Author: webmaster

Is The War on Drugs Racist?

Posted on by webmaster

June 26 marks the UN’s International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, when governments around the world applaud their own efforts to clampdown on drug trafficking. But advocates for the victims of the war on drugs urge for a better understanding of the colonial and racist motivations behind the “war on drugs” and its continued effects on poor and vulnerable people.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) publishes an annual report that spotlights the ever-changing nature of global drug markets. The report highlights changing trade routes, increases in the use of synthetic drugs and reports on government seizures. But the glaringly obvious fact that emerges from the report is that the international drug war is failing spectacularly.

Pyrrhic victory

Even in the most repressive regimes, drugs like cannabis, cocaine, or methamphetamine continue to be widely available, while higher incarceration rates and increasing punitive measures seemingly do nothing to stop their availability. According to experts, the clear failure to stop the use of drugs is not because of failed government approaches, but because of the insincere nature of the war on drugs itself.

According to Ann Fordham, executive director of the International Drug Policy Consortium (IDPC), the war on drugs has produced “a trail of destruction and human suffering of unimaginable proportions.” While organizations like IDPC recognize that drug abuse and unsafe drug consumption practice can be harmful, they consider the war on drugs to be empirically far more dangerous.

Fordham refers to a UN panel of experts on people of African descent who in March 2019 concluded that the war on drugs has operated as “a system of racial control” instead of combating the use and trafficking of narcotics. Advocates for a more humane approach to stopping victims of drug abuse and drug enforcement increasingly emphasize the racist origins of the war on drugs itself.

Racist origins

The trade in substances like opium, coca and cannabis has occurred since antiquity and the use of these substances were often weaved into local cultural and religious practices. To this day religions like Rastafarianism, Sufi Islam, and Hinduism see cannabis as a sacred plant, while its medical uses were known in the time of famous Islamic scientist Ibn Sina (Avicenna), who included the plant in his “Canon of Medicine,” used as the preeminent medical text until the 19th century.

Western colonial empires treated cannabis, coca, and opium as valuable commodities for international trade, but with the downfall of Europe’s empires and the emergence of US hegemony  attitudes changed.

In an effort to halt the lucrative European trade in these substances and increase its global trade power, the US pushed for a global drug control mentality that it used to oppress its own minority populations of Mexican immigrants and the descendants of African slaves.

Post-colonial consensus

The US used the disintegration of European colonial empires to pressure newly decolonized nations into subscribing to drug control efforts that saw them forced to eradicate crops that had grown in their native lands for centuries. Twentieth century drug conventions were places where white males decided on the prohibition of substances primarily popular among brown and black people.

The emergence of the current war on drugs occurred under US President Richard Nixon, who saw drug control measures as a way to arrest black Americans for Heroin use and ‘hippy’ activists for cannabis use.

“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black,” a Nixon advisor later said, “but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities.”

Moment for change

The growing breadth of evidence of the insincere and oppressive origins of the war on drugs has led to increasing public pressure to stop the war that has taken countless victims and won few victories. Regimes like those in the Philippines have highlighted the dehumanizing aspects of drug enforcement and the ease with which these policies are rife for abuse by the powerful.

The increasingly legal cannabis market, set to be worth $166 billion in 2025, is providing a new incentive for change. Governments around the world are eyeing the significant tax revenues that could be realized by stopping the prosecution of cannabis. In the Middle East, Lebanon and Israel have so far legalized the substance, with more likely to follow.

The war on drugs has evolved from what was considered to be a necessary evil to stop the harms associated with drug abuse. The “conflict” has instead resulted in millions of non-violent people imprisoned, higher risks of unsafe drug consumption and a continued availability of drugs around the world. By reevaluating the dark origins of the war on drugs, organizations like IDPC hope to change perspectives and produce a safer and less oppressive future.

Sudan Donor Event Raises $1.8 billion

Posted on by webmaster

The event co-hosted by Germany, Sudan, the European Union, and the UN, gathered 50 states and international actors in Berlin to seek political and financial support for Sudan’s democratic transition and struggling economy, on June 25.  

The event raised $1.8 billion in badly needed funds for projects aimed at propping up the country’s poorest citizens. It is hoped that reducing Sudan’s economic instability will give the transitional government the best possible chance of moving forward with democratic reform after the exit of former leader Omar al-Bashir last year.  

Over $1 billion in funding came from three donors — the European Union ($350 million), United States ($356m) and United Arab Emirates ($300m). Co-host Germany pledged $168m, while France and the United Kingdom offered $112m and $186m, respectively.  

“We are thankful and extremely delighted with the level of participation in today’s partnership conference, it was indeed unprecedented,” the Sudanese PM tweeted after the event on June 25. 

“This partnership lays a solid foundation for us moving forward. We know that there is a lot of work to be done, but with this type of support, we will certainly move ahead,” the Hamdok added.  

