Tuesday, August 3, 2021
Saudi Arabia: Authorities ramp up repression after G20 hiatus
Saudi Arabian authorities have brazenly intensified the persecution of human rights defenders and dissidents and stepped up executions over the past six months, following a lull in prosecutions of activists and a sharp decline in the use of the death penalty during Saudi Arabia’s G20 presidency last year, said Amnesty International in a new briefing published today.
Saudi Arabia’s post-G20 crackdown on expression documents how since Saudi Arabia handed over the G20 presidency, authorities have prosecuted, sentenced or ratified sentences of at least 13 people, following grossly unfair trials before the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC). After an 85% fall in recorded executions in 2020 at least 40 people were put to death between January and July 2021 – more than during the whole of 2020.
“As soon as the G20 spotlight on Saudi Arabia faded the authorities resumed their ruthless pursuit of people who dare to express their opinions freely or criticize the government. In one case, the Specialized Criminal Court sentenced a humanitarian worker to an outrageous 20 years in prison for a simple tweet in which he expressed criticism of economic policies,” said Lynn Maalouf, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.
“The brief respite in repression coinciding with Saudi Arabia’s hosting of the G20 summit last November indicates that any illusion of reform was simply a PR drive.”
As soon as the G20 spotlight on Saudi Arabia faded the authorities resumed their ruthless pursuit of people who dare to express their opinions freely or criticize the government.
In February 2021, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman vowed that Saudi Arabia would adopt new laws and reform existing ones to “bolster the principles of justice, enforce transparency” and “protect human rights”. He outlined plans to address four key laws: a Personal Status Law, Civil Transactions Law, Penal Code for Discretionary Sentences and Law of Evidence. The authorities have yet to publish any information about the impact of these promised reforms.
Yet instead of any progress on human rights, the SCC, Saudi Arabia’s notorious counter-terror court, resumed trials, handing down prison terms after grossly unfair trials. In at least three cases, people who had already finished serving lengthy prison sentences for their peaceful activism were either re-arrested, re-sentenced in new cases or had their sentences increased. In June 2021, one young man from the Shi’a minority was executed following the ratification of a death sentence issued three years earlier based on a grossly unfair trial.
Trials before the SCC are intrinsically unfair, with defendants subjected to flawed procedures that violate both Saudi and international law. In many cases defendants are held incommunicado and in solitary confinement for months at a time and denied access to lawyers. The court routinely condemns defendants to lengthy prison terms and even death sentences, following convictions based on “confessions” extracted through torture.
In April 2021 the SCC sentenced humanitarian worker Abdulrahman al-Sadhan to 20 years in prison followed by a 20-year travel-ban, for expressing satirical views of government policies on Twitter. The charges were based on vague counter-terrorism provisions, some of which criminalize peaceful expression.
In another example of the SCC at work, human rights activist Israa al-Ghomgham was sentenced to eight years in prison and an eight-year travel ban in February 2021, for charges related to her peaceful activism and participation in anti-government protests.
Mohammad al-Rabiah, who was arrested in May 2018 for supporting a campaign for women’s right to drive in Saudi Arabia, was also sentenced in April 2021 by the SCC to six years in prison, followed by a six-year travel ban. The charges against him included: “Seeking to disrupt social cohesion and weaken national unity” and “authoring and publishing a book containing suspicious views.”
Even human rights defenders who were released from detention continue to face judicially imposed travel bans and social media bans. The long-awaited releases of prominent women human rights defenders Loujain al-Hathloul, Nassima al-Sada and Samar Badawi in 2021 were marred by restrictive conditions. These included five-year travel bans, and a risk of re-arrest at any moment as their suspended sentences have not been quashed.
All human rights defenders released after serving prison sentences are forced to sign pledges, which often include bans on public speaking, human rights work or use of social media. These conditions are violations of the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
During 2020, recorded executions in Saudi Arabia dropped by 85%. Immediately after Saudi Arabia’s presidency of the G20 ended, executions resumed with 9 people executed in December 2020 alone. At least 40 people were executed between January and July 2021 – more than the 27 executed in the whole of 2020. In many cases executions took place following convictions in grossly unfair trials, marred by claims of torture during pre-trial detention leading to forced “confessions” which the prosecution systematically failed to investigate.
