Sinking Feeling With A Floundering Coalition

By Shyamon Jayasinghe –FEBRUARY 19, 2018

Shyamon Jayasinghe

What we have experienced over the last three years is a sinking feeling in the country and economy that a floundering and unworkable coalition has caused- far from a Lichchavi style harmonious governance.

Impossible Coalition

The so-called Unity Government myth is finally exposed. It was an impossible coalition to begin with. To be sure, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s model of a Lichchavi style consensual government where diverse parties with diverse interests can meet together is only good in concept. In the ancient Indian polity this was possible. Not in the contemporary Sri Lankan context.

The theoretical model of a consensual government  is predicated on the prevalence of common set of core values of a fundamental nature. In the context we have in our country today the UPFA that came in as the minor partner is embedded with an ulterior power game preset by the beaten Rajapaksa regime. That design was to white-ant the government as much as possible so that it will collapse along with President Maitripala Sirisena well before effective action can be taken to round up the thieves and murderers the former regime. More than what most people saw, the objective had been deliberately planned by the corrupt elements of Rajapakse camp. Most of the UPFA  inflow were acting not in the interests of any common policy objective but as deliberate agents for the old regime.

Destructive Acts from Inside

So, we witnessed Ministers Susil Premajayanth, Dayasiri Jayasekera, Dilan Perera, Mahinda Amaraweera and John Seneviratne performing destructive and comic tactics. They took turns to pine for  a Mahinda return, ostensibly to re-unite Mahinda and Maitripala and so on. Their tactics were never subtle but open and crudely visible to any discriminating political observer. Ranil Wickremesinghe and the UNP, by contrast, knew all this but avoided the escalation that these UPFA fifth column had been trying to cause.

That was very savvy leadership by the Prime Minister who in all his public speeches never forgot to courtesy the President. Any escalation would have led to implosion much before the elections and that was the result that the former regime hoped for. As a contrast, the UPFA limb kept up a hostile rhetoric right throughout. That was too open and transparent a process to be called white-anting. White-anting is a slow rarely discernible and insidious strategy, which these UPFA blokes were hardly capable of. For one thing, there was the urgency to bring down the government because the cases were progressing.

Weakening Role of a Fifth Column

On the other hand, all their undermining talk and rhetoric  achieved one sure overall outcome and that was to confuse the public, cause dismay among yahapalanaya supporters and disenchantment among the electorate. The local government election results reflected this outcome most certainly. More than a personal vote for Mahinda, the results represented a warning to the government.

The underhand efforts of the UPFA limb helped to weaken the yahapalanaya government morale. These Ministers never said anything positive about the achievements of the government- the restoration of democracy; of individual freedom; of transparency in government; of the rule of law; of the justice system; of the positive turn the economy  was visibly taking; of international cordiality and goodwill. These and other achievements had been ignored by these UPFA blokes who sought to highlight and to  openly criticise lapses. In particular, they seized the bond issue and whacked the UNP leadership for that. When the Commission reported no involvement of the UNP leadership in the bond saga these UPFA guys ignored that, too. They knew Ranil Wickremesinghe is the kingpin behind the UNP and the government and so they made it a point to criticise Ranil.

Disruptive Outcomes

Did you ever hear this UPFA fifth column ever criticise and show regrets over the ten year old regime of the Rajapaksa family? No. Did you ever hear any of them press for the completion of the serious cases against some leaders and cohorts of that regime? No. On the other hand, what you and I saw was a continuous undermining and barraging of the Unity Government. The UPFA limb of the yahapalanaya government created so much disruption and dysfunction, which in turn encouraged outside agencies like the GMOA and some trade unions to come out, use the new-found freedom and engage in wild cat strikes. What we have experienced over the last three years is a sinking feeling in the country and economy that a floundering and unworkable coalition has  caused, far from a Lichchavi style harmonious governance.

Read More

President Sirisena raises his sarong high up and pounces on SLFP Secretary Duminda – later apologizes !

(Lanka-e-News - 21.Feb.2018, 6.30AM) President Maithripala Sirisena who is these days in a  frenzy and behaving like a Sillysena from the loony bin had assaulted Duminda Dissanayake the Gen. Secretary of the SLFP, based on reports reaching Lanka e news. 

The reason for this wild and lunatic conduct of the president is : Duminda bitterly opposing the attempts made by the UPFA to enlist  the crooks of Mahinda Rajapakse group to form a government . Duminda had met president who is in an unhinged state these days after unleashing chaos and confusion in the country .  When Duminda had expressed his resentment against the latest moves and asked permission from president to cross over to the UNP, the president in a fit of insane rage like an inmate just released from the loony bin had attacked Duminda .

This incident took place at the residence of the president . No sooner  Duminda made the request than president had lifted his sarong high up and pounced on Duminda to assault him. Duminda had not retaliated because it is the president who was behaving like a rowdy. Later , after Duminda had gone , Sirisena alias Sillysena who always leaps before he thinks   has phoned Duminda . He had said ‘Dumi, Dumi and calmed him down .

Dogs Bark but the Caravan Moves...

  

2018-02-22

In response to the clarion call by the late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera, the nation safeguarded Democracy, in Sri Lanka in January in 2015.  Remarkably UNP Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, pledged his support to the common presidential candidate. Thus, on January 8, 2015, Maithripala Sirisena was elected as President. 

He polled 62 million votes as against 58 million polled by opposing candidate Mahinda Rajapakse.The people also gave a mandate to the President to appoint Ranil Wickremesinghe, as the Prime Minister. 

