Saudi Arabia’s Violations of Human Rights Supported by Trump’s Administration

For years, Saudi Arabia has had the honour to be one of the principal violators of human rights in the world. Regardless of its efforts to hide it from the international community, numerous local human rights organisations have regularly exposed the abuses perpetrated by the regime. In response, the Saudi government has banned all international human rights organisations from entering Saudi Arabia. As numerous organisations have suggested, the primary problem remains in the system and the interpretation of the Sharia (Islamic law).

Saudi Arabia uses Sharia (Islamic law) as its domestic legislation. There is no a formal penal code; the criminal justice court derives its interpretation from an extreme version of Sharia. In most of cases, detainees do not have a fair trial and are not allowed to meet with a lawyer during their interrogations. Further, the authorities do not usually inform them about their charges until the trial has already started and their lawyers are never allowed to interview witnesses or even present evidence during the trial. Judges usually sentence detainees to flogging, with hundreds of lashes. Children can also be judged as adults if there are signs of puberty. Saudi authorities detain suspects for months, or even years, without judicial review or prosecution. Here are some cases of extreme abuses and detentions in recent years:

1.Raif Badawi.

download-1

Raif Badawi was arrested in 2012 for insulting Islam through electronic channels.When Badawi was arrested, he was running a liberal blog advocating for human rights in Saudi Arabia. He used his blog to expose the violations of human rights committed by the Saudi government. In 2013, Badawi was sentenced to seven years in prison and 600 lashes, but in 2014, he was resentenced to 1000 lashes and ten years in jail plus a fine. Badawi is currently in prison in precarious health; according to his wife he could soon die if he is not released.

2. Ali Mohammed Al-Nimr.

story_647_092615070913-1

Ali Al-Nimr was just 17 years old when he was sentenced to death by crucifixion in the wake of the Arab Spring pro-democracy uprising. He was accused of participation in an illegal demonstration and as well as a large number of other offences. Like most of the human rights defenders detained in Saudi Arabia, Al-Nimr was tortured and forced to sign a criminal confession. He is currently in prison awaiting his crucifixion which could happen at any time without notice.

3.Essam Koshak.

download-7

On January 8, 2017, the human rights defender Koshak was summoned for interrogation by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) in Mecca and was immediately detained. Koshak was interrogated about his Twitter account, where he frequently exposed the violations of human rights committed by the Saudi regime. Like other detainees, he was not allowed to meet with a lawyer during his interrogation. Koshak is currently detained while awaiting his trial.

4.Dawood Al-Marhoon.

2015_10_29_pub-dawood-al-marhoon

On May 22, 2012, at the age of 17, Dawood Al-Marhoon was arrested for allegedly participating in peaceful anti-government protests during the Arab Spring. During his detention, Dawood was tortured and forced to sign a false confession. On October 21, 2014, the criminal court sentenced him to death by beheading. Dawood is currently awaiting his execution while being tortured on a regular basis. He could be executed at any time without previous notice.

These three cases represent a sample from the hundreds of human rights defenders who have been unfairly detained and killed in recent years by the Saudi government. Last year, Saudi Arabia executed 150 persons between January and mid-November, mostly for murder and terrorism-related offences. However, among these executions, there were 22 for non-violent drug crimes, including human rights defenders. In Saudi Arabia, most executions are carried out by beheading, sometimes in public. Aside from the illegal detention and execution of human rights defenders, the Saudi regime also commits other sorts of violations of human rights.

In 2016, while holding an illegal blockade in Yemen, the Saudi government authorised 58 unlawful airstrikes, killing 800 civilians and hitting homes, markets, hospitals, schools, and mosques. Because of the Saudi blockade, an estimated 14.4 million Yemenis were unable to meet their food needs, according to the United Nations.

In Saudi Arabia women are denigrated, they must obtain permission from a male guardian to travel, to marry, to exit prison, or to get access to health care. They also need a male relative to do transactions, such as filing legal claims or renting an apartment. Most of the schools do not offer physical education for women, and until recent times women were not allowed to participate in national competitions. The labour situation for women is not better. They face a range of abuses including being overworked, non-payment of wages, food deprivation, physical abuse, and sexual abuse. Women who attempt to report employer abuses sometimes face prosecution based on counterclaims of theft, “black magic,” or “sorcery.” 

Despite numerous investigations concluding that in 2015/2016 the Saudi Regime was the principal violator of human rights in the world, on Nov. 21, 2016, the United Nations elected Saudi Arabia, represented by Abdulaziz, to a 3-year term on its Human Rights Council.

As mentioned earlier, Trump’s administration has decided to continue collaborating with the Saudi regime by doing some business and providing them weapons. It is clear that if Trump wants to eradicate Islamic terrorism and advocate for human rights, he should stop collaborating with Saudi Arabia and apply high standards to himself.

Unfortunately, Trump has not been the only U.S. president who has collaborated with the Saudi regime. Under Obama’s presidency, the U.S. provided Saudi Arabia weapons and intelligence support during the illegal Saudi military operations in Yemen. In August, the US government approved a US$1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia, despite significant opposition from members of Congress, who were concerned about Saudi conduct in Yemen.

While countries like the U.S. collaborate with the Saudi regime, it will continue violating human rights, executing innocents and boosting Islamic terrorism. The only way to change the Saudi system is by uniting the international community to push the kingdom to reform its system and guarantee basic rights to its citizens. Until then, Trump has lost his legitimacy as a president since he has already violated his promise to cut off ties with Arabia Saudi.

In the near future, we will see whether the Saudi government will reform its system. Though there is not much hope, there is always light at the end of the tunnel.The destiny of millions of people are in the hands of the international community led by the U.S. Hopefully, Trump will soon realize his huge mistake and will halt his collaboration with Saudi Arabia. It could then be the beginning of the new dawn where human rights are respected.

Trump and his Dirty Relations with Saudi Arabia

Over the last few months, President Trump has declared himself the person who will lead the international community in eliminating Islamic terrorism. However, his cabinet, led by CIA director Mike Pompeo, has started to strengthen its collaboration with Saudi Arabia (a state sponsor of terrorism).

On Sunday, the director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo awarded Prince Mohammed, 57, with the George Tenet medal “for his counter-terrorism work.”

“excellent intelligence performance in the domain of counter-terrorism and his unbound contribution to realising world security and peace,” Pompeo said.

“The US and Saudi Arabia…have extensive ties. We have extensive challenges that we’re working on in counter-terrorism, in security, maritime security, and the whole gamut of issues,” Pompeo said.