In June 2021 Mustafa Darwish, a young Saudi Arabian man from the Shi’a minority, was executed following his conviction by the SCC in 2018 on a string of terror-related offences, following a grossly unfair trial. He told the judge in one trial session: “I was threatened, beaten and tortured into giving a confession… I confessed in fear for my life”.
Saudi Arabia’s plans for limited legislative and human rights reforms mean nothing while executions, unfair trials, and the relentless punishment of human rights defenders, activists and journalists continue
“Saudi Arabia’s plans for limited legislative and human rights reforms mean nothing while executions, unfair trials, and the relentless punishment of human rights defenders, activists and journalists continue. We urge the UN Human Rights Council to establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia,” said Lynn Maalouf.
“If the Saudi authorities want to show they are serious about respecting human rights, a first step would be to immediately and unconditionally release all human rights defenders detained solely for peacefully exercising their human rights, and ensure their convictions are quashed and all remaining penalties lifted.”
At least 39 individuals are currently behind bars for their activism, human rights work or expression of dissent in Saudi Arabia, according to Amnesty International’s research.
‘Cultural preferences’ for boys & prenatal sex-selection could lead to loss of 22 MILLION girls by 2100, researchers warn
https://www.rt.com/news/531044-boys-sex-selection-study/
#Pakistan - Imran Khan should know who ‘really’ messed up in Afghanistan
Little did US know that the mujahideen — who Reagan had so warmly welcomed to the White House — would develop a deadly ‘Delta variant’.
In his latest interview to PBS NewsHour, Prime Minister Khan correctly said the US “really messed it up in Afghanistan” and he also rightly questioned America’s motive for invading Afghanistan. In a second interview to Afghan media, he denied that Pakistan speaks for the Taliban. This too is technically true. But to keep one’s moral compass straight, one must acknowledge that it wasn’t just America that messed up. Other countries, particularly Pakistan, also helped create the Afghan tragedy.
Let us return to when the Soviet Union was supposedly eyeing the “warm waters of the Persian Gulf”, a ubiquitous phrase of the late 1970s. After the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in December 1979, it was said that Pakistan was next in line. For Ronald Reagan, the Evil Empire and its godless, atheistic communists were on the move; they must be stopped. Agreed, said Gen Ziaul Haq, else Pakistan and Islam would be mortally endangered.
That Pakistan stood in danger was deliberate fabrication. With a failing economy the Soviets had no capacity to move any further, much less another 800 kilometres to the coast. Note also the supreme irony: when a slightly different brand of godless communists did eventually reach the coveted waters, the heavens didn’t fall. In fact, an eager and willing Pakistan rolled out the red carpet upon which the Chinese walked down to Gwadar. Contrary to Gen Zia’s dire pronouncements, Islam remains safe from communists even if Uighur Muslims are not. Russia and USA are squarely responsible for Afghanistan’s tragedy but Pakistan is certainly not innocent. Post-invasion, we all know what happened. The US embassy in Islamabad hosted the world’s largest covert operation with trained fighters recruited from around the Muslim world. Pakistan’s intelligence agencies, abundantly funded and supplied, helped the CIA organise the world’s very first international jihad. A decade after the invasion, while preening before journalists and twirling his moustache, ISI’s head, Gen Hamid Gul, boasted to the world that he and his men had brought down the Soviet Union. Let’s speculate what might have happened if Pakistan had spurned America’s enticements to battle its Cold War rival. What if Pakistan had let the Soviet invasion run its course instead of creating, arming, and organising the forces of resistance? The temptation to ask such ‘what if’ questions is irresistible at a time when apocalypse looms upon Afghanistan. A likely scenario: left to themselves Afghan communists and the ‘Saur Revolution’ of April 1978 would have self-destructed within two to three years. Instead of the current count of one to two million dead and a devastated country, at most a few thousand would have been killed on all sides. The two communist parties — Khalq and Parcham — had little popular support outside the cities and much of the country’s army and police also