Modern nation-state: A blow from Digana

Relative calm after days of violence in Digana: Are we incapable of co-existence and nation building? 

2018-03-09 0

Sri Lanka’s nation-building process, it appears, is a farce and the state-building process a failure. The communal tension in the past ten days, first in Ampara and then in Digana, Kandy, when seen together with the three-decades of separatist war and seven decades of ethnic disharmony between communities, tells us that Sri Lanka is yet to become a modern-nation state. 

A nation’s development is assessed not by the number of highrise buildings or flashy cars on the road, but by its people’s collective will to regard humanity as one and rise above differences based on group identities, such as race, religion, caste or ideology.  A state reaches the height of civilization when a human being within its boundaries is safe from the actions, words and even thoughts of another human being.  Although, even the most liberal states have not reached the idealistically preferred level of civilization, it is progress when states strive for it. On the contrary, it is degeneration, when a state allows or encourages racism, prejudices and communalism.

With Sri Lanka yet to be liberated from dirty communalism,  incidents such as those in Ampara and Digana deal a crippling blow to efforts to establish an overarching Sri Lankan identity or “I am a Sri Lankan first” identity. 

Defining a nation-state only on the basis of a majority community is archaic, feudal in nature and preposterously inhuman. The modern definition of nation-state is multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and secular.  Sri Lanka, since receiving independence in 1948, has not taken serious step towards establishing the modern multi-ethnic nation state.  Instead, Sri Lanka’s post-independence leaders have played communal politics -- and as a result, the country was plunged into a 30-year separatist war, and, for the past several years, ethnic tension involving Sinhala racist groups and Muslims.  
We simply failed to build on the ‘Ceyloneseness’ we wrought at Independence and rise like Singapore, a multi-ethnic nation that has, by practising meritocracy, succeeded in establishing an overarching Singaporean national identity and emerged as an exemplary modern nation-state.  Last year, Singapore refused to issue visa to a world famous Muslim preacher, because he had said in a fatwa that it was un-Islamic to greet non-Muslims on their festivals.  The government contended that his views promoted religious discord. 

While Singapore has discarded ethnic politics, Sri Lankan politicians have adopted racism for short-term petty political gains, while causing long-term damage to the country’s well-being.  

While Singapore has discarded ethnic politics, Sri Lankan politicians have adopted racism for short-term petty political gains, while causing long-term damage to the country’s well-being

Racial prejudice is an acquired attitude. No child born into one community develops prejudices against other communities through instinct. Rather it is the parents, elders, politicians, religious figures, teachers, journalists and now social media bigots who poison innocent minds and make them racists.  In other words, it is society at large that makes one a racist.  The extent to which a person is racially prejudiced depends on the extent to which the society she or he lives in is enlightened. If children are brought up in an enlightened environment, especially the home and school environment, they would be less prejudiced.  Successive governments’ monumental failure in bringing about an enlightened society through the education system and government policy has nurtured prejudice and racism. 
A sociological explanation of prejudice is that it arises from competition over jobs and resources and also from political disagreements.  When groups vie with each other over these matters, they often become hostile towards each other.  A socio-psychological view of prejudice is that it arises when individuals who experience various kinds of problems become frustrated and tend to blame their troubles on groups that are often disliked in the real world (e.g., racial, ethnic, and religious minorities). These minorities are thus scapegoats for the real sources of the majority’s misfortunes.  In Europe, Jews were blamed for the bubonic plague and Germany’s economic recession.  (http://open.lib.umn.edu/sociology/chapter/10-3-prejudice/).  In Sri Lanka, Muslims are blamed for the low population growth rate of the Sinhalese.  

A fair share of the blame should also be placed on the minorities themselves.  For ethnic harmony sake, a minority community in a multiethnic society needs to be inclusive, while preserving its cultural and religious identity, without allowing the majority community to develop racial prejudices against it.  In this regard, the behaviour of a minute section of the Muslims indeed was provocative, to say the least, when they supported Pakistan while the Sri Lanka cricket team played against that country.  Such preposterous anti-national behaviour, seen at cricket stadiums and live on television, was condemned by the majority of Muslims, but, given the prejudicial nature of society, the entire Muslim community was stereotyped as anti-national. 

Racism and prejudice are not peculiar to one community.  They cut across all socio-economic barriers. Stereotyping the ‘other’ is part of prejudice.  So are efforts to assume a sense of superiority based on caste, race or religion. 

In a multicultural society that is partially prejudiced, majoritarianism represents the view that minorities can co-exist but whatever rights and privileges they enjoy are at the pleasure of the majority

In a multiethnic society highly steeped in prejudice, majoritarianism promotes the view that minorities need to be eliminated or expelled. This is happening in Myanmar where the Rohingya minority is being ethnically cleansed.

In a multicultural society that is partially prejudiced, majoritarianism represents the view that minorities can co-exist but whatever rights and privileges they enjoy are at the pleasure of the majority. This is what Narendra Modi’s India is turning out to be. Under his government, India’s Muslims feel they are second class citizens.