Apparently, hypocrisy is rampant in the White House, President Trump himself once suggested that he believed that Saudi Arabia was a state sponsor of terrorism. He added:

“We are prepared to stop buying oil from Saudi Arabia unless the kingdom provides ground troops to fight Islamic State.”

Trump’s administration has also reported that they are preparing a $300m (£240m) package for precision-guided weapons technology for Riyadh (Saudi Arabia, a state sponsor of terrorism). At this point, the central question is how will Trump eradicate Islamic terrorism if he is arming those who sponsor and fund terrorism?

By collaborating with the Saudi government, Trump is indirectly funding terrorism and betraying millions of citizens who elected him to fight terrorism. Trump’s actions not only affect Americans, but also represent a global threat, particularly for Western countries.

Saudi Arabia governs based on an extreme interpretation of Sharia law (Islamic law widely compared to ISIL). The Saudi regime has also spent over $100 billion on exporting and implementing Sharia law worldwide. To succeed, it uses charitable organisations which work in refugees camps and poor communities where uneducated and oppressed people are more susceptible to become radicalised. Besides, Saudi’s elites and business community are funding terrorism through organisations such as the International Islamic Relief, an institution created to hide the illegitimate funding of terrorism from the international community. Wikileaks reported:

“…donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.”

The Saudi government has shut down several charitable organisations which fund terrorism. However, the United Nations (UN) has reported several times that the Saudi government has not closed down those institutions listed by the international community as terrorists.

The U.S. intelligence services have always been aware that the Saudi regime has been collaborating with terrorist groups. In addition, it suggested that the Saudi Arabian government could have indirectly funded 9/11 (mostly perpetrated by Saudi Arabian citizens).

In conclusion, President Trump fully acknowledges that Saudi Arabia is exporting and funding terrorism worldwide. However, he is not taking any steps towards halting it. Instead, he has decided to strengthen the relationship between the U.S. and the Saudi regime by keeping several businesses in operation and providing them with arms. When President Trump was elected, he said:

“I am going to unite the civilised world to fight and eliminate Islamic terrorism”

Trump had a tremendous opportunity to take a step forward in seeking the elimination of Islamic terrorism. However, he has decided to prioritise his businesses with the Saudi regime before the security of millions of citizens. After this decision, the question is: How can Trump retain his legitimacy as President?

The fight against Islamic terrorism was Trump’s central promise during the last presidential campaign. It is evident that while Saudi Arabia funds terrorism, organisations such as ISIL and Al-Qaida will continue expanding their operational capacity. While this happens any collaboration with the Saudi regime will help terrorism and, the U.S. is collaborating with them.

There are still millions of people who, regardless Trump’s political orientation, still think that he is honest because he is fulfilling all his promises. However, the facts expose the contrary and politicians should be entitled to their words. Trump won the election as the person who would change the rule of law to fight against corruption, lies and terrorism.

So far, in just three weeks Trump has divided the country to levels not seen since the 60s, kept ties with his previous businesses directly or indirectly, and he has betrayed millions of American citizens by boosting terrorism.

For now, Trump will continue making controversial and unproductive decisions while millions of citizens will try to convince him to reverse them. For that reason, it is maybe time to ask oneself: if in just three weeks Trump has made unpardonable wrong decisions, what could happen after three or four years?

Remember to be reflective and honest with yourself when seeking an answer. Until then, you may try to convince your government to stop collaborating with Saudi Arabia and therefore indirectly with terrorism. There is still light at the end of the tunnel, however, it is gradually fading. You may consider taking (peaceful) strong actions before it is too late.

-Any sort of terrorism regardless of its political orientation should be eradicated as soon as possible-

By Josep.

 

Trump: The U.S. Transition From Democracy to Authoritarianism

In Upper New York Bay there stands the colossal Statue of Liberty, a universal symbol of freedom. She is also the Mother of Immigrants, embodying hope and opportunity for those seeking a better life in America. She stirs the desire for liberty in people all over the world. She represents the United States itself. However… In the last few weeks, the flame of freedom from her torch has started to flicker.ocaso sol estatua libertad simbolismo.jpgIn just two weeks, President Trump’s unlawful decisions and his unprecedented pressures on judges to rule in his favour have shaken the fundamentals of U.S. Democracy. For many, this indicates that Trump has hidden plans to turn the U.S. authoritarian to gain power. However, it won’t be possible without dominating the Supreme Court.supreme-courtThe U.S. Supreme Court is the final court of appeal and final expositor of the Constitution of the United States. It marks the boundaries of authority between state and nation, state and state, and government and citizen. It has the jurisdiction to determine whether Trump’s decisions are unlawful or not.

how-scalias-death-could-affect-major-supreme-court-cases-in-the-2016-term-1455500687480-facebookJumbo.png

The Supreme Court is composed of nine membersfour of which are currently Republican, and the other four liberal. The recent nomination of Neil Gorsuch (a Republican) to sit on the Supreme Court has set off all alarms. His presidency would tilt the balance for Republicans, and it could help Trump to accumulate an absolute power.

President Trump’s crusade to dominate courts and judges from all over the U.S. started when Judge James Robart, of the Federal District Court in Seattle, issued a temporary restraining Trump’s executive order to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. In response, Trump increased his pressures on Judges until days before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a temporary suspension.Trump said:

pantallazo-2017-02-09-12-21-35

pantallazo-2017-02-09-12-21-58

pantallazo-2017-02-09-12-20-52

pantallazo-2017-02-11-11-02-44

Another indication of the U.S. transition into an authoritarian state is so-called alternative facts. Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer suggested that the U.S. government could “sometimes disagree” with real facts presented by the Media.

“Sometimes we can disagree with the facts,” Sean Spicer said.

“Trump’s team is offering  alternative facts to media reports,”  Kellyanne Conway said.

Trump started his attacks against the mainstream media during the last presidential campaign. Back then, several outlets plotted with Clinton and his aides to help her to win the election. Trump is now using it to fabricate stories to convince citizens that the only honest information comes from government sources.

As if this was not enough, on February 1, Republicans voted successfully to change the Congress rules to elect nominees without Democrats. It happened days later; Trump suggested them to “go nuclear” if Democrats tried to halt any of his decisions. Trump added:

“If we end up with that gridlock, I would say, if you can, Mitch, go nuclear,””Because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was put up to that neglect,” he said of Gorsuch, a federal circuit court judge. “So I would say, it’s up to Mitch, but I would say go for it.”