opposed the coup against president Daoud. Plus, the two groups fought each other madly. A crazed killer, Hafizullah Amin, became the top dog within Parcham. His rule lasted just three months. But, of course, Afghanistan was not to be left alone. When infighting between Khalq and Parcham spiralled out of control, Moscow intervened to support the failing revolution by installing a new leader from Parcham, Babrak Karmal. This set off red alerts in the US. Publicly, America claimed Afghanistan was a domino whose fall would trigger that of multiple others. But, in fact, it had seen opportunity now that Russia had exposed its soft underbelly. The war began. By 1985 the exhausted Soviets were ready to quit Afghanistan. The “bleeders” in Reagan’s administration (a term invented by Eqbal Ahmad) had people like the assistant secretary of defence, Richard Perle, who saw Afghanistan as a place to teach the Russians a lesson. They became the most influential people in Washington and the apocryphal story of Afghanistan as Russia’s tar baby made its rounds. Meanwhile, Pakistan was savouring both the importance Afghanistan had brought to it and the planeloads of cash flying in. Gen Zia pointedly rejected Soviet offers to negotiate a withdrawal. A triumphant America walked away from the scene of devastation once its Cold War rival had crumbled. It did not expect the mujahideen — who Reagan had so warmly welcomed to the White House — to develop a deadly ‘Delta variant’. That mutant would level the World Trade Centre and cause the US to rush back while loudly promising to civilise Afghanistan and destroy those extremists used earlier against Russia. But 20 years later, with its spirit to fight broken and its reputation in tatters, America is limping away. Well-deserved, many will say. Indeed, justice has been served, albeit insufficiently. Abandoning Afghanistan in indecent haste has paved the way to hell. As the Taliban conquer ever wider swathes of territory, the hope of negotiating peace recedes. Once the cities fall, there is no reason to expect that things will be any different from 1996 when corpses dangled from Kabul’s lampposts, beards and prayers were forced onto men, women were thrust into burqas, and girls’ education was halted. Russia and America are primarily responsible for Afghanistan’s tragedy. As the saying goes, when elephants fight the grass gets trampled. But Pakistan cannot be exonerated either. With Gen Mirza Aslam Beg as its architect, Pakistan’s Afghan policy single-mindedly centred on the quest for strategic depth against India. And so for decades the Taliban leadership, fighters and their families were provided residence, healthcare, and protection by Pakistan. No one believes us when we claim otherwise. If Afghanistan is ever to become a civilised country, it must be governed by a constitution allowing freedom of expression, elections, power sharing, and human rights alongside Islamic basic values. Wild-eyed men who have forcibly seized power will lead the country from one disaster to the next. The Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban — the ones who slaughtered children at the Army Public School in December 2014 — are ideological brothers. One wants to capture Kabul (and likely will) whereas the other hopes for Islamabad but will satisfy itself with terrorist acts. Instead of a second Taliban government, Pakistan’s long-term interest would be served far better by a constitution-based democracy in Afghanistan.
If Afghanistan descends into chaos, Pakistan will feel the security heat: Maleeha Lodhi
As concern grows in Pakistan about the fallout of the deteriorating security situation in Afghanistan, protracted fighting that morphs into a civil war will pose severe dilemmas and multiple challenges for the country. Prime Minister Imran Khan reiterated this fear in a recent interview with an American TV network when he said such an outcome would be the “worst-case scenario for the country”.
Pakistan’s security is inextricably tied to Afghanistan. Prolonged strife in its neighbour will expose Pakistan to security threats that it has dealt with in the past at a heavy cost in lives and social and economic consequences. For over four decades Pakistan has borne the brunt of war, foreign military interventions and conflict in Afghanistan that produced grave repercussions for the country’s security, stability and economic development. The destabilising ramifications are too well known to bear repetition here. More turmoil on its western frontier would mean the country will have to simultaneously deal with internal, regional and international challenges that would flow from this outcome.