In an enlightened multiethnic society, majoritarianism epitomizes a caring older brother willing to share the parental property equally with his younger brothers.  Examples are Singapore, where the president is a hijab-wearing Muslim woman, and several Western nations, including Britain where a Muslim can become London’s mayor and a national cricket team captain.  

In Sri Lanka, majoritarianism manifests in all these forms. While the ethnic-cleansing majoritarianism is responsible for the Aluthgama, Gingtota, Ampara and Kandy mob attacks, the caring-brother-type majoritarianism manifested in the statements made by cricketing greats Sanath Jayasuriya, Mahela Jayawardena and Kumar Sangakkara and in the powerful speech made by Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake in parliament this week.  

But the responsibility to make Sri Lanka an enlightened society rests not with civil society alone. The Government should have a commitment towards nation-building – the creation of an all-powerful Sri Lankan identity.  Paying mere lip service to reconciliation and having ministries and offices for national unity and reconciliation would not help the nation-building process.  Politicians should become statesman or stateswomen with vision.

The mob attacks on Muslim properties and mosques rekindle the ugly memories of the 1983 pogrom against the Tamils.  Disregarding the pleas of the enlightened segment of society, the then President J.R. Jayewardene deliberately delayed the imposition of an islandwide curfew to teach the Tamils a lesson they would not forget.   

That this week’s attacks continued despite a curfew and the declaration of emergency is a serious indictment on the Government’s inaction and a breakdown of law and order.

There could even be a political conspiracy behind the race riots, given the undercurrents of the 2020 presidential race. Such ugly incidents -- taking place in the 21st century in a country blessed by the world’s four main religions -- shows the depth of darkness that we are in.  Are we a failed state, incapable of co-existence and nation-building?

Smart Phones and Stupid Governments: Blocking Social Media as Sri Lanka Burns

Featured image from Mangala Samaraweera’s Twitter

NALAKA GUNAWARDENE-03/08/2018

Struggling to contain a spate of Buddhist-led attacks on minority muslims, Sri Lanka’s government imposed temporary blocking of social media and chat applications on March 7. This followed the reintroduction of Emergency Regulations, for the first time since 2011.

The Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRCSL) has ordered all telecom operators to restrict access to Facebook, Viber and Whatsapp across the country for three days, Reuters reported. This is “to prevent the spread of communal violence”, the news agency quoted an unnamed government official as saying.

Meanwhile, AFP news agency added how Internet access has been stopped entirely to the Kandy district “after discovering rioters were using online messaging services like WhatsApp to coordinate attacks on Muslim properties”.

Blocking public communications networks is ill-advised at any time, and especially bad during a crisis, when people are frantically seeking situation updates or sharing information about the safety of loved ones.

Blocking selected websites or platforms is a self-defeating exercise in any case, since those who are more digitally savvy – many hate peddlers among them – will now use proxy serversto get around. It is the average web user who is deprived of news, views and updates. Such information vacuums can allow rumours to spread fast and wide.

But such finer points seem to be lost on the Lankan authorities, who did not have a contingency plan for crisis information management. That is despite some of us emphatically advocating developing one after experiencing chaos during monsoonal disasters in 2016 and 2017.

Of course, a wholesale blocking is much easier to order, even if wholly counterproductive.

On March 7 morning Dialog Axiata, the country’s largest telecom network, sent out a message and also tweeted to all subscribers saying: “On the directive of TRCSL in the interests of national security, access to certain social media sites and messaging platforms will be restricted with immediate effect until further notice.”

In reality, however, this is more a case of public order than a matter of national security. Faced with a major breakdown in law and order, the government should have policed the streets properly, before trying to police the Internet.

On that front, progress has been highly unsatisfactory up to the time of writing on the night of March 7. Despite giving the police enhanced powers and declaring night time curfews, mobs have kept on attacking Muslim mosques, shops and homes in the Central Province. Reports with images have been filed by both trusted foreign correspondents visiting affected areas, as well as by smartphone-totting residents of impacted localities.

I find it simply incredible that the police cannot quell these mobs, most of who are armed with just sticks and fuel cans. Is it because mobs are often led or instigated by extremist Buddhist monks, widely regarded as beyond reproach in traditional Lankan society?

In sharp contrast, the same police force has been deployed swiftly and ruthlessly in recent months against university students and trade unionists demonstrating peacefully on Colombo’s streets.

Police brutality, and not their docility or impotence, was the big concern on such occasions. So why is the police hesitant, or unwilling, to act against saffron-robed hooligans so openly defying and breaking the law?

Weaponised social media

In any case, the government’s blocking of social media and chat apps came too late to contain the current violence. The genie of hatred is well and truly out of the bottle, running amok as government plays watches confused.