As we can see, there are many indicators that Trump’s government has initiated the U.S. transition from democracy to authoritarianism. However, to dissipate doubts, one must compare Trump’s decisions with dictators from other countries. All authoritarian states share in common an underlying structure based in the re-centralization of power. The following list describes some basic structure of a dictatorship:

1.Little or no freedom of speech
2.No freedom to hold meetings without the approval of the government.
3.No freedom of movement-individuals needs documents/internal passports to move around inside the country.
4.No freedom to travel abroad.
5.No independent justice system.
6.Promote alternative facts and censor the Mainstream media.
7.Any opposition to the regime is punished.
8.Change rules of government’s institutions.

It is evident then that President Trump has already implemented several basic structures from the list to do a U-turn into an authoritarian state. He has started his crusade against the media, changed the rules of the Congress, attempted to end with the neutrality of the judicial system and violated the U.S. Constitution. However, while the flame of the freedom of the Statue of Liberty is still burning, there will be hope and citizens, union workers and organisations will have the last word…

Netanyahu: The Criminal Who Is Still Free

During the last decade, Netanyahu has been responsible for numerous violations of human rights, war crimes, sexual abuses of children and the death of thousands of innocent Palestinians. For years, the international community led, by the U.S. has ignored Netanyahu’s crimes. However, his recidivism of criminal acts against Palestinians on a regular basis has led several countries and international organisations to condemn Israeli’s war crimes and violation of human rights. The increasing indignation among world MP’s with Netanyahu’s government may soon trigger a prosecution against him at the International Court. Here are some of his atrocities:

-WAR CRIMES

In 2014, Prime Minister Netanyahu launched the Operation Protective Edge based on a 50 days war in Gaza. During the operation, Israel indiscriminately killed over 1500 innocent people, including children. More than 20,000 homes were reduced to rubble or rendered uninhabitable. However, the most shocking event was the assassination of four children of the same family who were playing football on the beach. The Israeli government alleged that they thought they were terrorists.

It’s a shame they didn’t identify them as just kids with all the advanced technology they had been using,” “I don’t know what justification they will use for what they did, but our boys are now gone,” the uncle said.

During 50 days of attacks, Israeli forces wreaked massive death and destruction on the Gaza Strip, killing close to 2100 civilians, more than 500 of whom were children,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Programme Director.

NUMBERS:

Palestinians killed: 2,139
Palestinian children killed: 525
Israeli soldiers killed: 64
Israeli civilians killed: 6
Israeli children killed: 1
Palestinians wounded: 11,000
Palestinian children wounded: 3,000
Gaza residents displaced: Up to 500,000
Homes destroyed in Gaza: 20,000


-Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law.

For years, Israel has been occupying Palestinian territories pursuing its expansion and Palestinian ethnic cleansing. Since Trump became the U.S. president, the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has accelerated the expansion of the existing Israeli settlements by authorising the construction of 5.500 new houses in the West Bank. For that to happen, often the Israeli military forces evict Palestinian families from their houses.

In 2016, the UN adopted a resolution reiterating its demand that Israel immediately ceases all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territories. The resolution was approved with 24 votes in favour and the U.S abstention.

-The Siege of Gaza

Since 2007, around 1.8 million Palestinians in the Gaza strip have been living under a land, sea and air closure blockade imposed by Israel. The impossibility of obtaining external medicines, food, drinkable water and other goods has triggered a humanitarian crisis without precedent. Thousands of Palestinians with serious illnesses are condemned to die due to the impossibility of going abroad to receive their pertinent treatments. As some officials recognised, “the purpose of implementing this blockade is to put Palestinians on a diet”

-Sexual violence against, and torture of, children:

During 2016, the number of cases of Israeli torture of children significantly increased. Often permanent physical disabilities were caused, including amputations. There were over 1300 children arrested and there are still 300 of them in Israeli jails. Around 40% of them were or will be sexually abused by police officers or military men. This degrading Israeli treatment of children violates international human rights law, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

“Israeli security forces have used unnecessary force to arrest or detain Palestinian children as young as 11. Security forces have choked children, thrown stun grenades at them, beaten them in custody, threatened and interrogated them without the presence of parents or lawyers, and failed to let their parents know their whereabouts.”

“Israeli forces’ mistreatment of Palestinian children is at odds with its claim to respect children’s rights. As Israel’s largest military ally, the US, should press hard for an end to these abusive practices and for reforms,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, the Middle East and North Africa director.

-The defence for Children International concluded:

Israel has the dubious distinction of being the only country in the world that annually systematically prosecutes between 500 and 700 children in military courts that lack fundamental rights to a fair trial.”


-Recruitment of Palestinian children as human shields by Israeli armed forces.

Since 2004, DCIP has documented numerous cases where Israeli forces attempted to recruit Palestinian Children as informants. They are recruited to monitor the activities of people living in their community and pass this information onto Israeli Forces.

The International humanitarian law explicitly prohibits parties to a conflict from directing “the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objects from attacks or to shield military operations.”

During Operation Protective Edge in July and August 2014, DCIP reported one incident where Israeli soldiers forced a 16 year-old-Palestinian to search for tunnels for five days. During that time, he was physically assaulted and deprived of food and sleep.

All these crimes and violations of international law represent a small sample of Netanyahu’s atrocities. Unless the international community proceeds to prosecute him at the International Court, Netanyahu will continue threatening thousands of families, women and children on a regular basis.

The international community will not be able to avoid taking action if Israel continues its persecution against Palestinians. Otherwise, it could create a bad precedent, which could be applied for populist emergent leaders to legitimize their illegitimate actions. For that reason, the international community will sooner or later take action to prosecute Netanyahu. But the issue is when? Palestinians do not have much more time to wait for. They struggle between life and death on a daily basis. They do not know if the next day Netanyahu will order an attack and they will die. People from the world are entitled to take action and push their MP’s to halt these sorts of atrocities as soon as possible.

Every second, day, week, month counts… Palestinian lives depend on you and the international community actions. People’s lives depend upon it.

By Josep

Will 2017 Be the Beginning of the End of The European Union?

Over the next few months, a sequence of events will determine the continued existence of the European Union. This year, both France and The Netherlands will hold crucial presidential elections. The rise of Alt-Right political parties in both countries such as the Front National (FN) led by Marine Le Pen in France and The Party for Freedom (PVV) led by Geert Wilders in the Netherlands could trigger the end of the European Union.

The first important test for the European Union will be on Wednesday, March 15, 2017, when the Netherlands will hold its presidential election. The anti-European Alt-Right candidate Geert Wilders has been leading all national election polls for several consecutive weeks. While his party currently holds 15 seats in the Dutch parliament, the latest poll now puts the PVV at 29– 33 seats, placing his party far ahead of the currently ruling Dutch Tories (VVD), who now consistently poll 23-27 seats. Wilders promised to hold a referendum on European Union  membership as the UK did if he wins the Dutch general election of 2017. He thinks that the European Union is obsolete and opposes all immigration policies.

