Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Sunday, September 17, 2017

UK to supply Qatar with Eurofighter jets in billion-dollar arms deal


Qatar's defence ministry is set to purchase 24 of the advanced jets from BAE Systems
Qatar signs a letter of intent with the UK to buy 24 Typhoon fighter jets (Twitter)

Jamie Merrill's picture
Jamie Merrill-Sunday 17 September 2017

The British government and defence giant BAE Systems have agreed a major new deal to supply Qatar with Eurofighter Typhoon jets, despite fears of regional instability.
British Defence Secretary Michael Fallon signed a letter of intent with Qatar on Sunday that will see BAE Systems provide 24 Typhoon jets and support capabilities worth billions of dollars. 
The move has shocked observers as it comes only three months after UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson called on Qatar to do more to clamp down on the funding of militant groups.
The wealthy Gulf state is at the heart of a regional dispute over the funding of terrorism, and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE and Egypt have since June imposed sanctions on Qatar, accusing it of financing extremist groups and allying with Iran, arch-foe of the Gulf Arab states - allegations Doha denies.
Speaking in Qatar on Sunday, where he met with Qatari defence minister Khalid Bin Mohammed Al Attiyad, Fallon said he hoped the deal would "enhance security within the region".
"This will be the first major defence contract with Qatar, one of the UK's strategic partners," said Fallon. "This is an important moment in our defence relationship and the basis for even closer defence co-operation between our two countries. We also hope that this will help enhance security within the region across all Gulf allies."
Human rights groups are likely to be dismayed by the move, which comes as the UK's $16bn defence industry is facing intense scrutiny over exports to Saudi Arabia and other states accused of major human rights violations.
The UK has exported more than $6bn in arms to authoritarian states since the summer's general election, with a huge increase in arms exports to Saudi Arabia and exports worth $160m to Qatar, where political opposition is banned and where the hereditary emir – currently Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani - holds all executive and legislative power.
The strategic letter of intent signed by Fallon agrees to lay the "groundwork for Qatar's intention towards procuring 24 advanced Eurofighter Typhoon's and supporting capabilities," according to a statement released by the Qatar Armed Forces.
It said that Qatar would use the aircraft to "advance its ongoing efforts in combating terrorism and violent extremism in the region".
The deal comes after Middle East Eye revealed the UK has been accused of fanning the flamesof the Gulf crisis by arming both sides of the dispute. The accusations were made after it emerged that Qatar and Saudi Arabia and its allies in a list of countries identified by officials as “priority markets” for the UK's defence industry.
Read more ►
Qatar now joins Kuwait, Oman and Saudi Arabia as operators of the advanced Typhoon jet in the Middle East. The jet has been deployed by the British Royal Air Force over Iraq and Syria in recent years and was also deployed during the 2011 intervention in Libya. Saudi Arabia operates at least 72 of the jets, which have been used over Yemen amid allegations they have contributed to mass civilian casualties.
Oliver Sprague, Amnesty’s UK arms control programme director, told MEE: "Until recently Qatar was part of the Saudi Arabia-led coalition that has caused such devastation for civilians in Yemen. The UK government should not authorize this deal unless it can demonstrate that there is no substantial risk that these arms will be used to commit or facilitate serious human rights violations."
BAE Systems likely overcame a rival bid from French firm Rafale, which has already supplied jets to Egypt and Qatar in a deal set to be worth billions of dollars. Last year Kuwait signed a deal worth more than $9bn when it purchased 28 Typhoon jets. A defence source said the Qatar purchase would be "at a similar level, perhaps a little less".
Andrew Smith, a spokesperson for Campaign Against Arms Trade, told MEE that the decision and its timing three months after Johnson's intervention was "staggering".
He said: "Despite the ongoing Gulf crisis, this is a clear sign of political and military support for a brutal regime that even its neighbouring states accuse of willingly ignoring violent groups."
The UK has called for a de-escalation of tensions in the region since the Gulf crisis erupted in June, but that can't be done at the "same time as pushing weapons to both sides of the political conflict," he added.
The deal is a major victory for BAE Systems, which produces the jets. It took less than 14 years for the firm and its European partners to deliver the first 500 Typhoon jets, but orders have dwindled in recent years and the production rate at the firm's factory in Preston, England has reportedly had to be slowed.
The order will also be seen as a major win for a minister who has been keen to push arms exports as a plank of Britain's post-Brexit economic strategy.
The Typhoon fighter programme has supported an estimated 8,600 jobs in the UK, with an estimated further 1,500 jobs dependent on export opportunities, according to BAE Systems.
However, it is unclear exacly what role the jets will play in Qatar's expanding air arsenal, said defence analyst Justin Bronk.
Qatar has already ordered 24 Rafales jets as well as 72 F-15 fighter-bombers from the US despite having relatively few combat pilots and limited infrastructure.
It currently operates just 10 frontline jet fighters, Bronk added.