 “The participants took stock of the achievements of the Sudanese transition so far, and discussed the challenges ahead,” said the end of conference communiqué.  

“Building on the progress made by the Transitional Government in putting in place political and economic reforms, a strong political consensus emerged to support Sudan and its transition in building peace, democratic governance and inclusive economic recovery as well as in progressing towards debt relief,” the countries present declared.   

Despite Hamdok’s positivity about the Berlin conference, the $1.8 billion raised still falls far short of the $8 billion in aid he called for in August 2019. It also falls short of the $1.9 billion Sudan’s The Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning said it needed to support a cash-handout program aimed at alleviating the rising living costs.  

Prior to the conference, Hamdok told donors they needed to show up, stressing “I do not want to paint a rosy picture. Any transition is messy and there are so many challenges.” 

“So Many Challenges” 

Hamdok’s transitional government remains in a precarious power-sharing arrangement with the military and has struggled to restructure the economy after losing oil revenues through South Sudan’s recession in 2011. The Sudanese have taken to the streets multiple times to protest the lifting of fuel and other subsidies, which cost the government an estimated $3billion.  

Sudan’s government debt still stands at $62 billion, and it has struggled to get international financing after defaulting on International Monetary Fund loans and because it remains on the United States’ state sponsors of terrorism blacklist.

The country’s Central Bank is on life support, and with foreign currency reserves depleted, the Sudanese Pound has crashed. As a result of the pound’s devaluation, inflation currently stands at 114.33% and remains highly volatile, which places significant cost of living pressures on the Sudanese people  

The pledging conference not only raised funds, but has brought some progress on debt relief and international financing, which are challenges that have long plagued Sudan. 

Following the conference, Poland announced it is ready to settle $122 million of debt, “with favourable conditions to Sudan,” the Sudan News Agency (SUNA News) reported on June 26.  

A number of participants in Berlin including Spanish Foreign Minister Arancha Gonzalez Laya, threw their weight behind calls for Sudan to be removed from the state sponsors of terrorism list.  

“The conference had political targets and it has put Sudan back on the map and signalled its return to the international community. Many countries asked for Sudan to be removed from the state sponsors of terrorism list which is very important for economic recovery,” Khartoum-based journalist Shawqi Abdelazim told the Inter-Press Service on June 26.  

Meanwhile, the US has indicated that a deal could soon be reached with Sudan regarding compensation for the victims of the terrorist attacks on the American Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.  

“My team on the ground is working closely with the Sudanese leadership to try to reach a good result, and I hope that this will be achieved in the coming weeks,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Sudanese media on Wednesday. 

The agreement, and growing international pressure, as expressed in Berlin could pave the way for the US to remove Sudan from its terrorism blacklist and open up crucial financing opportunities for Hamdok’s government.  Both will be crucial to providing international and local legitimacy for the civilian branch of the government and ensuring they can make the major economic advancements required to support Sudan’s transition. 

Read also: Sudan, Egypt Push for Diplomatic Solution to GERD Dispute

 

Turkey: Bolton’s New Book is ‘Reprehensible’

Posted on by webmaster

Fakhruddin Alton, head of the Turkish Republic’s Communications Department, has hit back at the claims made by former US National Security Adviser John Bolton in his new book. The book includes references to discussions between Turkey and the United States.

Alton explained that, according to Bolton’s account of the meetings, it is clear that the talks held by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his US counterpart Donald Trump were “one-sided” and “manipulative”

“We find it reprehensible that former high-level officials attempt to use serious diplomatic conversations and efforts to resolve outstanding issues between allies like the U.S. and Turkey for their domestic political agendas,” Alton continued.

Alton also stated that “President Erdogan and Trump are keen on repairing and maintaining stable Turkish-American relations, despite deep differences, and despite the votes targeting Turkey in Washington.”

Bolton’s book alleges that in 2018 Trump offered to step and help Erdogan with a Justice Ministry investigation. Erdogan was suspected of breaching US sanctions on Iran through links to a Turkish bank. Bolton wrote that Trump told Erdogan: “I will take care of things.” 

Bolton alleged that Trump said “they are not his [Trump’s] people (close to him) but they are Obama’s people” and that the problem will be solved when they are replaced by his [Trump’s] people.

“Erdoğan provided a memo by the law firm representing Halkbank, which Trump did nothing more than flip through before declaring he believed Halkbank was totally innocent of violating U.S. Iran sanctions. Trump asked whether we could reach Acting U.S. Attorney General Matt Whitaker, which I sidestepped. Trump then told Erdoğan he would take care of things, explaining that the Southern District prosecutors were not his people, but were Obama people, a problem that would be fixed when they were replaced by his people.” Bolton wrote in his tell-all book.

The Turkish statement came a day after South Korea slammed Bolton’s new book. South Korea clarified that the account of discussions between US President Donald Trump and the leaders of the two Koreas were inaccurate and distorted.

“It does not reflect accurate facts and substantially distorts facts,” South Korea’s National Security Adviser Chung Yue Young said.