Despite the chronic economic crises, then prevailing in the country, under the’100 Days UNP Government’, programme, they restored the democratic rights of the people and granted economic relief to the people by cutting down the cost of daily needs. Rs. 10,000 pay hike given to the Government Sector was unique. Accordingly at the General elections held in August 2015, UNP polled 45.7% of votes. 

Moreover the UNP leader Ranil, gaining over 5,50,000 votes became the highest polled candidate. 

LG polls held under the new system and in the most democratic fashion, the SLPP with the blessings of Mahinda Rajapakse, gained 44.6%. The UNP received only 32.6% of votes, which was a visible decline of its popularity as against the 2015 election results at which they received 45.7%

At the recent local Government elections held under the new system and in the most democratic fashion, the SLPP with the blessing of Former President Mahinda Rajapakse, gained 44.6% and boasted victorious. The UNP received only 32.6% of votes, which was a visible decline of its popularity as against the 2015 government election results at which they received 45.7%. 

In the case of MR too, the popularity has declined from 47.6% to 44.6%. Following the 1977 land side UNP victory, the UNP leader, then PM J.R. Jayewardene in his maiden address to the Nation from the historic Pattirippuwa of the Sri Dalada Maligawa, announced that he was making his address not as the UNP leader but as the Leader of the Nation. 

On the Contrary, President Maithripala Sirisena, soon after assuming office as the President of the Country embraced utopian leadership of the SLFP, which commanded 5.8 million of his immediate political enemies. Ever since he got entangled in to an unwarranted political storm and in his unsuccessful attempt to take control of the SLFP, he even resorted to elevate politically bankrupt SLFP colleagues by giving ministerial portfolios. Some of these black and white kit boys did not care for pledges made to masses during polls. The poor farmers and the peasants were ignored and were intimidated without being provided their basic needs including fertilizer. But the people remained flabbergasted not knowing what to do. Millions in housing rent was paid to an actress, obtaining her premises for a ministry office, but remains unused and unoccupied. 

Rice, coconut and many other consumer goods have skyrocketed in the process. The first and foremost election pledge to bring the politically corrupts before the law dragged and lethargically delayed. 

On priority basis, service personnel and Buddhist monk’s cases were taken to legal task simultaneously where the PMs ill-made choice to appoint the economic driver to Central Bank crashed head on bringing him to disrepute. These were some of the reasons for the government’s downfall. 

In such a scenario, the much-delayed local polls were held. Though the head of the Yahapalana Government President Sirisena, who believed that he could compensate mercilessly attacked his partner in good governance; the UNP. In the light of his own goals, the strength of the UNP was reduced to 32% while the President who led the SLFP and UPFA ended up in the 4th place with just 13% votes. 

The President even resorted to elevate politically bankrupt SLFP colleagues by giving ministerial portfolios. Some of them did not care for pledges made to masses during polls. The poor farmers were ignored without being provided their basic needs including fertilizer

Adding insult to injury, empty vessels of the UPFA and SLFP are making the biggest noise, which has now become a mockery. Most of them who were rejected by people in their own electorates started to clamour to set up a SLFP Government and pressurize the PM to resign. 

The is more or less the most pathetic and ridiculous political drama in our recent political history. Sri Lanka has a written constitution and any person with average intelligence knows where the law stands. But for some of the Diyawanna folk, who do not even possess Ordinary Level Examination qualifications are day- dreaming to create ‘nobodies’ into ‘somebodies’. The people have given a clear mandate to the PM to continue his services until 2020. 

But the political lunatics think he should resign in the wake of the local government election results. If the PM should resign due to the fact that the UNP only gained 32.6%, what about the leader with barely13%? Isn’t it a case of the pot calling the kettle black? Ignorance of law is innocence. Dogs may bark, but the caravan keeps moving on...   

Nineteen injured in Kahagolla bus explosion

R.M. Somaratne  Ananda Hapugoda and Zahrah Imtiaz-Thursday, February 22, 2018

An explosion which occurred in a private bus plying from Bandarawela to Diyatalawa at Kahagolla set the bus fully ablaze injuring 19 passengers.

The passengers were admitted to the Diyatalawa hospital around 5 am yesterday.

Military spokesperson Brigadier Sumith Atapattu said the Military has ruled out any terrorist involvement in the bus which caught fire at Kahagolla yesterday.

Brigadier Attapattu addressing the weekly media briefing noted that given the nature of the blast, they suspect that an explosive such as a grenade might have been carried inside the bus causing it to explode. The Military is conducting further investigations.

Several passengers in transit from Jaffna, a group of Army and Air Force personnel enroute to the Diyatalawa Camp to report for duty and several members of the public enroute to Diyatalawa were among the passengers in the bus heading to Mahiyangana when the explosion occurred.

The passengers from Jaffna had broken journey at Bandarawela to board the bus heading for Mahiyangana which belonged to the same bus operator.

It had been the usual practice of the bus operator to service the Jaffna - Mahiyangana route with two buses with a transit at Bandarawela.The fire gutted the bus.The cause for the explosion had still not been established by the Bandarawela police conducting investigations.

The Diyatalawa Army base too has launched a separate investigation into the blast.

SRI LANKAN ACTIVIST HERMAN KUMARA GETS “TO DO AWARD HUMAN RIGHTS IN TOURISM”

Image: Herman Kumara speaking to press during a fishermen’s protest. ( SLB photo)

21/02/2018

Seefeld, 02.14.2018 – The internationally recognized human rights defender and director of the National Fisheries Solidarity Movement Sri Lanka Herman Kumara was awarded this year to the “TO DO Award Human Rights in Tourism”. The price is 2,018 awarded for the second time, awarded by the Institute for Tourism and Development in cooperation with the Round Table Human Rights in Tourism and Studiosus Munich. The award ceremony will take place on March 8, 2018 from 16:30 at the ITB in Berlin.