Establishment gears up for Steve Bannon’s war on the GOP leadership


Former White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon has ties to a group taking on the establishment favorite in the U.S. Senate race in Alabama. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)


If “war” against the Republican establishment is what former White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon wants, then war is what he will get.

Deep-pocketed supporters of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other GOP leaders have resolved to fight a protracted battle over the next year for the soul of the party in congressional primaries. “It’s shaping up to be McConnell, the Senate Leadership Fund and the Chamber against Bannon,” said Scott Reed, the senior political strategist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “And we will take that fight.”

But the task will not be easy. Strategists from both sides of the party’s divide say recent focus groups and polling have shown that the frustration within the Republican base has only grown since the 2016 election, stoked by an inability to repeal and replace President Barack Obama’s health-care law.

President Trump, meanwhile, has continued to cast his presidency in opposition to the current ways of Washington, which could encourage primary voters to buck the system in a way that endangers House and Senate incumbents.

“Just as in 2008, the election did little to let the air out of the tires,” said Steven Law, the president of the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC allied with McConnell that plans to spend heavily on Senate primaries in support of incumbents. “The raw material of the electorate is just increasingly volatile.”

The first battle will conclude this month in Alabama, where the incumbent senator — establishment-backed Luther Strange — is fighting uphill against former state Supreme Court judge Roy Moore, a conservative evangelical jurist who has twice been removed from the bench for defying legal decisions. Known for his conviction that Christian teachings are the source of all government authority, Moore has twice been elected statewide to the Supreme Court, but he also lost two primary campaigns for governor, in 2006 and 2010. He bested Strange by a margin of 39 percent to 33 percent in the first round of Senate primary voting last month.

Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), who came in third in the first round of primary voting, threw his support behind Moore at a rally Saturday. “It is truly amazing the audacity, the ego of the special-interest groups and the political action committees as they try to buy this United States Senate race thinking that with impunity they can run over the people of the state of Alabama,” Brooks declared.

In a sign of fights to come, the two Republican candidates are now competing to demonstrate their disgust with Washington politics. Strange, who was appointed this year to take the seat of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, begins one of his most recent television ads looking at the camera and announcing that he is “mad at Washington politicians.”

Moore describes his campaign as an effort to hurt McConnell, drain the swamp and bring more radical policies to the Senate, including a possible effort to impeach sitting U.S. Supreme Court justices for affirming the constitutionality of same-sex marriages.

Although Trump has endorsed Strange, Bannon is backing Moore — and using the conservative website he runs, Breitbart News, to hammer the incumbent as a “swamp monster.”

Allies of McConnell have been blanketing the Alabama airwaves to shrink Moore’s polling lead. After spending nearly $4 million on ads before the first primary vote in August, the Senate Leadership Fund plans to blitz the state with another $4 million before the Sept. 26 runoff. So far this year, the super PAC has raised more than $11 million, including a $1 million infusion from hedge fund manager Paul Singer last month, federal filings show.

The Republican National Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have also sunk money into the race to defend Strange. The Business Council of Alabama, working with the U.S. Chamber, plans a major employee get-out-the-vote operation to support Strange by arguing that he will be better for the state’s industry and jobs. The chamber has also paid for a statewide mailer and an ad campaign that will include a spot during Saturday’s Alabama and Auburn college football games. “There is no taking it back,” Reed said. “Alabama is the big enchilada.”