While Chung did not elaborate on specific points that South Korea considers inaccurate, he said the book sets a “dangerous precedent.”

“Unilaterally publishing consultations made based on mutual trust violates the basic principles of diplomacy and could severely damage future negotiations,” he added.

A book that annoys Trump

Bolton became Trump’s national security adviser in April 2018 but left his post in September 2019 due to differences between him and Trump over dealing with countries that pose major challenges for the United States, including Iran, North Korea, and Afghanistan.

In his book, “The Chamber that Happened the Events ” Bolton presents President Trump as a reckless leader.

Bolton’s book was published on June 23, after a federal judge in the United States ruled on Saturday, June 20, that former National Security Adviser John Bolton could go on publishing his book. The ruling came despite the efforts made by President Donald Trump’s administration to prevent the book from being released due to concerns that classified information could be revealed.

Egyptian farmers hit hard by COVID-19 remittances slump

Posted on by webmaster

COVID-19 has pushed Egyptians migrant workers who would normally support their families by working in GCC countries or Europe back home and into the fields, slashing remittance income for poor farming families and cutting agricultural output.

Agriculture is considered the most resilient sector of Egypt’s economy but that has not stopped poor farming families from feeling the brunt of the global COVID-19 pandemic. In April, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) warned that poor households—and especially those in rural areas— would likely suffer the most from lower remittances. 

Two months on, farmers such as Abdel-Qader Mustafa, from Qena in Upper Egypt, are feeling the reality of the global economic crisis caused by COVID-19.

Mustafa’s son used to work in Saudi Arabia, sending back roughly LE 2,000 ($124) to supplement his family’s income each month.  

“Due to the coronavirus, my son could not go back to his work in Saudi Arabia after the end of his annual vacation in February. Since then, he has been taking money from us,” Mustafa told Egypt Today.  

As a result, all seven members of Mustafa’s family have been pushed back into working the agricultural fields where they earn as little as LE 15 to LE 20 ($0.90 to $1.20) per day.  

Mustafa’s son is amongst the 20,000 Egyptian workers that have been either repatriated or deported from Gulf Cooperation Countries and European nations as a result of COVID-19 shutdowns and declining oil revenues.  

Egypt’s higher-income households who rely mostly on the services sector for their income have seen the largest COVID-19 losses in absolute terms, but the IFPRI says “the poor may find it harder to cope.”

The rural-urban differentiation 

“Rural households also lose, but less than their urban counterparts.” IFPRI says this is explained mostly by stronger economic growth in the agricultural sector and its ability to keep operating through the virus crisis. 

“While the income losses of the rural and urban poor are smaller compared to the non-poor in absolute terms, poor households are likely to find it harder than wealthier households to cope with such income losses.” 

That is in part because they already have significantly lower monthly incomes than their urban counterparts, meaning even a small reduction could push them closer to poverty. They are also more heavily reliant on remittances, a fact that Egyptian Farmers Syndicate chief Hussein Abdel-Rahman says is having a big impact on farming families. 

Abdel-Rahman recognizes “the decline in remittances would have a great impact on Egypt generally,” but says farmers and their families who constitute 55 million citizens, around 50% of Egypt’s population, are really feeling the pinch. 

“The plunge of the remittances led to weakness in the purchase power and a decline in the living conditions in the rural areas,” he told Egypt Today on Thursday.

The union boss also reports that the drop in remittances, and income more generally, has led to a decrease in cultivation with farmers planning to plant three instead of the usual five feddans (1 feddan = 1.037 acres) this year. According to Abdel-Rahman, reduced purchasing power is already pushing poor rural Egyptians towards low-quality imported meat, and lower crop plantings could drive food prices up further in the future. 

Another factor creating hardship for rural Egyptians are limits on cash withdrawals.  

“Also, farmers sometimes find difficulties in taking the remittances as he/she is not allowed [by the banks] to withdraw all [the] amount of the remittances at once from banks,” Abdel-Rahman said. 

 Read also: Lebanon and Egypt to Suffer Severe Impacts of COVID-19 Remittances Slump

 

Islamic State Recovers While US Declares Victory in ‘War on Terror’

Posted on by webmaster

At its peak in 2014, the black flags of the Islamic State flew over 100,000 square kilometers in Iraq and Syria, becoming the principal target for the US’ “War on Terror.” Never before in recent history had an insurgent group taken control of such a large area and subjugated a population of more than eight million people.

With a revenue of hundreds of millions, ISIS was more than capable of outcompeting local governments. More than just occupy, the Islamic State began to govern within its territorial holdings. Clean water and reliable electricity reached cities where it had been previously sparse or nonexistent. Law and order returned to areas ravaged by war in the previous decades.

Yet, this “law and order” ultimately took the form of the Islamic State’s sadistic interpretation of Sharia law. Systematic executions, torture, and brutality became the hallmark of the group in the eyes of the West.