Herman Kumara is head of the “National Fisheries Solidarity Movement” (NAFSO), a network of 17 fishing organizations, trade unions and other civil society organizations in Sri Lanka for 22 years. The award-winning human rights defender committed to his organization for the recognition of traditional fishing and land rights, the education and training of women and children and for displaced people from the war. Other focal points of his work are the protection of natural resources, the peace between the various ethnic and religious groups and a stable economic and social development of fishing communities. Kumara sees herself as a bridge between these ethnic groups and religions and seeks to constantly dialogue with international stakeholders.

“The tourism strategy the government violated the rights of local people and deprives them of the means of livelihood,” said Herman Kumara. He compiled multiethnic research team that promoted the facts from their point of view revealed in an interview with the affected fishermen. These are too often overwhelmed by the rapid tourism development and a threat to their existence. Kumara: “Our goal is a prosperous coexistence in terms of tourism, which brings all the benefits and does not violate any human rights.“

The “TO DO Award Human Rights in Tourism” is awarded after the successful premiere last year for the second time. On the initiative of the Institute for Tourism and Development, in close coordination with the Round Table Human Rights in Tourism – a coalition of stakeholders from the civil society, tourism industry and policy – develop criteria for the annual award of the prize. Can be honored initiatives, projects and individuals who work in an outstanding manner for the protection and observance of human rights principles along the entire tourism value chain. A jury will select potential winners and then assessed their efforts.

“Especially in the anniversary year of human rights – 2018 marks the 70th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – we are pleased that we managed to anchor the issue of human rights in tourism firmly. Never neither the human rights of employees nor the local population may at destinations for grabs are, “said Claudia middle Eder, Managing Director of the Study Group in this understanding. He continued: “The strong partner at our side – such as the German Commission for UNESCO .

Back to business: Making people’s lives better

 Thursday, 22 February 2018

“People are the real wealth of a nation. The basic objective of development is to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. This may appear to be a simple truth. But it is often forgotten in the immediate concern with the accumulation of commodities and financial wealth.”

The purpose of politics is the betterment of the lives of the people as stated above by the late Pakistani Economist Mahbubul Huq. This purpose is not well served by spending an entire week finding an answer to the question of how the Prime Minister could be replaced. But now that our tail-chasing politicians have finally found the relevant page in the Constitution, we should do our bit to refocus their minds on the real priorities.

It so happened that the final report of the 2016 Household Income and Expenditure Survey just came out. This is a very good use of taxpayer money. The problem is that most politicians and officials do not use the information it provides. For the most part, the media neglects to present the results in understandable form, choosing to wallow in political gossip and speculation instead. But let us try.

It has been said that Engel’s Law which states that the lower a family’s income, the greater is the proportion of it spent on food is one of the best established of all the empirical regularities observed in economic data.

From a high of 60.9% of total household expenditures spent on food in 1990-91, the food ratio has declined to 34.8% in 2016, the lowest it has ever been for Sri Lanka. What that means is that 65.2% of an average household’s expenditures are now devoted to things like housing, transport, education, healthcare, personal care, entertainment and so on. This is what a better life means, practically. We can be happy about how far we have come over the past decades in terms of improving the incomes of Sri Lankan households.

But averages are averages. In the estate sector only 51.5% of household expenditure is available for non-food items. Until we see the gap between our plantation workers and the urban dwellers narrow, we cannot be content.

As can be seen from Figure 1, protein consumption has been increasing over the years along with our prosperity. This is a corollary of Engel’s Law. As the wealth of households increases, people shift from carbohydrates to protein. Carbohydrate consumption has declined over the past decades, as shown by Figure 2.

It is a good thing that carbohydrate consumption, especially sugar consumption, is going down. The greatest health problems for Sri Lankans are non-communicable diseases such as diabetes and hypertension. Reduced rice, flour and sugar consumption is definitely a good thing. If the population is not growing as much as in the past and households are consuming less rice and sugar, should this not be factored into our agricultural policies and the land and resources now devoted to these products gradually diverted to other purposes?

Fish consumption is increasing and will continue to increase. Would it not make sense to allow the use of paddy lands for fish cultivation as it is being done in Bangladesh? As reported by the Economist, in 2016 Bangladesh’s farmers produced 2.2m tonnes of fish in inland fisheries on land that used to grow crops in the past. That is more than what was caught in the wild, and more than fish farmers produced in any other country except China, India, Indonesia and Vietnam. Bangladesh’s domestic farmed-fish industry has doubled in size since 2008 and is 19 times bigger than it was in 1984.

It’s not that the government of Bangladesh made this happen. The decentralised initiative of Bangladeshi entrepreneurs was responsible. The difference between the two countries is that we have laws stifling such initiative.

The 2018 Budget Speech included language suggesting that, finally, the Government of Sri Lanka was beginning to get the point. It stated that the Paddy Lands Act, No. 1 of 1958, and the Agricultural Lands Act, No. 42 of 1973, would be amended to allow the farming of alternative crops. Mention in the Budget is not enough. Research and consultation must be done and legislation drafted. This is the kind of work our government should be doing, not engaging in futile debate about how to subvert the provisions of the 19th Amendment.