We did not reach this point overnight. For many years, ultranationalists have been poisoning the public mind with racial and religious hatred. Some local language newspapers – in both Sinhala and Tamil – regularly use racially-charged language and accommodate extremist viewpoints. Privately owned TV channels, engaged in a fierce competition for ratings, have also sometimes played with fires of communalism.

Somewhere around 2010, Sinhala ultra-nationalists discovered social media, where there were no gatekeepers or restraints that apply – however imperfectly – in the mainstream media. Over the years, a few political and religious groups systematically ‘weaponised’ social media. They exploited the web’s facility to remain anonymous or use pseudonyms, and the social media’s great ease of sharing content.

Warnings have been sounded even if they went unheeded. Since 2014, social activists and researchers have gathered and analysed evidence of rising volumes of hate speech on Facebook, the country’s most popular social media platform (which now has over 6 million Sri Lanka Lankan users, nearly a third of the 21 million population).

In the first such local study published in late 2014, the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA), a non-profit, non-partisan group noted: “The growth of online hate speech in Sri Lanka does not guarantee another pogrom. It does however pose a range of other challenges to government and governance around social, ethnic, cultural and religious co-existence, diversity and, ultimately, to the very core of debates around how we see and organise ourselves post-war.”

While the Muslim communities in Sri Lanka – who make up 9% of the population – have been the direct target of online hate speech, the CPA study found how various other groups are also been targeted. Among them were human rights activists, politicians, clergy who advocate religious harmony, women, the LGBT community and citizens who don’t ‘identify with the hard-line Sinhalese Buddhist cause’.

According to human rights lawyer Gehan Gunatilleke, a law to deal with hate speech has been in the country’s law books for a decade. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Act No 56 of 2007 prohibits the advocacy of ‘religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence’. This law is fully compliant with international standards.

The problem has been its non-enforcement. To date, no one has been successfully prosecuted for this offence either online or offline. The police and attorney general seem to be unwilling to file charges using this law, despite some offenders posting hate-spewing videos online under their names.

End Impunity

Such a culture of impunity has clearly emboldened the racists, religious zealots and those brainwashed by them. They soon stepped up their vitriol online, and spread complete fabrications against minorities, especially the Muslims.

One oft-repeated claim revolves around a vast conspiracy ‘to make the Sinhalese infertile’ through food or clothes sold at Muslim-owned shops. The myth has been used in the past to call for consumer boycotts of such establishments (they failed). It is this fallacy that triggered an eruption of violence in Ampara, in the Eastern Province, on February 27.

Health authorities and medical professionals have reassured that no such ‘instant infertility drug’ exists, but the credulous continue to believe it. Other, more sinister tales of today’s ethnic minorities (especially Muslims) becoming majority in a few decades are also shared uncritically. Demographers have debunked them as complete nonsense, but the myth persists.

Social media is a noisy and contested space, for sure, but many have been using the platform to counter myths, misconceptions and prejudices. Notable among them is Kumar Sangakkara, former Sri Lankan cricketer and captain, whose social media following far exceeds that of political leaders. He has this week issued a passionate appeal for peace, harmony and restraint.

In recent days, thousands of men, women and children have expressed similar sentiments on social media. Some of them have offered safe haven to any Muslims under threat, while others have showcased rare instances where Buddhists guarded mosques against attacks.

The outpouring of goodwill and solidarity has yet to be mapped or quantified, but we certainly should not underestimate its symbolic value. Unlike in 1958 or 1983 – when earlier waves of ethnic violence erupted in Sri Lanka – today’s citizens are increasingly networked and expressive.

The temporary blocking of Facebook will pause such positive exchanges, but hopefully not for long.

Face new reality

Indeed, policy makers and regulators need to come to terms with this new communications reality. Gone are the days when government or mainstream media could control flows of information. For better or worse, that power has been democratised.

The challenge now is how to enhance everyone’s digital literacy as a strategy of strengthening the online community’s capability to counter hate speech, fake news and other abuses.

Sri Lanka’s Minister of Telecommunications and Digital Infrastructure Harin Fernando has been quoted saying that this week’s restrictions have been taken “as an extraordinary but temporary response to limit the increasing spread of hate speech and violence through social media websites and phone messaging applications”.

He has added, “Do not make the mistakes of our past generations…You have in your hands, technology that our forefathers didn’t even imagine was possible…put down your smart phones, let go of your hate and help make a new Sri Lanka that is good for everyone.”

When a few extremists weaponise airplanes, automobiles or other everyday objects, modern societies don’t stop using these inventions but instead step up precautions and preparedness. Similarly, Sri Lanka now needs to move to a new phase in its digital transformation.

We hope the government, the IT industry and civil society can at last have that long overdue public discussion on how best the web and social media can be optimised for national healing, harmony and growth.

The age of innocence has now ended, and a new era of cautious, enlightened engagement must soon begin.

Maithri- Mahinda Peacock dance recital; inside story -whither SL?