Five years later, the tearing down of the Islamic State’s black banners across Iraq and Syria symbolized progress in the War on Terror. The collapse of the Islamic State’s caliphate, the death of its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, and the loss of tens of thousands of its fighters has given the appearance that the Islamic State was defeated.

As of 2019, ISIS had lost all of its territory and was, on the surface, at its weakest. The US government under President Donald Trump has since touted this as a victory against the Islamic State and global terrorism as a whole.

The US State Department’s annual terror assessment, published on Wednesday, echoed these sentiments. The report reiterated the Trump administration’s claims of victory over the Islamic State, pointing to the death of al-Baghdadi and the group’s loss of territory as examples.

‘Mission not accomplished’

However, the report admitted that none of these achievements were enough to make a meaningful impact in the War on Terror.

As a whole, the government’s rhetoric surrounding the “victory” over ISIS shows a fundamental misunderstanding regarding the Islamic State and Islamist terrorism as a whole.

Believing that the war has already been won, the United States has begun to pull troops from the Middle East en masse. Meanwhile, the Islamic State is starting to lick its wounds and recover, threatening to reverse all of the progress made thus far against it.

A hollow victory

Eager to end Washington’s decades-old commitment in the Middle East, the Trump administration declared victory at the first sign of the Islamic State’s decline. At the same time, those who fought on the front lines against ISIS have warned that the loss of territory is not enough to qualify the claim.

Among those who have warned about the resurgence of the Islamic State following the withdrawal of the United States are Kurdish officials, who have seen the rise and fall of the caliphate first-hand.

“ISIS is still very much intact,” Masrour Barzani, the prime minister of Iraqi Kurdistan, told the Atlantic in an interview earlier this year. “Yes, they have lost much of their leadership. They have lost many of their capable men. But they’ve also managed to gain more experience and to recruit more people around them. So they should not be taken lightly.”

Mosul
Although the Islamic State has lost its caliphate, tens of thousands of fighters still remain loyal.

Although tens of thousands of the Islamic State’s fighters have been killed or captured since 2014, the group has retained a fighting force of between 10,000 to 20,000 troops. Prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, ISIS was still able to carry out upwards of 60 attacks per month in Iraq. With the United States out of the picture, this should only increase as the Islamic State finds itself with less opposition.

Aside from directly attacking the foot soldiers and leadership of the Islamic State, the War on Terror has involved targeting the finances of violent extremist groups. The Islamic State’s finances came primarily from internal sources, such as oil revenue and taxation, much of which disappeared as the group lost its territorial holdings.

However, although the Islamic State lost much of its income alongside its territory, the group still has access to at least $100 million, according to the most recent UN estimate. With an average terrorist attack costing a fraction of this, ISIS has no need for concern over its finances at the moment.

The Guerilla Caliphate

In the past, self-proclaimed members of the Islamic State have not relied on the caliphate to launch devastating attacks. In the West and elsewhere, terrorists with little or no affiliation to the Islamic State chain of command carried out many of the Islamic State’s most infamous attacks.

Most recently, Islamist terrorists with loose links to the ISIS carried out the 2019 Sri Lanka bombings, which killed more than 300 people. While the Islamic State inspired the attack, those involved coordinated and planned the operation without any influence from ISIS itself.

Sri Lanka
The devastating 2019 Easter bombing in Sri Lanka was orchestrated by local militants inspired by the Islamic State.

Far from an anomaly, this has become the new norm in the Islamic State’s strategy. Instead of training and deploying fighters from Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State has preferred to share information over the Internet on how to carry out individual attacks.This strategy of “leaderless resistance” has ensured that traditionally military strategies will not work against the Islamic State. Bombing campaigns and ground invasions by the West only serve as fuel to justify attacks by sympathizers on foreign soil.

Furthermore, the Islamic State’s decentralized structure lends credence to critics who argue that targeting the group’s leadership is ineffective. Experts in particular have argued that so-called “decapitation” tactics do not work.

“I don’t think taking him [al-Baghdadi] off the battlefield ends the Islamic State threat at all, especially when a lot of that threat now is based outside of Iraq and Syria,” American Enterprise Institute Resident Fellow Katherine Zimmerman said. 

“If Baghdadi were still alive today, would the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, would the Islamic State branches globally look significantly different? I don’t think so,” she added.

A Band-aid for terror

Instead of following a militaristic approach to the War on Terror, experts argue that targeting the root causes of terrorism is the only way to put an end to the Islamic State.

“We need to think about how do we play a role in getting at the disease rather than just dealing with the symptoms,” former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell told lawmakers on Wednesday.

The State Department report addressed this as well, supporting the argument that military intervention alone cannot defeat global terrorism. In particular, the report emphasized that addressing the roots of terrorism is essential to winning the War on Terror, a sentiment supported by local officials.