“We want to be in charge of our own country, our own money, our own borders, and our own immigration policy,” “As quickly as possible the Dutch need to get the opportunity to have their say about Dutch membership of the European Union,” Wilders said.

“It is time for a new start, relying on our own strength and sovereignty. Also in the Netherlands,” “If I become prime minister, there will be a referendum in the Netherlands on leaving the European Union as well. Let the Dutch people decide,” Wilders said.

Wilders’ plans to hold a referendum represent a real threat to the European Union, but it would not be the end of the project in any case. However, what most worries European leaders is Wilders’ intentions to violate human rights and international law on a regular basis whether the Netherlands remains part of the EU or not. So far, his statements indicate that he will not step back on his intentions to start his personal crusade against refugees and Muslims. It might open an identity crisis among the European Union members. Wilders has suggested numerous times that the Judeo-Christian culture is superior to other cultures from all over the world.

“Our Judeo-Christian culture is far superior to the Islamic one. I can give you a million reasons. But here is an important one. We have got humour and they don’t. There is no humour in Islam. .. Islam does not allow free speech because free speech shows how evil and wrong Islam is. And Islam does not allow humour because humour shows how foolish and ridiculous it is,” Wilders said.

Like President Trump, Wilders also wants to stop immigration from Islamic countries.

“We want to stop all immigration from Islamic countries. We want to stimulate voluntary re-emigration to Islamic countries. We want to expel all criminals with dual citizenship and deprive them of their Dutch nationality. We want to de-islamize our nation. Dear Friends, there is a lot of work to do. We, the defenders of freedom and security, have an historic duty. Our generation has been entrusted with a huge task: To oppose Islam and keep the flame of liberty burning. I say it without exaggeration: the future of human civilisation depends on us. Now is a time when everyone in the West must do his duty. We are writing history here. So, let us do our duty. Let us stand with a happy heart and a strong spirit. Let us go forth with courage and save freedom,” said Wilders.

pantallazo-2017-02-01-18-52-06pantallazo-2017-02-01-18-52-39

A few months ago, Wilders was found guilty of inciting discrimination against Moroccans.

“The Netherlands have become a sick country.” “I am not a racist and neither are my voters. This sentence proves that you judges are completely out of touch. Support for the Party for Freedom is stronger than ever and keeps growing every day. The Dutch want their country back,” Wilders said.

“Today I was convicted in a political trial which, shortly before the elections, attempts to neutralise the leader of the largest and most popular opposition party. But they will not succeed, not even with this verdict, because I speak on behalf of millions of Dutch,” Wilders said.

The second and most important test for the European Union will be the 2017 French presidential election.The first round will be held on April 23. If no candidate wins a majority, a second round between the top two candidates will be held on May 7.Until a few days ago, François Fillon, the Republicans (LR) candidate was considered the favourite to win the two-round presidential election in April and May. However, his implication in a fake jobs scandal related to payments to his wife from MP funds has all but eliminated his chances of success. Marine Le Pen, the National front (FN) candidate is now, the favourite to win the first round of the election. A victory for her in the second round would represent a real threat to the EU. Le Pen wants to leave the European Union and it could never exist without France (one of the co-founders). She stated:

No, I think we need to renegotiate with the EU because I want to see French sovereignty restored in France, supported by a referendum.”

If I am voted in, I will announce that a referendum will be held in six months time. I will spend those six months going to the European Union and telling them: ‘I want the French people to regain at least their territorial sovereignty because I want to control the borders – they don’t belong to you.’”

“The EU is deeply harmful, it is an anti-democratic monster. I want to prevent it from becoming fatter, from continuing to breathe, from grabbing everything with its paws and from extending its tentacles into all areas of our legislation. In our glorious history, millions have died to ensure that our country remains free. Today, we are simply allowing our right to self-determination to be stolen from us,” Le Pen said.

Even if France remains in the EU, Le Pen would still represent a real threat to the EU. Like President Trump, Le Pen is also willing to violate international law to start her personal crusade against immigration, Muslims and Islam.This would violate all European values and human rights which could accelerate the disappearance of the EU. 

“The progressive Islamisation of our country and the increase in political-religious demands are calling into question the survival of our civilisation,”said Le Pen.

“For those who want to talk a lot about World War II, if it’s about occupation, then we could also talk about it (Muslim prayers in the streets), because that is occupation of territory,” she said at the gathering in Lyon.

“It is an occupation of sections of the territory, of districts in which religious laws apply. It’s an occupation,” Le Pen said.

“There are of course no tanks, there are no soldiers, but it is nevertheless an occupation and it weighs heavily on local residents,” said Marine Le Pen

In conclusion, this year will be full of threats and challenges for global society.The potential disintegration of the European Union represents one of these, but no one knows how it will end. History is full of threats and challenge that are often happily resolved. The elections in The Netherlands and France will be all about choosing between tolerance or intolerance, war or peace, friendship or enemies, future or past…Their citizens will have an enormous advantage since they can see what Trump is doing in the U.S. and based on that they will make an important decision that will change the world for the better or worse. Whether the European Union changes or not, what’s most important is that citizens will have the last word. Whatever your decision will be….Remember to think critically…And stand up for human rights.

By Josep


President Trump: Persecution of Refugees, Muslims, and Reactions.

Since President Trump and his entourage of advisors started their personal crusade against Muslims from SYRIA, IRAQ, IRAN, LIBYA, SOMALIA, SUDAN and YEMEN, there have been hundreds of peaceful refugees detained at airports from all across the U.S. (including green card holders)

Trump’s executive order suspending the entry of refugees into the U.S. constitutes a violation of international law and numerous human rights. According to the Geneva agreement:

“The core principle is non refoulement, which asserts that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. This is now considered a rule of customary international law.”

As if that were not enough, Trump said in an interview:

“it has been “impossible, or at least very tough” for Syrian Christians to enter the United States.If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible and the reason that was so unfair — everybody was persecuted, in all fairness — but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”

Such a statement implies a violation of the first amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom. However, President Trump said:

“This is not about religion – this is about terror and keeping our country safe.”

pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-55-32

Since Trump signed the executive order, numerous elected republicans and democrats have also criticized Trump’s decision to persecute the Islamic community. So far, the elected republicans who have criticized the executive order are:

-Charlie Dent

-Jeff Flake

-Justin Amash

-Ben Sasse

-Susan Collins

-Barbara Comstock

-Rob Portman

-Orrin Hatch

-Dean Heller

-Brian Fitzpatrick

-Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

-Elise Stefanik

-Cory Gardner

-Will Hurd

-Leonard Lance

-Steve Stivers

-McCain

-Graham’s

McCain and Graham’s both released the following statement:

Our government has a responsibility to defend our borders, but we must do so in a way that makes us safer and upholds all that is decent and exceptional about our nation.