(Lanka-e-News - 08.March.2018, 11.45AM)  The  super luxury car – Bentley Mulsanne Hallmark bought for Rs. 1.6 million by Sri Lanka’s multimillionaire businessman Dhammika Perera entered the gates of a Paget Road residence , one night last   week .  Guess who came  out to enter the car  with two security personnel ? It was none other than Maithripala Sirisena , the president whose popularity has by now dropped to a most despicable 4 %  , but still holds the post of ‘honorable’ president of Sri Lanka . What happened thereafter is even more shocking ! This car with Sirisena went straight and stopped at a house in Flower Road ,Kollupitiya belonging to Dhammika.  The other individual in the Kollupitiya house anticipating Sirisena was another faceless , ruthless Machiavellian - ex president Mahinda Rajapakse.

The  secret discussion that took place between the ex president and Sirisena is no secret now to the country. Based on information seeping out , following the recent local government polls ,  the rift between Gotabaya and Basil has deepened .Sirisena however has used this rift to help Gota realize his dream . Hence, in that context  the Sirisena – Mahinda discussion was  most decisive.

Under the 19 th amendment ,Mahinda cannot again contest as presidential candidate. Yet under the constitution it is the presidential elections that should be held first. It is why Sirisena who  is having secret exchanges with Mahinda , inquired from the Supreme court whether his term can be prolonged to six years . The cabinet reshuffle in respect of the UNP alone without his party’s is also part of that conspiracy.

Basil –Gota rift escalates…

Roshan  Ranasinghe leaving  the Mahinda team was  an outcome of the rift. It was the justifiable contention of Basil , if Gota is to be  the presidential candidate , the Tamil and Muslim votes as well as those of Colombo and the Urban middle class cannot be secured, and he would definitely lose .

To illustrate his point , Basil  said , because Roshan made a big din in the entire Polonnaruwa district  that Gota is the next presidential candidate prior to the local government elections ,the Flower Bud could not secure the votes of the Muslims .Basil has proved that with evidence. 

At the same time Basil -Mahinda’s team had charged that Gotabaya during the local body polls the latter stayed put in America. It was also pointed out it was Basil who shouldered the entire election campaign , and that Namal gave the consent and support to it.. 

Gota was only issuing notifications from America , and after his return , the media cronies of Wimal inquired about Gota’s presidential candidacy, Basil accused.  The website of Wimal giving  publicity that the American citizenship of Gota   is going to be  cancelled , also came in for heavy flak from  Basil.

Meanwhile Dallas had said in a threatening tone ,it will be he (Dallas) who would  be appointing chairman , Vice chairman and members on ratio  to the Matara district local government ,and warned Basil ‘not to poke his fingers into those affairs’

It is following these frictions , the attempts to arrest Gota were initiated prior to the local body elections. Basil’s wealth and  political connections have contributed to that. Sirisena who learnt of this had immediately dispatched Gota to America for which Sirisena  received Mahinda’s blessings.

Basil and Sirisena are like snake and mongoose…

Between Sirisena and Basil is a deep  rooted grudge .Basil treats Sirisena as a ‘double- crosser and  enemy   who destroyed the future of Rajapakses. Hence Basil takes  the steadfast  stance that there cannot be any dealings or friendship with this double faced  Sirisena .It is the truth  that the Flower Bud won without having any ties with Sirisena.

During the Rajapakse era , there were attempts to push out minister Sirisena from SLFP general secretary post and take that to  Basil’s hands .  If Sirisena seeks to organize a protest or calamitous situation within the party against that , ‘Sirisena will be made to wear the jumper suit’ , Basil had boasted earlier on. Basil has evidence to ‘fix’ him perhaps.

Many have even reminded  to then  minister Sirisena , if he is to lose at the last presidential elections , and he was to wear the jumper suit like Sarath Fonseka had to, what amount of support Fonseka received locally and internationally. In the end ,Sirisena agreed to be the  common candidate axing Nimal Siripala De Silva because of the conflict between himself and Basil.

Owing to this ,it was Basil who became the accused when charges were mounted that he was responsible for chasing Sirisena out from the party , as well as the defeat at the last presidential elections. Though Gota was the one most blamed following the defeat , yet it was Basil who had to leave the country immediately owing to this , while Gota stayed back. The Basil- Sirisena  enmity has such a long history .

At all events , it is Mahinda who had to bear the brunt of all these issues . This is why Mahinda’s lackeys and lickspittles ,Vasudeva and TissaVitharane are gone underground these days. At a recent discussion among them, Vasudeva the bearded buffoon who has outlived his utility on earh had said , ‘somehow this government must be ousted , and Mahinda must be made president. It is only then we can wear red shirts without fighting shy and mount the stage.’  In the circumstances , until the final decision is heard from Mahinda about the presidential candidacy , Vasu and Vitharane have agreed that they pool all their strength to promote a general election , instead of getting involved in a presidential election.

