Monday, February 12, 2018

SRI LANKA: JVP MEMBERS HAVE BEEN ELECTED TO ALMOST EVERY COUNCIL- TILVIN

Image: JVP general secretary Tilvin Silva.

12/02/2018

(LT/12 Feb 2018) “The votes for the JVP have increased proportionately as well as quantitatively. JVP Members have been elected towards that had never had a JVP Member. Several JVP Members have been elected to almost every council. There are certain councils in which five or six JVP Members have been elected. Hence, we believe that we could carry out a massive service for the people. In time to come these councils will deteriorate politically. Then the people will greatly need our service,” said the General Secretay of the JVP Tilvin Silva as a press conference held at the head office of the JVP at Pelawatta yesterday (11th).

He said, “After about one year of functioning of these local councils the people living in them would understand what has been denied to them by Mahinda regime. The people have lost the opportunity to get the best service through local councils. The election result has not incurred any losses to our party but the people who expected to get a good service from the local councils have lost that opportunity. It is the same people who have been controlling the councils 4 years ago. As such, the people will have to suffer the same experiences. The people will finally realize they have lost something they could have won.

The votes for the JVP have increased proportionately as well as quantitatively. JVP Members have been elected towards that had never had a JVP Member. Several JVP Members have been elected to almost every council. There are certain councils in which five or six JVP Members have been elected. Hence, we believe that we could carry out a massive service for the people. In time to come these councils will deteriorate politically. Then the people will greatly need our service.

Only the JVP contested as a single party throughout the island. All other parties contested as amalgamations. Certain parties contested under three symbols. We did politics on a policy. We addressed a large section of the population. We have taught politics to a large number of people. As such, people will understand what would happen in these councils and realize the truth we have told the people. It is certain that a different political situation will be created in the country in the near future. We have the strength and determination to go forward with the number of votes and members we have received.

During the past two years, there was disorder within politics in this country. There was the confrontation between the President and the Prime Minister. As they were attempting to fulfil their petty interests, fulfilling the needs of the people took a backstage. The mandate they received was completely ignored. This is why the defeated wicked forces could raise their heads again. This anarchic situation would not end in the future. We would take measures to manage this anarchic situation for the benefit of the people and the country. Those who have temporarily taken power would not be able to solve the issues of the people. It is the JVP that will have to solve the issues of the country and its people. We would march forward with this belief.”

Sri Lanka: Time to take drastic measures to fulfil the promises

It is evident that the same Mahinda Rajapaksa who in January 2015 commanded 5.77 million votes (47.6%) as his presidency waned, last week was not even able to muster 4.95 million votes or even 44.7% of voters.

by Mangala Samaraweera-Feb 12, 2018

( February 12, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) On the 8th of January 2015, fifty one percent of Sri Lankans voted for the vision put forth to them by our unity candidate Maithripala Sirisena: that the time for dictatorship in our country was over, and that those committed to re-establishing democracy in Sri Lanka must unite to ensure that government serves all of the people, and not a single family and their loyal disciples.

On that day, the United National Party, several stalwarts of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, the People’s Liberation Front, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress, the Tamil National Alliance, the Democratic People’s Front, and all together over 30 political and civic bodies came together to prove that Sri Lankans shared their vision of a Sri Lanka that was ruled by law and not through fear.

We promised to amend the constitution to restore independence to the public service, abolish the executive presidency, and enshrine the rights of all Sri Lankans into the legal bedrock of our legal system. We promised to bring those who robbed the coffers of the treasury to justice. We promised to hold accountable those who quenched their thirst for power with the blood of brave journalists and peaceful protestors. Most of all, we promised you a government that would be free of the rampant corruption that defined the decade that came before us.

Today, the people told us that we have not done enough. Despite the sincerest of efforts to inject haste and independence into a dilapidated justice system over the last three years and empower the police with the tools they need to successfully investigate complex crimes, murderers and fraudsters remain at large. Despite our government being the first in the nation’s history to insist that ministers must resign from the cabinet at the first sign of wrongdoing, and indeed the first to investigate allegations of corruption within its ranks with such vigour, justice is yet to be served.

This message from the people has sunk deep into the UNP, and we are committed to taking drastic measures to fulfil the promises we made three years ago and maintain the public trust. As we embark on this chapter in the story of our democracy, Sri Lanka can be proud of two remarkable things we saw last Saturday.

