Mexico: Mexico protests over president's plans for reform

Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto has delivered his first State of the Union address.This as thousands of protesters marched against his plans for widespread reforms.Al Jazeera's Lucia Newman reports from Mexico City.

Malaysia: Thousands Face Deportation in Malaysian Immigration Crackdown

Source: Voice of America

Kate Woodsome

September 02, 2013 

More than 2,000 immigrants in Malaysia have spent the night in detention centers in a nationwide crackdown on illegal immigration that authorities say could deport hundreds of thousands of people.

Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told the press the 2,433 detainees were among approximately 8,000 people examined by authorities in dozens of operations that began Sunday.

“This shows the seriousness of the Home Ministry and Immigration Department [to flush out the illegal immigrants]. Ours is not a spur-of-the-moment action,” Ahmad Zahid said Monday, as quoted by Malaysia's national news agency, Bernama.

The Home minister told reporters that so far, authorities have detained 717 Indonesian nationals, 555 Burmese nationals, 387 Bangladeshi nationals and 229 Nepali nationals. He said authorities also detained immigrants from Cambodia, Vietnam, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, China, Nigeria and Thailand.

Officials say more than 400,000 immigrants could be affected by the operation. Many of them hold low-paying construction and plantation jobs, while others work as domestic helpers or in massage parlors.

Thanks, but no thanks

Their labor has helped build Malaysia into Southeast Asia’s third largest economy. But as the economy has weakened, concerns have grown among some Malaysians that foreigners could push down wages and drive up crime.

The government has vacillated in its approach to illegal immigration over the past decade, from whipping and fining people for working illegally in Malaysia, to registering 1.3 million of an estimated two million undocumented foreigners for an amnesty program in 2011.

The crackdown that began Sunday is focusing first on immigrants who signed up for amnesty but didn’t finish the process.

It comes as Malaysia is trying to transition to a higher-skilled economy and is facing a slower growth rate than expected. The central bank recently downgraded Malaysia’s economic growth forecast from 6 percent to between 4.5 and 5 percent this year.

Human rights

Malaysian authorities say they are working with foreign embassies to repatriate the undocumented workers. Home Minister Ahmad Zahid also said authorities will take action in accordance with international law to avoid human trafficking.

Malaysia is a destination and transit country for trafficking victims who suffer exploitation and abuse as forced laborers and sex slaves. The U.S. Department of State placed Malaysia on its Tier 2 human trafficking Watch List for the fourth consecutive year this year, because the government does not fully comply with the minimum standards for ending trafficking. 

Georgia: Coming Or Going, Georgian Minaret Draws Ire

Samkhretis (SKnews.ge) (Courtesy photo)

RFE/RL Copyright (c) 2013. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036.

Coming Or Going, Georgian Minaret Draws Ire

By Antoine Blua and RFE/RL's Georgian Service

September 02, 2013

The removal of a minaret from a mosque in southern Georgia has sparked intercommunity tensions between local Muslims and Orthodox Christians.

Local authorities forcibly removed the 24-meter minaret in the village of Chela in the province of Samtskhe-Javakheti on August 26, prompting angry protests among the country's Muslims.

The move was initiated by the revenue service of the Georgian Finance Ministry. Officials said they wanted to verify if the materials used to build the minaret – the distinctive spire used for the daily calls to prayer -- were properly declared in customs when they were imported from Turkey in July.

A protest by a group of Muslims who tried to block the removal of the minaret was broken up by police, who arrested some 20 people. A number of protesters were also injured.

Human rights defenders and the head of the Board of Muslims of Georgia, Mufti Jemal Paksadze, called the operation a violation of citizens' rights.

Muslim protesters also gathered in the Black Sea port of Batumi, the capital of neighboring Ajara region.

"We demand that justice be restored, we demand that the minaret gets put back," said one protester. "And we demand an apology to the Muslim community from everyone who is responsible for this act of vandalism."

Christian Objections

Three days later, the minaret was returned to a site near Chela following inspections in Tbilisi.

But that move sparked controversy as well, with a group of Orthodox Christians blocking a road in an attempt to prevent the minaret's return.

The Orthodox activists, who gathered in the regional capital of Akhaltsikhe, also called for a national referendum on whether there should be minarets in the country at all.

The minaret is now in storage in a warehouse near Chela and will not be reassembled, under an agreement announced late last week by senior Orthodox and Muslim clerics.

The dispute, however, continues to rumble on.

Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili, in his first public comment on the issue, said September 2 that the minaret had been put up illegally. He added, however, that the government needed to tread particularly carefully in cases where religious feelings were involved.

Ivanishvili's rival, outgoing President Mikheil Saakashvili, earlier said the minaret's removal was an "illegality committed against the Georgian Muslims."

Stirring Conflict?

The Georgian Orthodox Church meanwhile, appealed for calm, warning against attempts to incite "religious strife."

"What's happening now is that someone is trying to create a religious conflict similar to what they tried to do in [the villages of] Nigvziani, Tsintskaro, and Samtatskaro," said David Sharashenidze, a spokesman for the Georgian Patriarchate. "The aim of these attempts is to pit the Christian and Muslim populations against each other, and in so doing, to discredit the Church and the state."

Sharashenidze was referring to incidents that have occurred since November 2012 in three villages with mixed Muslim and Christian populations -- Nigvziani in the western region of Guria, Tsintskaro in Kvemo Kartli region, and Samtatskaro in the Kakheti region.

In each instance, the local Christian communities there confronted Muslims and barred them from performing prayers in houses converted into mosques.

The population of Chela and other nearby villages in Adigeni municipality includes Muslims who resettled in the area in recent decades after leaving Ajara.

Pakistan: Musharraf faces another murder case

Source: IRNA

Islamabad, Sept 2, IRNA – Police in the Pakistani capital on Monday registered another murder case against former military President Pervez Musharraf over killings of students during a military raid of Islamabad’s Red Mosque in 2007, lawyers said.

Police said nearly 100 people, most of them students of religious school as well as security personnel, had been killed in clashes.