It is well known until the last moment , president Sirisena tried his utmost to jointly contest the local body elections with Mahinda.That was because of the Intelligence division report predicting Sirisena’s humiliating defeat. Basil too had long before ,based on his calculations predicted correctly the victory of Flower Bud. All Sirisena’s efforts went down the drain because of Basil’s calculation and prediction. 

The pro Mahinda groups with president pressurized the latter irrespective of the past fiascos , to display his readiness again to join after the local elections. The president who was bragging that he had to do a lot of roaming in parliament to get the 19 th amendment passed , did a U turn and inquired about his period of tenure of office from the Supreme Court in order to confirm  that readiness.

If that effort was  fruitful , it was  agreed to hold the general elections prior to the presidential elections , and make Mahinda the P.M.  while devolving  the executive powers to the parliament. Yet because he lost ,Sirisena is urging the Rajapakses repeatedly to give room to make  Gota the presidential candidate. 

The maximum attacks launched on the UNP during the local body elections ,and arrests made based on the Bond scam just before  the elections were part of the aim and agenda jointly  with the Rajapakses . Yet , to their consternation nothing worked according to plan for them .

President’s last refuge….

Though President Sirisena  failed in all these efforts , he  did not abandon his sly maneuvers . Next he tried to send out the P.M. which also went awry. As a last resort he then insisted on a cabinet reshuffle only in relation to the UNP  .President Sirisena had  told the Rajapakse camp ,if  Mahinda is not agreeing to discuss he will be granting the law and order portfolio to Fonseka. 

Therefore if they do not come to an agreement , all the Rajapakse family members , as well as the pro Mahinda groups will have to wear the ‘jumper suits’, and if they wish to know about how probable that is ,  they can inquire from the Attorney General (AG) , the president had informed. 

The Rajapakses who got panic stricken had then decided to meet with Sirisena. The meeting between Maithri  and Mahinda recently at Dhammika Perera’s house is a sequel to this. Maithri had explained  the details to Mahinda , and the latter had asked for time to convey  his final decision.

The injunction order precluding the arrest of Gota being extended  , and the law and order ministry still remaining parked in the vicinity of Galle milepost is because of this development. Who will take oaths as minister of law and order , and whether justice will be done to the 2015-01-08 pledges ?

Answers to these questions will emerge  after  the decision to be taken by the Rajapakses today. Strangely , it is Athureilya Rathane Thera who separated  from the Rajapakses, who   is most energetically and enthusiastically  mediating to reconcile Maithri and Mahinda.

President Sirisena conducting a campaign  to chase out Ranil , and also subjecting  him to humiliation and degradation is another Peacock dance of his to please and ingratiate himself into the favor of Rajapakses. Thanks to Sirisena , the pro Mahinda Rajapakse groups have found their  much longed for climate to  create unrest and turmoil in the country .

 In all probability it is the Gota sidekicks and scoundrels who are  behind the violence and mayhem. Of course Basil is against this. It is Basil’s view , friendly ties with India shall be built even if Europe is left alone , and a free society and environment at least to some extent within SL  shall come into being.

 At this juncture , the sole and whole aim of Sirisena is , after his term is over to escape from the punishment of Rajapakses , go to ‘ Awake Polonnaruwa’  and spend the  twilight  of his life . In the process he is prepared to betray at any moment anybody who came out of the SLFP with him,  and dishonor all the  promises he made on 2015-01-08 . 

The disillusionment and disappointment of  President following his  popularity dropping steeply to a 4 % at the local body elections , had intensified his vindictiveness and anger.

Terrel Dunusinghe 

Translated by Jeff 

---------------------------
by     (2018-03-08 06:56:38)

Listen: Israeli lawfare “backfires” in New Zealand

On this episode of The Electronic Intifada Podcast: How Israel’s attempt to chill the boycott movement “has backfired” in New Zealand; Bay Area supporters of imprisoned Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi rally for her release.

Oakland protesters demand Ahed Tamimi’s release

Nora Barrows-Friedman- 8 March 2018

More than 100 activists gathered on 31 January at the Federal building in Oakland, California, to demonstrate in solidarity with Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi, who turned 17 in Israeli military detention that same day.

Protesters connected Israel’s military detention of Palestinian children to the system of youth imprisonment in the US.

“None of them should be in prison – we say no more cages,” a speaker said. “Free Ahed and all political prisoners.”

Tamimi was detained during a night raid in the occupied West Bank village of Nabi Saleh two months ago. She was arrested after video circulated showing her and a cousin slapping and shoving two heavily armed Israeli soldiers following an incident in which a soldier had shot in the head and seriously injured their 15-year-old relative Muhammad Tamimi.

Israeli leaders have vowed revenge against the Tamimi family and are subjecting Ahed, her mother Nariman and cousin Nour to military trials in kangaroo courts with a near-100 percent conviction rate.

Ahed Tamimi is one of some 300 Palestinian children currently in Israeli military detention.

Audio of the protest was recorded for The Electronic Intifada by Sajja Shawasheh of Arab Youth Organizing.