Cutting ties with Israel won’t hurt SA

DIPLOMACY

Na’eem Jeenah, Matshidiso Motsoeneng 15 Dec 2017 00:00

Among discussions to take place at the ANC national conference this week, and for which there is lobbying from all sides, will be a proposal for the ANC to call for the South African embassy in Israel to be “downgraded”.

Despite the particular perspectives of the pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli lobbies, this debate must be framed as a South African one with consideration of two critical issues:

• The practical implications for South Africa; and

• The balancing of our values and interests — which should always be considered in developing our foreign policy — and what it means for the South African nation, its character, benefits and future.

The debate follows a recommendation from the July ANC policy conference, which asks the national conference to choose between two options in order to “to send a strong message about Israel’s continued illegal occupation of Palestine and continued human rights abuses against the people of Palestine”. The first option is to “downgrade” South Africa’s embassy in Tel Aviv (no explanation is given for what “downgrading” means) and the second is “a total shutdown of the embassy”. Both are very strong recommendations.

Good relations between (apartheid) South Africa and Israel began after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Both states were facing isolation for their policies, which were condemned by large sections of the world’s population.

Those relations included defence co-operation, the sale of military hardware to each other despite the United Nations arms embargo against South Africa, Israel’s sanctions-busting that included exporting weapons to South Africa and exporting South African goods to the rest of the world, intelligence co-operation and the sharing of nuclear weapons technology, resulting in both countries developing nuclear weapons. South Africa also supplied diamonds and other natural resources to Israel, trade that continued after 1994.

Values and interests

According to South Africa’s foreign affairs white paper of 2012: “The values that inspire and guide South Africa as a nation are deeply rooted in the long years of struggle for liberation. As a beneficiary of many acts of selfless solidarity in the past, South Africa believes strongly that what it wishes for its people is what it wishes for the citizens of the world.” The document lists equality, democracy, human rights, human dignity, freedom, justice, solidarity, nonracialism, nondiscrimination, liberty and peace among the values that should drive our foreign policy.

South Africa’s national interests, it states, “can be articulated as people-centred, including promoting the wellbeing, development and upliftment of its people; protecting the planet for future generations; and ensuring the prosperity of the country, its region and continent … informed by a desire for a just, humane and equitable world order or greater security, peace, dialogue and economic justice”. The interests it refers to include “stability of the republic and the constitutional order”, and “growth and development of the South African economy”.

I will return to the issue of balancing values and interests.

Implications

A discussion on the concrete implications of a downgrade will loom large at the ANC conference. Let’s be clear that the policy conference recommended only a diplomatic downgrade, not an economic or trade downgrade nor any other constraint in the relations between South Africa and Israel. Yet much of the response to the recommendation has been scaremongering based on speculation about how Israel and its supporters might respond rather than what the recommendation says.

There are three broad areas of possible implications: diplomatic, trade, and social or religious.

The most obvious likely repercussion will be Israel’s reciprocity; it will similarly downgrade its embassy in South Africa. It has been suggested that this will constrain the possibility of a South African role in the Palestinian-Israeli peace process — a problematic argument for two reasons. First, there is no peace process to speak of and, second, South Africa has had no previous role whatsoever — not for lack of trying — and will have no role in the future.

Israel is immensely satisfied with the role of the United States — especially after President Donald Trump’s Jerusalem announcement, and its cosy relationship with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, and cares nothing for other players. This “warning” about South Africa’s “role” has repeatedly been used by Israeli lobbyists for more than a decade in an attempt to prevent criticism of Israel.

Some within the ANC are also concerned that Israel may force the closure of the South African mission in Ramallah, which could be negative for its engagement with the Palestinians. This fear is unwarranted. A look at other experiences, particularly Venezuela and Bolivia, is instructive.

After the 2008-2009 Israeli onslaught on Gaza, Venezuela expelled Israeli diplomats; Israel reciprocated. Bolivia also severed ties with Israel in January 2009, and President Evo Morales continues to use harsh rhetoric against Israel. Yet Venezuela opened a mission in Ramallah in April 2009, and both its and Bolivia’s missions have been upgraded to ambassadorial level. This suggests that a downgrade of South Africa-Israel relations will not affect South Africa’s Ramallah mission and will not impede ties with the Palestinians. Indeed, this will be South Africa’s opportunity to upgrade the Ramallah mission to an embassy.

Whether there are any trade implications from a downgrade will depend on how Israel responds. Even if Israel places obstacles to trade between the two countries, the effect will be insignificant. As many in the pro-Israel lobby acknowledge, trade volumes are not significant enough to be of great concern to South Africa.

The country might struggle initially to redirect its exports to other markets but that is not impossible. And Israeli imports can easily be replaced with substitutes from elsewhere or, as the Western Cape desalination project demonstrates, by locally developed technology. Israeli technology is not indispensable.

The notion that Israeli companies divesting from South Africa (which is unlikely) will have a significant negative effect on employment is also untrue. Israeli companies employ only small numbers of South Africans, and some use almost all Israeli employees. Even if Israel responds harshly, the effect on employment will be negligible.

Some of the fearmongering suggests a downgrade will negatively affect South African Jews and Christians and their ability to travel to Israel/Palestine. This is nonsensical. The ANC has no intention to take such steps, and this fear can only be realised if Israel denies entry to Jews and Christians.

Over the past few years, those prevented from entering Israel or are harassed, deported and banned are Muslims and others who oppose Israel’s apartheid, including two Cabinet ministers and Christian witnesses with the World Council of Churches’ Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme. Jews have no difficulty, and only those critical of Israel might.

