever situation that might be triggered hereafter , and that Gnanassara is being granted bail because the police did not submit the  report duly.’

Strangely DIG Kamal Silva of Police of organized crimes division did not object to bail being granted to Gnanassara. The  magistrate expressing surprise recalled how the police themselves reported to him  that Gnanassara made statements inciting violence that he would set fire to mosques , and he would kill Muslim families; and how the magistrate therefore gave the order after waking up at  midnight  taking into account the serious  threats and the grave situation . The magistrate therefore rightly questioned the police, how come , today they have done a U turn suddenly to release such a dangerous suspect , and is not objecting to bail? The magistrate also questioned the police why with regard to other normal suspects they don’t conduct themselves this way ? The magistrate categorically stated   he is thoroughly disappointed and disillusioned with the police. 

Gnanassara subsequently appeared in the Colombo chief magistrate court for yet another  case against him based on charges of holding a media briefing in Kennewelpitti or Weragodawella  district , Polonnaruwaand vilifying  the Muslim community. In that case too Gnanassara the robed goon who is disgracing his own religion by his violent and hooligan conduct was released on a cash bail of Rs. 10.000,00 , and two surety bails of Rs. 500,000.00 each. He was warned that if he tried to create panic  and be a cause of breach of the peace, his bail would be rescinded , and he will be remanded again.

In any event all these cases are not based on charges of committing contempt of court. Those are being heard in the appeal court. It is to be noted that though Gnanassara was evading courts citing various reasons , no warrant was issued on him. The court warned that if he kept away on the next occasion , a warrant will be issued.

Gnanassara who absconded courts saying he was sick  and  that there are threats to his life , on his way to secure bail today , showed no signs of  ‘sickness’ or facing threats to life . He  revealed to the  media ‘ the issues I stirred up hitherto have now  been transferred   to the Mahanayake’ 

Going by the notification issued by the Mahanayake of Asgiriya chapter ,  as well as  the government refraining from raising any objections  or making a report against  bail being granted to  Gnanassara , the people would have by now clearly understood this whole ‘circus’was  a play acting and a drama .  No matter what if all these circus acts how well or ill performed , will conduce and contribute to establishing peace in the country and create religious concord  , it is certainly welcome. 

( The notification  that rudely shocked the true Buddhists  issued by Asgiriyamahanayake who came forward shamelessly and brazenly to rescue notorious disgraceful drunkard Gnanassara the violent robed  thug is appearing elsewhere of the website) 

---------------------------
by     (2017-06-22 13:28:41)

Invisible hand behind Gnanasara Thera getting bail?

Jun 22, 2017

The Colombo Fort magistrate today (21) ordered that Bodu Bala Sena general secretary  Galagodaatte Gnanasara Thera, who had been evading courts, be released on bail. The Thera surrendered to the court through his lawyers.

Warrants were issued twice against him for not having appeared before courts in connection with two cases. Lawyers question as to whether a person who had been evading courts be given bail.

When the Thera was in hiding, several quarters were accused of having protected him, including certain powerful ministers. There is suspicion as if the Thera was given bail at the instigation of one of those ministers. Police failed to arrest him despite warrants have been issued twice. The IGP has told a powerful government minister that it was difficult to arrest the Thera, as he was being protected by a top government politician.

After he was given bail, the Thera was once again arrested by the police and produced before the Fort magistrate. The FCID arrested him when he arrived to give a statement.

Shashi Weerawansa obtained National Identity Card at 39 - NIC Dept Official

Lakmal Sooriyagoda-Friday, June 23, 2017

Registration of Persons Department Assistant Commissioner Indika Kumara Herath told court that

Shashi Weerawansa had applied for a National Identity Card (NIC) in 2010 as a person applying for a NIC for the first time.

Herath giving evidence in court said Weerawansa had submitted her application for an NIC at the age of 39 as a person who never obtained one. Herath was giving evidence in connection with two cases filed against Shashi Weerawansa, the wife of National Freedom Front (NFF) Leader Wimal Weerawansa at the Magistrate’s Court Colombo yesterday.

The CID had filed two charge sheets against Shashi Weerawansa that she had fraudulently obtained two passports including a diplomatic passport by submitting forged documents to the Department of Immigration and Emigration.

Assistant Commissioner Indika Kumara Herath whose evidence was led by Deputy Solicitor General Dileepa Peiris told court that his department had not initiated any inquiry against Shashi Weerawansa for not obtaining a NIC even until the age of 39 which is declared as a punishable offence under the Act.

The witness had earlier informed Chief Magistrate Lal Ranasinghe Bandara that an article published on Ravaya newspaper had revealed the accused had possessed two identity cards under two different numbers indicating that she was born in 1967 and 1971.

The case was fixed for further trial on July 31. The witness is to be cross-examined on next trial date.On a previous occasion, the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) filed a charge sheet against Shashi Weerawansa under two counts.