Israel lawfare group tries to intimidate activists

An Israeli lawfare group tied to the Mossad, Israel’s deadly spy agency, announced in January it was suing two activists in New Zealand who encouraged pop singer Lorde to cancel a performance in Tel Aviv scheduled for June.

However, the activists, Justine Sachs and Nadia Abu-Shanab, told The Electronic Intifada Podcast that they have not received any official notice that they are being sued.

Since Sachs and Abu-Shanab are in New Zealand, and were exercising their free speech rights there, it is difficult to see how any Israeli judgment could be enforced.

Lorde, also from New Zealand, had called the cancellation of her gig “the right decision.”

The lawsuit was reportedly filed in Israel by the lawfare group Shurat HaDin under a 2011 law that allows Israelis to sue those who call for a boycott of Israel or its settlements built illegally on occupied Palestinian land.

The law is part of Israel’s effort to stifle speech and activism in support of Palestinian rights.

Legal bullying by Shurat HaDin by other anti-Palestinian groups is aimed at chilling speech critical of Israel and discouraging activists around the world from engaging with the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign for Palestinian rights.

The escalation of tactics against New Zealanders “has backfired,” Abu-Shanab told The Electronic Intifada Podcast.

After reports of the lawsuit broke in that country, people responded with disbelief and called on the New Zealand government to support the activists, she said.

But she cautioned that Shurat HaDin “genuinely want[s] a world where criticism of Israel is criminalized – and in some ways they’re being successful with that.”

She added that groups like Shurat HaDin will “settle for the headline, that idea that might plant a seed in someone’s head that if you’re going to do this stuff, it may come at a cost.”

Meanwhile, a Florida lawmaker is attempting to have Lorde’s upcoming concerts in that state canceled as punishment for her cancellation of the Tel Aviv show.

In his demands, Republican state representative Randy Fine is citing a Florida law that prohibits public entities in the state from entering into contracts worth $1 million or more with blacklisted entities or others who boycott Israel.

Florida is one of two dozen states around the US that has passed an anti-BDS measure. Legal experts are challenging their constitutionality in courts: a federal judge blocked the enforcement of an anti-BDS law in Kansas, and a lawsuit has been filed against a similar measure in Arizona.

In November, Fine smeared critics of a proposed expansion of the state anti-BDS bill, calling them “Nazis” and “anti-Semites.”

“Quite terrifying”

Sachs noted that the escalated state repression against the boycott movement, particularly in the US, is “quite terrifying.”

But Lorde listened to her fans and cancelled her performance, invigorating the boycott movement, Sachs noted.

The activists referred to a growing generational divide as Israel continues to lose support from young people around the world.

“Zionist establishments are particularly worried because younger people live in a politicized time and they have a growing conscience about injustice locally and internationally,” Sachs told The Electronic Intifada Podcast.

Lorde is “a cultural ambassador for where we’re at,” Abu-Shanab said.

When fans of Lorde who had not been active in Palestine solidarity “heard about the fact that people were asking her to respect the boycott call and did some reading on it, they immediately understood what that meant and they immediately thought it was the right thing to do,” she added.

There is also memory of the country’s mobilization behind the anti-apartheid South Africa campaign, the activists say.

“I think we’re reaching more of a consensus in this country about boycotts being a reasonable action to take in a context of Israeli impunity,” Abu-Shanab said.

Listen to the interview with Justine Sachs and Nadia Abu-Shanab, and sounds from the Oakland rally in support of Ahed Tamimi, via the music player above.

Production assistance and music by Sharif Zakout

Photo of Oakland rally by Bill Hackwell

No polling, no opinions, no point? Egyptian journalists face election crackdown

Journalists fear their coverage of presidential election this month will be rendered pointless by repression

Journalists carry their cameras as shackles during a Cairo protest against press restrictions in November 2016 (AFP)

Thursday 8 March 2018

CAIRO - More than 2,000 journalists are set to cover Egypt's presidential elections later this month, but many believe that even a state-issued permit will not guarantee them immunity against a widening crackdown.

No polling, no opinions, no point Egyptian journalists face election crackdown.docx by Thavam on Scribd

Russian spy was poisoned by nerve agent, UK police say

By Kara Fox and Sheena McKenzie, CNN- March 8, 2018

London (CNN)

Former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter were deliberately poisoned by a nerve agent, UK police say, significantly increasing the likelihood that a foreign state was behind the attack.

Mark Rowley, head of the counter-terrorism division of London's Metropolitan Police, told reporters that Sunday's incident was being treated as attempted murder. He revealed that one of the first police officers on the scene had fallen sick and was seriously ill in hospital.

The developments mean that the British government must confront the suspicion that elements linked to the Kremlin carried out a brazen attack with a deadly agent in the middle of a rural English city, two weeks before President Vladimir Putin seeks re-election for a new six-year term.