Again, Venezuela and Bolivia are useful examples. Their Jewish populations continue to enjoy normal ties with Israel, and the Chavez government even secured Jewish religious sites in 2009, protecting the country’s Jewish population from protests against Israel’s 2008-2009 Gaza massacre, the kind of responsibility that the South African government should also adopt.

Although there is a desire to balance our values and interests, South Africa’s values are in our interest. Consider that the previous good status that South Africa enjoyed globally was due entirely to its moral standing, not the size of its trade figures or its military.

The degradation of its status is a result of its ethical and moral decay. Reasserting our position from a value-based perspective, emphasising justice, international law and solidarity, will enhance rather than deprecate its national interests.

Yes, there is a possibility of some negative implication for South Africa if it downgrades its diplomatic relationship with Israel. But a close examination indicates it is not enough to cause great concern.

Indeed, the price South Africa might pay will be worth it, for it will represent another front in the battle against this manifestation of apartheid and colonialism, and will allow the country to act with integrity and persuade other states to do the same. The moral capital alone will be worth more than any potential losses.

Na’eem Jeenah is executive director of the Johannesburg-based think-tank, the Afro-Middle East Centre, and Matshidiso Motsoeneng is a researcher at the centre

Israeli forces kill two boys in Gaza boundary area

Relatives mourn during the funeral for Salem Muhammad Sabah, 17, and Abdallah Ayman Armelat, 15, in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, 18 February. The boys were killed by Israeli shelling the previous day.

Ashraf AmraAPA images

Maureen Clare Murphy-20 February 2018

Two Palestinian boys were killed by shelling amid a series of attacks on Gaza by Israeli occupation forces since Saturday.

Israeli forces hit several sites allegedly used by Palestinian armed groups in Gaza over the weekend and early Monday after four soldiers were wounded by an explosive device Israel says was planted along the Gaza-Israel boundary midday Saturday.

Armed groups in Gaza responded by firing rockets towards Israel, causing no injuries.

Salem Muhammad Sabah, 17, and Abdallah Ayman Armelat, 15, were fired on by Israeli soldiers as they approached Gaza’s southeastern boundary with Israel on Saturday night.

Israeli soldiers operate under an apparent shoot-to-kill policy in Gaza’s boundary areas. The exact range of the zone is undeclared but is generally understood to be within 300 meters of the Gaza-Israel boundary.

Israeli forces prevented medical teams from recovering the teens’ bodies until the following morning, according to Al Mezan, a human rights group based in Gaza.

Al Mezan stated that the children “posed no imminent threat of death or serious injury” to soldiers.
Two additional children sustained minor injuries during the same incident.

Indiscriminate fire

The deaths of the two boys came days after rights groups revealed that the Israeli military launched missiles at children playing on a Gaza beach without first identifying the targets during its 51-day offensive in summer 2014.

Four boys aged between 10 and 11 were killed during the 16 July 2014 strike, which was witnessed by international journalists at a nearby hotel.

Israel closed its investigation into the killings one year later without taking any action.

The rights groups Al Mezan and Adalah have pressed for the release of materials related to the investigation and are appealing the closure of the Israeli military’s internal probe of the incident.

A soldier involved in the strike told military investigators that soldiers were operating “on the assumption that there [were] only Hamas members there.”

The military made no efforts “to ascertain whether the targets on the ground were civilians, let alone children, prior to intentionally directing the attacks against them,” according to Al Mezan and Adalah, a group based near Haifa.

“The Israeli military was obligated to do everything feasible to verify that the individuals to be attacked were not civilians,” Muna Haddad, an attorney with Adalah, stated in a press release.
“Entry into a military area is not sufficient in order to [justify] attack and an attack of this nature is therefore a gross violation of the principle of distinction and of Israel’s responsibilities under international humanitarian law.”

Hundreds of protesters shot by live bullets

Hundreds of Palestinian protesters have been injured by live ammunition fired by the Israeli military after US President Donald Trump declared that the US would recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in early December.

Nine Palestinians in Gaza have been killed in such protests over Jerusalem.

“This reality is a direct result of the military’s open-fire policy near the perimeter fence, which includes gunfire – also by snipers – at stone-throwers who pose no danger whatsoever,” the Israeli rights group B’Tselem stated last week.

One of those killed was Ibrahim Abu Thurayya, a 29-year-old double amputee who had already been injured three times by occupation forces.

He was shot in the leg during confrontations with soldiers east of Gaza City in 2001, shot in the stomach in the same location in 2004 and lost both of his legs as a result of a missile strike in 2008, according to B’Tselem.

Abu Thurayya was apparently known by name to the Israeli soldiers along the Gaza boundary fence.
Two days before Abu Thurayya was shot in the head, according to witness testimony given to B’Tselem, an Arabic-speaking soldier using a bullhorn said, “Go away, Ibrahim.”

The same witness told B’Tselem that Abu Thurayya would lift up his shirt “to show the soldiers that he wasn’t armed and that he posed no threat to anyone.”

Children shot by live fire

Ten Palestinian teenagers under the age of 18 have been shot and injured by soldiers using live fire during protests along the Gaza-Israel boundary so far this year.

Khalil Abu Habal, 17, was running away from the boundary in northern Gaza when he was shot in the right thigh, causing a bone fracture, on 9 February.

In a separate incident that same day, Akram al-Sharafi, 16, was throwing stones when he was shot by soldiers stationed in a watchtower along Gaza’s northern boundary.