Deputy Chief of the mosque, Abdul Rashid Ghazi, his mother and nephew were among those killed during the operation.

Haroon Rasheed, son of slain Ghazi had approached the Islamabad High Court for registration of murder case against Musharraf, who was ruling the country at the time of the operation.

Police had earlier refused to register the case against Musharraf despite the court’s order in July. An application for contempt of court against the police officer was later submitted in the court because of his refusal to register the case.

Justice Noorul Huque Qureshi Monday summoned the police officer, Qasim Niazi, and scolded him for his behavior. The judge then ordered registration of the case inside the court room. The section also includes murder charges against Musharraf.

The police had refused to register the case on the plea that they would do so after consulting their legal branch.

Tariq Asad, lawyer for the applicant said they had also approached the court for terrorism charges against Musharraf but they were not included.

Musharraf had ordered military raid on the mosque known as ‘Lal Masjid” after students, some of them armed, took positions inside the mosque and its attached girls religious school.

Lawyers say that the police will now formally begin proceedings against Musharraf, who is facing other charges including conspiracy to kill former Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto.

Musharraf, who resigned as President in 2008, returned the country this year in March after over four-year of exile. He is under arrest at his residence in Islamabad.

The former President also faces charges of the killing of a tribal elder, Nawab Akbar Bugti, who was killed in a military operation in 2006 in southwestern Balochistan province.

Sudan: Sudan scales up efforts to improve maternal and child health

Source: World Health Organization

1 September 2013 – on 28 August Sudan’s Federal Ministry of Health together with the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF and the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) launched Sudan's National Acceleration Plan for Maternal and Child Health.

Sudan is the first of the 10 high-burden countries in the Region to launch an acceleration plan on maternal and child health, in line with the commitment expressed in the Dubai Declaration, adopted in January 2013.

There has been a significant decrease in the under-5 mortality rate in Sudan, which declined by 33% between 1990 and 2010. The neonatal mortality rate has also decreased by 11% in the same time period.

The Sudan Household Health Survey 2010 reflected a 60% decrease in maternal mortality per 100 000 live births, from 537 in 1990 to 216 in 2010. Despite progress, child and maternal mortality remain high; at the current rate and without more intensive efforts, the country will be unable to achieve the targets of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 4 and 5.

The high-level gathering in Khartoum, led by the Vice President of Sudan Dr Al-Haj Adam Youssef brought together officials from the Government, WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, as well as the country’s diplomatic corps, highlighting their commitment to mobilize resources and work towards implementation of the plan.

Dr Ala Alwan, WHO Regional Director for the Eastern Mediterranean, together with UNFPA Regional Director for Arab States Mr Mohammed Abdel-Ahad, and UNICEF Country Representative joined hands with Sudan as it presented the plan that has been developed to accelerate the implementation of the most effective health interventions to improve the health of mothers and children. The plan aims to reduce maternal and under-5 child mortality in order to reach the targets of the MDGs.

The work plan was prepared after analysing the current health indicators at locality level, and the process was technically supported by WHO, UNICEF and UNFPA. During preparation, the priority was given to localities with low coverage of maternal and child health services and community-based services (midwives and community health workers), and those with high population density.

The work plan will be implemented through several axes: expanding coverage of maternal and child health services to ensure equitable access for all population, strengthening the referral system at the primary health care level, raising community awareness regarding maternal and child health issues, strengthening and supporting the health system at the locality level and ensuring community empowerment to promote maternal and child health.

World Water Week: UN deputy chief urges greater international cooperation on sanitation

A young resident of Maslakh camp (Afghanistan) takes a drink of water. UN Photo/E. Debebe

UN - 2 September 2013 – Now is the time for accelerated, energized and concerted action on water and sanitation, Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson today urged, calling for renewed cooperation on water management and access to adequate sanitation for the more than 2.5 billion people around the world without it.

In a keynote address to the World Water Week plenary session in Stockholm, Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson said:“Dealing effectively with the water and sanitation crisis is fundamental to fighting disease and poverty.”

“In a world of population growth and pressures on water resources within and among nations, sound and fair water management is a huge task and a clear imperative for all of us,” Mr. Eliasson added.

He urged the hundreds of delegates gathered for the session entitled “Building partnerships for Sanitation and Water for All” to work towards sustainable solutions and measures among actors, including national governments, local administrations, development partners, international organizations, the private sector, the research and science community and civil society.

Water and sanitation are included in the eight anti-poverty targets known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which world leaders agreed to meet by the end of 2015.

The deputy noted last year's announcement that the world had reached the target for access to improved sources of water, but water quality to a large degree still fails to meet basic UN World Health Organization (WHO) standards.

Roughly 80 per cent of global wastewater from human settlements or industrial sources is discharged untreated, contaminating oceans, lakes and rivers.

Inadequate water supply and sanitation around the world lead to an economic loss of $260 billion in health costs and diminished work productivity, WHO reported. Meanwhile, meeting the MDG target on water and sanitation amount to $60 billion annually, according to studies Mr. Eliasson cited.

Sanitation is the most lagging of the MDGs. Meeting the target would involve reducing the proportion of people without access to sanitation from more than half to 25 per cent by 2015.

“We must continue to break taboos. As was the case for the word 'toilets' a few years ago, it is time to incorporate 'open defecation' in the diplomatic discourse today,” Mr. Eliasson urged.

Currently, one out of every four people in the least developed countries defecates in the open. Ending the practice could, for instance, lead to a 36 per cent reduction in diarrhoea, the deputy UN chief noted, and enhance the personal safety of women and girls who risk sexual assaults when venturing from their homes to isolated places for basic needs.

Open defecation is part of the “Call to Action” that Mr. Eliasson launched in March on behalf of Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. It aims to improve hygiene, change social norms, better managing human waste and waste-water, and completely eliminate the practice of open defecation by 2025. The General Assembly furthered that aim last month, declaring 19 November as World Toilet Day.

Noting examples of international cooperation on these issues, Mr. Eliasson noted the Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) initiative comprised of governments, donors, civil society organizations, development partners and several UN agencies.