Shashi Weerawansa was arrested on February, 2015 over the charge of obtaining diplomatic and general passports illegally. She had allegedly submitted birth certificate with forged names and dates of birth to obtain those passports. She is currently out on bail.

Deputy Solicitor General Dileepa Peiris, Chief Inspector Jayantha and Police Constable Ganegedara of CID prosecuted. President’s Counsel Anil de Silva with Jayantha Weerasinghe PC appeared for the accused. 

Quds Day

The Israeli forces are killing, bombarding and torturing the innocent Palestinian people in a planned manner. Palestinians are struggling against the forced and illegal foreign occupations since last 6 to 7 decades and Israel is using every possible oppressive method to suppress the voice of helpless people.

by Javeed Ali-Jun 22, 2017

(June 22, 2017, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) International Quds Day is an important day for humanity. It is the day to express our solidarity with the oppressed people and demonstrate the resentment against the oppressors. It is the day which breaks the back of Zionist forces and their allies. It is the day of persecuted ones against the tyrants. Its a day of remembering Quds (Jerusalem), the entire Palestine, and the catastrophe and calamity that was brought upon them with the creation of the State of Israel.

Quds Day was founded by the revolutionary leader of Islamic Republic of Iran late Imam Khomeini (R.A.) and laid the solid foundation for the freedom struggle of Palestine which is illegally occupied by Israel. It is commemorated every year on the last Friday (Jumut-ul-Vida) of the holy month of Ramzan and is also designated as Youmi Quds. Quds Day was initiated by Imam Khomein (R.A.) in 1979 after he established Islamic system in Iran.

The Israeli forces are killing, bombarding and torturing the innocent Palestinian people in a planned manner. Palestinians are struggling against the forced and illegal foreign occupations since last 6 to 7 decades and Israel is using every possible oppressive method to suppress the voice of helpless people.

The first Qiblah Muslims prayed towards is Al-Aqsa mosque or “Bait-ul-Muqqadas” (Holy place) which is now in Jerusalem (Quds). Most of the prophets of Allah were appointed in this city. This is one of the most blessed places in the world and was the first Qiblah (direction) of Islam. Prophet Mohammad (SAWW) with Ahlulbayt (A.S.) and companions used to say their prayers facing towards its direction. Prophet Mohammad (SAWW) offered his prayers facing Bait-ul-Muqqadas for thirteen years when he was in Mecca then for seventeen months after emigration to Medina. The foundation for Bait-ul-Muqqadas has been laid by Prophets of Allah Almighty and they used to spend their sacred life there besides offered their prayers there also. Prophet Mohammad (SAWW) has said that Masjid-ul-Haram in Mecca is the first mosque that was constructed in the world and then Bait-ul-Muqqadas was the second mosque which was build 40 years later after the establishment of Masjid-ul-Haram. According to the Holy Quran and Islamic traditions, Al-Aqsa Mosque is the place from which Prophet Mohammad (SAWW) went on a spritual night journey (Shabi Meraj) during which he rode on Buraq, who took him from Mecca to al-Aqsa. Prophet Mohammad (SAWW) tethered Buraq to the Western Wall and prayed at al-Aqsa Mosque and after he finished his prayers, the Angel Jibril (A.S.) traveled with him to heaven, where he met several other prophets and led them in prayer. There are traditions regarding Bait-ul-Muqqadas 1. Whosoever visits Bait-ul-Muqqadas with lot of zeal and religious fervour then he or she will enter the heaven. 2. If anyone will offer two Rakats of prayers in Bait-ul-Muqqadas then his sins will be pardoned, his heart will always stay attached to Allah Almighty and he will keep reciting the eulogy of Allah Almighty. 3. Whosoever gives alms to destitute people in Bait-ul-Muqqadas will save himself from the fire of hell. It is well established fact that Quds is an important part of Islam and its liberation from the Zionist Israel is paramount for Islam. Therefore, whole Muslim Ummah leaving apart their sectarian differences should unite under one umbrella and fight for the Palestine freedom struggle with greater energy. Quds Day is a unique opportunity for us to unite under one platform and we should provide all the resources available to us for the just cause of Palestine.

Quds Day is not only aimed for Palestine but it is also meant for all the oppressed nations. It is the day to oppose all the oppressors including the notorious oppressors America, Israel and their allies. It is the day to reenergize ourselves to fight against the falsehood. It is the day which demarcates between the right and wrong. The righteous ones do support Quds Day rallies whole heartedly but the hypocrites oppose it by tooth and nail as they prove their friendly relations with America, Isreal and other Zionist forces. They don’t permit Quds Day demonstrations and always create hurdles and try to sabotage it. At times, they attack it through their paid mercenaries like they did in Quetta, Pakistan on 3rd September, 2010 when 60 participants of Quds Day rally were martyred in a suicide attack by terrorists. Moreover, the Nigerian Army who are subservient to the Zionists and to prove their loyalty to masters, perpetrated a bloodbath of peaceful participants in the Quds Day rally at Zaria, Nigeria on 24th July, 2014 which claimed the lives of 33 peaceful pro-Palestinian protesters including the three sons of the leader of Islamic Movement in Nigeria Sheikh Ibrahim Zakzaky. So it is crystal clear now that the Israel along with its master America and their collaborators are the biggest enemies of Islam and anything which goes against their stand, they thwart it with all their available resources. It is very unfortunate for the Muslim World that some Arab countries are hand in glove with the America and Israel to persecute Muslims all over the world. Recently Donald Trump, the President of US was conferred accolades in the holy land of Hijaz despite the fact that the US policies are always formulated against Islam particularly against the oppressed people of Palestine.