The first is the conduct of an election under the auspices of an independent elections commission and police service. Never before has a government shied from manipulating public personnel, funds, resources and state media into an organ of their political ends. We hope that under these independent bodies, Sri Lanka has seen the last of corruption, intimidation and violence marring our elections.

Finally, it is evident that the same Mahinda Rajapaksa who in January 2015 commanded 5.77 million votes (47.6%) as his presidency waned, last week was not even able to muster 4.95 million votes or even 44.7% of voters. The UNP has a solemn duty not just to the 46% of the electorate who voted for us and President Sirisena’s SLFP last Saturday, but to the entire resounding majority of our citizens, all 6.1 million of them (55.3%) who marched to the polls last Saturday and voted against a return to Rajapaksa rule. Our duty is to broaden our own voter base by delivering results, while joining hands with all honest and democratic political forces to uplift our motherland and ensure that Sri Lanka never again returns to rule by the sword. That is our calling and we must not fail. Our democracy, our republic, depends on it.

The writer is the Minister of Finance & Mass Media, Governmnet of Sri Lanka

Drastic drop in MR’s vote, from 2015 – Mangala

Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa who commanded 5.77 million votes (47.6%) at the 2015 Presidential polls was barely able to muster 4.95 million votes (44.7%) at the recently concluded Local Government Elections, Finance and Mass Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera said. Issuing a press statement on the outcome of the LG elections, Minister Samaraweera yesterday noted that a resounding majority of citizens numbering 6.1 million (55.3%), marched to the polls last Saturday and voted against a return to Rajapaksa rule.

Taking note of the election results, Samaraweera however said; “Today, the people told us that we have not done enough.

Despite the sincerest of efforts to inject haste and independence into a dilapidated justice system over the last three years and empower the police with the tools they need to successfully investigate complex crimes, murderers and fraudsters remain at large. Despite our government being the first in the nation’s history to insist that ministers must resign from the cabinet at the first sign of wrongdoing, and indeed the first to investigate allegations of corruption within its ranks with such vigour, justice is yet to be served,” he added.

He stressed that “the message from the people has sunk deep into the UNP” and that the Government is “committed to taking drastic measures to fulfill the promises made three years ago and maintain the public trust”.

“Our duty is to broaden our own voter base by delivering results, while joining hands with all honest and democratic political forces to uplift our motherland and ensure that Sri Lanka never again returns to rule by the sword.

That is our calling and we must not fail. Our democracy, our republic, depends on it,” he added.

“On the 8th of January 2015, fifty one percent of Sri Lankans voted for the vision put forth to them by our unity candidate Maithripala Sirisena: that the time for dictatorship in our country was over, and that those committed to re-establishing democracy in Sri Lanka must unite to ensure that government serves all of the people, and not a single family and their loyal disciples.

On that day, the United National Party, several stalwarts of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, the People’s Liberation Front, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress, the Tamil National Alliance, the Democratic People’s Front, and altogether over 30 political and civic bodies came together to prove that Sri Lankans shared their vision of a Sri Lanka that was ruled by law and not through fear.

“As we embark on this chapter in the story of our democracy, Sri Lanka can be proud of two remarkable things we saw last Saturday.

UNP decides to form UNF govt.

By Saman Indrajith-February 12, 2018, 11:03 pm

The UNP has decided to form a United National Front (UNF) government ending the coalition with the SLFP Maithri faction, party sources say.

The decision to form a UNF government was taken following discussions between President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at the President’s official residence at Pajet Road in Colombo 07 on Sunday night, according to sources.

Speaker Karu Jayasuriya was also present at the talks between the President and the Prime Minister.

Prime Minister Wickremesinghe informed the President that he had been asked by UNP and its allies to form its own government if there was no practical means to continue with the national unity government with the SLFP (Maithri faction).

In response to the Prime Minister’s statement, the President told him to prove that the UNF could muster a majority in Parliament and if so it could form a government of its own.

Following the meeting with the President, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe met UNF’s coalition members and representatives of other parties represented in Parliament on the same evening and decided to form a UNF government without the SLFP.

Sources said as per the provisions of the Section 43 (3) of the Constitution an MP who commands the trust of majority of MPs in Parliament should be appointed Prime Minister by the President.

"Even if we leave out MP Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, we have 107 seats in Parliament including those of the SLMC. We need only six more to prove Parliament majority," a senior UNP MP said.