The Senate Leadership Fund is also taking aim at Bannon himself in an effort to tarnish his position as a champion of the Trump political movement. Law released a statement on Tuesday calling Bannon “dead wrong” for using a recent “60 Minutes” interview to criticize Trump’s decision to fire former FBI director James B. Comey.


Former White House chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon gave a wide-ranging interview to “60 Minutes.” Here’s what he said about Republican leadership and the Russia investigation. (Amber Ferguson, Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

At the Chamber, Reed echoed the criticism of Bannon for breaking with Trump. “He is turning into a rallying point for the alt-right, which is kind of bizarre because half of what he does is damage his former client and friend, whom he served as chief strategist for,” Reed said.

Bannon declined to comment. But a person familiar with his thinking described the pushback by McConnell allies as “the corrupt and incompetent political class” taking on Trump’s base.

Bannon’s allies scoffed at the notion that the McConnell-allied groups could drive a wedge between Trump’s supporters and Bannon. “At the end of the day, folks like that think the president’s base is stupid,” said a person close to the conservative media executive. “It shows the arrogance of the Republican political class in Washington.”

To counter the onslaught against Moore, the conservative advocacy group Great America Alliance, which is now overseen by Bannon protege and former deputy White House political strategist Andy Surabian, released a digital ad Tuesday featuring a montage of grainy photos of McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) that argues over a rock-n-roll score that Strange was “appointed by the swamp.”

The group and its allies do not intend to match the volume of anti-Moore ads on television, but there are plans for a bus tour of the state by conservative activists in the next couple of weeks to support the Moore campaign, culminating in a major rally before the election. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who has endorsed Moore, is expected to travel to Alabama to appear as part of the tour.

And Moore allies have hope that their side will see an infusion of big money, too. Great America and its sister super PAC have new links to Bannon and his political patrons, the wealthy Mercer family. The former White House strategist does not have a formal role with the organizations, but he helped install Surabian as the top strategist at the advocacy group, according to a person familiar with his role.

Ed Rollins, the veteran GOP strategist who leads Great America PAC, said he has recently “exchanged some ideas” with Bannon, for whom he said he has “great respect.” And he has also been in talks with the Mercers, influential but idiosyncratic donors who often buck the GOP party establishment.

“We are having discussions but no formal ties at this point,” Rollins said of the family. “The more we can get going in the same direction, the better. We certainly have had some conversations.”

If they decide to put serious sums into groups taking on establishment candidates, hedge fund magnate Robert Mercer and his middle daughter, Rebekah, could help fuel the GOP’s latest internecine battles. Before supporting Trump in the 2016 presidential campaign, they gave $13.5 million to a super PAC that backed Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, Trump’s longest-lasting challenger for the nomination.

A spokeswoman for the Mercer family did not respond to a request for comment.

But there are already indications the Mercers plan to use their money to take on GOP incumbents this cycle. In late July, Robert Mercer gave $300,000 to a super PAC allied with former Arizona state senator Kelli Ward, who is challenging Republican Sen. Jeff Flake in the state’s primary, federal filings show.

Mercer also contributed $50,000 this summer to a new super PAC, Remember Mississippi, set up by an aide to state Sen. Chris McDaniel, who is considering challenging GOP incumbent Sen. Roger Wicker in the state.

Meanwhile, the pro-Trump super PAC America First and its sister advocacy group — which have emerged as the president’s officially approved outside groups — have largely stayed out of the intraparty fights. Since making a small digital ad buy for Strange in early August, before the first round of voting in the Alabama special election, the PAC has not invested any money in the contest.
Trump’s own apparent ambivalence over the Alabama race hints at the complicating factor he is likely to play in the coming fights. Although he endorsed Strange, he has not yet cut any political advertisements.

After the first round of primary elections, he tweeted congratulations to both men who made it through to the runoff, notably listing Moore’s name first. “Congratulation to Roy Moore and Luther Strange,” the tweet said, adding, “Exciting race!”

White House legislative director Marc Short said this week that Trump “continues to stand by” his Strange endorsement. Trump announced late Saturday on Twitter that he would visit Huntsville, Ala.. on Saturday to campaign for Strange.