It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security.

Such a hasty process risks harmful results. We should not stop green-card holders from returning to the country they call home. We should not stop those who have served as interpreters for our military and diplomats from seeking refuge in the country they risked their lives to help. And we should not turn our backs on those refugees who have been shown through extensive vetting to pose no demonstrable threat to our nation, and who have suffered unspeakable horrors, most of them women and children.

Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism. At this very moment, American troops are fighting side-by-side with our Iraqi partners to defeat ISIL. But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots from coming to military bases in Arizona to fight our common enemies. Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of hatred. This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improving our security.”

In response Trump tweeted:

pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-55-56pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-56-07

The Democratic party has announced numerous protests and legal challenges over Trump’s executive order:

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer and Democrats will introduce legislation to stop President Trump’s actions of temporarily banning refugees and arrivals from certain Muslim countries.

“This executive order was mean-spirited and un-American,”

“It must be reversed immediately,” said Schumer.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said House Democrats are exploring legal options.

Hillary Clinton, who is the main person responsible for the rise of Trump has also criticized Trump’s action. However, her resignation as presidential candidate during the last campaign would have facilitated another government.

pantallazo-2017-01-30-10-51-54

The international community has also criticised Trump’s executive order to persecute Muslims. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said:

It’s not the time to build walls between nations.” “They have forgotten that the Berlin Wall collapsed many years ago,” “Even if there are walls between nations, they must be removed.”

In response, Rohani banned American citizens from entering Iran until President Trump steps back in his decision.

pantallazo-2017-01-30-16-54-23pantallazo-2017-01-30-16-54-39pantallazo-2017-01-30-16-54-50

The reception of refugees fleeing the war, fleeing oppression, is part of our duties,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said.

In an unstable and uncertain world, turning inward would be a dead end,” Hollande said he told Mr Trump in their first phone conversation since the president took office last week.

Trudeau, in a tweet, said Canada would welcome those fleeing “persecution, terror and war. Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith.”

Pantallazo-2017-01-30 16-58-29.png

Prime minister Theresa May, who is applying double standards with President Trump, decided to keep silent over the Muslim Ban by alleging that it is an American domestic issue. Her failure to condemn the persecution of refugees and Muslims has caused a wave of indignation in British society. In response, more than one million people have already signed a petition to demand that Theresa May cancels her invitation to Trump to visit the UK.

The leader of the major party of the opposition Jeremy Corbin said:

“President Trump’s executive order against refugees and Muslims should shock and appal us all. “Theresa May should have stood up for Britain and our values by condemning his actions. It should sadden our country that she chose not to. After Trump’s hideous actions and May’s weak failure to condemn them, it’s more important than ever for us to say to refugees seeking a place of safety, that they will always be welcome in Britain.”

So far the only ally who has supported the Muslim Ban has been Australia. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said:

I’m confident that the Australian government and the U.S. government will continue to support each other in ensuring that we can implement our strong immigration and border protection policies,” Ms Bishop said in Los Angeles.

The Australian government is working very closely with the administration and the US officials and we want to ensure that Australians continue to have access to the United States, as they have in the past, and people from the United States have access to Australia.”

Treasurer Scott Morrison also jumped to Mr Trump’s defence, reasoning that the newly-elected president was simply fulfilling an election promise.

In his first two weeks as president, Trump has:

1. Divided American society.

2.Violated international law.

3. Violated the first amendment of the U.S constitution.

4.Violated human rights of refugees and Muslims.

5. Made numerous enemies from all over the world.

6. Helped terrorist groups to recruit thousands of new members.

7. Endangered U.S. troops in the Middle East.

8. Endangered U.S. travellers.

Trump’s actions are already isolating the U.S. from the international community. Furthermore, the lack of critical thinking in society will make citizens from all over the world think that the vast majority of Americans approve Trump’s unethical policies. It will cause serious problems to millions of American travellers, who will be judged for something that they did not choose.

Fortunately, the protests against Trump’s executive order to persecute Islamic society shows that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. If Trump continues violating the law and American society continues holding mass protests, President Trump may then be impeached by the congress. If it ever happens, Pence who is politically smarter than Trump and is backed by most of Republicans elected would try to implement a catholic- evangelical system based on reforming the education system and denigrating women.

American society will have to be very attentive with the upcoming events. History shows that protests are useful, but unless something really shocking happens they will not have any real impact. In 2008, when the global financial crisis started, there were millions of citizens who held protests for years in countries such as Spain. However, the Spanish authoritarian government reacted by oppressing all the protesters without contemplations on a regular basis. Finally, this movement turned into a political organisation, which is strong, but was created too late. For that reason, if American society really wants to change the existing situation, aside from holding protests against the government, it should also create an alternative to replace the two major parties in the U.S.

The Republican and Democrat parties have been alternating the U.S. presidency for decades, which means that the corruption is already instilled in all layers of both organisations.

The upcoming turbulent times will determine whether global society can protect their human rights or not. Every single person from all over the world has the responsibility to resist any government attack against other human beings regardless of political and religious orientation.

Resisting against those who abolish human rights and violate the law on a regular basis is not bad, rather, it is everyone’s obligation for the sake of our children.

Be attentive, defend your neighbours, and never keep silent over injustices.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Freedom of the Press: Three Cases that Should Never Be Forgotten

EVERY YEAR , hundreds of journalists like Barret Brown, Serena Shim, or Anna Politkóvskaya are threatened, killed, tortured and prosecuted by terrorists and governments. It is important to remember and honour all of them, who once gave their life to expose and inform the public about the reality of government misconduct, which many times, is hidden, and distorted by government agencies.

The Freedom of the Press is a concern that affects all citizens regardless of location. It is a right that is registered in The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It states:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” Article 19.

Brief Analysis of Serena Shim, Barret Brown and Anna Politkóvskaya cases.

-Case 1: Serena Shim.

shim-375x305

SERENA SHIM WAS an American war journalist for Press TV (Link Press TV).While covering the War in Syria, she was allegedly killed in a car crash by the Turkish government.

Shim’s death happened under strange circumstances. She was on her way back from Suruç (a rural area near the Syrian border) to her hotel with the driver and her camerawoman Judy Irish in a rental car, when the car collided with a cement mixer.

serenashimwreck.jpg

Car Crash.

abd-li-gazetecinin-cenazesi-ve-yarali-kameram-6612670_o.jpg

Judy Irish.