If a Moscow link were proved, it would plunge relations between the West and Russia into a new low, and would call into question the British government's ability to protect residents of the UK at home. Rowley said officers from Wiltshire police, the local force, were providing support to the sick officer and his families, but insisted there was no evidence of a wider threat to public health.

Skripal -- a former Russian military official convicted of spying for the UK -- and his daughter Yulia remain critically ill in hospital after being found unconscious on a shopping center bench. Police said they believe the pair were the specific targets of the attack.

Yulia Skripal (R) is thought to be one of the few members of her father's (L) immediate family still alive.

"This being treated as a major incident involving attempted murder by administration of a nerve agent," Rowley said. Describing the investigation as fast-moving, police urged members of the public to get in touch with any information.

Rowley said UK government experts had identified the specific nerve agent used in the attack, but declined to say what it was.

The executive director of Europol, the EU's law enforcement agency, described the incident as "outrageous affront to our security in Europe and our way of life," but cautioned not "jumping to any conclusions" as to who was responsible.

The UK government convened an emergency cabinet-level meeting to discuss the investigation on Wednesday.

'Echoes' of the past

Confirmation that a nerve agent was used in the Salisbury attack considerably narrows the range of suspects. Nerve agents, highly poisonous chemicals that that prevent the body's nervous system from functioning properly, are rarely used outside the battlefield and require considerable expertise to develop. Exposure to potent doses can result in death.

VX, Sarin: How do nerve agents kill? 01:10

Sarin was used in the 1995 attack on the Tokyo subway, carried out by the Aum Shinrikyo doomsday cult, which killed 13 people and injured 5,500 others. Another nerve agent, VX, was used to kill Kim Jong Nam, the half brother of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, at Kuala Lumpur international airport in February 2017.

On Wednesday, UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson warned that Britain would "respond robustly" if the Salisbury attack was found to be the work of a foreign power.

Johnson had said that there were "echoes" in this case of what happened to former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, who died a slow death after drinking tea laced with highly radioactive polonium-210 in 2006 in a hotel in London.

Russia spy case a chilling reminder of suspicious deaths in UK

A detailed UK inquiry later concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin probably approved the operation by Russian agents to kill Litvinenko. The Russian Foreign Ministry dismissed the inquiry as politically motivated.

Johnson's Tuesday comments drew an acerbic response from Russia's embassy in London, which released a statement saying it "looks like the script of yet another anti-Russian campaign has already been written."

Russia had not received an official request from British authorities to assist in the investigation, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters.

Skripal's English refuge

Skripal, 66, is believed to have lived in the UK since his release from Russian custody in 2010.

He was convicted in Russia of spying for Britain before he was granted refuge in the UK after a high-profile spy swap in 2010 between the United States and Russia.

His daughter Yulia, 33, is thought to be one of the few members of the former spy's immediate family still alive after his wife and son died in recent years. She was visiting him from Russia at the time of the incident.

Police officers outside the Zizzi restaurant in Salisbury which has been closed following the incident.

A woman who saw Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury town center on Sunday described the pair as appearing "out of it," as if they had "been taking something quite strong."

Police have called on anyone who visited the area on Sunday, including Zizzi restaurant or the nearby Bishop's Mill pub -- two sites that are being examined -- to come forward with any information that might help them piece together what happened.

Local convenience store manager Ebru Ozturk had seen Sergei Skripal at the Bargain Stop shop in Salisbury just five days before the incident. She told CNN that he was a "kind customer" who would usually come in once a week and buy Polish-smoked bacon and scratch-and-win lottery cards.

CCTV footage showed Skripal talking to Ozturk and buying items at the store on February 27, five days before he was apparently poisoned.

"His wife died a few years ago. He was feeling bit sad. He started to get used to living on his own after the wife died," Ozturk said.

"He is (a) regular customer, he is so kind and he seems to me an educated person. Very polite," said Ozturk. "I don't talk too much to the customers, but he was, you know, one of the very kind customers."

CNN's Euan McKirdy, Zahra Ullah, Milena Veselinovic, Simon Cullen and Carol Jordan contributed to this report.

Mueller gathers evidence that 2017 Seychelles meeting was effort to establish back channel to Kremlin

Blackwater founder Erik Prince met with a Russian person close to President Vladimir Putin in Jan. 2017, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. (Sarah Parnass/The Washington Post)

By Sari Horwitz and Devlin Barrett March 7 at 9:12 PM

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has gathered evidence that a secret meeting in Seychelles just before the inauguration of Donald Trump was an effort to establish a back channel between the incoming administration and the Kremlin — apparently contradicting statements made to lawmakers by one of its participants, according to people familiar with the matter.

In January 2017, Erik Prince, the founder of the private security company Blackwater, met with a Russian official close to Russian President Vladi­mir Putin and later described the meeting to congressional investigators as a chance encounter that was not a planned discussion of U.S.-Russia relations.