He said that during the Sunday meeting, the President had told the Prime Minister the SLFP MPs who were not willing to join the SLPP would join the UNF government within the next two days.

UNP MP Nalin Bandara said their party would submit a list of names of MPs who were willing to form the UNF government to the President on Thursday evening and the list would prove the UNF’s majority in the House.

The portfolios of the SLFP ministers joining the UNF government would not change as per an agreement between the President and the Prime Minister. However, the two leaders have agreed to effect a change with regard to the Foreign Minister post which was now under the UNP, sources said.

The TNA had expressed its willingness to support the UNF government but would not accept any ministerial portfolios, its parliament group leader R Sampanthan said.

Several SLFP Ministers Start Talks With UNP While Some Plan To Sit In Opposition: SLFP Heading Towards Natural Death?

February 12, 2018

Several Cabinet Ministers representing the SLFP have expressed willingness to join the UNP, sources within the UNP confirmed, a short while ago.

This comes in the wake of a landslide defeat suffered by the SLFP at the Local Government polls. It is learnt that these Ministers are not willing to join the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramun, mainly due to personal reasons.

"They have opened up channels of communication. Some of them were previously in the UNP. So, they can come back to the UNP at any time," a senior party spokesman said.

Meanwhile, another group of SLFP ministers have informed President Maithripala Sirisena that they contemplate resignation from their ministerial portfolios.

This group is likely to sit in the opposition in Parliament and work with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna. Party sources added that the President might soon make a statement allowing the 'disgruntled' SLFP ministers to sit in the opposition.

"This means the SLFP is heading towards a natural death," a political observer who wished to remain anonymous said, commenting on the current state of affairs in the SLFP.

Although the SLFP-led coalition contested for all districts at the Local Government election, they only managed to secure 1.4 million votes, just over 13% of the country's total voter-base.

In terms of number of Local government elections held by the party, the SLFP only managed to secure the fourth place at the Local Government and even came behind the TNA.

It is the worst result the party has received at an election in its 67 year history.

The hounding of Udayanga

2018-02-13

As campaign rhetoric reached fever-pitch last week in the run-up to the LG elections on Saturday (10), the government stumbled on an unexpected news-nugget to feed its propaganda mill.

It came in the form of reports that Udayanga Weeratunga, Sri Lanka’s former ambassador to Russia and Ukraine, on whom court issued an arrest warrant in October, had been detained for questioning at Dubai airport on Sunday (4). This news snowballed in a manner that left the impression that the government was about to secure the extradition of a criminal ‘Red Noticed’ by Interpol. Several media reports referred to an ‘international warrant’ having been issued for Weeratunga’s arrest. The story dovetailed nicely with the ‘yahapalana’ government’s professed commitment to punishing the corrupt, especially from the Rajapaksa regime. Weeratunga is a relative of former president Mahinda Rajapaksa.

On Tuesday (6) police said a team would be dispatched to Abu Dhabi the next day to ‘bring back’ Weeratunga who was under ‘arrest’. The Minister of Law and Order Sagala Ratnayake reportedly made similar assertions on the campaign trail. However, Sri Lanka’s ambassador to the UAE in Abu Dhabi S. J. Mohideen responding to a phone query on Thursday (8) was unable to confirm whether an arrest had taken place, saying “nobody has informed officially,” and that he too was going by ‘what he heard from newspapers in Sri Lanka.’

It was not until Weeratunga himself made a statement on an evening TV news bulletin on Thursday, posted also on Facebook, that it came to light that Abu Dhabi authorities had acted to detain him on the basis of an Interpol ‘Blue Notice’. Weeratunga dismissed as untrue the claim that he was under arrest. He said the Interpol officers knowing they had no right to have a person arrested on a Blue Notice, released him after duly questioning him regarding his address and other details.

Still, the Police Spokesman was unable to confirm on Friday (9) whether it was a ‘Blue Notice’ and not a ‘Red Notice’ that had been issued. It was only by Friday evening, by which time much of the damage in terms of misinformation had been done, that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Law and Order issued a joint statement saying Weeratunga “was intercepted in the UAE on Sunday 4th of February 2018 when he attempted to leave to the United States.” Somewhat ambiguously it said he had been released subsequently, but was prevented from leaving the UAE till investigations were concluded. It described his detention as an ‘arrest’ “made on the basis of a Blue Notice issued by Interpol” and said a delegation of Lankan officials was in discussion with UAE authorities with the aim of deporting him.