SHIM SURVIVED the crash but died later of a heart attack in an undisclosed location. Camera woman Judy Irish was injured and sent to a hospital state in Suruç. For his part, the driver was initially arrested, though later he and the car suspiciously disappeared.

It is still unclear why Shim was sent to a different hospital, and why the driver and the car eventually disappeared. Shim’s death, happened two days after the Turkish government allegedly accused her of spying. 

In response to the accusations, Shim stated:

“probably due to some of the stories I have covered about Turkey’s stance on the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant militants in Kobanê”

” I am a bit frightened by what MİT might use against me.”

Shim had reported the Turkish government was helping ISIS militants.They were smuggled into Syria on trucks wearing symbols of NGO’s.

THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT announced an investigation and later it was concluded that it was a simple car crash. For its part, the American government refused to hold an independent investigation of Shim’s death (an American citizen). It also rejected to comment on the case in several occasions.

The international community soon forgot the case, and her family is still waiting for an independent investigation to clarify Shim’s death. Nevertheless, her mother assumes that Shim was assassinated by the Turkish government as a consequence of her investigations. Unfortunately, Shim belongs to a long list of suspicious deaths of journalists in Turkey.

SHIM WAS ASSASSINATED because she was seeking truth and exposing it to the public. Before her death, Shim was conscious that the Turkish government was monitoring her movements and could take undetermined further actions to halt her investigations. Even so, she decided to remain loyal to her public by continuing her investigation related to the Turkish government‘s misconduct.

It is important not to forget Shim’s case until her death is clarified by conducting an independent investigation. The American government is supposed to support an independent investigation of the death of any American citizen. Until it happens, the journalistic community must continue to publicise Shim’s case to persuade the international community to take action against this assassination. Journalists like Shim risk their lives to bring the truth into citizen’s lives. Without them, the information manipulation would be absolute.

-Case 2: Barret Brown.

o-barrett-brown-facebook

BARRET BROWN  is an American journalist that has written several books and wrote for important outlets like the Guardian or the Vanity fair. In 2015, Brown was sentenced to five years in prison after pleading guilty to federal charges.

In 2009 Brown launched an investigation called Project PM from anonymous leaked information concerning the misconduct of the cyber-military-industry complex Stratfor.

On March 6, 2012, the FBI executed a warrant at his mother‘s house seeking evidence of alleged crimes related to his investigation about Stratfor.She was accused of hiding Brown’s laptops and was sentenced to 6 months of probation.

ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2012, Brown uploaded a video on youtube “threatening the agent of the FBI,” who charged his mother. A few hours later, Brown’s house was raided and later was indicted on 12 federal charges, including a fraud charge for spreading around the hyperlink to an IRC (Internet Relay Chat).

Later on, most of the charges were dropped off and replaced for three new:

1-transmitting a threat in interstate commerce.

2-for interfering with the execution of a search warrant.

3-accessory after the fact in the unauthorised access to a protected computer.

In 2015, Brown made an agreement and pleaded guilty to avoid 100 years of his sentence. 

Brown was finally sentenced to five years (By that time Brown had already served over two years in prison). As part of his sentence, Brown was also required to pay almost $900,000 to Stratfor.

AFTER HIS SENTENCE, Brown released a satirical statement that read in part:

 

“Good news! The U.S. government decided today that because I did such a good job investigating the cyber-industrial complex, they’re now going to send me to investigate the prison-industrial complex.”

Barrett wrote a column from jail for The Intercept for which, he won a National Magazine Award and a New York Press Club journalism award. (Link winner column and award)

During his time in prison, Brown was in solitary confinement on numerous occasions for no reason. Brown was released in advance on November, 29th 2016 due to his good conduct.

cyc3wtjuuaaigaf-jpg_large-800x661

Currently, Brown works for the DMagazine (Dallas). While living in a halfway house due to his probation time.

Brown’s case was very controversial. It was the first time that a journalist was charged for sharing a link on a website. Most investigative journalists share links, with secret information to share their investigations with other journalists to reach some conclusions.

Brown’s case should never be forgotten. He was unfairly prosecuted for investigating the misconduct of a private military complex. As in Shim’s case, Brown is an honest journalist, who was seeking truth to expose corporations and government misconduct to the public.

-Case 3. Anna Politkóvskaya 

download-5

ANNA POLITKÓVSKAYA was a RussianAmerican journalist, writer and human rights activist. She received many awards for her publications, including Putin’s Russia Book. But on 7 October 2006, Politkovskaya’s was assassinated by the Russian government. 

anna1-1m_s1.jpg

Anna Politkóvskaya centred her career on her opposition to the Chechen conflict and Vladimir Putin. She reported on numerous human rights abuses by the Russian army in Chechnya.In addition, she accused Putin and the Russian secret service FSB of intentionally degrading civil liberties in order to establish a Soviet-style dictatorship.

She once stated:


“Society has shown limitless apathy.… As the Chekists have become entrenched in power, we have let them see our fear, and thereby have only intensified their urge to treat us like cattle.
The KGB respects only the strong. The weak it devours. We of all people ought to know that.”

She also wrote:

“We are hurtling back into a Soviet abyss, into an information vacuum that spells death from our own ignorance. All we have left is the internet, where information is still freely available. For the rest, if you want to go on working as a journalist, it’s total servility to Putin. Otherwise, it can be death, the bullet, poison, or trial—whatever our special services, Putin’s guard dogs, see fit.”

“People often tell me that I am a pessimist, that I don’t believe in the strength of the Russian people, that I am obsessive in my opposition to Putin and see nothing beyond that,” she opens an essay titled Am I Afraid?, finishing it—and the book—with the words: “If anybody thinks they can take comfort from the ‘optimistic’ forecast, let them do so. It is certainly the easier way, but it is the death sentence for our grandchildren.”

IN SEPTEMBER 2004, Politkovskaya was poisoned while drinking a coffee on an aeroplane. While she was attempting to act as an intermediary in Beslan’s school, a hostage crisis erupted in the North Caucasus in early September 2004.

In 2005 while attending a conference on the freedom of the press in Vienna organised by Reporters Without Borders, she said:

“People sometimes pay with their lives for saying aloud what they think. In fact, one can even get killed for giving me information. I am not the only one in danger it.”

Even at that point, Politkovskaya had already been threatened and attacked numerous times.

ON OCTOBER 7, 2006, Politkovskaya was found assassinated in the elevator of her apartment. The police found three suspects for her murder:

Ibragim and Dzhabrail Makhmudov, and former Moscow police officer Sergei Khadzhikurban

In 2009, the lack of evidence forced a jury in Moscow to acquit them.