In its latest report, the SWA partnership said that political leadership and concrete action have led to good progress on creating universal and sustainable access to decent sanitation and drinking water, but additional efforts are needed.

High-level members of the group are due to meet again next April, in a meeting led by the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Bank.

Turning to his experiences in Darfur, Sudan, where Mr. Eliasson had been a Special Envoy of the Secretary-General, the UN deputy chief cautioned that water scarcity is an increasing reason for conflict.

“I have seen it in Darfur where poisoning of water wells was a way for forcing people to leave their villages for the overcrowded camps,” he noted, as well as in strained relations between States related to cross-border river and waterways management, agriculture and energy.

“If competition for resources turns into open conflict, invariably all sides, all involved, will suffer,” Mr. Eliasson said. “Our aim must be to make scarce resources, in particular water, a reason for cooperation rather than conflict.”

GMO: 'Monsanto wants total control, covers up grave GMO dangers'

Supermarkets are flooded with GMO products, but how safe is it to eat them? Tasty and beautiful, they are produced with intervention unprecedented in history. Gene manipulation: how appropriate is it? Does it contribute to solving the food crisis on the planet? Or will humanity have to pay a costly price for meddling with what is not theirs. We talk to Jeffrey M. Smith, GMO researcher from the Institute for Responsible Technology.

Syria: International Crisis Group - Syria Statement

Source: International Crisis Group

Assuming the U.S. Congress authorises them, Washington (together with some allies) soon will launch military strikes against Syrian regime targets. If so, it will have taken such action for reasons largely divorced from the interests of the Syrian people.  The administration has cited the need to punish, deter and prevent use of chemical weapons - a defensible goal, though Syrians have suffered from far deadlier mass atrocities during the course of the conflict without this prompting much collective action in their defence. The administration also refers to the need, given President Obama's asserted "redline" against use of chemical weapons, to protect Washington's credibility - again an understandable objective though unlikely to resonate much with Syrians. Quite apart from talk of outrage, deterrence and restoring U.S. credibility, the priority must be the welfare of the Syrian people. Whether or not military strikes are ordered, this only can be achieved through imposition of a sustained ceasefire and widely accepted political transition.
To precisely gauge in advance the impact of a U.S. military attack, regardless of its scope and of efforts to carefully calibrate it, by definition is a fool's errand.  In a conflict that has settled into a deadly if familiar pattern - and in a region close to boiling point - it inevitably will introduce a powerful element of uncertainty.  Consequences almost certainly will be unpredictable.  Still, several observations can be made about what it might and might not do:

• A military attack will not, nor can it, be met with even minimal international consensus; in this sense, the attempt to come up with solid evidence of regime use of chemical weapons, however necessary, also is futile.  Given the false pretenses that informed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq and, since then, regional and international polarisation coupled with the dynamics of the Syrian conflict itself, proof put forward by the U.S. will be insufficient to sway disbelievers and skepticism will be widespread.

• It might discourage future use of chemical weapons by signaling even harsher punishment in the event of recidivism - an important achievement in and of itself.  Should the regime find itself fighting for its survival, however, that consideration might not weigh heavily.  Elements within the opposition also might be tempted to use such weapons and then blame the regime, precisely in order to provoke further U.S. intervention.

• It could trigger violent escalation within Syria as the regime might exact revenge on rebels and rebel-held areas, while the opposition seeks to seize the opportunity to make its own gains.  

• Major regional or international escalation (such as retaliatory actions by the regime, Iran or Hizbollah, notably against Israel) is possible but probably not likely given the risks involved, though this could depend on the scope of the strikes.

• Military action, which the U.S. has stated will not aim at provoking the regime's collapse, might not even have an enduring effect on the balance of power on the ground.  Indeed, the regime could register a propaganda victory, claiming it had stood fast against the U.S. and rallying domestic and regional opinion around an anti-Western, anti-imperialist mantra. 

Ultimately, the principal question regarding a possible military strike is whether diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict can be reenergized in its aftermath.  Smart money says they will not: in the wake of an attack they condemn as illegal and illegitimate, the regime and its allies arguably will not be in a mood to negotiate with the U.S. Carefully calibrating the strike to hurt enough to change their calculations but not enough to prompt retaliation or impede diplomacy is appealing in theory.  In practice, it almost certainly is not feasible.
Whether or not the U.S. chooses to launch a military offensive, its responsibility should be to try to optimize chances of a diplomatic breakthrough.  This requires a two-fold effort lacking to date: developing a realistic compromise political offer as well as genuinely reaching out to both Russia and Iran in a manner capable of eliciting their interest - rather than investing in a prolonged conflict that has a seemingly bottomless capacity to escalate.
In this spirit, the U.S. should present - and Syria's allies should seriously and constructively consider - a proposal based on the following elements:

1. It is imperative to end this war. The escalation, regional instability and international entanglement its persistence unavoidably stimulates serve nobody's interest.
2. The only exit is political. That requires far-reaching concessions and a lowering of demands from all parties. The sole viable outcome is a compromise that protects the interests of all Syrian constituencies and reflects rather than alters the regional strategic balance;
3. The Syrian crisis presents an important opportunity to test whether the U.S. and the Islamic Republic of Iran can work together on regional issues to restore stability;
4. A viable political outcome in Syria cannot be one in which the current leadership remains indefinitely in power but, beyond that, the U.S. can be flexible with regards to timing and specific modalities;
5. The U.S. is keen to avoid collapse of the Syrian state and the resulting political vacuum. The goal should thus be a transition that builds on existing institutions rather than replaces them. This is true notably with respect to the army;
6. Priority must be given to ensuring that no component of Syrian society is targeted for retaliation, discrimination or marginalisation in the context of a negotiated settlement.

Such a proposal should then form the basis for renewed efforts by Lakhdar Brahimi, the joint United Nations/Arab League envoy, and lead to rapid convening of a Geneva II conference.

Debate over a possible strike - its wisdom, preferred scope and legitimacy in the absence of UN Security Council approval - has obscured and distracted from what ought to be the overriding international preoccupation: how to revitalise the search for a political settlement. Discussions about its legality aside, any contemplated military action should be judged based on whether it advances that goal or further postpones it.