A witness cooperating with Mueller has told investigators the meeting was set up in advance so that a representative of the Trump transition could meet with an emissary from Moscow to discuss future relations between the countries, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

George Nader, a Lebanese American businessman who helped organize and attended the Seychelles meeting, has testified on the matter before a grand jury gathering evidence about discussions between the Trump transition team and emissaries of the Kremlin, as part of Mueller’s investigation into Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 election.

Nader began cooperating with Mueller after he arrived at Dulles International Airport in mid-
January and was stopped, served with a subpoena and questioned by the FBI, these people said. He has met numerous times with investigators.

[Businessman cooperating with Mueller probe]

Last year, Prince told lawmakers — and the news media — that his Seychelles meeting with Kirill Dmitriev, the head of a Russian government-controlled wealth fund, was an unplanned, unimportant encounter that came about by chance because he happened to be at a luxury hotel in the Indian Ocean island nation with officials from the United Arab Emirates.

In his statements, Prince has specifically denied reporting by The Washington Post that said the Seychelles meeting, which took place about a week before Trump’s inauguration, was described by U.S., European and Arab officials as part of an effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and the incoming administration.

Prince told lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee that he did not plan to meet Dmitriev in Seychelles but that once he was there discussing possible business deals with UAE officials, they unexpectedly suggested that he visit the hotel bar and meet Dmitriev.

“At the end, one of the entourage says, ‘Hey, by the way, there’s this Russian guy that we’ve dealt with in the past. He’s here also to see someone from the Emirati delegation. And you should meet him, he’d be an interesting guy for you to know, since you’re doing a lot in the oil and gas and mineral space,’ ” Prince told lawmakers.

The two men, he said, spoke for no more than 30 minutes, or about the time it took him to drink a beer.

“We chatted on topics ranging from oil and commodity prices to how much his country wished for resumption of normal trade relations with the USA,” Prince told lawmakers. “I remember telling him that if Franklin Roosevelt could work with Joseph Stalin to defeat Nazi fascism, then certainly Donald Trump could work with Vladi­mir Putin to defeat Islamic fascism.”

Prince said he went to Seychelles as a private businessman, not as an official or unofficial emissary of the Trump transition team. During the congressional interview, which became testy at times as Democratic lawmakers pressed him to be more specific in his answers, Prince repeatedly complained that he had reason to believe U.S. intelligence agencies were leaking information about his activities.

Asked to comment on assertions that new evidence appears to contradict Prince’s description of the Seychelles meeting, a spokesman for Prince referred to his previous statements to the committee and declined further comment.

A spokesman for the special counsel declined to comment.

[Blackwater founder held secret meeting in Seychelles]

Prince has known Nader for years and once hired him to try to generate business from the Iraqi government in the years after the U.S.-led invasion of that country. That effort was not successful, according to Prince’s statements in a subsequent deposition.

Nader, according to current and former officials, was known to Trump transition and administration officials as someone with political connections in the Middle East who could help navigate the tricky diplomacy of the region.

Nader had also attended a December 2016 meeting in New York between senior Trump advisers and the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, according to a person familiar with the matter.

While Mueller is probing the circumstances of the Seychelles meeting, he is also more broadly examining apparent efforts by the Trump transition team to create a back channel for secret talks between the new administration and the Kremlin. Mueller was appointed special counsel to investigate possible Russian interference in the 2016 election, whether any Americans assisted in such efforts, and any other matters that arise in the course of his probe.

Investigators now suspect that the Seychelles meeting may have been one of the first efforts to establish such a line of communications between the two governments, these people said. Nader’s account is considered key evidence — but not the only evidence — about what transpired in Seychelles, according to people familiar with the matter.

Nader has long served as an adviser to the UAE leadership, and in that role he met more than once with Trump officials, including Stephen K. Bannon and the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, according to people familiar with the matter. After the Seychelles meeting, Nader visited the White House several times, and met at least once there with Bannon and Kushner, these people said.
Nader could not be reached for comment, and his lawyer declined to comment.

Nader — and the Seychelles meeting — are also of interest to Mueller’s team as it examines whether any foreign money or assistance fueled the Trump campaign, and how Trump officials during the transition and early days of the administration communicated with foreign officials, particularly Russians.

Nader’s cooperation with the special counsel was first reported by the New York Times.

The UAE agreed to broker the meeting in part to explore whether Russia could be persuaded to curtail its relationship with Iran, including in Syria, a Trump administration objective, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. Such a concession by Moscow would have been likely to require the easing of U.S. sanctions on Russia, which were imposed for Russia’s intervention in Ukraine in 2014, those officials said.

Prince had no formal role with the Trump campaign or transition. However, according to people familiar with the Seychelles meeting, he presented himself as an unofficial envoy for Trump to high-ranking Emiratis involved in setting up his discussion with the Russian official.

Correction: This story has been updated to reflect that the meeting in the Seychelles took place in January 2017, not 2016.

Carol D. Leonnig, Josh Dawsey and Spencer S. Hsu contributed to this report.