According to Interpol’s website however, a Blue Notice is only “To collect additional information about a person’s identity, location or activities in relation to a crime.” A Red Notice is required “To seek the location and arrest of wanted persons with a view to extradition or similar lawful action.”
What is the nature of Interpol’s involvement in the case of Udayanga Weeratunga? Responding to an email query on Wednesday (7) as to whether Interpol has ‘issued a warrant for his arrest’ as widely reported in the media, Interpol’s Press Office replied saying “INTERPOL does not issue arrest warrants nor make arrests. These are always done by police in our 192 member countries in accordance with national regulations.”
It said “An INTERPOL ‘Red Notice’ is a request to provisionally arrest an individual pending extradition issued by the General Secretariat upon the request of a member country based on a valid national arrest warrant. It is not an international arrest warrant” (emphasis added). It stressed that “INTERPOL’s General Secretariat does not send officers to arrest individuals who are the subject of a Red Notice.”

Although there is no Red Notice on Weeratunga, politicians (including minister Mangala Samaraweera in parliament as recently as in May last year) have routinely and deceitfully referred to a Red Notice having been issued on him, in parliament and at press briefings.

If a Blue Notice is to collect additional information about a person in relation to a crime, then what is the crime in relation to which information on Weeratunga is sought? If we are to go by the stories vigorously propagated by some politicians, there are many. They include allegations of ‘supplying weapons to separatist rebels in Ukraine,’ the murder of an embassy employee, and fraud relating to the purchase of MiG-27 aircraft.
In 2015, then Foreign Minister Samaraweera fed the dramatic story of ‘weapons smuggling to Pro-Russian Ukrainian separatist rebels’ to the media. Since then other UNP parliamentarians too have pitched in from time to time, elaborating on this and other assorted claims. But of late the ‘Udayanga crime list’ has been whittled down to the MiG-27 fraud allegation, and the government has gone relatively silent on the other accusations. And no wonder.

A BBC Ukraine report of March 23, 2015 refuted Samaraweera’s claims regarding Weeratunga’s involvement in ‘weapons smuggling,’ quoting Ukraine’s foreign ministry spokesman Yevhen Perebiynis saying “this information has not been confirmed.” Though Sri Lanka’s foreign ministry alleged that the government of President Petro Poroshenkov had complained about Weeratunga’s activities, for which he was being investigated, the Ukrainian mission, then based in Delhi, said “the Embassy does not have information concerning investigations against Mr. Weeratunga.” The statement dated May 10, 2016 was in response to an email query seeking clarification as to whether Weeratunga was under investigation by Ukrainian authorities for any wrongdoing. As for the allegation that Weeratunga was involved in the murder of Noel Ranaweera - an employee of the Sri Lanka embassy in Moscow - the Press Secretary of the Russian embassy in Colombo, Evgeniya Altukhova confirmed on May 6, 2016 that Ranaweera died in a motor accident. Udayanga was not a suspect, a Russian man has been convicted and the case is closed she said, responding to a phone query.

The only allegation against Weeratunga that has not yet been decisively trashed is the vague accusation of fraud in connection with the Defence Ministry’s US$14 million purchase of four Ukrainian-built MiG-27 aircraft in 2006. The court twice rejected the FCID’s requests to issue an arrest warrant on him before finally acceding to the request after they named him a suspect in a B-Report in October 2016.

Udayanga Weeratunga may not have been an exemplary diplomat. He may have breached diplomatic protocol in failing to surrender his cancelled diplomatic passport. He may have irritated foreign ministry officials by not making timely arrangements to have the container with his personal belongings cleared from the port. He may have been an altogether troublesome officer. But does any of this justify the campaign of vicious lies directed against him by political opponents? In the public eye it would seem he is already a murderer, arms smuggler and big-time fraudster.
Punishing the corrupt is all well and good. But given the trajectory of Weeratunga’s case, since the change of government in 2015, his would seem to be a case of ‘give-a-dog-a-bad-name-and-hang-him,’ rather than anything like a crusade against corruption.