He too was hit in his right thigh. According to Defense for Children International Palestine, the bullet caused a three- to four-inch opening and “serious damage to his femur, arteries and nerves before exiting through his left thigh.”

Thaer al-Astal, 15, tripped and fell when he was running away from the southern boundary east of Khan Younis on 2 February.

“When I rose, I looked toward the border and saw a soldier on top of a truck pointing his gun in my direction. I heard the sound of one live bullet and I fell to the ground,” the boy told Defense for Children International Palestine.

The group said that the bullet entered the boy’s “left lower back and exited his upper left thigh.” The injury caused a fracture in Thaer’s left hip “and caused nerve damage that may result in permanent paralysis.”

Also injured that same day during confrontations with soldiers in northern Gaza was Arkan Saad, 17.
“I bent over to pick up a stone from the ground when I heard the sound of one live bullet,” Arkan told Defense for Children International Palestine.

“I felt something under my left armpit between my back and my chest. It felt as hot as boiling oil.”
Doctors removed three pieces of shrapnel from the boy’s body.

“X-rays showed three additional pieces of shrapnel settled near Arkan’s lung and heart,” Defense for Children International Palestine stated.

Twelve Palestinians – half of them children under the age of 18 – have been killed by Israeli fire in the West Bank and Gaza so far this year.

Two Israelis were killed by Palestinians in the West Bank during the same period.

Netanyahu aide 'agrees to implicate PM over corruption claims'

Israeli media report that Shlomo Filber has made a deal to testify after being arrested

 Benjamin Netanyahu has not been named as a suspect, but may soon be questioned. Photograph: Amir Cohen/Reuters

 Oliver Holmes in Jerusalem Wed 21 Feb 2018 14.54 GMT

The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who is battling for his political career in the face of various corruption allegations, has suffered a potentially devastating blow after a former confidant reportedly agreed to turn state witness.

A week after police recommended the country’s second-longest serving prime minister be indicted for bribery, Israeli press reported that Shlomo Filber would testify against his former boss to avoid jail.

Police did not confirm whether Filber, a Netanyahu appointment who headed the ministry of communications, would testify, but all major Israeli media reported that a deal had been reached.
Filber was arrested on Tuesday on on allegations that he promoted regulations worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the telecomms company Bezeq in return for a news website run by its principal shareholder providing favourable coverage of Netanyahu and his family.

The shareholder, Shaul Elovitch, is also in custody along with his wife and son. Former reporters at the Walla! news outlet have claimed they were pressured to avoid negative reports on the 68-year-old prime minister.

Elovitch has denied the allegations. Filber’s legal team has not commented.

Police also announced that they had arrested Nir Hefetz, a former Netanyahu spokesman, this week, alleging that he tried to bribe a judge to drop a fraud case against Netanyahu’s wife.

The prime minister has not yet been named as a suspect in the case, but he is expected to be questioned. Netanyahu denies any wrongdoing and claims a media-led witch-hunt has sought to remove him from office.

Appearing in a video released late on Tuesday, he said the accusations were “total madness”.
Government critics hope Filber’s testimony will open a fissure in Netanyahu’s inner circle that may force him to step down early, despite promising to remain in office until elections in 2019.

Aluf Benn, the editor-in-chief of the leftwing newspaper Haaretz, wrote a piece headlined The Final Days of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Rule. Others have speculated about snap elections, possibly as a last-ditch attempt to stall legal proceedings.

Avi Gabbay, head of the opposition Labour party, said on Tuesday night: “The events of the last two days and recent hours make very clear. The Netanyahu age is over. We must prepare for an election soon.

“The criminal house of cards the prime minister built in recent years - corrupting the civil service, harming the rule of law, threatening freedom of the press and more than all else, dividing Israeli society - is crashing down on him and around him.”

Despite months of mudslinging, Netanyahu’s delicately-balanced governing coalition has held together, but his once-sturdy political foothold appeared shaken last week when police declared they were recommending the country’s attorney general indict him for “bribery, fraud and breach of trust” in two separate cases.

Case 1000, also know as the “gifts affair”, involves claims that he and his family received around £200,000 in gifts from international billionaires, including expensive cigars, pink champagne and jewellery for his wife. Alleged wealthy benefactors include the Hollywood producer and media magnate Arnon Milchan and the Australian businessman James Packer.

In return, police said, Netanyahu had helped Milchan, a producer who has worked on Pretty Woman and Fight Club, on US visa matters and Israeli tax breaks.

Case 2000 relates to secret talks with the publisher of a leading Israeli newspaper, Yedioth Ahronoth, in which Netanyahu allegedly requested positive coverage in exchange for damaging a competitor, the pro-Netanyahu freesheet Israel Hayom.

Yedioth Ahronoth columnist Nahum Barnea wrote that Netanyahu’s days in office were numbered. While he still had a legal defence, Netanyahu’s “problem is the accumulation. When so many dark clouds accumulate in the sky, the chances of rain increase,” he wrote.

“The common thread that ties together all of the investigations is the excessively long amount of time that Netanyahu has been wallowing in the swamp of governing … the less cautious he became and the greater his sense of entitlement grew. His desire to eradicate rivals by any means, his disdain for the gatekeepers, his cynicism and his self-pity superseded his good judgment and he went too far.”
Having ruled for nearly 12 years over four terms, Netanyahu will now wait, possibly months, for the attorney general to make a final decision on whether to press charges.

Shortly after police released their recommendation to indict last week, a poll by Israel’s Channel 2 suggested Netanyahu could survive an election despite the corruption claims. The survey found that if an election were held, his Likud party could gain a seat. It also found that 48% of respondents believed he should quit in the wake of the allegations, and 40% said he should stay on.