In 2012, the investigation was re-opened and in December the same year, and sentenced to 11 years in prison for the murder in a special bargain deal for providing evidence against those who ordered the killing. However, he did not name any people who hired him to commit the murder.

download-7

Former police officer Dmitry Pavliutchenkov.

IN JUNE 2014, Makhmudov’s brothers, former officer Khadzhikurbanov, and Chechen underground leader Lom-Ali Gaitukaye were sentenced to prison for the murder, two them received life sentences. Politkovskaya’s family was certain that they played an important role in Politkovskaya’s murder, but that it was orchestrated by someone else in the government who needed to be further investigated.

headlineImage.adapt.1460.high.murder_russia_journalist_anna_sentence_0609.1402328980773.jpg

Lom-Ali Gaitukayev, Sergei Khadzhikurbanov, Gunman Rustam Makhmudov and his two brothers.

The international community quickly assumed that Putin orchestrated Politkovskaya’s murder in order to halt her investigations about his cabinet. She was very influential in Russia and abroad, which was a dangerous combination for Putin. Politkovskaya belongs to a long list of journalists and political opponents, who have been murdered under strange circumstances during Putin’s presidency. 

Politkovskaya will be always remembered for her braveness as a journalist; she reported on Putin’s misconduct and the war crimes committed by the Russian army in Chechenia. 

Politkovskaya was fully aware that Putin might order her to be killed, but it did not stop her from seeking truth until her last breath. Her legacy will endure for many generations. It will encourage the next group of journalists to seek truth regardless o the political repercussions.

AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO DEDUCE from this article, criminals, governments and powerful actors tend to murder those, who are investigating, to discover some hidden information related to their misconduct. These three cases are the representation of a long list of honest journalists murdered and repressed by governments. 

Honest journalism is often the governments’ counterbalance. It exposes all sorts of political, corporate, and lobbying misconduct of citizens. Who then have the opportunity to evaluate and decide whether they take action to change it or not.

It is important to encourage the new generations of journalists to assume more risks in order to seek truth like their predecessors once did. It is not always easy to be an honest journalist, but it is comforting to know that one’s work is contributing to transforming society for the better.

Journalists should never be afraid of seeking the truth because it is their role. Honest journalism and danger are many times together, to seek the truth implies to take some risks that may end in death. However, it should not discourage anyone, the rest of society is more important than just one individual.

Without honest journalism, it is impossible to know what is real or not. There will be always journalists, who will seek truth and reveal the government’s misconduct, but civil society will be responsible for their protection.

The three cases exposed in this article should never be forgotten. By remembering them and many others, society will keep alive the spirit of fighting to achieve more transparency, justice and rights to transform this world into a better place to live in.

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

The Low Standards of Some Traditional Media

IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, The Washington Post, The Guardian, and CNN have abandoned the high standards that they once had by fabricating news with the intent of misleading the public about the Russian hacking case. However, just a few months ago the same media groups supposedly, launched a campaign to eradicate false news being fabricated by the independent media, bloggers and social media. They alleged that the increase of false news was representing a threat to society.They called for citizens to engage in their campaign to protect their rights. that part of the traditional media maintains a double standard rhetoric. While engaging in campaigns to eradicate false news they adopt the same illegitimate positions by implementing a new editorial line presumably imposed by the government. Let’s scrutinise some cases of false news published by the traditional media:

THE GUARDIAN:

ON DECEMBER 23th, the Republicca (an Italian magazine), published an interview of Julian Assange conducted by Stefania Maurizi. An Italian journalist, who has worked with Julian Assange and his organisation “WikiLeaks” since 2009. 

After Assange’s interview was released, the Guardian published a misleading article written by Ben Jacobs. It made two false claims. The first appeared in the headline:

Julian Assange gives guarded praise of Trump and blasts Clinton in interview.”

guardianheadline

The second claim appears in the first paragraph:

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, has offered guarded praise of Donald Trump.”

pantallazo-2017-01-08-10-44-34

Both claims are easily demonstrably false, by reading the original interview.

As a matter of fact, there is no trace of the claims written by Jacob in the original interview.It indicates that Jacob intentionally fabricated the facts of the article to gain some popularity and damage Assange’s reputation. As further evidence, once Stefania Maurizi, Gleen Greenwald, and other honest journalists pointed out the false article, the Guardian amended part of it.

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-41-14

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-43-21

The Guardian Amendment:

  • This article was amended on 29 December 2016 to remove a sentence in which it was asserted that Assange “has long had a close relationship with the Putin regime”. A sentence was also amended which paraphrased the interview, suggesting Assange said “there was no need for Wikileaks to undertake a whistleblowing role in Russia because of the open and competitive debate he claimed exists there”. It has been amended to more directly describe the question Assange was responding to when he spoke of Russia’s “many vibrant publications”.

pantallazo-2017-01-07-10-45-45

ALTHOUGH the Guardian amended the article, the damage was already done. It had already been shared by thousands of people on the social media. The public does not generally read the same article more than once so a large number of people are still misled. By its part, the journalistic community has shown its concerns and has requested Jacob give more explanations about the motivations behind his actions. Unfortunately, Jacob has not given any explanation yet.

THE WASHINGTON POST:

ON DECEMBER 27th of last year, the Washington Post published an article alarming the population about that Russian hackers penetrated into the U.S. electricity grid through an utility in Vermont.

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-50-00

it contained serious accusations from Vermont officials. The state’s Democratic governor, Peter Shumlin, said:

“Vermonters and all Americans should be both alarmed and outraged that one of the world’s leading thugs, Vladimir Putin, has been attempting to hack our electric grid, which we rely upon to support our quality of life, economy, health, and safety. This episode should highlight the urgent need for our federal government to vigorously pursue and put an end to this sort of Russian meddling.”

The reaction of the media was dishonest and outrageous by spreading false information and falsely alarming the citizens.

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-51-59

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-52-27

A few hours later, it was found that the article was false. Surprisingly, according to sources from Vermont’s utility, the Washington post did not even contact them to confirm whether the information was authentic or not.

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-52-55

As the Guardian did with Assange’s article, when it was revealed that the article was false and after some journalists exposed it on the social media, the Whasighton Post amended part of the article.

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-53-24

AS IN THE GUARDIAN’S CASE, the article was amended, but the damage was already done.The readers do not usually read the same article twice, and it had already been shared by thousands of people on the social media. The Washington Post still have an “excellent” reputation by the general public (who are not experts). This makes it difficult for some of to verify whether a story is fabricated or not. However, it is irrefutable that the article generated a high social alarm and hysteria. There is also clear evidence that it was deliberately fabricated to make think people that “Russia was attacking the U.S.”.