Supreme leader of Islamic Republic of Iran Ayatollah Syed Ali Khamanai has predicted in 2015 that “God willing, Israel will cease to exist in next 25 years”. He further said that America is Grand Satan (Shaitan-i-Buzurg) which is evil to humanity and Islam. He further reiterated to chant slogans like “Marg Bar America”, “Marg Bar Israel” (Down with America, Down with Israel) on Quds Day and it should reverberate the atmosphere throughout the world. He stated that these slogans are not against the people of the respective countries but against the policy of the concerned authorities. Israel along with its masters America with full backing and support from Pro-Zionist Arab countries started crises in Iraq and Syria through the the ISIS (Daesh) terrorists to trammel the freedom struggle of Palestine. The Resistance Movement of Lebanon Hezbollah who had earlier defeated Israel in 2006 had made a blueprint to liberate Quds and Palestine from the clutches of Israel but it was impeded by Israel and its associates who orchestrated a civil war in Syria and turmoil in Iraq.

23rd June, 2017 (Jumut-ul-Vida) is the day of remembering Quds (Jerusalem), the entire Palestine, and all the oppressed people of world including Kashmir, Yemen, Bahrain, Burma, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nigeria and so on. All the Islamic Scholars and Imams of the Masjids should highlight the issue of Masjid Al-Aqsa which is under the illegal and forced occupation of Jewish forces in their Jumma-tul-vida sermons and organize special prayers for the liberation of Palestine from Israel. After Friday prayers, peaceful demonstrations should be held all around the globe to press upon international community to liberate Palestine from the illegal occupation and give befitting reply to Israel that Palestine is not alone. Everyone with with heart should participate in these rallies as it the religious obligation to confront the oppressor and stand with the oppressed people.

I want to conclude with the slogan, “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free”.

Life in a septic tank

A flooded quarter in northern Gaza’s Jabaliya refugee camp, February 2017. Gaza’s beleaguered sewage system is overwhelmed during heavy rains, causing flooding and forcing families to evacuate from their homes.

Anne PaqActiveStills

Sarah Algherbawi-20 June 2017

Hiba al-Ashi has to keep the windows of her apartment closed. It is the only way to avoid the foul odors from the polluted sea.

“Life has become unbearable,” said the 36-year-old mother, whose Gaza City home overlooks the Mediterranean.

Every day, 100,000 cubic meters of raw sewage are discharged into the sea around Gaza.

The Gaza Strip’s environmental problems have worsened in recent years.

Gaza has suffered from chronic electricity shortages ever since its sole power plant was bombed by Israel in 2006. Israel imposed an ongoing, severe economic blockade on the territory one year later, restricting the import of fuel and hindering repair of electricity infrastructure destroyed and damaged during successive military offensives.

Gaza’s power plant shut down entirely in April this year, and Israel further reduced electricity supply to Gaza this week – a violation of international humanitarian law, according to human rights groups. Electricity is currently available fewer than three hours per day.

One of the results – among others profoundly affecting daily life in Gaza – is that there is not enough power to run sewage treatment facilities in the territory. Desalination plants, which provide most of Gaza’s drinking water, are also operating at significantly reduced capacity.

“Unprecedented”

Visiting the beach used to be one of the only possibilities for enjoyment and relaxations for Palestinians living under siege in Gaza.

Pollution has narrowed such possibilities. Around 50 percent of Gaza’s beaches are unfit for swimming, according to the local Environment Quality Authority. A number of beaches have been closed to the public.

“The pollution rate of the sea water and beaches this year is unprecedented,” said Ahmad Helles, a representative of that authority. “This indicates that there is a real environmental disaster.”

According to Helles, both the sand and water are contaminated. The sand, he said, “carries a lot of microbes which may be harmful and cause illnesses in humans.”

Maher Salem, a leading administrator of water services in Gaza, said that the sewage facilities will “stop totally soon.”

“We are forced to pump all the sewage into the sea untreated,” he said. “This is preventing people from swimming and, in many cases, even going to the beach.”

Having a view of the sea or living near it is considered desirable throughout the world. In Gaza, however, many people wish to leave homes close to the shore.