Republican strategists aiming to defend incumbents say they expect Trump to be an unreliable partner in the coming season. The president tends to approach questions of political loyalty on a case-by-case basis instead of as a party leader. And he is intent on keeping some distance from Republican congressional leadership, which has so far failed to deliver on his promise of Obamacare repeal.

In many ways, the coming 2018 contests will be a rematch of high-stakes primary fights that have taken place every two years since the 2008 election, when self-branded tea party challengers began trying to unseat incumbent Republicans. Flake and Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.), who both face reelection next year, expect populist primary challenges this year. Several primary contests will be for seats with no Republican incumbent, such as those in Michigan, Montana and possibly Utah, where party insiders worry that the more anti-establishment candidates could jeopardize Republicans’ general-election hopes.

“2018 is going to be a wave election, and it is going to be an anti-incumbent wave election,” said Eagle Forum Fund President Ed Martin, who has been traveling the country to hold events to pressure moderate Republicans to support the Trump agenda. “Any Republican that is in office as an incumbent is on the line.”

After the 2010 and 2012 elections, which saw Republicans lose Senate races in Missouri, Delaware,
 Indiana, Colorado and Nevada with tea party candidates, both the Chamber and McConnell decided to be more aggressive in Senate primaries. Since then, the insider powers have tended to have the upper hand, winning the Senate elections they have contested in the primary. McConnell himself survived a tough tea party challenge in 2014, and a huge influx of television spending helped Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) hold off a strong primary challenge that same year.

Reed said the Chamber got involved in eight House races and one Senate contest in 2016, and won each. He expects to outperform expectations again over the coming months.


“I think it’s going to be an epic challenge, and we are seeing it in Alabama to start,” he said. “The polls look bad. We’ve got two weeks. We know what we need to do. That’s why we are in this business.”

Cyprus 'selling' EU citizenship to super rich of Russia and Ukraine

Passports issued under ‘golden visa’ scheme raises €4bn since 2013, according to papers seen by the Guardian

 Dmitry Rybolovlev, the Russian billionaire who allegedly met with Donald Trump during his campaign, received a Cypriot passport in exchange for investing in the Bank of Cyprus. Photograph: Patrick Kovarik/AFP/Getty Images

Sara Farolfi,  and Stelios Orphanides-Sunday 17 September 2017

Billionaire Russian oligarchs and Ukrainian elites accused of corruption are among hundreds of people who have acquired EU passports under controversial “golden visa” schemes, the Guardian has learnt.

The government of Cyprus has raised more than €4bn since 2013 by providing citizenship to the super rich, granting them the right to live and work throughout Europe in exchange for cash investment. More than 400 passports are understood to have been issued through this scheme last year alone.

Prior to 2013, Cypriot citizenship was granted on a discretionary basis by ministers, in a less formal version of the current arrangement.

A leaked list of the names of hundreds of those who have benefitted from these schemes, seen by the Guardian, includes prominent businesspeople and individuals with considerable political influence.

The leak marks the first time a list of the super rich granted Cypriot citizenship has been revealed. A former member of Russia’s parliament, the founders of Ukraine’s largest commercial bank and a gambling billionaire are among the new names.

The list sheds light on the little-known but highly profitable industry and raises questions about the security checks carried out on applicants by Cyprus.

Beneficiaries of the pre-2013 schemes include an oligarch and art collector who bought a Palm Beach mansion from Donald Trump, and a Syrian businessman with close links to the country’s president, described in a leaked US diplomatic cable as a “poster boy for corruption” in war-torn Syria.

European politicians have been watching the sector’s growth with alarm, with some saying the schemes undermine the concept of citizenship. Ana Gomes, a Portuguese MEP, described “golden visas” as “absolutely immoral and perverse”.

“I’m not against individual member states granting citizenship or residence to someone who would make a very special contribution to the country, be it in arts or science, or even in investment. But granting, not selling,” she said.

She added that she had attempted several times to obtain the names of golden visa buyers in Portugal, but without success. “Why the secrecy? The secrecy makes it very, very suspicious.”