CNN:

ON JANUARY 4th, Phil Mudd, a counterterrorism analyst for the CNN, asserted during the New Day’s Show that Assange was a pedophile. The same day, WikiLeaks warned CNN that if it did not rectify the situation during the next 48 hours, Wikileaks would sue them.

pantallazo-2017-01-06-18-33-23

After three hours, CNN announced that it had deleted the link to the interview on its Twitter account, and attached a statement announcing that there is no evidence of the assertion earlier that day by Phil Mudd.

Pantallazo-2017-01-06 18-34-08.png

Phil Mudd’s intentions were to mislead the public and make them think that Wikileaks is a suspicious journalistic organisation led by a pedophile. Once again, CNN rectified the error, but the damage was already done. CNN has millions of viewers on a regular basis, and most of them do not follow its Twitter account. It suggests that a great proportion of the public did not have the opportunity even to see the correction.

WHY IS IMPORTANT to point out the false news? The media has a highly hypnotic manipulative capacity to make people think that everything said by them is authentic. It has been used numerous times in other countries to influence elections, or instigate revolutions. So it is important to ensure that the citizens are well-informed about what is surrounding their lives on a regular basis, regardless of the subject. However, some governments are resisting it by dictating news to some traditional media outlets.

No one should blame journalists working for the traditional media unless they participate in the fabrication of news. But in case the current editorial line continues being dubious for some more time, they should consider whether or not to keep working there and accept its new editorial line. 

THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN false news and it will be impossible to entirely eradicate them. However, the implementation of some mechanisms that teach the citizens how to think critically may decrease, which is the real impact that false news have in society. It is also important to call the traditional media to return to its high standards that it once had. This would be the best way to almost eradicate false news and prevent unnecessary geopolitical conflicts that may soon turn into wars. Honest journalism is that which always pursues truth, regardless of the situation and the case. Hopefully, the media, which is fabricating news, will soon reconsider its positions. Until then, critical thinking will be the only effective weapon that society will have to resist false news. 

 

 

 

 

 

Netanyahu: “the Right of Protection”

Days after the UN (United Nations) condemned the expansion of the Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, announced that Israel will not abide by the UN resolution because it is an attempt against Israeli’s security. Instead, Netanyahu announced mass punishments against the countries that voted for the resolution.

Netanyahu considers that the expansion of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories serves to protect Israel from terrorism. Nevertheless, the international community reflects that the existing dispute between Israel and Palestine will increase.

Netanyahu is leading a radical coalition, considered to be the most right-wing in Israeli history.Avigdor Lieberman, who heads Yisrael Beiteinu – the other major party in the ruling coalition – opposes to recognise Palestine as a state. He has also proposed to transfer the Arabic community (including Israeli Citizens) from Israel to Cisjordania to evade a forthcoming Arabic majority in Israel.

Lieberman demanded to expand the settlements in Palestinian territories, as a condition to enter into a coalition with Netanyahu. Lieberman thinks that the Palestinian territories belong to Israel. It will make improbable the negotiation of the peace with Palestine while he is the Israeli minister of defence. It is in this context that Netanyahu has experienced a sudden radicalization. It worries the international community, who considers that Netanyahu’s actions are undermining the forthcoming negotiations between Israel and Palestine.

The international community recognises the right of Israel to protect the country from terrorists. It also considers that the Israeli occupation kills any possible process of peace in the region. The only possible solution is the mutual acknowledgement of both states.

No one doubts that the Palestinian government made mistakes in the past, which contributed to undermining possible agreements, but not in the last few years. The terrorism from Palestine is also widely rejected by the international community. However, it is not an excuse to avoid negotiating a lasting agreement which satisfies both sides. Netanyahu’s imperialistic vision in collaboration with Lieberman is making it nearly impossible.

Netanyahu should think about why the international community has almost unanimously condemned his policies. In the case that Israel takes more unlawful actions, it will become gradually more isolated from the international community.

Netanyahu expects that Trump’s presidency will halt any sort of international sanctions against Israel. However, the UN resolution opens the possibility for the Palestinian government to invoke the International Court of Justice (ICJ). If it ever happens, Trump will not be able to halt any prosecution or investigation against the Israeli government. In the case that the government is finally found guilty of any crime, the international community will be obliged to implement financial sanctions on Israel. It would have negative impacts on the citizens since the Israeli economy would fall down. Hopefully, the Israeli government will rethink its suicidal positions.

As a consideration, It is impossible to protect a country by imposing violence on your neighbourhood because it provokes more violence. There have been similar scenarios in history with a bad end. Governments should learn from history not to make same mistakes over and over again.

 

 

Threats for 2017, and Global Resistance

In many ways, 2016 will be remembered as the year when society lost its common sense. Fascism became predominant in the world again, with Trump as a visible face; governments increased their violations of human rights; and the right to privacy, free speech and the freedom of the press were eliminated. In 2017, our society will face crucial events which could change this dynamic or make it worse.

Here are some of the global events and threats for 2017:

-Refugees: Millions of refugees are still along our borders waiting for a solution. In many cases, they have been living in precarious conditions for years now. It is provoking a humanitarian crisis that must be addressed as soon as possible. However, the Alt-Right political party and the elitist media are criminalising all refugees to halt their entrance into Western countries.

-Russia: Putin is increasing the nuclear capability of Russia to have more influence in the world. He is also abolishing human rights in Russia. As a result, activists and journalists are criminalised and sometimes assassinated by the government.

-Israel: Netanyahu’s rhetoric against the international community and Palestine is becoming more radical. He is threatening everyone who opposes his genocidal ideas. The potential international isolation of Israel, combined with his deranged actions make him a dangerous person. Everything indicates that in 2017, he will radicalise his rhetoric.

-Europe: In 2017, France, Germany and the Netherlands will hold presidential elections. Marine Le Pen (France), Geert Wilders (the Netherlands), and the tandem Frauke Petry/Jörg Meuthen(Germany) will be the perspective presidential candidates. Boosted by Trump’s success, they will have real chances to win the election in their countries representing a threat to the fundamentals of democracy.

-U.S.: Like Putin, Trump will also try to increase the nuclear capability of the U.S. representing a threat to the world. Trump is the visible face of fascism, and his ties with Alt-Right organisations, represented on his cabinet by Bannon, indicates that his presidency will soon turn authoritarian. It is foreseeable that Trump will try to abolish several human rights in the U.S.

As far as we know, these are threats to our democracy and human rights. It is in this context that, people will have to organise a global resistance to defend their rights. In conclusion, 2017 will be the year of the consolidation of fascism, violations of human rights, authoritarianism or the year that civil society will organise to defeat all these threats.