“Living in a septic tank”

Taysir Abu Saada has lived in Beach refugee camp, part of Gaza City, for 18 years. He is trying to save money so that he can rent an apartment elsewhere. He wants to “take my family away from this unhealthy atmosphere,” he said.

“I feel like we are living in a septic tank, not a real house,” said his 19-year-old daughter Shaima.

Wisam Lubad, a 22-year-old student, used to enjoy walking on the beach. Now she has to hold her nose when she ventures towards the shore.

“Nothing is well in Gaza,” she said. “That includes the sea – our only escape.”

One recent day, a local family decided to eat a grilled lunch on the beach in Gaza City. The family found the experience so unpleasant that it abandoned the lunch after a short while.

“We’re living in a big tragedy in this country,” said Samar, one member of the family. “We have one disaster after another.”

Beaches in Rafah, an area of southern Gaza near its border with Egypt, have been closed – at the order of the local authority.

The closures are necessary “to protect our citizens from harmful diseases which may be caused by this pollution,” said Sobhi Abu Ridwan, who heads the Rafah municipality.

Masoud Matar is among a number of people in Gaza who have vowed to keep visiting the beach, despite warnings by the authorities.

“Everybody in Gaza considers the sea as their friend,” he said. “Most Gazans are poor. They cannot pay for holidays in resorts or go to swimming pools. The sea is their only hope for having a bit of fun when it is hot.”

The closure of beaches is also causing income losses. Many people in Gaza work as peddlers during the summer.

Muhammad Abu Assi is a recent college graduate, who was hoping to earn a little money by selling corn on the shore. “I was waiting for the summer to start my life as a peddler,” he said. “Now it seems that this is not going to happen.”

Fishermen, too, are worried about the consequences of the pollution.

One of them, Mahmoud al-Ghandour, said that much of the fish for sale in Gaza’s markets may be unsafe to eat.

“Fishing has been my life for 30 years,” he said. “I have never seen so much pollution as that which we’ve had over the past five years.”

Sarah Algherbawi is a freelance writer and translator from Gaza.

ANALYSIS: Trump's moves in Syria are tactical, not strategic

With no overarching plan on what to do in Syria, experts say US may risk conflict with Russia or Iran


File photo of a YPG military vehicle in Syria with a US flag (AFP)

James Reinl-Thursday 22 June 2017

NEW YORK, United States – The shooting down of an Iranian-made drone by a United States warplane in southeast Syria on Tuesday was the latest sign of Washington’s greater willingness to confront Damascus and its allies since Donald Trump became president.

It came on the heels of US forces knocking a Syrian army jet out of the sky near Raqqa on Sunday. Iran-backed militias have repeatedly come under US fire recently and, in April, Trump ordered cruise missile strikes on a Syrian airfield, ostensibly responding to a poison gas attack.

Analysts contacted by Middle East Eye praised Trump’s greater readiness to use force in Syria than his predecessor, Barack Obama. Others warned that, without a broader endgame strategy, US muscle flexing risked a deeper confrontation with Syria or its backers, Iran and Russia.

READ MORE ►

US shoots down armed drone in Syria, after Russian threats

“Trump’s very muscular on foreign policy. He doesn’t look at the ramifications, repercussions or the bigger picture. He’s tactical, as opposed to strategic, and I think he’s going to escalate against the Russians,” Barak Barfi, from the New America Foundation, a think tank, told MEE.

Moscow reacted angrily to the US downing Syria’s jet, saying it would treat US-led coalition aircraft flying west of the Euphrates River in Syria as potential targets and will track them with weapons systems, but stopped short of threatening to fire on them.

After a US F-15 jet destroyed an armed Iranian drone near al-Tanaf base along Syria’s eastern border on Tuesday, Russia’s deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov railed against the US-led coalition for “complicity with terrorism”.

Will Trump raise tensions with Iran or Russia?

For Jennifer Cafarella, from the Institute for the Study of War, a think tank, the Pentagon’s approach is sound – use force to deter aggression from forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his backers and focus on the stated goal of defeating the Islamic State (IS) group. 

“I don’t think the US risks a shooting war with Iran or Russia because it has taken no offensive action and has consistently messaged that it has no offensive intent,” Cafarella told MEE, adding that aggression from Damascus-aligned forces was the real danger.

“The question is whether the pro-Assad coalition intends to contain and deter the US, or if it intends to pick an actual fight. I currently assess the former, but we must be alive to the less likely but dangerous possibility of the latter.”

Trump, a Republican, has delegated more authority to his generals to make battlefield decisions. By launching 59 Tomahawk missiles on a Syrian government airfield in April, he was lauded for enforcing a “red line” against chemical weapons use that Obama, a Democrat, failed to apply in 2013.

The question is whether the pro-Assad coalition intends to contain and deter the US, or if it intends to pick an actual fight

- Jennifer Cafarella, Institute for the Study of War

Like his predecessor, Trump has focused on defeating IS. But as the religious extremists’ self-proclaimed caliphate dwindles, the Assad-aligned forces are increasingly competing for newly liberated territory with their US-backed rivals.