“If people are jobless, if people are hopeless, if people have no security, if people have no opportunity, if there is no political stability, it’s always easy for terrorist organizations to manipulate local populations,” Barzani said. “ISIS is a by-product. So as long as these factors are still valid, there will always be either ISIS or something similar to ISIS.”

Despite the fact that the State Department acknowledges this, there has been little progress towards addressing the root causes of the emergence of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Iraq is still scarred by widespread sectarianism, corruption, and poor governance. Meanwhile, the war in Syria has deprived its population of the most basic human rights.

The isolationist shift in American foreign policy since the ascension of Trump to the presidency has left Iraq and Syria vulnerable to the Islamic State’s recovery, and threatens to plunge the two countries into renewed crisis.

US Sees New COVID-19 Peak, Trump Aims to Cut Testing

Posted on by webmaster

The United States has set a new unfortunate record in its problematic COVID-19 response, reporting 38,672 new infections on June 24. The epidemic appears to be spreading most rapidly in the urban centers of conservative states with Arizona, Texas, and South Carolina leading the nation in new infections.

But US President Donald Trump has a plan to radically bring down the number of reported infections: Reducing testing. During a campaign rally in Tulsa on June 22, Trump admitted that he asked his team to “slow the testing down please,” which his new plan to stop federal funding for COVID-19 testing sites clearly reflects.

Rising cases

Since the start of the US epidemic, the country has reported more than 2.3 million cases and 120,955 deaths, with the coronavirus now claiming more American lives than World War I. The US has so far performed 28.6 million COVID-19 tests, meaning less than 10% of its population has been tested for the virus.

While the initial outbreak in the US was mostly situated on the East Coast with hot-spots in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, those states appear to have brought transmission down significantly. But while tightly controlled lockdowns helped curb the spread of the virus in the East, resistance to government measures in traditionally conservative states kept the outbreak from ever concluding its first wave.

Florida, Arizona, Texas, and South Carolina all reported record-high cases while California stood out as another new hotspot, recording 5,019 new cases in a single day. The spread of the virus in populous states like California, which is home to 39.5 million, and Texas, where 29 million people live, means the epidemic is likely still on the increase.

Limiting testing

The Trump administration confirmed on Wednesday, June 24, that it plans to end federal funding for some COVID-19 testing sites, many of which are in hard-hit Texas. The move would end funding for 13 testing sites, seven of which are in Texas. The funding would end on July 1 but four US congresspeople are urging the Trump administration to reconsider.

The four legislators called the move “harmful and irresponsible” in a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). “We need the support of Fema now more than ever as our communities and the state of Texas see unprecedented growth in cases of the coronavirus disease,” the congresspeople added.

According to the Guardian, hospitalizations related to COVID-19 have increased by 60% in the last week alone. Limiting testing during a growing epidemic would make it difficult to stop the spread of the coronavirus. According to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the Trump administration has $14 billion in available funding for testing and tracing.

The fact that the government chose to defund critical testing sites could easily qualify as less a public health consideration and more a public relations strategy.

World Struggles to Stand Against Israeli Annexation

Posted on by webmaster

With less than a week until Israeli annexation plans could feasibly commence, countries around the world are expressing very different reactions to Israel’s intended moves. The responses have been varied as global alliances, religious convictions, and economic factors weigh on nations’ willingness to risk conflict with Israel and its powerful ally in Washington.

While few nations have expressed outright support for the clear violation of international law, the rhetoric employed by those in opposition indicates that few are willing to position themselves as “anti-Israeli” or risk the ire of our global hegemon. That annexation would risk the local peace progress is nothing but a statement of simple fact, but most world leaders are reluctant to venture beyond restating this.

The EU

European leaders have received Israel’s annexation plans with much bombastic diplomatic language, but have been reluctant to make any threats if Israel proceeds with its planned violation of international law.

Germany’s foreign minister, Heiko Maas, traveled to Israel to discuss the matter, but even before departure had to admit he would offer no practical threat that could provide an incentive for Israel to halt its plans.

Over 1,000 parliamentarians have since signed a letter opposing Israel’s planned annexation, but the letter does little more than express “serious concerns” or highlight the “destabilizing potential” of Israel’s publicly stated intention to break international conventions on warfare, the Charter of the United Nations, and the basic premise of national sovereignty.

The US

In the US wide-spread political support for Israel has led to fragmented partisan splits on the issue. While many politicians have spoken out against annexation, the language used reveals much more concern about implications for Israel’s security than the well being of “annexed” Palestinians.

Their entire concept of an “agreed upon” annexation according to an unsigned peace plan originates from diplomatic novice Jared Kushner’s heavily criticized proposal. Much of the US press has opposed annexation but has done so primarily from a perspective that focuses on Israeli security.

Many have claimed that the annexation plans, and their timing, are a direct Trump ploy to create a new narrative before the US presidential elections in November 2020.

Arab nations

The Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League have condemned annexation plans and endorsed the establishment of an independent Palestine. However, other than highlighting the obvious breaches of international law, the Arab world has so far not shown a united front against a possible expansion of Israeli land at the expense of Palestinians.