Iraq: Impartial investigation of Camp Ashraf deaths crucial

Source: Amnesty

Impartial investigation of Camp Ashraf deaths crucial

Amnesty International urges the Iraqi authorities to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into violence at Camp Ashraf that reportedly left at least 47 dead on 1 September.

“On previous occasions the Iraqi authorities have failed to conduct effective investigations into attacks on camps housing Iranian exiles. This has meant that no one has been held accountable for these incidents, and that residents live in constant fear for their safety,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.

“The authorities must ensure that an inquiry into yesterday’s violence is promptly carried out and that it is independent, transparent and in full conformity with international standards.”

The circumstances of the event are disputed. Residents claim that Iraqi security forces attacked the camp and killed several residents. Several victims were allegedly arrested and hand-cuffed before being shot dead. However, Iraqi officials have provided different accounts of what happened, including blaming infighting among camp residents.

Some 100 Iranian exiles remained at Camp Ashraf, after most of the camp’s inhabitants were relocated to Camp Liberty in north eastern Baghdad in recent years.

Earlier this year deadly attacks were launched against Camp Liberty. On 15 June 2013 Camp Liberty, now home to more than 3000 Iranian exiles, came under rocket attack. Two residents were killed and dozens were wounded. An earlier rocket attack on Camp Liberty on 9 February 2013 left eight residents dead and scores wounded. No effective investigations are known to have been conducted into either attack.

A leader of the Mukhtar Army, a Shi’a militia, has told the media on several occasions that his group was responsible for attacks on Camp Liberty. Despite these admissions, no effective measures to prevent possible attacks by the Mukhtar Army against the Iranian exiles are known to have been taken by the Iraqi authorities

“The failure of the Iraqi authorities to investigate and bring to justice those allegedly responsible for previous attacks is unacceptable and is putting lives at risk,” said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui. “The government of Iraq is responsible for the safety and security of all the residents of Camp Liberty and Camp Ashraf and must take immediate measures to ensure their protection.”

Background:

Camp Ashraf previously housed some 3400 Iranian exiles, mostly members and supporters of the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI) who were allowed to move to Iraq by Saddam Hussain’s government in the 1980s.

After the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq the Camp and its residents were placed under US protection but this ended in mid-2009 following an agreement between the US authorities and the Iraqi government. Barely a month later, on 28-29 July 2009, Iraqi security forces stormed the camp; at least nine residents were killed and many more were injured. Thirty-six residents who were detained were allegedly tortured and beaten.

In April 2011, Iraqi troops stormed Camp Ashraf in Diyala governorate. The troops used excessive force, including live ammunition, against the residents who tried to resist them. At least 36 people were killed and more than 300 injured. The government failed to conduct a prompt, thorough, independent, and impartial investigation into the incident, in breach of international standards, including the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.

In 2011 the Iraqi government announced the closure of Camp Ashraf after relocating its residents to a new location, Camp Liberty in north-east of Baghdad. After the majority of residents had been relocated about 100 people were allowed to stay behind in Camp Ashraf in order to resolve remaining property issues.

According to a December 2011 memorandum of understanding between the UN and the government of Iraq, the UNHCR may process requests for international protection from residents of the camps. Those residents who apply for international protection are asylum seekers under international law.

Afghanistan: Ensuring Security Through Regional Cooperation

Interview by Manish Rai | IDN-InDepth NewsInterview*

NEW DELHI (IDN) - As the Afghan government prepares for the post-2014 withdrawal of NATO forces, M. Ashraf Haidari, Deputy Chief of Mission of the Embassy of Afghanistan in New Delhi, India, says in an exclusive interview with ViewsAround Editor Manish Rai that the survival of the Taliban in Afghanistan hinges on the support they receive in Pakistan. "Without safe havens, without an operational infrastructure, and without financial means for their sustainment, the Taliban would cease to exist in a matter of a couple of months, if not a few weeks. Once these lines of support are withdrawn from their terror campaign, they would be smashed into easy defeat by the armed forces of Afghanistan," adds the Afghan diplomat.

Question: What was the main reason for shutting down of the Taliban political office in Doha, Qatar?

Answer: The main reason was the way the Taliban opened their office against the agreed-upon principles of the peace process. Labelling the political bureau of the Taliban, a basic venue for peace negotiation meetings, as the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Office,” along with hoisting their white flag, invited immediate reaction from the government and people of Afghanistan, as well as from our allies in the region and beyond. The symbolism of the event aimed at raising the legitimacy of the Taliban against Afghanistan’s elected government and the statement Taliban released, in which they neither committed to cutting ties with Al Qaeda nor accepting Afghanistan’s peace conditions, have indefinitely stalled the peace process. Any such attempts in the future would fail, unless the peace process is completely Afghan-led and Afghan-owned.

Q: Do you feel the Afghan forces are capable enough to defend the country alone?

A: Afghanistan is now blessed with over 350,000 forces, willing to fight and die for the defence of our homeland against any type of external aggression, including the terror campaign of the Taliban. The press frequently reports on the spectacular successes of our special operations forces against the recurrent complex suicide terrorist attacks by the Taliban on innocent civilians. And under the security transition process, our forces are now leading all military operations across Afghanistan, with the NATO forces having entered into a new mission of advising, training, and equipping the Afghan forces. The Afghan people take immense pride in our forces, and we strongly believe that our brave, dedicated soldiers can perfectly defend our homeland, provided that they have the necessary training and critical enablers to be provided by NATO and allies like India.

Q: Why is the Taliban movement getting more aggressive day by day?

A: The brutality of the Taliban has increased given their utter rejection by the peace loving people of Afghanistan, who have embraced a culture of democracy, pluralism, and co-existence. The Afghan people continue defying the Taliban, their ideology of hatred, and their mass killing of civilians by suicide terrorist attacks. We recently witnessed the outrage of the Afghan people against the opening of “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Office” in Doha, a clear indication that the Taliban would never be accepted by Afghans, unless they renounce violence, accept the Afghan constitution and the democratic gains of the past 12 years, and join the peace process with honesty and sincerity to end their foreign-dictated violence against Afghanistan.