They include the US-backed Kurdish-Arab Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which control four neighbourhoods of Raqqa and are close to encircling the de facto IS capital. Assad-allied forces, meanwhile, are focused further east on the mostly IS-held oil-rich province of Deir Ezzor.

Government forces skirted around al-Tanaf base on 9 June and reached the Iraqi border for the first time since 2015. That effectively blocked US-led coalition forces in their garrison, and secured a land corridor connecting Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq.

“US Generals do not want this to happen and will use force to prevent it, as they have done,” Bob Freedman, a Johns Hopkins University scholar, told MEE.

“The Assad regime, in my view, would like to precipitate a conflict between Russian and US forces, and would like to exploit Russian military forces to regain all of Syria — that is, fight to the last Russian.

“I don’t think [Russian President Vladimir] Putin wants this and will not take the chance to shoot down a US plane with its SAM-400’s.”

No clear strategy

As Assad strives to win his country back, with help from Russia and Iran, Trump and his national security aides have not advanced a clear strategy of what Syria will look like, or who will run it, once the six-year-old bloodbath grinds to a halt.

All the while, Washington is riven over whether its chief goal is routing IS or halting Iran’s growing influence in Syria and across the Middle East,” Jonathan Cristol, a scholar at the World Policy Institute, a think tank, told MEE.

“It has no coherent strategy in Syria, but the administration’s instincts are to oppose IS and Iran at every turn. The problem is that Iran and IS oppose each other in Syria. Navigating that requires nuance and sophistication that this administration lacks,” Cristol said.

“I don’t think Trump’s team has any desire to escalate any conflict with Russia, quite the contrary; and I think that direct confrontation with Iran is something it would stumble into rather than plan on.”

For Francis Boyle, a University of Illinois law scholar, the military escalation under Trump raises a constitutional problem. US attacks on IS and al-Qaeda have been justified under the open-ended Authorization for Use of Military Force passed by Congress after the 9/11 attacks in 2001, but attacks on Assad’s government forces and allies “ha[ve] no justification whatsoever”, said Boyle.

“It is obviously impeachable. But pro-war Democrats don’t raise it because it would constrain the US president’s war-making capacities,” Boyle told MEE.

“Israeli strategic interests are obviously served by a breakup of Syria; as is the case for much of the US establishment. The Saudis are clearly on board. The Russians, rhetoric aside, are likely simply looking for some scraps.

“The big losers are the Syrians and most of the other people of the region,” Boyle said.

'I feel betrayed': the Somali refugees sent from safety into a war zone

Somali families repatriated from neighbouring Kenya feel let down by Nairobi and the UN refugee agency, and fear for their safety and survival
Madino Dhurow, a Somali refugee and mother of six who was repatriated from Kenya’s Dadaab camp, holds her ‘voluntary repatriation form’. Photograph: Farah Abdi Warsameh/AP

 Somali children repatriated from Kenya’s Dadaab camp play in a camp for displaced people in Mogadishu. Photograph: Farah Abdi Warsameh/AP

Moulid Hujale and Karen McVeigh-Thursday 22 June 2017

Families repatriated to Somalia from Dadaab refugee complex in Kenya say they feel abandoned and let down by the UN after officials used small cash payments to encourage them to return home, where a hunger and security crisis awaited.

Many travelled back to Somalia only to find themselves in a far worse position than they had been in the refugee camp, with no access to food, shelter or medicines. Having lost their legal refugee status by crossing the border, they were no longer entitled to any help.

Sacdiya Noor, 38, a mother of three children, said she felt betrayed by UN aid workers and the Kenyan authorities, who told her it was safe to go back to Mogadishu in 2015.

“There was no security in the city, no free services and nothing special [to help] returnees,” she said. “There are explosions every day. Food is expensive; you have to pay for everything, even if you are sick.”

Noor is among thousands of Somalis who have now made the long trek back to Kenya, where they felt safer. “I left my country the second time for the safety of my children. I feel betrayed because they [the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the Kenyan authorities] told me it is safe to return. I tried my best but it was too much for me to bear as a single mother with no one to stand with me. I am stuck here with no rights. It is like they are saying, ‘You either die of gunshot in Somalia or come back to starve in Dadaab’,” she said.

The plight of repatriated Somalis who fled for the second time emerged as the UK announced a £75m, three-year programme, aimed at tackling the central Mediterranean transit route to Europe, to enable voluntary returns and repatriation and to assist governments in Africa to support asylum seekers.

Since the Kenyan government announced it would close the world’s largest refugee camp and stepped up its repatriation programme to Somalia in 2016, almost 60,000 people, roughly a quarter of the camp’s population, have left. The Kenyan government is no longer registering new arrivals from Somalia or processing asylum claims.

Dadaab camp has been a long-running sore between Kenya, Somalia and the UN, with the Kenyans claiming it represents a security threat. The Nairobi government has been accused of ramping up rhetoric on closure when it has been politically expedient, and currently it is appealing a decision by Kenyan high court judges that shutting down the camp is unlawful.