Later this year the European parliament will debate an amendment tabled by Gomes requiring countries to carry out thorough security checks on “golden visa” applicants. The European Commission recently ordered its own inquiry into whether checks were being properly conducted.

Launched in 2013, Cyprus’ current citizenship-by-investment scheme requires applicants to place €2m in property or €2.5m in companies or government bonds. There is no language or residency requirement, other than a visit once every seven years.

Rami Makhlouf, the cousin of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, was first placed under US sanctions in 2008 over allegations that he had benefited from corruption. Cyprus issued citizenship to him in 2010. It is unclear what due diligence checks the country carried out on his application.

Makhlouf, who was subsequently sanctioned by the EU in 2011 and whose Cypriot citizenship was revoked after the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, did not respond to requests for comment.

Many other purchasers are prominent Russian businesspeople or politicians – “politically exposed persons” in industry parlance – requiring stringent checks on the sources of their wealth.

The billionaire art collector Dmitry Rybolovlev found himself at the centre of international attention last year after it emerged that his private jet crossed paths with that of Donald Trump during his presidential campaign. Rybolovlev denied meeting Trump and said the flight paths were a coincidence.

In 2005, Trump paid $41m for 515 N County Road, a mansion in Florida’s Palm Beach. After renovating it, he sold it to Rybolovlev three years later for a reported $95m.

A spokesman for Rybolovlev, who acquired Cypriot citizenship in 2012 and is worth an estimated $7.4bn according to Forbes, said it was “natural [for him] to get citizenship upon becoming an investor in Bank of Cyprus.”

The spokesman reiterated that Rybolovlev has never met Trump, and added that the Palm Beach mansion has been demolished and divided into three lots, one of which has been sold.

The anti-corruption group Global Witness demanded tougher checks in response to the findings. “All countries offering golden visas must make sure the lure of investment doesn’t mean a race to the bottom on values. That means ensuring the sharpest of checks on applicants and safeguards on process,” the group said in a statement.

“Without these, they risk offering a ‘get-out-of-jail free card’ to the corrupt and criminal.”

The Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Cyprus said the programme was intended for “genuine investors, who establish a business base and acquire a permanent residence in Cyprus”.

They said that stringent checks were conducted on all citizenship by investment applications, with funds required to undergo money laundering checks by a Cypriot bank. They also observed that Cyprus was not the only EU country to have granted citizenship to high net-wealth Russians. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing on the part of beneficiaries.

Makhlouf did not receive his citizenship through the current scheme, they said, adding that the launch of the 2013 scheme “established a much improved, transparent process for the examination of applications”, and that their decision to later revoke his citizenship was proof of their readiness to take corrective action.

Additional reporting by Craig Shaw and Micael Pereira.


This article was developed with the support of the Journalism Fund.

Should Aung San Suu Kyi be blamed for Rohingya crisis?

What Aung San Suu Kyi needs today is not push and pressure but understanding and support.