Q: Are you saying that Taliban is just sustaining because of Pakistani support?

A: It is now clearly known to everyone and acknowledged by the Pakistani government itself that the Taliban’s survival hinges on the support they receive in Pakistan. Without safe havens, without an operational infrastructure, and without financial means for their sustainment, the Taliban would cease to exist in a matter of a couple of months, if not a few weeks. Once these lines of support are withdrawn from their terror campaign, they would be smashed into easy defeat by the armed forces of Afghanistan. And for those willing to discontinue violence, we have a peace process through which they can reconcile with the Afghan people and pursue their political objectives democratically.

Q: But Pakistan also blames the Afghan government for non-cooperation in their campaign against Taliban?

A: The government of Pakistan cannot deny the fact that we have been asking them since 2004 to join hands with us and our common allies in the fight against extremism and terrorism. We had been warning them that external sponsorship of terrorism in Afghanistan would backfire with far-reaching security implications in Pakistan and the rest of the region. As a landlocked, war-torn country, Afghanistan can hardly afford to side with any entity or country against any of our neighbors. So, that is why right at the beginning after the fall of the Taliban, we signed a Good Neighborly Relations Declaration with all of our six neighbors, who firmly committed to non-interference in the Afghan affairs as a way to end war and violence in Afghanistan and to stabilize the entire region. And that is the foreign policy we continue to pursue, inviting and encouraging our immediate and near neighbors to support the implementation of the Istanbul Process to ensure peace, stability and prosperity for all countries of the Heart of Asia, at the center of which lies Afghanistan.

Q: Is the Afghan government willing to talk to Taliban again?

A: The Afghan government is firmly committed to ending the war in Afghanistan through peace and reconciliation, which is also an integral part of a comprehensive transition process with security, political, and economic components. The High Peace Council, consisting of representatives from across Afghanistan, has the sole responsibility of negotiating a peace settlement with the armed opposition, including the Taliban, after they have accepted our peace conditions. President Hamid Karzai recently visited Pakistan, and requested Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to support sincerely and vigorously the Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace process. Pakistan has acknowledged their strong influence and leverage over the Taliban leadership in the country, which we hope they would use to jump-start the stalled peace process.

Q: Do you think that the Taliban menace is a threat to other countries as well?

A: There is broad regional consensus on the fact that extremism and terrorism in their different manifestations pose a major threat to the security and stability of every country in the region.[ . . .] extremism threatens the security of Pakistan itself, as a direct consequence of neglecting the menace, which has been victimizing the Afghan people for too long. If Pakistan joins hands with Afghanistan, India, and the rest of the region in the fight against the threat of extremism, we should be able to immediately contain and subsequently eliminate it. Doing so will not only stabilize our region but also enable us to focus on regional economic development, a key demand of every nation in the region.

Q: What will be the three top priorities of the Afghan government following the post 2014 withdrawal of NATO forces?

A: Our three top priorities in the post 2014 period include the consolidation of our gains of the past decade, the pursuit of a negotiated peace settlement that can end war and violence in Afghanistan, and the implementation of our vision for 2024, with a focus on achieving self-reliance in the economic and security sectors. To achieve these top priorities, we will need the continued support of the international community, including our allies in the region and beyond. And we are confident that, based on the many strategic partnership agreements we have signed with them, our allies will stay the course in Afghanistan, and together we will achieve our shared objective of enabling the Afghan people to stand on our own. Let me also extend the gratitude of the Afghan government and people to more than 55 countries, including India, for their continued multi-faceted assistance, as well as for the ultimate sacrifices of their forces to stabilize Afghanistan.

*This interview is being re-published with due acknowledgement to ViewsAround, which carried it on August 31, 2013. [IDN-InDepthNews – August 31, 2013]

2013 IDN-InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

Picture: M. Ashraf Haidari, Deputy Chief of Mission of the Embassy of Afghanistan in New Delhi | Credit: ViewsAround

Israel: Investigate Fatal Shootings

Source: Human Rights Watch

3 Killed in Raid on Qalandia Refugee Camp

(Jerusalem) – Israeli troops appear to have used unlawful lethal force during an arrest raid in a Palestinian refugee camp that killed three Palestinians. The raid on August 26, 2013, and the response to subsequent disturbances in the camp also injured 19, including the target of the arrest, Yusuf al-Khatib, who was wanted in relation with unspecified “terrorist activities.”

Residents of the Qalandia refugee camp responded to the arrest raid by throwing stones at Israeli soldiers, who initially responded by firing tear gas and rubber bullets. As clashes spread, a larger number of camp residents threw stones, Molotov cocktails and other objects, and Israeli forces used live ammunition as reinforcements arrived, witnesses said. In several cases, soldiers shot Palestinians who were not throwing stones in circumstances indicating that they intentionally used lethal force that was not necessary to protect life, in violation of international standards.

“Israeli forces confronted stone-throwing and mayhem during the raid on Qalandia but that doesn’t justify shooting Palestinians who posed no threat,” said Joe Stork, acting Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “The results are shattered lives, shattered limbs, and shattered families – and a need for criminal investigations.”

Israeli soldiers who shot people unlawfully should be prosecuted. According to international standards,Israelshould also grant victims and their families access to an independent, judicial process to seek compensation.

Israeli forces allegedly beat the target of the arrest severely, breaking his nose and teeth, and assaulted a relative without justification.

Human Rights Watch examined the locations of the three killings and spoke with 16 camp residents who said they witnessed the incidents, including five who had been shot, and compared their accounts with information collected by Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups and international organizations.

According to information provided to Human Rights Watch by staff at the Ramallah hospital, 5 of the 18 people wounded by gunfire during the clashes were under 18 years old, and 12 of the 18 required surgery.
In a statement released on the day of the incursion, the Israeli military said that the results of a “preliminary” inquiry by its Central Command indicated that Israeli forces had acted “according to orders and in a restrained and proportionate manner,” and had used live ammunition in self defense because they felt threatened by the crowds. According to the statement, “there was live fire in the direction of our forces, and we located four bullets in a vehicle that was escorting the force.”