The Plight Of The Pangolin: Biodiversity Trade & Trafficking

By Amayaa Wijesinghe –February 13, 2018

The recent nabbing of a frozen pangolin in the kitchens of a Chinese restaurant in the heart of Colombo has shed a much-needed spotlight on the importance of curbing the illegal exploitation of these shy mammals which are a globally endangered species, and nationally a near threatened one. There are four species of Pangolin restricted to Asia. The one found in Sri Lanka is the Indian Pangolin (Manis crassicaudata), and is commonly called the Scaly Ant-eater (Sinhala: “Kaballawa”, “Aya”; Tamil: “Alungu”). Pangolins can be identified by the distinctive scales which cover their entire body, and they are found in both the wet and dry zones of Sri Lanka.

Although Pangolin meat, scales and bile have been used extensively in traditional Indian and South-East Asian medicines, there is no evidence that Pangolins in Sri Lanka were hunted for medicinal or Ayurvedic purposes. In Sri Lanka, pangolins are prized as bush meat. They usually get entangled in traps left for other animals such as porcupines, and are consumed by local communities. There is no past evidence to suggest that a roaring illegal trade was present in the country.

Increasing market demand

Today, the Indian Pangolin in Sri Lanka is under severe hunting pressure due to the rising demand for its scales and meat in East Asian markets, especially in the Chinese markets, according to the IUCN Red List 2018. The scales are either used whole or in powdered form in traditional medicines and as curios. The Indian Pangolin’s skin has also been used in leather manufacturing, particularly as footwear.

The market demand in the species available in Sri Lanka is driven even more today by the fact that the numbers of the Chinese Pangolin (Manis pentadactyla) and the Malayan Pangolin (Manis javanica) have significantly fallen due to trafficking, forcing smugglers and illegal traders to look towards alternative species of Pangolin, like the one present in Sri Lanka.

A booming illegal trade

It is suspected that Indian Pangolin populations worldwide will fall by at least 50% by 2039, if the demand and supply continue to rise unchecked. The IUCN has estimated that pangolin trade in just the last decade has seen over a million individuals crossing international borders, giving this shy mammal the dubious title of “World’s Most Trafficked Mammal”.

The market price for Pangolins have been known to start at $ 600 (Rs. 100,000) for a kilo of scales, and a kilo of meat can sell for anything upwards of $250 (Rs. 40,000). These values are double what they were in 2008, indicative of growing demand. According to the Environmental Investigation Agency, the known seizures of pangolin scales since December 2016 total more than 14 tonnes worldwide, and around 20,000 individual pangolins may have been hunted to supply this amount. This is the conservative estimate, and it’s alarming.

Last year, the Customs Department of Sri Lanka has reported four cases of pangolin products being caught at the Bandaranaike International Airport. In each case, the smuggler’s destination has been Chennai, India. The largest pangolin-related bust in Sri Lanka took place last year as well, when police in Kalpitiya discovered 130 kg of pangolin scales in the possession of 5 persons in a house near the Kalpitiya Lagoon. Wildlife experts estimate that approximately 150 pangolins may have been killed to extract the skutes. Police reported that these scales were earmarked for export to India.
Pangolins are nationally protected in Sri Lanka by the Flora and Fauna Protection (Amendment) Act No. 22 of 2009 (included in Schedule ll). The National IUCN Red List (2012) lists it as a Near Threatened species in the country. It is listed as endangered in the Global IUCN Red List. This makes it illegal to hunt and be in possession of a Pangolin or Pangolin products within country borders (or any other wildlife or flora protected by the Ordinance), and perpetrators stand to face penalties including fines and imprisonment.

A wake up call

The pangolin has never really penetrated into the public’s consciousness as a mammal which needs conservation in quite the same way that elephants or leopards have. This may be due to the fact that it is rarely seen by humans, being an elusive nocturnal eater of ants and termites. They also rarely survive in captivity. Only six zoos in the world have any, making it a mammal that is relatively unknown, especially in the West.

The recent nabbing of the frozen pangolin in Colombo has sparked public interest in protecting local biodiversity, and authorities such as the Department of Wildlife Conservation should use the momentum created to strengthen efforts to protect this scaly mammal. The crackdowns must come fast and strong, in order the nip the growing local demand in the bud.

The Ministry of Sustainable Development and Wildlife and other research bodies need to take up the mandate of carrying out more research regarding the numbers and habits of the pangolin in Sri Lanka. If not, we stand to lose this beautiful creature before we have even understood it.