by N.S.Venkataraman-
( September 17, 2017, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) Aung San Suu Kyi is the state councillor of Myanmar and is the de facto head of government of Myanmar, equivalent to a prime minister. Her critics say that she is all powerful in Myanmar today and should be held fully responsible for all the commissions and omissions of Myanmar government and therefore, should be squarely blamed for the present Rohingya crisis in Myanmar.
Her bitter critics, who now appear to be pledged critics , have gone to the extent of questioning her credibility and her commitment to the peace and harmony in the world. Quite a few of the critics have even said that she should be stripped of the Nobel Laureate award for peace that was conferred on her a few years back.
Aung San Suu Kyi has been hailed as an apostle of peace and non violence until recently and now she is being painted as a person presiding over the actions to liquidate Rohingya community in Myanmar by driving them out of the country forcibly, what the critics call as ethnic cleansing. The U N Human Rights Commissioner have also issued stern statement on similar lines.
One aspect that the critics have failed to note is that how can one who has been praised as champion of peace and human rights can become an oppressor overnight. Obviously, no attempts have been made to view the problems faced by Aung San Suu Kyi in an dispassionate manner and to initiate efforts to provide constructive support for Myanmar , it’s leadership represented by Aung San Suu Kyi and the Rohingya refugees.
Rohingya crisis in Myanmar has been waiting to happen and Aung San Suu Kyi is in no way responsible for the present crisis. Rohingya crisis is not due to her but inspite of her best and silent efforts. Certainly, Suu Kyi is looking for tangible solution and deserve international support.
In Jnuary,2009, hundreds of people belonging to the Muslim Rohingya minority community were expelled off it’s coast by Thailand government and many of them reached Myanmar. In August,2012, violence between Buddhists and Rohingya muslims in the Rakhine state in Myanmar resulted in many deaths. In November, 2012, more than 90 people were killed in the renewed community violence.
Obviously, there have been bitterness and conflict of interests between local buddhists and Rohingya muslims for the last several years , which is known to everyone. The immediate provocation for the Rohingya crisis is that Rohingya insurgents attacked police stations in Rakhine state in August,2017, when several people were killed. The military has to respond to restore peace and order after the attack by the insurgents , which is viewed by the Myanmar government as terrorist attack.
The terrorist attacks are taking place around the world these days and every country has no alternative other than fighting against the terrorists and eliminating them using force without showing any mercy. This is what USA and NATO countries are doing in Afghanistan now, when terrorist camps are being targeted and bombed.
Russia is now attacking the ISIS terrorists in Syria by launching missile attacks. Several other countries including Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran have attacked the terrorists militarily. The war in Iraq , where western countries play an active role now, is also being carried out in the name of eliminating the terrorist forces. Sri Lanka militarily attacked the terrorists when it faced internal strife and India is now attacking the terrorists in Jammu & Kashmir and shooting them down.
Why blame Myanmar alone for using the military attack to quell the insurgent attack by Rohingya muslims?

It is a fact that in everyone of such fight between the terrorists and the government forces, innocent people lose their lives or suffer injuries are displaced. This is what has happened for Rohingya refugees , just as it has happened to thousands of other refugees, who recently entered Europe in the wake of Syrian conflict.
What is conspicuous in such issues is that the United Nations Organisation has failed to intervene in the matter effectively due to it’s inherent and in built weakness and the conflict of the interests amongst the members of the Security Council.
Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheik Hasina would be addressing the United Nations General Assembly shortly , when she is likely to ask for international pressure on Myanmar to solve the Rohingya crisis. India too says that it would push Myanmar to solve the refugee crisis.
What Aung San Suu Kyi needs today is not push and pressure but understanding and support.
As a person committed to the life long mission for peace , Aung San Suu Kyi would certainly respond to international efforts to bring peace in Myanmar and she is certainly pragmatic to realize that such efforts would be in the short term and long term interests of Myanmar. So far, all that Aung San Suu Kyi has received from other countries is severe and arm chair criticism. .
United Nations should play it’s due role and immediately form a committee of credible mediators and send the team to Myanmar to discuss with Aung Sang Suu Kyi to find an appropriate solution.
Myanmar is an economically poor country, though it is endowed with vast natural resources including natural gas. It has all the potentials to rediscover itself as a strong and progressive country,. However, at the present juncture, it does not command the resources to rehabilitate the Rohingya refugees as well as the Buddhists who too have suffered in the Rakhine state.
It would be appropriate for the Prime Minister of Bangladesh to voice her suggestions in her forthcoming speech in United Nations General Assembly to send a peace committee to Myanmar that should be backed by international support. Her voice would be heard with respect and concern, as Bangladesh is neighbouring country of Myanmar as that has also been severely suffering due to Rohingya crisis.

Exclusive - "We will kill you all": Rohingya villagers in Myanmar beg for safe passage

People displaced by violence walk in the banks of Mayu river with their belongings while moving to another village, in Buthidaung in the north of Rakhine state, Myanmar September 13, 2017. REUTERS/Stringer

Wa LoneAndrew R.C. Marshall-SEPTEMBER 17, 2017

SITTWE, Myanmar (Reuters) - Thousands of Rohingya Muslims in violence-racked northwest Myanmar are pleading with the authorities for safe passage from two remote villages that are cut off by hostile Buddhists and running short of food.

