Wednesday, May 23, 2007
US War on Terror Fuels Human Rights Abuses
Amnesty report condemns U.S. war on terror
Rights watchdog says conflict is ’eroding human rights worldwide’
Updated: 2:33 p.m. CT May 23, 2007
LONDON - The United States is treating the globe like a giant battlefield in its war on terrorism, eroding rights worldwide, a leading human rights group said Wednesday.
Amnesty International’s secretary-general, Irene Khan, said the United States' and its allies’ behavior was setting a destructive example for other nations, and that other countries were using the war on terrorism as an excuse to violate human rights and stifle dissent.
“One of the biggest blows to human rights has been the attempt of Western democratic states to roll back some fundamental principles of human rights — like the prohibition of torture,” Khan told The Associated Press, speaking before the launch of her organization’s annual report on the global state of human rights.
While Amnesty International has highlighted rights issues that have erupted since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, little of the 337-page report dealt with the terrorist threat itself or attacks linked to the al-Qaida terror network.
The report condemned the United States’ response to international terrorism, saying it had done little to reduce the threat, while deepening mistrust between Muslims and non-Muslims and undermining the rule of law. The Bush administration’s policy of extraordinary rendition — the alleged practice of secretly flying terror suspects to countries where they could be tortured — came in for particularly scathing condemnation.
“The U.S. administration’s doublespeak has been breathtakingly shameless,” the report said. “It is unrepentant about the global web of abuse it has spun in the name of counterterrorism.”
In Washington, Deputy State Department spokesman Tom Casey said the report reads more like a political document than an honest review of human rights around the world.
“It’s pretty clear that Amnesty International thought that we’d make a convenient ideological punching bag,” he said.
Khan said America’s unique position on the world stage justified the criticism.
“If we focus on the U.S. it’s because we believe that the U.S. is a country whose enormous influence and power has to be used constructively,” she said. “When countries like the U.S. are seen to undermine or ignore human rights, it sends a very powerful message to others.”
European countries were attacked for failing to challenge the U.S. rendition scheme, while U.S. allies Britain, Australia, and Japan were singled out for passing harsh new anti-terror or anti-immigration laws.
Russia in focusRussia’s crackdown on journalists also attracted Amnesty’s ire.
“The authoritarian drift in Russia has been devastating for journalists and human rights defenders,” the report said, noting the assassination of journalist Anna Politkovskaya and new laws clamping down on rights organizations.
Khan also noted the deteriorating human rights situation in Zimbabwe and Darfur, which she called “a bleeding wound on world conscience.”
The report also criticized China’s role in shielding Sudan from U.N. action, saying that the Chinese government and companies showed little regard for their “human rights footprint” on the African continent.
The report did sound some positive notes, saying that a change of the political guard in the United States, and the growth of informal networks of activists were grounds for hope.
Khan compared Amnesty’s struggle to the fight against climate change.
“Just as global warming requires global action based on international cooperation, the human rights meltdown can only be tackled through global solidarity and respect for international law,” she said.
© 2007 The Associated Press.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Four Years of Bush's Imperialistic War
Massacres, Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing Worldwide
The term Genocidal Massacre, was introduced by Professor Leo Kuper (1908-1994) to denote breaches of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which are massacres committed on a relatively smaller scale when compared to such major genocides such as the Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust and the Rwandan Genocide. Some contest that such massacres have been committed commonly by imperialist states; a target of such accusations is the United States.
Massacres, Genocide, ethnic cleansing worldwide:
Genocide in Iraq
_a_new_age_of_genocide.php ( url is divided because length extended it into sidebar. To access, type in entire url to address bar.)
Iraq: A New Age Of Genocide?
May 15, 2007
Bill Weinberg, editor of the online journal WW4Report.com . This piece originally appeared in New America Media.
Amid daily media body counts and analyses of whether the “surge” is “working,” there is an even more horrific reality in Iraq, almost universally overlooked. The latest annual report by the London-based Minority Rights Group International, released earlier this year, places Iraq second as the country where minorities are most under threat—after Somalia. Sudan is third. More people may be dying in Darfur than Iraq, but Iraq's multiple micro-ethnicities—Turcomans, Assyrians, Mandeans, Yazidis—place it at the top of the list.
While the mutual slaughter of Shi’ite and Sunni makes world headlines, Iraq is home to numerous smaller faiths and peoples—now faced with actual extinction. Turcomans are the Turkic people of northern Iraq, caught in the middle of the Arab-Kurdish struggle over Kirkuk and its critical oilfields. Assyrian and Chaldean Christians, now targeted for attack, trace their origins in Mesopotamia to before the arrival of the Arabs in the seventh century. So do the Mandeans, followers of the world’s last surviving indigenous Gnostic faith—now also facing a campaign of threats, violence and kidnapping. The situation has recently escalated to outright massacre.