House Democrats urge Trump to back aid for Palestinian refugees

Palestinian schoolchildren take part in a protest against the US move to freeze funding for UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestine refugees, at the Nuseirat refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip, 31 January. Ashraf AmraAPA images

Michael F. Brown Power Suits 11 February 2018

Two members of the US House of Representatives, Peter Welch of Vermont and David Price of North Carolina, sent a letter Thursday to Donald Trump expressing concern over the president’s freeze on “vital US contributions” to UNRWA, the UN agency that provides basic humanitarian services to more than five million Palestinian refugees in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

The letter additionally backs “bilateral assistance” to the Palestinians, though in fact funds given to the Palestinian Authority are used disproportionately on internal suppression in collaboration with Israel.

Even protests against Israeli occupation and Israel’s deadly assaults on Gaza are frequently deemed unacceptable by the PA.

Welch and Price were joined by 100 other Democrats in the House.

There was not a single Republican signer in the group. More than half of all 193 Democrats in the House co-signed the letter, though only nine out of 21 – two fifths – of Democrats on the important foreign affairs committee added their names.

Eliot Engel, the ranking minority member on the committee and a staunch pro-Israel Democrat, did not join.

The Democratic Party mustered an even lower percentage of signers from the Middle East and North Africa subcommittee. Just three out of nine Democrats there signed the letter and ranking member Ted Deutch of Florida was not one of them.

Democrats representing the party on foreign policy matters are too often PEP – progressive except on Palestine – or outright conservative when it comes to service on relevant committees.

Another notable absence is House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi.

Mixed bag

The letter itself is a mixed bag. Humanitarian support to ensure that the health, food, and education needs of Palestinian refugees are met is crucial.

Further aid to prop up a corrupt and non-democratic PA that is suppressing its own population is clearly far more problematic.

Democrats, including those who did not sign, are anxious to ensure that the PA continues its cooperation with Israel – which helps maintain a status quo of military occupation that has deprived millions of people of their basic rights for decades.

It is striking that support for the PA and its cooperation with Israel did not bring on board a single Republican and nearly half the Democrats. These members care even less for Palestinian refugees.

Who are the extremists?

The limits of the debate in Washington mean that discussion of Israel’s intentions and ongoing domination of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip is largely off the table.
Consider, for example, this tweet about the letter from Welch, whose intention to alleviate the pain the Trump administration is inflicting on Palestinian refugees is surely good:

Rep. Peter Welch

✔@PeterWelch

Joined 101 of my colleagues to urge @realDonaldTrump to continue vital @UNRWA assistance for 5 million Palestinian refugees. Instead of further entrenching the region in extremism, point these individuals towards peace and stability.

4:12 PM - Feb 8, 2018

He writes of the necessity to urge Trump to “continue vital UNRWA assistance for five million Palestinian refugees” and that “instead of further entrenching the region in extremism, point these individuals towards peace and stability.”

I get it. This is the “inside the Beltway” reality where up is down. There, the extremism is all on the side of the occupied, the dispossessed, the most disempowered, and not on the side of the occupier, whose overwhelming violence has led to their plight.

Aaron Maté, a host and producer with The Real News, calls out Welch on the flipped reality, tweeting in response that, “it’s the extremism of a US-backed Israeli occupation that blocks peace and stability.”

Aaron Maté

✔@aaronjmate

While it's nice you don't want Palestinian refugees to suffer more, it's rich to talk about the region's "extremism" & need to "point these individuals toward peace and stability" when it's the extremism of a US-backed Israeli occupation that blocks peace and stability https://twitter.com/PeterWelch/status/961709326799958017 …

5:18 PM - Feb 8, 2018

Welch and other Democrats need to move off the “peace paradigm” and begin to consider the Palestinian freedom paradigm.

Through Israel’s eyes

With Israel increasingly setting its sights on annexing the West Bank, we are no longer in a two-state framework, but one in which Palestinians are struggling for equal rights within a crushing system that violently robs them of any real control over their political, economic and social lives, and where they are routinely maimed and killed with impunity.

Unsurprisingly, there’s not a word in the letter about Israeli occupation or the right of Palestinian refugees to return to homes they were forced out of in 1948.

Israel’s long-running oppression of Palestinians simply isn’t addressed though the signers tout “robust and expanding US aid to Israel.”

They even resort to quoting Peter Lerner, a former Israeli military spokesperson, making the case that withdrawing support for UNRWA “will not contribute to security or stability in the region.”