Noor said her situation has become unbearable since she returned to Dadaab 10 months ago, explaining that her lack of official refugee status means she has to rely on the generosity of others in sharing meagre rations with her and her children.

She is far from alone. Other asylum seekers and refugees who spoke to the Guardian from inside Dadaab, some of whom had been displaced twice, told similar stories. They talked of the danger, persecution and hunger they saw in Somalia.

The severe drought, which has brought Somalia to the brink of famine, comes alongside the UN’s own warnings that the country is in the grip of a cholera and measles outbreak. After the failure of this year’s rains, the number of Somali people forced to leave their villages and land has reached more than 1.7 million.

Last September, a Human Rights Watch report said refugees in Dadaab were effectively being forced to return to Somalia in a major breach of international law, since the 1951 refugee convention forbids the return or “refoulement” of refugees to countries where they may be at risk. HRW criticised the UNHCR for not giving refugees accurate information about the security situation.

On the outskirts of Ifo II, one of four camps making up Dadaab, Madina Issack, 21, said she left her homeland for the second time because she feared for her life. Issack, a mother of four, from Saakow, a town in the Juba region that is under al-Shabaab control, said she fled with her husband last November after he was arrested for smoking.

“Al-Shabaab don’t like the people who come from Kenya,” said Issack. “They accuse them of spying for the Kenyan government and execute them in public.”

The family first returned to the relative safety of Kismayo, but were forced to move after discovering there was little support for returnees and displaced people. “Some of the people we travelled with were welcomed by their relatives in the city, but we had no one to help us,” Issack added. “The little support we received from UNHCR finished in a few weeks so we went ahead to settle in our hometown in Saakow. It is easy to get into the town but very difficult to get out.

“After staying nine months trying to get used to life, my husband was arrested by al-Shabaab. He was later released on bail but we had to run away and seek asylum in Kenya again.”

The UNHCR estimates there are 3,570 unregistered Somalis in Dadaab, a third of whom arrived in 2017. Only 122 of them have been repatriated, it said, 79 of whom cited security concerns as the reason for their return.

But refugee groups say this is likely to be an underestimate. Victor Nyamori, from Amnesty International in Kenya, said: “There are large numbers of refugees who were given money by the UNHCR and the government, and they do not want to identify themselves.”

The Refugee Council of Kenya, an organisation that monitors the border, said an estimated 11,100 people had crossed the border from Somalia into Kenya since January.

Nimca Samatar, one of the refugee community leaders in Ifo II camp, said she has seen hundreds of Somalis entering the camp in the past few months. “People are coming every day, just like [during] the 2011 famine, they are fleeing the drought with malnourished children and elderly,” said Samatar.
“We collect some food rations from other refugees and distribute them to the new arrivals but that is like a drop in the ocean. They need shelter, food, medicine and protection. Kenya must register these people, and I would urge the UNHCR and other agencies to support them, otherwise they will die in front us.”

The UNHCR said that while the security situation remains a “matter for concern”, it only supports returns to specific areas that are considered safe and have good humanitarian access. It also monitors the situation with regard to returnees alongside the Norwegian Refugee Council, it said.

Yvonne Ndege, the UNHCR’s spokesperson in Kenya, said: “The UNHCR has been sharing updated ‘country of origin information’ with refugees in order to allow them to make well-informed decisions on the situation in the main areas of return, notably about drought and cholera. This has prompted many to reconsider their return to Somalia. The impact of drought and cholera has regularly been discussed during cross-border meetings since January 2017 and this situation has, for instance, prompted suspension of the support to return to Baidoa, which is still in force.”

The UN agency is not allowed to carry out formal registration, she said, but it continues to advocate the registration of all new arrivals and undocumented persons in the Dadaab camps.

Of the 122 returnees in Dadaab who had been repatriated, she said: “While only one case has been reactivated, those coming back have access to basic services such as education and health. The situation of this group is under close review despite the fear of the government that a swift and systematic reactivation would likely be a pull factor for the 67,267 who have returned so far to Somalia.”

The Kenyan government denied any suggestion that the returns are forced.
While the number of Somalis repatriated has slowed in recent weeks, families in Dadaab are continuing to make what one father described as “one of the most painful decisions I have ever taken in my life”.

In a transit centre in Dadaab, waiting for his departure to the homeland he left 10 years ago, Madar Gaas, 47, feared what lay ahead for his family, but felt he had no alternative. “Kenya asked us to leave and then UN reduced the food rations,” he said. “Then other aid agencies started to pull out of the camp, scaling down the live-saving assistance we used to get. That is why I volunteered to go back to Somalia, even though I am risking the future of my children. There is no free education and healthcare in Somalia.

“You can be killed any time in Somalia. I am concerned about the safety of my children, and because of the drought everything is expensive.”