Pakistan Supreme Court rules ousted PM Sharif cannot lead his party

Kay Johnson, Asif Shahzad-FEBRUARY 21, 2018

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan’s Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered that ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif be removed as head of the political party he founded, six months after the court disqualified him as the country’s leader over unreported income.

The new ruling could throw into disarray Senate elections due on March 3, with opposition figures saying it invalidates candidates from the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) nominated by Sharif.

The PML-N controls the lower house of parliament. Winning control of the Senate too would allow the PML-N to change the constitution to make Sharif eligible to hold office again when the party contests a national election due later this year.

Sharif is also being tried by a separate anti-corruption court on other charges - proceedings ordered by the Supreme Court last July - and could face jail when that trial winds up as soon as next month.

Wednesday’s order overturned a legal amendment by PML-N lawmakers allowing Sharif to remain party president despite being disqualified from public office by the Supreme Court for failing to declare monthly income of 10,000 Emirati dirham ($2,723) from a company owned by his son.

“The Election Commission is directed to remove the name of Nawaz Sharif as president of PML-N from all official records,” Chief Justice Saqib Nisar said from the bench.

“As a result, all steps taken, all orders passed by Nawaz Sharif are also declared to be as if they had never been taken.”

Sharif denies any wrongdoing and has said his family fortune was obtained legally.

Sharif’s party retains a majority in the National Assembly and has vowed it will be vindicated in elections held this year, in which his brother will be the prime ministerial candidate.

While the national election is voted upon by the public, the Senate election is conducted by members of the National Assembly and the local assemblies of Pakistan’s four provinces.

“DISGRACE”

The legal cases against Sharif have been spearheaded by opposition politician Imran Khan, a former international cricketer whose party cheered Wednesday’s decision as a victory against corrupt politics.

Members of Sharif’s party were defiant on Wednesday.

“This is Pakistan. Nawaz Sharif will run PML-N even if he is in a jail cell,” said a government official from Sharif’s party, speaking on condition of anonymity.

“It will send an impression among people, and in our party that these actions are being taken to pressure Nawaz Sharif,” Zafrullah Khan, Sharif’s ruling party legal adviser, said to Geo TV. “It will benefit us.”

Sharif has said his removal from office was part of a political conspiracy against him, and his party and the judiciary have engaged in an escalating war of words.

Sharif has served as prime minister twice before and each time was removed from office - in 1993 by presidential order and in 1999 by a military coup that saw him jailed and later exiled before returning when General Pervez Musharraf stepped down.

Faisal Chaudhry, a lawyer for one of the 17 opposition party petitioners who sought Sharif’s removal as party head, said the court decision invalidated all of Sharif’s decisions since last July, including the candidates he nominated for the Senate election.

“My understanding is that the candidates can still contest but as independent and not as Nawaz Sharif’s party ticket holders,” Chaudhry said.

Khan’s party praised the ruling, saying it was a “disgrace to the constitution to appoint a person who has been disqualified by the court for dishonesty and corruption”.

If America Is First, Is NATO Second?

An interview with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg answers journalists' questions as he arrives to attend the 54th Munich Security Conference on February 16, 2018 in Munich. ANDREAS GEBERT/AFP/Getty Images

By Robbie Gramer-| February 20, 2018, 7:30 AM

At this year’s Munich Security Conference, tensions in the U.S.-European relationship were on full display. Top European officials slammed President Donald Trump’s “America first” vision, and leaders grappled with how to manage Russian aggression and other threats. Back in Washington, special counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of 13 Russians for alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election was announced on Friday, the first day of the conference. The news prompted U.S. national security advisor H.R. McMaster, in Munich for the event, to describe Russian interference as “incontrovertible,” followed by a rebuke on Twitter from Trump.

Amid the drama, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg sat down on the sidelines of the conference for an interview with Foreign Policy’s diplomatic reporter, Robbie Gramer, to discuss U.S.-NATO relations under Trump, tensions with Russia, a new NATO mission in Iraq, and the deterioration in Turkey’s relations with the West. This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.

Foreign Policy: President Donald Trump has hounded NATO members to boost their defense spending. Is NATO doing that?

Jens Stoltenberg: NATO has delivered a very good start. What we decided in 2014 was to stop the cuts and move toward spending 2 percent of GDP on defense. The cuts have stopped. We are increasing defense spending across Europe and Canada, and we are moving toward 2 percent.

In 2014, when we made the decision, only three nations met the 2 percent pledge. This year, it will be eight, and it will increase further in the years to come. So we are making progress. But we still have hard work. We still have a long way to go, but after the years of decline, we now see that European allies have turned a corner.

FP: In your personal conversations with Gen. McMaster and President Trump, have they expressed satisfaction with how NATO has responded to their requests to boost spending, or are they still not satisfied?

JS: They have said what I expect them to say: This is a good start, but we need more. And I totally agree with them. President Trump said the money is “pouring in,” referring to the increase of defense spending across Europe and Canada. But again, this is the beginning. This is a start. We didn’t promise to meet the 2 percent target the next year. We promised to move towards 2 percent within the decade, and we are moving.

More countries will meet the 2 percent target. So we are addressing burden-sharing. European allies are stepping up, both with more spending, but also with adding more troops to our collective defense in Europe. The United States is increasing their presence in Europe, and we welcome that very much.