Lerner may well be right about UNRWA cuts being destabilizing, but the choice of a professional defender of Israeli war crimes to make a progressive case is an affront to those who know the regional situation as well as Lerner’s history, particularly when there is not even an acknowledgment of the horrors Lerner has defended over the years.

It is a confirmation that even what is good for Palestinians is only deemed so in Washington if it is first and foremost good for Israel.

Yet the sad reality is that these signers generally are the progressives in the House. Those who wouldn’t even sign on to this watered down letter largely hold even crueler positions.

Still it is positive that more than 100 members of Congress stood up for support for refugees.

But they should be pushed to take bolder stances against Israeli violence, occupation and discrimination and get closer to where grassroots liberal Democrats now stand on these issues.

After the Saudi purge: The $106bn question hanging over the kingdom

MEE investigation raises doubts about how much money the Saudi state has seized. Numbers don't add up, sources tell MEE

Saudi Arabia says 381 citizens were arrested in purge, but most of their identifies remain unknown (MEE)

Dania Akkad-Nadine Dahan-Monday 12 February 2018 09:42 UTC

As the Ritz-Carlton Riyadh's $650-per-night rooms return to paying guests, a Middle East Eye investigation raises questions over the extent to which Saudi Arabia has cracked down on corruption.

Apple and Amazon are charging in to invest in the kingdom and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) will set off on a "kingdom roadshow" to steel investor nerves in Western financial capitals in the coming weeks.

But MEE's investigation reveals that basic questions remain over the events that started on 4 November when a group of royals and businessmen was summoned to the five-star hotel for what they believed would be a late-night meeting with MbS.

Riyadh's Ritz-Carlton, where many of the high-profile detainees were held since the crackdown began in November (AFP)

Instead, they were arrested and held in the luxury hotel. Some senior royals were beaten and tortured to reveal their bank account details and required hospital treatment.

After the majority of princes and tycoons were released, Saudi Arabia’s attorney general Sheikh Saud al-Mojeb said that more than $106bn had been seized from 381 Saudi citizens, according to a 30 January statement.

But MEE's investigation shows that very little is known about the majority of those who were locked up, what kind of assets they may have been forced to hand over and if - or how - the final figure tallies.

A financial advisor in the Gulf with detailed knowledge of several of the detainee said: "The numbers don't gel."

MbS and his supporters say that the crackdown was a type of "shock therapy" neccessary to rein in decades of high-flying corruption that have left the kingdom with a $52bn deficit.

"It's messy, it's disruptive, it has short term negative implications, but long term, it's a very positive development," Ali Shihabi, director of the Washington, DC-based Arabia Foundation, told CNBC.

But the lack of transparency around the campaign suggests that the same players and practices used before the purge will carry on.

Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst and director of the Brookings Intelligence project, said: "If it was a true corruption probe, then the government would have every interest in ensuring that everyone knew who was arrested and what the charges were.

"If those details are not available, it's because the Saudi government is trying to cover something up and that thing is that this wasn't about corruption at all. This is about raising money for a country that has a severe economic problem."

Who were the other 350 arrested?

The identities of around 30 of the Saudis arrested in the November campaign have been well-documented. The most prominent - and richest - is Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who was released last month, saying in an interview while he was still in the Ritz that it had all been a "misunderstanding".

'The majority of people? Nobody knows anything about them'

- Yahya Assiri, founder of Saudi human rights advocacy group Al-Qst

Others arrested included prominent businessmen from a variety of sectors; royals including Prince Miteb bin Abdullah who was once a contender for the Saudi throne, and several former and current government officials.

One detainee - Ibrahim al-Assaf, a current minister of state and adviser to King Salman - retained his role and, after his release, led the Saudi delegation at the World Economic Forum in Davos in January.

MEE has identified 34 detainees. But if, according to al-Mojeb, 381 people were arrested, then who are the others?

Just weeks before the November purge, a group of more than 60 clerics, human rights activists, journalists and poets were detained.

While the arrests garnered much less media attention, their identities are largely known to human rights organisations and have been compiled in a list by Al-Qst, a Saudi human rights organisation with an underground network of activists in the kingdom.

Not so those seized in November. MEE contacted four of the main human rights organisations which monitor Saudi Arabia - Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Alkarama Foundation and Al-Qst - to see if they could supply a list of the detainees.