“We’re terrified,” Maung Maung, a Rohingya official at Ah Nauk Pyin village, told Reuters by telephone. “We’ll starve soon and they’re threatening to burn down our houses.”

Another Rohingya contacted by Reuters, who asked not to be named, said ethnic Rakhine Buddhists came to the same village and shouted, “Leave, or we will kill you all.”

Fragile relations between Ah Nauk Pyin and its Rakhine neighbours were shattered on Aug. 25, when deadly attacks by Rohingya militants in Rakhine State prompted a ferocious response from Myanmar’s security forces.

At least 430,000 Rohingya have since fled into neighbouring Bangladesh to evade what the United Nations has called a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”.

About a million Rohingya lived in Rakhine State until the recent violence. Most face draconian travel restrictions and are denied citizenship in a country where many Buddhists regard them as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

Tin Maung Swe, secretary of the Rakhine State government, told Reuters he was working closely with the Rathedaung authorities, and had received no information about the Rohingya villagers’ plea for safe passage.

“There is nothing to be concerned about,” he said when asked about local tensions. “Southern Rathedaung is completely safe.”

National police spokesman Myo Thu Soe said he also had no information about the Rohingya villages, but said he would look into the matter.

Ah Nauk Pyin sits on a mangrove-fringed peninsula in Rathedaung, one of three townships in northern Rakhine State. The villagers say they have no boats.

Until three weeks ago, there were 21 Muslim villages in Rathedaung, along with three camps for Muslims displaced by previous bouts of religious violence. Sixteen of those villages and all three camps have since been emptied and in many cases burnt, forcing an estimated 28,000 Rohingya to flee.

Rathedaung’s five surviving Rohingya villages and their 8,000 or so inhabitants are encircled by Rakhine Buddhists and acutely vulnerable, say human rights monitors.

The situation is particularly dire in Ah Nauk Pyin and nearby Naung Pin Gyi, where any escape route to Bangladesh is long, arduous, and sometimes blocked by hostile Rakhine neighbours.

Maung Maung, the Rohingya official, said the villagers are resigned to leaving, but the authorities have not responded to their requests for security. At night, he said, villagers had heard distant gunfire.
“It’s better they go somewhere else,” said Thein Aung, a Rathedaung official, who dismissed Rohingya claims that Rakhines were threatening them.

Only two of the Aug. 25 attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) took place in Rathedaung. But the township was already a tinderbox of religious tension, with ARSA citing the mistreatment of Rohingya there as one justification for its offensive.

In late July, Rakhine residents of a large, mixed village in northern Rathedaung corraled hundreds of Rohingya inside their neighbourhood, blocking access to food and water.

A similar pattern is repeating itself in southern Rathedaung, with local Rakhine citing possible ARSA infiltration as a reason for ejecting the last remaining Rohingya.
“ANOTHER PLACE”

Maung Maung said he had called the police at least 30 times to report threats against his village.

On Sept. 13, he said, he got a call from a Rakhine villager he knew. “Leave tomorrow or we’ll come and burn down all your houses,” said the man, according to a recording Maung Maung gave to Reuters.

When Maung Maung protested that they had no means to escape, the man replied: “That’s not our problem.”

On Aug. 31, the police convened a roadside meeting between two villages, attended by seven Rohingya from Ah Nauk Pyin and 14 Rakhine officials from the surrounding villages.

Instead of addressing the Rohingya complaints, said Maung Maung and two other Rohingya who attended the meeting, the Rakhine officials delivered an ultimatum.

“They said they didn’t want any Muslims in the region and we should leave immediately,” said the Rohingya resident of Ah Nauk Pyin who requested anonymity.

The Rohingya agreed, said Maung Maung, but only if the authorities provided security.

He showed Reuters a letter that the village elders had sent to the Rathedaung authorities on Sept. 7, asking to be moved to “another place”. They had yet to receive a response, he said.

VIOLENT HISTORY

Relations between the two communities deteriorated in 2012, when religious unrest in Rakhine State killed nearly 200 people and made 140,000 homeless, most of them Rohingya. Scores of houses in Ah Nauk Pyin were torched.