Only Jordan has posed a clear ultimatum to Israel by threatening war. Jordan is highly dependent on the US and fears its possible retaliation, just like many Arab states, but stands alone in offering a practical disincentive to Israel’s plans. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent the director of the Israeli secret service to Amman last week with a message for Jordan’s King Abdullah II. Whether Israel can force Jordan to renege on its commitment remains to be seen.

Israeli Settlers

People living in Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories generally oppose annexation plans. Even though many of these settlements would become part of Israel following annexation, settlers fear the plan does not go far enough and would create momentum for the establishment of a small, fragmented Palestinian state, which they categorically oppose.

Billboards along Israeli highways feature Hebrew slogans urging Netanyahu to “do it right,” calling on him to annex all of what remains of Palestinian land. While annexation of more land than included in the Trump “peace plan” would be controversial, it would be no more illegal than Israel’s current plans.

Palestinians

For Palestinians, especially those living in the occupied territories, annexation is simply an inevitable reality. “These areas are already [as good as] annexed… It’s all in their hands” a farmer in the West Bank told the BBC. But many Palestinians see the looming annexation as the logical next step in the decades-long Israeli encroachment on Palestinian territory.

Israel has intensified evictions of Palestinians in the Jordan Valley and locals see annexation as inevitable. “Everyone is scared about annexation, no one wants to live under the occupation’s law,” Palestinian activist Sami Hureini told Al Jazeera, as locals appear to have no illusions over Israeli intentions.

The UN

On June 24, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres joined in the growing chorus of voices opposing annexation rhetorically. “We are at a watershed moment,” Guterres told the UN Security Council (UNSC), saying, “If implemented, annexation would constitute a most serious violation of international law.”

But the head of the UN is as powerless to stop Israel as those living in the occupied territories. As long as Israel proceeds with the blessing of the US, international law is of little consequence.  The power of the US alone could prevent any strong response against annexation.

The crisis over Israeli annexation has revealed once again that we are all living under American hegemony that in practice can supersede international law, the UN, and the will of the rest of the globe. Underneath political posturing, angry letters, and formal diplomacy, all nations continue to tremble at the prospect of angering the US.

UN: Without International Support, Yemen ‘Will Fall off the Cliff’

Posted on by webmaster

UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Mark Lowcock, who is also the UN’s under secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, pulled no punches when he briefed a closed session of the UN Security Council about the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Yemen on Wednesday night. 

The UN aid chief said five factors have converged to push Yemen, already considered the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, towards the precipice of even greater disaster. 

A large and deadly COVID-19 outbreak has added an additional layer of misery for the people of Yemen, already struggling to survive the country’s civil conflict and deepening economic crisis. 

“COVID-19 is spreading rapidly across Yemen. About 25% of Yemenis confirmed to have the disease have died. That’s five times the global average,” Lowcock said. 

Burial prices have reportedly increased seven fold in some areas. Given the country’s dilapidated health system, many believe a significant number of COVID-19 cases are going undiagnosed and unreported. 

Crises extend beyond COVID-19

In addition to the COVID-19 threat, Lowcock said lack of protection for civilians and humanitarian access are plaguing Yemen, as is a major shortfall in aid funding. 

The recent uptick in violence in northern Yemen between the Saudi-backed coalition forces and Houthi rebels, and clashes between the nominal coalition partners the Southern Transitional Council (STC) and Yemen government in the South, have been deadly for civilians. 

“In May, an average of five civilians were killed or injured every day,” Lowcock revealed. “One in three of them was a child. Two-thirds of incidents that harmed civilians occurred in family homes or farms, and five incidents struck health facilities.” 

Like protection of civilians, humanitarian access is obligatory under international law but has been hamstrung by COVID-19 measures and uncooperative conflict actors. Aid agencies and international donors like the US cut funding to Houthi-controlled parts of Yemen earlier in the year, but Lowcock said that after significant negotiations, “the environment is improving.” 

Aid operations in the South, where Southern Transitional Council forces recently overtook Socotra Island before parties implemented a tenuous ceasefire, have been impacted by an “increase in ad hoc restrictions, including interference and unnecessary delays in assistance.” 

Funding shortfall 

Lowcock also warned that, if the international donor community does not step up soon, there will be no aid to deliver. He noted the failure of the June 2 joint Saudi-UN donor conference, which only raised half the target amount. He also called out Gulf countries, saying that “reduced pledges from the Gulf region account for essentially all of the reduction.” 

The impact of those cuts is massive: “Water and sanitation programmes that serve 4 million people will start closing in several weeks. About 5 million children will go without routine vaccinations, and by August, we will close down malnutrition programmes. The wider health programme, which 19 million people that benefit from will stop too.”