Only Al-Qst had a list - and that had only 30 people on it.

"The majority of people?" said Yahya Assiri, founder of Al-Qst. "Nobody knows anything about them."

How much of that $106bn is hard cash?

Days after the first arrests in November, Saudi officials said that they aimed to seize $800bn in cash and other assets. Ten days later, that figure halved to between $400-$300bn. Now it's $106bn.

"What it shows is this wasn't very well planned and that's not a surprise," Riedel said.

One reason the estimate has dropped may be the difficulties Saudi officials have had in seizing assets outside of the kingdom. Some have been tied up in legal agreements that make change of ownership complicated or are in Swiss banks, where attempts to seize funds have been rebuffed, according to the Financial Times.

But even the $106bn figure raises questions. Dollar figures have only been reported for two settlements - those of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal ($6bn) and Prince Miteb bin Abdullah ($1bn) - accounting for $7bn. However, Bin Talal has disputed that amount and told Reuters in an interview last month that he didn't expect to hand over "anything at all".

In addition to the two princes, there are seven others who have reportedly settled:

Bakr Bin Laden, chairman of the Saudi Binladin Group, who is said, along with family members, to have transferred some shares in Saudi Binladin to the state, but whose company continues to be privately run. However, a well-informed Saudi source on Monday told MEE that Bin Laden is still in state custody
Waleed al-Ibrahim, chairman of Middle East Broadcasting Center (MBC), who has been ordered to hand over a controlling stake in MBC valued at more than $2bn
Mohammad al-Tobaishi, former head of the Royal Court, handed over unspecified amountof cash and property
Mohammed bin Hamoud Al Mazyad, former assistant minister of finance
Saoud al-Daweesh, former CEO of Saudi Telecom
Saleh Kamel, chairman and founder of Dallah Albaraka Group
Prince Turki bin Khalid

There were no reported details about what assets the other five offered, if any. The same Saudi source said on Monday that Amr Dabbagh, chairman and CEO of Al-Dabbagh Group, has also settled, but has not been released.

Saudi authorities have said they expect that $13.3bn of the $106bn to go towards the state's finances by the end of the year.

But the Gulf financial advisor familiar with the players, who requested anonymity because he continues to work in the region, said the numbers don't add up.

Aside from Bin Talal and Mohammed Al-Amoudi, a Saudi-Ethiopian businessman, he said, the other detainees "are all much smaller". If Bin Talal gave $6bn - and again, that's a figure he disputes - then how is it possible to get to $99bn from the rest?

"There are some people here worth a billion, maybe 100 million. Even if you do an average – there are 350 people. And each of them is basically worth $500mn – that’s $175bn. I don’t believe they’ve taken basically half of their wealth away from them," the advisor said.

One way to get to $100bn, he explained, is to factor in the value of property seized by the authorities - but that doesn't necessarily bring cash to coffers.

"Who are you going to sell it to?" the advisor said. "It's a desert place so it would be very difficult."

The other explanation is that the government may have told companies to whom it owes money - like Saudi Binladin Group which is reportedly owed around $30bn - that it will not pay off its debts.

Again, money is saved - but that's different from having cash in the bank.

Why don’t we know more?

Julia Legner, the regional legal officer for the Gulf at the Alkarama Foundation, explained that those detained in November depend on those in power if they want to operate - and still need their support to continue doing so. This is in contrast to those arrested in September, who have spoken out against the state in the past

"If you are a businessman or a member of the royal family, you need a network. You can't just denounce them," she said. "There is a lot of money and existence at stake."

Both Assiri and Legner said that while the disappearances and arrests were standard fare for Saudi Arabia, the volume of arrests in November, paired with the lack of information about who was involved, is unprecedented.

"Everyone in Saudi Arabia – he thinks, am I in the queue?" Assiri said.

READ MORE ►

The Sheikh of Ethiopia: How Saudi purge could disrupt an African country

And there are other unanswered questions, said Riedel. What are the conditions, for example, that have been set on those who are released? In particular, are they free to move their assets around?

"The obvious assumption would be that anyone who went through this experience, once they were released, would go home and try to transfer all of their assets out of the kingdom to the US and the UK where they would be safe," he said.

And there is still the missing answer to the ultimate question: where is that $106bn now?

MEE contacted the Saudi Arabia embassies in London and the US for comment, but did not get a response.

This article is available in French on Middle East Eye French edition.