Since then, said villagers, Rohingya have been too scared to leave the village or till their land, surviving mainly on monthly deliveries from the World Food Programme (WFP). The recent violence halted those deliveries.

The WFP pulled out most staff and suspended operations in the region after Aug. 25.
Residents in the area’s two Rohingya villages said they could no longer venture out to fish or buy food from Rakhine traders, and were running low on food and medicines.

Maung Maung said the local police told the Rohingya to stay in their villages and not to worry because “nothing would happen,” he said.

But the nearest police station had only half a dozen or so officers, he said, and couldn’t do much if Ah Nauk Pyin was attacked.

A few minutes’ walk away, at the Rakhine village of Shwe Long Tin, residents were also on edge, said its leader, Khin Tun Aye.

They had also heard gunfire at night, he said, and were guarding the village around the clock with machetes and slingshots in case the Rohingya attacked with ARSA’s help.

“We’re also terrified,” he said.

He said he told his fellow Rakhine to stay calm, but the situation remained so tense that he feared for the safety of his Rohingya neighbours.


“If there is violence, all of them will be killed,” he said.
'Weak evidence' light alcohol use in pregnancy harms

Pregnant woman drinking water

  • BBC12 September 2017









  • There is "surprisingly limited" evidence that light drinking during pregnancy poses any risk to the baby, say UK researchers.

  • They reviewed all the available studies done on the topic since the 1950s and found no convincing proof that a drink or two a week is harmful.
    The Bristol University team stress this does not mean it is completely safe.
    They say women should avoid all alcohol throughout pregnancy "just in case", as per official guidelines.
    But women who have had small amounts to drink in pregnancy should be reassured that they are unlikely to have harmed their baby.

    Drinking while pregnant

    The Chief Medical Officer for the UK, Prof Dame Sally Davies, updated her advice last year to advocate total abstinence.
    Before that, pregnant women had been told they could drink one or two units - equivalent to one or two small glasses of wine - a week.
    There is no proven safe amount that women can drink during pregnancy, although the risks of drinking heavily in pregnancy are well known.
    Getting drunk or binge drinking during pregnancy increases the risk of miscarriage and premature birth and can lead to mental and physical problems in the baby, called foetal alcohol syndrome.
    The risks associated with light drinking, however, are less clear.
    Dr Luisa Zuccolo and colleagues found 26 relevant studies on the topic.
    Their review found no overwhelming proof of harm - but, in seven of the studies, light drinking was associated, on average, with an 8% higher risk of having a small baby, compared with drinking no alcohol at all.
    The review, in BMJ Open, also notes it appeared to increase the risk of having a premature birth.
    It is hoped the findings will help pregnant women make an informed choice about alcohol.

    'I drank a little - but still felt conflicted'

    Rachel Pearson from Devizes, Wiltshire, told the BBC she drank in moderation during both of her pregnancies:
    "Having looked at the research, and seen that there was no evidence to back total abstinence, I drank a little through both but I felt conflicted about it. I stuck to the advice of one or two small drinks every week."
    "I didn't feel a stigma or pressure from peers .I have friends who had a similar approach to me - and some who were ultra-cautious.
    "However, I did notice on every bottle of wine there was a symbol of a pregnant woman with a line through it. It seemed wrong that even to drink the amount advised might be perceived to be behaving irresponsibly."
    Rachel's children are now aged six and three, and she says both are "strong and healthy".

    Prof David Spiegelhalter, from the University of Cambridge, said: "A precautionary approach is still reasonable, but with luck this should dispel any guilt and anxiety felt by women who have an occasional glass of wine while they are pregnant."
    Prof Russell Viner, from the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, said: "My advice to women is that it's best not to drink at all if you're trying for a baby or are pregnant.
    "Regularly drinking even small amounts could be harmful and should be avoided, in line with the precautionary approach."

    Advice

    • The risk of harm to the baby is likely to be low if a woman has drunk only small amounts of alcohol before she knew she was pregnant or during pregnancy
    • Women who find out they are pregnant after already having drunk during early pregnancy, should avoid further drinking, but should be aware that it is unlikely in most cases that their baby has been affected
    • If you are worried about how much you have been drinking when pregnant, talk to your doctor or midwife