All camp residents whom Human Rights Watch interviewed denied that any Palestinians had used live fire, or said they were unaware of it happening. Israel should make public any evidence of use of live fire by Palestinians and clarify the circumstances warranting the use of lethal force pursuant to the military’s rules of engagement, Human Rights Watch said.

Israeli forces conducting policing operations in occupied territory are subject to the international standards set out in the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.  According to these standards, law enforcement officials may make “intentional lethal use of firearms” only when it is “strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.”

Please see below for more information.

The Arrest Raid

Israeli news reports said that according to the military’s initial inquiry, an undercover Border Guard force entered the refugee camp at around 5:30 a.m. on August 26 in order to arrest a wanted suspect, and later called in a backup force from the Artillery Corps after clashes began with camp residents.
Witnesses told Human Rights Watch that by around 5:45 to 6 a.m., undercover forces dressed in civilian clothes had entered the home of Yusif al-Khatib, the target of the arrest operation, and that uniformed soldiers were also present on the street outside his home.

Israeli forces had raided the camp on two prior occasions in July and August in failed attempts to arrest al-Khatib, who had previously been jailed by Israel and released. Israeli spokespersons have not specified why al-Khatib was wanted beyond alleging his implication in “terrorist activities.”
Israeli forces inside al-Khatib’s home ordered all the residents into one room. They blindfolded and “zip-tied” O., a relative of al-Khatib’s, who told Human Rights Watch:

They thought I was Yusif. They drove me to the military base near al-Ram [a nearby Palestinian neighborhood] and pushed me onto the floor of the vehicle with my back on the ground. One of them was hitting me in the stomach all the way there with a heavy object, maybe a fire extinguisher.

At the base, he said, a “captain removed my blindfold and said he was sorry they had arrested me, because now they had found Yusif, and they drove me back home to identify him.” O. said that soldiers took him to a neighbor’s home, where al-Khatib had been apprehended. “I could barely recognize him. They had broken his nose and knocked out his teeth, and his hand was broken,” he told Human Rights Watch.

Israeli forces then took al-Khatib outside, put him in a military vehicle and drove away. O. said this occurred between 7:30 and 8 a.m. Al-Khatib is currently detained at the Ofer detention center and military court complex.

Clashes in Qalandia Camp

Men and youths in the area around al-Khatib’s home had begun throwing rocks at soldiers in the street soon after the soldiers arrived, at around 6 a.m. Soldiers initially responded with teargas and rubber bullets. Clashes escalated from 6 a.m. until around 6:45, when more troops arrived. Witnesses said that by 7 a.m., around eight military vehicles and a large number of soldiers on foot had entered the camp and were stationed on al-Khatib’s street, on the camp’s main east-west road, and on rooftops, and were firing live ammunition.

Youth from the camp dragged two large metal garbage containers into the road behind the soldiers to block their withdrawal back to the main north-south street on the camp’s western side, and threw rocks, Molotov cocktails and other objects at them from side streets and rooftops. Witness statements indicate that Israeli forces fired a large number of live rounds. Human Rights Watch counted 26 bullet holes in one side of one building, which residents said Israeli forces had fired during the August 26 raid.

Use of Live Ammunition

The injuries and killings that Human Rights Watch documented all apparently occurred at around 7 a.m. or shortly afterwards, according to witnesses. Evidence in at least some cases strongly suggests that the use of live ammunition was not justified. All of the incidents detailed below warrant further investigation; cases in which lethal force was used without adequate justification should be criminally prosecuted.

Israeli forces stationed outside al-Khatib’s home, on a small side-street parallel to the camp’s main road, shot and injured Abu Murad, 50, a garbage collector employed by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), witnesses said. Residents of the area told Human Rights Watch that at around 7:15 or 7:30 a.m., before Israeli forces had captured al-Khatib, Abu Murad had left his trash-collecting wagon at the eastern end of the side-street, when he saw soldiers standing in front of al-Khatib’s home, about 50 meters down the street to the west. He retreated around a corner, then returned to retrieve the wagon, and a soldier shot him in the back of his lower leg.

A witness who asked not to be identified said he did not hear the shot but saw Abu Murad fall, ran to help drag him away, and saw a soldier in front of al-Khatib’s home looking at them.  Another witness said there was a single shot, which he believed indicated that the soldier had aimed deliberately at Abu Murad. Residents said that young men on rooftops were throwing stones at Israeli forces at the opposite, western end of the street, throughout the clashes. However, both witnesses to Abu Murad’s shooting said they did not see anyone throwing stones at the Israeli forces from Abu Murad’s direction in the street at that time.

Israeli forces remained inside and in front of al-Khatib’s house until they arrested him at a neighbor’s house at some point between 7:30 and 8 a.m., and then drove away with him in custody. At least one military vehicle drove west a short distance down the side street before turning south into another small street leading to the camp’s main road.  A group of Palestinians not involved in the clashes slowly walked in the same direction after the Israeli forces withdrew around the corner, believing the clashes were over in the immediate area, residents said.

Two witnesses said that Israeli forces shot Roubin Abd al-Rahman Zayed, 34, in the chest, after the military vehicles had driven away from al-Khatib’s home. Multiple witnesses said that Zayed, who worked as a cleaner at an UNRWA training center in the camp, had not participated in the clashes, and had been waiting in an area to the east of al-Khatib’s home for the clashes to end and Israeli forces to depart in order to go to work.

One of the witnesses told Human Rights Watch:

[Zayed] and I were at the head of a group waiting to get around the corner. Roubin wanted to go to work. The [military vehicles] had left from in front of [al-Khatib’s] house and the last one was around the corner and half-way down to the main road when a soldier who was about to get into the back of the vehicle shot Roubin. There were no other soldiers still on the street. It was the last [vehicle] pulling away, the last soldier and the last shot.