On top of an already long list of urgent threats, Yemen’s economy is now “heading for an unprecedented calamity,” Lowcock reported. The aid chief said the rapidly depreciating Rial was driving high inflation that in turn has driven up food prices by 10 to 20%, leading to wide-spread food insecurity. In addition to the currency crisis, remittances — a vital source of national income and foreign currency — have dropped by a dramatic 50-70% in the wake of the global economic crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Lowcock ended his address to the UNSC with the following brutal proposition:  

“There is a stark choice before the world today: support the humanitarian response in Yemen and help to create the space for a sustainable political solution,” he said. “Or watch Yemen fall off the cliff.” 

In a country where 80% of the population, some 24 million people, are already receiving humanitarian assistance, these converging crises are alarming. It is hard to believe that the situation in Yemen could deteriorate further but the reality on the ground is that it is indeed spiralling deeper into crisis every day.  

It remains to be seen if the world will heed Lowcock’s call or if Yemen will become this decade’s Rwanda  — alongside Libya and Syria. 

Read also: Fighting Continues in South Yemen Despite Ceasefire

Economic Woes Could Trigger New Levant Conflict

Posted on by webmaster

When the militant extremists of ISIS started occupying territory in 2013, Iraq and Syria seemingly became the center of the world. Camera-crews from around the world reported breathlessly on each small town where black-clad men in pick-up trucks were advancing. Cities like Mosul, Raqqa and Palmyra became common features in news items as each small conquest was widely shared.

But in 2020, it seems very few still care about the region. Camera-crews have moved on and politicians have found new enemies to worry about. The reporting in the region does garnish is a stream of negative news. Financial crises, the impact of COVID-19, rising bread prices, it appears the region just cannot catch a break from misery.

Countries like Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria face multiple crises at once, with far-reaching consequences for neighboring countries and the region as a whole. What seems like an uncommonly troubled region where misery appears to simply compound and evolve, is largely a strategy of orchestrated and controlled chaos at the behest of foreign powers and institutions.

Hyperinflation

Comments on “hyperinflation” are becoming more common in reports on Syria and Lebanon, as extreme inflation causes prices for basic necessities to skyrocket amid stagnant or diminishing wages. Hyperinflation has sparked renewed protests in Syria, unseen since Bashar al-Assad and Russia reasserted control over the country through a brutal military campaign.

In Lebanon protests have again rocked the country, with much of the ire aimed at the country’s banking sector and the Lebanese central bank itself. A crisis of institutionalized corruption and sectarianism have intertwined with the country’s dwindling foreign currency reserves and the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic to create a “perfect storm” of troubles for the Lebanese.

Austerity

In response to a historic drop in oil demand, oil prices have tumbled to levels that no expert could have predicted at the start of the year. For countries in the region, the drop in state revenue leaves large gaps in their national budget amid an increase of costs for the healthcare sector and much needed basic support for the poorest and most vulnerable.

In order to find funds abroad, countries like Lebanon and Iraq face increasing pressures from global institutions to reform their countries in order to cut public spending, boost the private sector and increase foreign direct investment. Receiving loans from institutions like the World Bank and the IMF means bending domestic policy to align with foreign visions and implementing unpopular reforms.

Sanctions

Then there are ever increasing sanctions that further weaken local economies. The US targets the leadership of Syria by halting most international trade, including from its destitute neighbor Lebanon. Washington similarly limits Iraq’s ability to buy much needed energy from its neighbor Iran, with the US issuing “waivers” that allow Iraq to import Iranian electricity.

Iran itself is facing crippling sanctions that have turned a health crisis into an unmitigated human tragedy, as the country continues to have the life squeezed out of its last remaining international trade. Iran has faced severe medical shortages and faced major barriers to importing much needed protective equipment and medicine, making the spread of COVID-19 in the entire region more likely.

Misery by Design

While hyperinflation, austerity, and sanctions continue to make an impact on citizens’ lives in the region, none of these are accidental byproducts, but instead are very much the intended goal. Financial support only comes when nations submit to the “Washington Consensus,” turning their countries into neoliberal countries rife for exploitation by foreign multinationals.

Sanctions and hyperinflation are similarly highly related to foreign influence. Sanctions on Syria intend not just to hurt its leadership but actively intend to starve the people of Syria and Lebanon into revolt against its leaders. US officials regularly regurgitate their belief that economic hardship for citizens will lead to a popular uprising that will replace elements of the government that the US does not like.

Sovereignty

While it appears that countries in the region roll from one crisis to the next, in truth these countries have never been “granted” the ability to stop these crises. Iraq cannot exercise any sense of a sovereign foreign policy because of its reliance on US support, Lebanon cannot reform its banking sector without demands from the IMF, and Syria is unlikely to have a “successful” new revolution after al-Assad’s inhumane crushing of dissent.

If foreign powers are genuine about creating stability in the region, they would be best served by leaving the region to determine its own future. The US alone could make a significant contribution to local stability by following the will of the Iraqi people by withdrawing its forces. The US could also lift sanctions on Syria and Iran and allow Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon to freely decide who it trades with.