The U.S. reduced its military presence in Europe after the end of the Cold War; the last American battle tank left Europe in autumn 2013. Now, the U.S. is back with a armored brigade and with the more supplies, more equipment, and money for infrastructure.

FP: Many European allies were nervous when President Trump came into office. Do you worry about the future of the trans-Atlantic bond under Trump?

JS: President Trump has clearly stated that he’s committed to NATO and to the trans-Atlantic bond, not only in words, but also in deeds. The United States is now increasing their presence [in Europe], so I think actions speaks louder than the words.

Second, we have to remember that NATO is an alliance of 29 democracies with political leaders from different political backgrounds, with different views on many issues. But we have always been able to overcome those differences and agree on the core task of NATO: that we stand together and protect each other because that is in the interest of the United States, North America, and Europe. Look back at on NATO history: We had the Suez Crisis, the Iraq War — we had disagreements on many issues. But NATO has always been able to unite around [its] core tasks.

FP: You said NATO is an alliance of 29 democracies. But one NATO member, in particular, is turning away from democracy: Turkey. How concerned are you about Turkey in NATO, particularly given its tensions with Washington and Europe?

JS: Turkey is a key ally for several reasons, not least because of its strategic geographic location, bordering Iraq and Syria and also Russia in the Black Sea.

Turkish infrastructure, bases, airports have been extremely useful in the fight against ISIS. Turkey is also the NATO ally that has suffered, by far, the most terrorist attacks. They have legitimate security concerns, but we of course expect that they address them in a proportionate and measured way.

Turkey also suffered a failed coup in 2016, a bloody coup. The plotters bombed the parliament and killed many people. Those who are behind the failed coup attempt must be prosecuted based on the rule of law. The rule of law, democracy, and individual liberty are core values for NATO. I underline that in my meetings in many NATO capitals, including Ankara.

FP: But you said “29 democracies.” Do you still consider Turkey a democracy?

JS: Turkey is a NATO ally. There are elections in Turkey and we just expect Turkey to adhere to NATO’s core values.

FP: How would NATO respond if Russia did in the Baltics what it did in Ukraine? The “little green men” situation. Would NATO trigger Article 5 in that situation?

JS: First, we don’t see any threat against any NATO ally and therefore, I’m always careful speculating too much about hypothetical situations. But what I can say is that anything like what happened in Crimea and Ukraine would, of course, trigger a response from the whole alliance, because NATO is there to defend and protect all allies against any threat.

NATO’s core task is to protect all allies based on the idea, “One for all and all for one.” We deployed battlegroups for the first time to this part of Europe. The combat-ready battlegroups, which are multinational, send a very clear signal that NATO is there to protect [allies]. If any NATO ally is attacked, NATO is already there.

The purpose of our presence is not to provoke a conflict, but it is to prevent a conflict. That is how NATO, for almost 70 years, has preserved the peace in Europe by providing credible deterrence. We implemented the biggest reinforcement of collective defense since the end of the Cold War, with increased defense spending, a direct result of Russia’s aggressive actions. We’re making sure that nothing similar will ever happen to a NATO-allied country.

FP: NATO just recently announced a new training mission in Iraq. What will the mission entail? How big will the mission be, and when will it be deployed?

JS: We have some training activities in Iraq, which is deployed to Baghdad, including mobile training teams there. The plan now is to scale up these activities by establishing a training mission. It will provide us with a better footing for the whole operation, including access to common NATO resources.

We decided at the defense ministerial meeting this week to start planning, and the aim is to make final decisions at the NATO summit in July. We are looking to help Iraq with professionalizing their armed forces, building military schools, military academies, to train the trainers so they can in turn train soldiers themselves. We can also help them build and reforming their security infrastructure, including the Ministry of Defense and joint chief of staffs. I just met Haider al-Abadi, the prime minister, and he very much welcomed NATO’s efforts, what we do already and the plans to scale up. He asked for more, and we are now planning how to scale up the support for Iraq.

FP: NATO has said in the past it would trigger its Article 5 collective defense clause in response to a cyberattack. Does that threat still hold? What type of cyberattack would trigger that?
JS: A cyberattack can trigger Article 5 because we know that cyberattacks can be as harmful as kinetic attacks.

Cyberattacks can cause human suffering, can destroy infrastructure, and can also undermine military capabilities. We have made it clear that if we really see these cyberattacks, then we could possibly trigger Article 5. We would never exactly define where the threshold is, because we won’t give that kind of information to potential adversaries. We are also doing a lot to strengthen our own cyber defenses.

FP: Some allies have expressed growing concern about Russian military buildup in the Arctic. How should NATO counter this? Does NATO have a role to play in the Arctic?

JS: NATO is in the Arctic. Half of my own country [Norway] is above the Arctic Circle. The Joint Force Command of the Norwegian forces is located north of the Arctic Circle. Most of the Norwegian military forces are north of the Arctic Circle. So NATO is in the Arctic already.

But, at the same time, we used to say that “in the High North, we have low tensions.” We see increased tensions in the North, but we have to continue to strive for lowering the tensions and build cooperation we have developed with Russia over decades. Even during the Cold War, we saw cooperation between NATO allies and the Soviet Union up in the north. So we have to be present, but in a proportionate, defensive way.

FP: Several German media outlets are reporting German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen is favored to succeed you as NATO’s next secretary-general. Is this true?

JS: Ursula von der Leyen is a great political leader and a great defense minister. I appreciate working closely with her. My focus now is on the fact that I’m going to be secretary-general for almost three more years, so for me, it’s a bit early to start to speculate on who’s going to be my successor.