The second witness, interviewed separately, who also asked not to be identified, said:

Roubin thought he was safe, he’d been hiding behind the corner. People were telling him it wasn’t safe. He got out and they shot him in the chest. He was just walking, not running. I was standing on the roof and saw it. Have you seen a video game where the blood spatters? It was like that, at close range. I ran down, we grabbed him and took him down the road to get a car. No way did they hit him by accident.

Both witnesses to Roubin Zayed’s shooting identified the locations where the military vehicle and Zayed were at the time of the shooting, about 25 meters apart. There is a clear line of sight to the location where the witnesses said Zayed was shot.

Youths had thrown rocks at Israeli forces on the same street prior to Zayed’s death; for instance, Human Rights Watch interviewed A.,20, who had a bullet lodged in the bone of his lower leg after being shot at around 7 a.m. while trying to throw a rock. This was just “up the hill from the place where Roubin was killed later,” he said. However, according to two witnesses as well as another resident of the area, at the time the soldier shot Zayed no camp residents were throwing rocks near or behind him. “There were guys throwing rocks from the rooftops at the intersection, but none were in the street between Roubin and the [vehicle] or behind him,” the first witness said.

I.,20, said that he had been shot that morning in the abdomen while throwing stones, and was being driven to hospital in a neighbor’s car when “someone said, ‘take another wounded with you,’ and they put in Roubin. He wasn’t moving. He’d been shot in the chest, with blood coming out of his mouth.”

Fire Against People Throwing Objects

Human Rights Watch documented other cases where Israeli forces shot live ammunition at men and children who were throwing stones and other objects at soldiers and military vehicles. Based on witness accounts, the forces frequently used live ammunition in response to clashes after 7 a.m. One youth, Y., 17, who was using crutches, said that a live bullet fired by Israeli forces had entered and exited his left thigh at around 7:30 a.m. while he was “throwing rocks at the jeeps” on the camp’s main road.

Israeli forces shot Yunis Jamal Jahjouh, 22, twice as he stood on the roof of a one-story building on the south-western side of the intersection of the main camp road and a smaller road leading north to the home of  al-Khatib, witnesses said. Two witnesses told Human Rights Watch that Jahjouh was attempting to throw a satellite dish at military vehicles in the street below when he was killed. One witness, T., 18, said, “he was thrown off balance by the satellite dish. He was shot once, and said ‘Allahu Akhbar,’ and then he was shot again. There were two people with Yunis on the roof, but there was no way to get him down and out of there because of the clashes. He bled out until they got him to the ambulance, and it was too late.” According to a statement by the Palestinian hospital in the city of Ramallah, Jahjouh suffered gunshot wounds to the chest and stomach.

Further east along the main camp road, Israeli forces shot and killed Jihad Mansour Aslan, 21, as he was standing on the corner of the roof of a one-story building on the southern side of the road. A relative told Human Rights Watch:

I had been with Jihad on the roof when the [soldiers] started shooting intensively at us and we scattered. There were eight or nine of us. I jumped down and was shouting at Jihad to get back from the front of the building. He was shot the first time in his hand, and then he picked up a rock and they shot him again. We went to get him and brought him down. There was a lot of blood. We put him in a civilian car. He was still alive but he wasn’t speaking. The bullet hit him in the chest and went out his back.

The Israeli authorities should immediately open criminal investigations into the Qalandia shootings, Human Rights Watch said. Under the UN principles on the right to a remedy for human rights violations, states have the duty to investigate and, if there is sufficient evidence, the duty to submit to prosecution the person allegedly responsible for the violations and, if found guilty, the duty to punish her or him.

The Israeli military has a poor record of accountability. Since the beginning of the second Palestinian intifada in 2000, Israeli military courts have convicted only six Israeli soldiers for offenses involving the deaths of Palestinians, and one soldier for the death of a British citizen, according to Yesh Din, an Israeli rights group. Israeli investigations into the raid in the Qalandia camp should be prompt, thorough and impartial.

Syria: Readying for escalation in Syria

Photo: Nasser Nouri/Flickr. Foreign military action could cause further displacement (file photo)

Source: IRIN 

 ANTAKYA/DUBAI, 2 September 2013 (IRIN) - Aid agencies responding to the Syrian crisis are updating contingency plans and pre-positioning stocks, warning that any US-led military action against Syria could lead to an increase in humanitarian needs.

“It’s already a complex situation with profound humanitarian consequences,” said humanitarian coordinator Yacoub El Hillo, the highest ranking UN humanitarian official in Syria. “If you’re talking about five million people displaced internally and two million people who are now refugees in neighbouring countries; if you have one million refugee children who are now away from their homes and their schools, this is already a dramatic situation. So imagine if this is to be compounded by a military strike? It will only add to the suffering,” he told IRIN, citing possible displacement of civilians, increased exposure to risk, and reduction in service delivery.

“Disruption to life is likely to happen and this will produce a lot of difficulties for civilians, which means more challenges for the humanitarian community to cope [with] and to deliver under these very constrained circumstances.”

On 31 August, US President Barack Obama announced he would seek approval from Congress to take military action against Syrian targets, as punishment for an alleged chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government which the US says killed more than 1,400 people. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government denies responsibility for the attack.

"There is a state of panic in Damascus," according to Sham Land*, an activist in Damascus who documents civilian casualties for the Syrian Network for Human Rights and uses a pseudonym for security reasons. "People are lining up to get bread... Many people are preparing to leave the city, especially people who live near the government security buildings."

In the past week, the value of the Syrian pound has depreciated sharply, and fewer people are walking around on the streets or driving through the city in the evenings, Land, a 31-year-old former dentist, told IRIN via Skype. "Some people are preparing food and storing it. If they have a house in the countryside, they're leaving to go there," he said.

“Pro-Assad people” have started “running away and taking their families out of Damascus,” said Susan Ahmed*, 30, an activist living in a regime-held part of the city. Regardless of their political beliefs, “people are afraid” and some are fleeing to “safer areas”, she added.