Freedom to choose

Stability in the region will only materialize when local economies are allowed to grow, politicians are permitted to succeed, and nations can freely trade with one another. The only standard the West needs to follow, is the standard of national sovereignty that it sets for itself. Greater personal freedoms, religious tolerance, and gender equality all depend on rising living standards and the absence of fear and chaos.

By removing foreign influence from the region, the Levant and its neighbors could have a genuine shot at improving the lives of its citizens, unconstrained by the motivations and goals of nations thousands of miles away. As long as foreign powers freely meddle with the fate of millions of local people, the Levant and its neighbors will continue to spiral into further chaos, exactly as was intended.

Syrian Children Suffering Psychologically, Afraid to Go Home

Posted on by webmaster

After interviewing 170 children both in Syria and in refugee camps outside the war-torn country, Save the Children says Syrian chilren scared, suffer discrimination, and are afraid to go home. 

The report confirms long held fears within the international aid community that a whole generation of Syrian children have been lost to the country’s civil war — killed or maimed by the fighting, displaced from their homes, unable to access education, forced to grow up before their time, and psychologically damaged by the painful experience.  

The children’s charity found interviewees are severely traumatised by a number of factors – from living through the conflict, to being displaced, and now with Syria’s health system badly damaged, they have extremely limited access to the psychological help they so desperately need. 

“Displaced children have lost so much over the course of the conflict – their homes, friends and families, and their childhoods. It’s unacceptable that they now view the future as a source of fear, rather than hope,” said Save the Children’s Syria Country Director Sonia Khush on June 25. 

Scared to go home

For children living outside of Syria, the idea of returning is fraught with fear and anxiety. Although many are desperate to go “home,” parents report the idea is extremely stressful for their children, triggering “panic attacks, relentless feelings of fear, self-isolation, and bedwetting.” 

Sari* is among the children who reported being very stressed about their future in Syria. 

“I think about the army. Could I go and fight in a battle? Do I know what I am doing? You’re going to kill your cousin, a human. Why do I have to do that?” 

“We suffer from extreme racism in neighbourhoods and schools,” said 12 year old Fadi* who lives in a neighboring country after his family fled Aleppo. “It’s humiliating, making me feel that death in Syria would be easier for us than to stay in this place.”  

Reuters photographer Khalil Ashawi recently took portraits of nine Syrian children living in refugee camps, one for each year of the war, to mark World Refugee Day on June 20. He reported that, after living most of their lives in camp tents, the children old enough to talk did not have a clear sense of home anymore. 

“These kids don’t know the meaning of a home, some don’t know or have forgotten that a house has a wall and a door,” the Syrian photographer explained. 

Childhood ripped away 

For older children, like 16 year old Syrian refugee Safaa* who do remember their home, childhood memories combined with her current difficult living conditions, are a source of great sadness.  

“Living [here], I feel terrible,” Safaa* told Save the Children, as she began to cry, “I feel so much pain inside. We’re poor in a foreign country and I miss my country.”   

Unlike Safaa, 10-year old Dara* has been able to return to her bombed out home in Syria. She now sells toys in front of her destroyed house in Syria to try and make enough money to support her family.  

“I wish I could play with one of these toys, but I can’t. I sell them so we can live with that money.”

Dara, like many Syrian children, has been forced to assume an adult role and become the family breadwinner as her father is too disabled to work. Instead of playing with other children, forming important social bonds, and learning to read and write at school, Dara is shouldering a heavy burden that she does not have the psychological tools to cope with.  

Save the Children encountered many similar stories throughout the interview process, and found that aside from the initial severe distress of being forced to flee the bombs and bullets that destroyed their homes, the war in Syria has impacted every part of the children’s lives. 

Although clearly in need of psychological support, there is little to no chance any of the children will receive it from a health system crippled by conflict and camps that are underfunded, and overwhelmed. The OCHA estimates there is just one psychiatrist for every 250,000 people in Syria today, and psychosocial support mechanisms are also at breaking point, Save the Children says. 

Save the Children are calling on the international community to prioritize child mental health services at the upcoming Brussels Conference on Supporting the Future of Syria and the Region on June 29.  

“Syria’s children deserve better. As leaders gather in Brussels in the coming days, there is a real opportunity to ensure that children’s long-term mental health needs are prioritised and adequately funded. Together we can ensure that children have the help they need to feel safe and to look forward with hope,” Khush added.  

On March 6, when he announced the latest round of talks, European Union Vice-President Josep Borrell said the Brussels Conference’s “immediate concern is to work towards a lasting ceasefire across the country.”

The conference will also provide an opportunity for Syrian civil society actors to engage with donors, who are prepared to pledge further humanitarian and development support to Syrian, and neighboring countries. 

*names have been changed to protect children’s identities. 

Read also: France Repatriates 10 Children of ISIS Fighters From Syrian Camp