It’s OK That Trump Doesn’t Care About Human Rights

• 
  
• BY SUZANNE NOSSEL-
JUNE 19, 2017

Amid the endless post-mortem of Donald Trump’s first overseas trip, human rights advocates have focused more fire on what the president didn’t say than what he did: His failure to call out rights abuses in Saudi Arabia or anywhere else left activists aghast. Yet, nearly five months into Trump’s administration, his attitude toward human rights can come as no surprise. The president doesn’t go much for strictures of any kind, much less international legal standards and softer norms developed by humanitarians, activists, and lawyers. He has little regard for precepts and edicts enshrined in treaties and overseen by U.N. institutions. He isn’t moved by the invocation of universal values, principles, or truths. He isn’t even moved by the courage of the powerless citizen who challenges the strongman; between authoritarian rulers and the dissidents who challenge them, he chooses the former almost every time.

In light of this, it is time for human rights advocates to pivot from voicing outrage at the president’s failure to press for rights in his global pronouncements and appearances and instead double down on making sure the rest of the world understands he does not speak for all Americans. The idea that the current White House will press Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to release his country’s jailed journalists and academics, urge China’s Xi Jinping to loosen restrictions on anti-government speech, or persuade Arab leaders to usher in democratic reforms is fantasy. Moreover, coming from this president, speeches and statements on human rights would ring hollow, compounding the global propensity to read hypocrisy and cynicism into American articulations of values. Rights advocates would be better off working to temper the worst in Trump’s domestic policies and finding other vehicles and voices to uphold, and ultimately restore, the credibility of the United States as a global human rights standard-bearer. Advocates may find there is a silver lining of sorts in Trump’s silence on rights: It creates an opportunity for more credible actors — from members of Congress to intellectuals and activists — to remind the world that despite Trump’s election, liberal values and support for dissidents remain strong across the United States.

Consider Trump’s speech in Saudi Arabia, which aimed to rally Sunni Muslim nations to redouble the fight against terrorism. Trump promised Arab allies, “We are not here to lecture — we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship.” Trump’s sojourn in Saudi Arabia made no mention of the country’s imprisoned and brutalized political dissidents, no comment on its repressive policies toward women, gays and lesbians, or minority groups. Foregoing critique of any kind, he pronounced the kingdom “magnificent.” And just weeks before, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson gave a tour d’horizon speech to diplomats that stressed national security and economic interests and slighted human rights and democratic values.

Make no mistake: Trump and Tillerson’s silence on human rights issues is a betrayal to rights advocates and those they defend. There is every reason to voice alarm that the U.S. president is surrendering American credibility as a force for human rights, betraying rights defenders and dissidents who have long looked to Washington as an ally, and even undercutting years of rights-oriented policy by demonstrating that America’s commitment to its professed values is politically contingent and expendable. The damage caused by Trump’s reversals will be real and lasting. However fraught and uneven, the U.S. commitment to human rights has long imbued its foreign policy with a sense of moral conviction and uplift, tempered some of Washington’s most bellicose and self-serving instincts, and made international affairs into something more purposeful than a grinding, cyclical power game.

But the real blow to U.S. global human rights leadership is, of course, a function of beliefs, policies, and actions — not simply the rhetoric that reflects them. Trump was quick to remake the Obama administration’s standoffish relationship with Egyptian military ruler Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, ending the cold shoulder with the warm embrace of a high-profile visit to Washington and praise for the autocrat’s “fantastic job” as president. Neither Trump nor anyone in the administration has spoken about Egypt’s killing of protesters and arrests of tens of thousands of political dissidents. Trump’s affection has given Sisi license to issue a draconian new law regulating nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), never mind that such laws have previously been used to target and even jail American NGO workers. In late March, Tillerson greenlighted large-scale arms shipments including F-16 airplanes to Bahrain, lifting human rights conditions that the Obama administration imposed after a harsh crackdown on protesters. The most heavily touted “deliverable” of Trump’s Middle East junket was a $110 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia. No amount of homage to jailed activists or pleas for women’s rights could ever have made up for that.

Earlier, Tillerson had skipped the public release of the State Department’s annual global human rights report, an event traditionally attended by his predecessors regardless of party. In his initial weeks in office, Trump made clear that he favored reintroducing torture as an interrogation technique and only demurred because Defense Secretary James Mattis talked him out of it. Top human rights posts in the administration either sit empty or have been filled with officials who lack any human rights background or expertise — meaning that when key decisions are made, no one will be at the table to advocate that rights be considered. Trump’s one grand “humanitarian” gesture since taking office, ordering cruise missile strikes on a Syrian air base that was used to launch a chemical weapons attack, was, by his own account, an act of intuition and impulse, driven by outrage and possibly by compassion but not by fealty to an international norm under assault.