More than two years of conflict between government and rebel forces in Syria have killed over 100,000 people, according to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and driven more than six million from their homes, either internally or to neighbouring countries. But the capital Damascus has been largely spared from the worst of the fighting.

Although limited and targeted strikes would be unlikely to cause a significant increase in humanitarian needs, aid workers said, “there’s a lot of uncertainty about what the worst case is,” as one aid worker put it.

Lebanon

So far, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has noted no increase in refugees arriving at international borders.

And while a mass outflow remains unlikely, “we are preparing for it and accelerating all the stockpiling and the preparations at the moment,” said Roberta Russo, communications officer with UNHCR in Lebanon - the closest country for people fleeing Damascus.

On 28 August, UNHCR agreed with the Lebanese government to quickly set up reception areas at the Masna’a border crossing to be able to more easily provide medical care, counselling and referrals to refugees as they cross the border. Thousands continue to cross the border daily, while many simultaneously return to Syria.

Lebanon is already home to more than 710,000 Syrian refugees - equivalent to more than 15 percent of its original population - who are staying with friends and family, renting apartments, squatting in abandoned or half-finished buildings or establishing informal settlements. There are no formal camps for Syrian refugees in Lebanon.

“The shelter options are exhausted,” Russo told IRIN. “We can’t absorb any more.”

UNHCR’s efforts to obtain government permission to establish transit sites that could house 20-25,000 refugees each as a last resort have not succeeded. This could cause challenges in case of a mass influx.

“We have informal settlements mushrooming everywhere. Some are also in flood-prone areas and the facilities are not good enough,” Russo said. “I don’t know what will happen if the government doesn’t agree.”

One major question is whether Lebanon, which has increased entry restrictions for Syrians and refused entry to Palestinians from Syria, and Jordan, which has limited the number of refugees it admits, will provide unrestricted access to anyone seeking refuge in the case of an escalation of violence.

Jordan

UNHCR in Jordan is “well-placed” to handle any influx, the agency’s representative in Jordan, Andrew Harper, said, having grown accustomed to several thousand new arrivals a day, and with stocks in place for an additional 100,000 people.

Jordan’s Za’atari camp could take in at least 20,000 more people; and a new Jordanian camp, called Azraq, is set to open in two weeks with a capacity of 50,000.

UNHCR has a global stockpile of supplies - including tents, plastic sheeting and kitchen sets - in Dubai, currently enough for 350,000, according to UNHCR regional spokesperson Peter Kessler.

“Our job is to be prepared,” Kessler told IRIN. “We have to work to assist people in need and to plan for eventualities.”

But any influx will necessarily strain services that are already stretched in Za’atari and not yet ready in Azraq.

“It’s not the tents and the places to put them up that is the challenge,” one aid worker said. “It’s all the services and security which goes around the physical location of the new tent site, which is expensive and time-consuming to get ready, particularly provision of water, adjusting food distribution, having adequate security, ensuring the site is adequately drained. All of that is ongoing in Azraq.”

Funding for preparedness?

“The big message is,” he continued, “what are donors - over and above their current commitments for the response in Syria and the region - willing to commit for enhanced preparedness, particularly to increase stockpiles, to fast-track preparations for new camps in Jordan and to secure more funds for shelter programming in Lebanon?”

A UN-coordinated appeal for a record $4.4 billion to help Syrians already in need inside and outside their country in 2013 is currently less than 40 percent funded. Aid workers say donors are unlikely to focus on preparing for potential future scenarios as they are already squeezed between many crises and finite aid budgets.

“Our concern is: Are we able to pay for these supplies as quickly as we would need to deliver?” asked Juliette Touma, regional spokesperson for the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

Describing the situation in Syria as a “humanitarian crisis of rarely precedented proportions”, El Hillo, the humanitarian coordinator, said donor funding must be predictable and timely. He said the UN was exploring the unusual step of requesting funding from its Central Emergency Response Fund - usually reserved for responding to actual rather than potential needs - to procure and pre-position supplies to be prepared for any eventuality.

Damascus

Inside Syria, UN agencies have long struggled to meet rising needs, operating in a complicated bureaucratic and security environment, with limited funding and insufficient implementing partners.

“As it is, we are unable to fully respond to the needs as they exist now in the country because of insecurity, because of the difficulty of access, because of the enormity of the challenge and the needs,” El Hillo said. “There is an expectation that this is going to create new challenges in addition to those that already exist.”

Many Syrians have grown accustomed to violence and see potential US missile strikes as nothing more than what they have already experienced after two years of shelling, street clashes, suicide bombs, snipers and kidnappings. In many respects, daily life in Damascus continues.

But others fear foreign military attacks will kill or injure yet more civilians, even if bombardment has “become something very normal”, as activist Abu Yasin* put it. He said residents have set up bomb shelters for women and children.

“Regardless of what happens, our concern is that children be protected at all times,” UNICEF’s Touma said.

People are trying to stock up on “everyday” supplies, like first aid kits, bread and gas in anticipation of Western attacks, said Ahmad, the activist, but increased demand has meant that many basics - including children’s milk formula and bread - are not available and goods are very expensive. High demand for bread has been problematic on and off for months, she said via Skype, but the news of a possible foreign military attack has exacerbated the problem.

“People stayed [in lines] until midnight [on 29 August] trying to get bread,” she said. Instead of bread, she added, people are eating rice and bulgur.

Another resident of Damascus, who preferred anonymity, said many residents could not afford to stock up on supplies because of rising prices.

In other areas, there is little access in the first place. In the Rural Damascus town of Muadhamiya, there is widespread hunger, according to Omar Hakeem, a doctor. The area also has no communications network, water or electricity due to a year-long “siege” by al-Assad’s military forces, Hakeem, 26, told IRIN.

UN agencies in Damascus have vowed to maintain their operations as best they can despite possible US strikes. Most UN agencies work through local NGOs and the Syrian Arab Red Crescent.

El Hillo said agencies would use “all means possible” to meet any increase in needs, by expanding partnerships with local NGOs, charity organizations, third party deliveries through contractors or private sector arrangements.

*not a real name