In late April, a grim story appeared on the wire services about another such small ethnic group in northern Iraq. Twenty-three textile factory workers from the Yazidi community were taken from a mini-bus in Mosul by unknown gunmen, placed against a wall and shot down execution-style. Three who survived were critically injured.
Yazidis, although linguistic Kurds, are followers of a pre-Islamic faith which holds that earth is ruled by a fallen angel. For this, they have been assailed by their Muslim neighbors as "devil-worshippers" and are often subject to persecution.
The wire accounts portrayed the attack as retaliation for the stoning death of a Yazidi woman who had eloped with a Muslim man and converted to Islam. After the killings, hundreds of Yazidis took to the streets of Bashika, their principal village in the Mosul area. Shops were shuttered and Muslim residents locked themselves in their homes, fearing reprisals.
Yazidis have often been the target of calumnies, and the stoning story may or may not be true. If it is, it says much about the condition of women in "liberated" Iraq, where "honor killings" witness a huge resurgence. In any case, it says much about the precarious situation of minorities in post-Saddam Iraq.
By eerie coincidence, April 24, the day the story of the massacre appeared on the wire agencies, also marked the 92nd anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide, commemorated in solemn ceremony by Armenians worldwide. Following the mass arrests of that day in 1915, some 1.5 million met their deaths in massacres and forced deportations at the hands of Ottoman Turkish authorities. The Yazidis, whose territory straddles contemporary Turkey and Iraq, were targeted for extermination in the same campaign.
[Seven Stones: Armenian Genocide: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide ,
http://www.genocide1915.info , http://www.armenian-genocide.org . A good fictional novel that contains factual events of the sadistic massacres is "Mamigon" by Jack Hashian.]
It is telling that the United States refuses to officially acknowledge the Armenian genocide, out of a need to appease NATO ally Turkey. More disturbingly, the United States is now presiding over the re-emergence of genocide in the same part of the planet.
The United States went into Iraq in 2003 to put an end to a regime that had committed genocide against the Kurds in 1988 (when, lest we forget, it was still being supported by Washington). Even if the aim was to control Iraq's oil under a stable, compliant regime, the result has been Yazidis massacred, Assyrian churches bombed, the majority of the Mandeans forced into exile in neighboring countries.
The armed insurgency and the forces collaborating with the occupation seem equally bent on exterminating perceived religious and ethnic enemies. In April 2004, the Badr Brigades of Shi’ite militant cleric Moqtada al-Sadr burned down the Roma (“Gypsy”) village of Qawliya, accused of “un-Islamic” behavior—like music and dance. Last year, the usually pacifistic Sufis, followers of Islam’s esoteric tradition, announced formation of a militia to defend against the Shi’ite supremacists in both opposition and collaboration. “We will not wait for the Mahdi Army and the Badr Brigade to enter our houses,” read the statement from the Qadiri Sufis. “We will fight the Americans and the Shi’ites who are against [the United States].” Suicide bombers have also struck Sufi tekiyas (gathering places).
House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio recently stated without irony: “We can walk out of Iraq, just like we did in Lebanon, just like we did in Vietnam, just like we did in Somalia and we will leave chaos in our wake.” He may be right. But the alternative may be staying—presiding over, and fueling chaos. Boehner ignores the inescapable reality that United States intervention created the current chaos, now approaching the genocidal threshold. It has only escalated throughout the occupation.
This reality raises tough questions for those calling for military intervention in Darfur: will this end the genocide there—or inflame it? And the United States failure to even impose sanctions on Sudan, despite four years of threats, again points to oil and realpolitik as imperial motives, rather than humanitarian concerns. Even the renewed warfare in Somalia, topping the Minority Rights Group list, was sparked by the U.S.-backed Ethiopian intervention late last year.
There are secular progressive forces in Iraq who oppose both the occupation and the ethno-exterminators in collaboration and insurgency alike. These groups, such as the Iraq Freedom Congress and the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq, support a multi-ethnic Iraq, and constitute a civil resistance. Their voices have been lost to the world media amid the spectacular violence.
Such voices may have little chance in the escalating crisis. But looking to the United States occupation as the guarantor of stability is at least equally deluded. Above all, Iraq’s minorities will likely be struggling for survival in the immediate future, whether the United States stays or goes. We owe them, at least, the solidarity of knowing about them.
© 2007 TomPaine.com ( A Project of The Institute for America's Future )
Labels: Iraq - Genocide