The Trump administration has also pursued domestic policies that call into question America’s claim to international leadership in areas including press freedom, tolerance for political dissent, women’s rights, and the protection of religious minorities, refugees, and immigrants. Trump’s attacks on the press and false cries of fake news make it impossible for him to act as a champion for the rights of journalists or independent media globally. His indignation at criticism and propensity to lash out against opponents make him an uneasy ally for dissidents worldwide. His slashing of funding for women’s health care and reproductive rights would hollow out any pronouncements he might offer on women’s rights. His restrictive approach to refugees, plans for a wall to block migrants from Mexico, and indifference toward immigrant workers render him unfit to extoll the virtues of a humane approach to global migration. Beyond that, Trump’s refusal to respect the integrity and independence of federal law enforcement institutions, his cronyism, nepotism, lack of transparency, and proclivity toward self-dealing make him an impossible exponent for the values of good governance, accountability, transparency, and rule of law that underpin the defense of human rights.

Given all this, human rights advocates need to do more than decry each and every missed opportunity for the president to articulate a set of values that he manifestly does not share. Even those U.S. presidents most passionate about the spread of rights and freedoms — Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama — walked a tightrope in trying to maintain America’s credibility on human rights while seeking to advance a breadth of foreign-policy interests, many of which directly contradicted rights-respecting policies. For as long as the United States has had an articulated human rights policy Washington has been dogged by charges of selectivity, hypocrisy, and empty rhetoric. Against this backdrop, Trumpian pronouncements on human rights seem liable to hurt more than they help, making it easier to impugn other American leaders and future presidents as equally insincere.

This is not to suggest that advocates should give up on the role of the United States as a defender of human rights. Now, with authoritarianism on the rise in China, Russia, Turkey, the Philippines, and Hungary and intact in much of the Middle East and Africa — and backsliding likely to accelerate amid an absence of leadership from the White House — brave rights defenders and dissidents in those countries need more international support, not less. Left to their own interests, governments like Russia and China that wish to weaken international human rights institutions and instruments will seize opportunities to expand their influence. Progress made in advancing norms of international accountability, LGBT rights, and the protection of journalists and human rights defenders will almost certainly atrophy.

But crocodile tears from President Trump, should they even be offered, will address none of that. Much more important are efforts to show the world that the current administration is neither the only face of America’s role in the world nor the sole vessel for U.S. values.

Most foreign governments and informed citizens know that most of Washington regards his leadership with skepticism and that his public approval ratings are at historic lows.

Most foreign governments and informed citizens know that most of Washington regards his leadership with skepticism and that his public approval ratings are at historic lows. Members of Congress, civil society organizations, and other institutions work to defend human rights globally and can speak out and step up where the current administration won’t. The role of these actors in showing solidarity with dissidents, calling out repressive policies, supporting rights defenders, and advocating for the role of institutions and norms should redouble as the White House retreats. That Trump won’t — and can’t credibly — speak out doesn’t mean that American society or even the American government must go quiet. Members of Congress can hold hearings, send letters, take meetings with visiting advocates, take part in delegations, and otherwise demonstrate that the U.S. government as a whole takes seriously its role as a human rights standard-bearer, even if the current administration amounts to an egregious lapse.

Funders should step up to help alleviate the strain that civil society organizations face in trying to address the challenges posed by the president’s domestic policies while simultaneously trying to fill the vacuum created by the administration’s retreat from America’s traditional role as a rights defender globally. These groups should not be forced to choose now that the agenda at home has grown so imperative as well.

In recent years, private funders of human rights campaigns have been shifting their support away from U.S.- and European-based groups in favor of direct help to advocates working in hotspots around the world. The logic is simple: The solution to human rights abuses in Turkey, Russia, or China won’t be found in Washington. The Obama administration reinforced these efforts through its own campaign to buttress local civil society organizations around the world, offer them financial support, and elevate their participation in international diplomacy. Importantly, this assistance in funding and organizational development came backed with the moral leadership of the U.S. government voiced at the highest levels and through its diplomatic missions.

But with President Trump’s budget dramatically scaling back such support, foundations should reinvest additional resources in organizations and partners who can keep faith with international counterparts, raise the global media profile of rights violations and crises, and apply pressure through international mechanisms and forums. Such efforts will help blunt the impact of the Trump administration’s indifference, catalyze the engagement of Capitol Hill on human rights issues, and sustain and strengthen connections internationally.

Trump’s retreat from leadership on human rights can be mitigated if nongovernmental groups lean in.

Trump’s retreat from leadership on human rights can be mitigated if nongovernmental groups lean in. Just as civil society organizations and the media are tempering some of the president’s most constitutionally and morally dubious domestic policies, so they should also help to bridge shortfalls in funding, speak out for those who counted on the United States for support, and fortify civil society groups that the Trump administration is abandoning.

The best way to preserve America’s global human rights leadership is not to put words in Trump’s mouth but to demonstrate that the U.S. system of government, strong independent civil society, and claim to global leadership are strong enough to withstand his term of office.

Photo credit: MARIA BELEN PEREZ GABILONDO/AFP/Getty Images