In a back-to-the-future scenario Pakistan will be faced with a serious threat to its stability if civil war erupts in Afghanistan and spills over into its border areas. Pakistan has sought to mitigate this danger by fencing much of the border, sealing illegal crossing points, increasing border posts, strengthening the capacity of the Frontier Corps, upgrading training of law-enforcement personnel, enhancing technical surveillance and stationing regular troops there. While these measures are necessary, they may not be sufficient to stop the determined from crossing over given the long border and the mountainous terrain and topography.Moreover, a chaotic situation across the border will provide fertile ground and more space to a host of militant groups to continue operating from there. The principal but not only threat is from the TTP (the Pakistani Taliban) whose 6,500 members are based in Afghanistan and launch cross-border attacks from there. A reunified TTP has reinforced its capacity. The latest report of the UN’s sanctions monitoring team notes that “the return of splinter groups to the TTP fold has increased its strength”. The TTP’s links continue with the Afghan Taliban, which are acknowledged by Pakistan’s security officials. TTP leader Noor Wali Mehsud surfaced recently to announce in a CNN interview that his militant group will continue its “war against Pakistan’s security forces” and its aim is to “take control of the border regions and make them independent”. A surge in violence in North and South Waziristan has led to rising casualties among Pakistani security personnel in recent months. Since May, there have been 167 terrorist incidents in KP and Balochistan, an ominous portent of what could lie ahead. Armed groups residing in Afghanistan would pose a threat to Pakistan with some making common cause with elements who were defeated but dispersed after a series of successful operations by security forces. The UN report says that “a significant part of the Al Qaeda leadership is based along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border” while ISIS-K or Daesh “remains active and dangerous”. Pakistani military officials have already warned of terrorist sleeper cells being galvanised if there is protracted fighting next door. In Balochistan there could be a further rise in violent activity by revived dissident and other groups orchestrated by hostile foreign intelligence agencies. Thus, Pakistan’s hard-won gains in its counterterrorism campaign could be upended. The prime minister said pointedly in the PBS interview that a civil war in Afghanistan would mean “terrorism in Pakistan”. Also, forces of extremism in the country will take heart and be emboldened by the Taliban’s military success. A civil war could also lead to a fresh refugee influx into Pakistan which has hosted three million Afghan refugees for decades now. Pakistani officials worry that fighting will force more Afghans to flee with estimates of new refugees ranging from 500,000 to 700,000. Apart from instituting more effective border controls the government is working on a plan to establish camps near the border to prevent refugees from entering the mainland. Whether the Iranian ‘model’ can work here is open to question especially as tribes are so intertwined on both sides of the border. Using the nomenclature ‘externally displaced Afghans’ to describe them could put at risk international assistance for these refugees as that depends on their refugee status. World Bank funding for refugees too could be in jeopardy. Then there is the likely economic fallout that Pakistan also experienced in the past. Given how fragile and vulnerable the economy is the shock from a civil war next door and threat of violence at home will jeopardise prospects of growth and investment. This will place Pakistan in a zone of instability which will dampen trade and investment badly needed to achieve economic growth targets. The recent past shows that Pakistan had to bear billions of dollars in economic losses in the aftermath of 9/11 when the ‘war on terror’ spilled over into the country’s border areas and cities. Beyond this, a civil war can lead to a regional proxy war, as it did in the past, but with more damaging consequences and drawing in more countries that perceive threats to their security and are already beefing up their defences. It could turn out to be fiercer than what followed the Russian military withdrawal in the 1990s as neighbours and near neighbours act to protect their interests. More regional states have security concerns now than was the case during Afghanistan’s previous bout of civil war because of transnational armed groups and foreign terrorist fighters who operate from there. They include ETIM, Daesh, IMU, TTP and of course Al Qaeda. There are also fears of fighters in Syria relocating to the region. A proxy war could trigger a regional geopolitical crisis of uncertain proportions. All this may sound alarmist but it is predicated on a worst-case scenario of Afghanistan descending into chaos and civil war. This only underlines the urgency of regional and international diplomatic efforts to avert such an outcome. There is time yet for these efforts to make headway. Ultimately however, it will be up to the Afghan parties to make the difficult compromises that can deliver peace to their long-suffering people.
https://theprint.in/opinion/if-afghanistan-descends-into-chaos-pakistan-will-feel-the-security-heat-maleeha-lodhi/707981/
عمران خان کی وجہ سے ملک میں ناامیدی بڑھ رہی ہے، بلاول بھٹو زرداری
چیئرمین پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی (پی پی پی) بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے کہا ہے کہ
عمران خان کی وجہ سے ملک میں ناامیدی بڑھ رہی ہے۔
ایک بیان میں بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے کہا کہ کھوکھلے حکومتی وعدے کاغذ پر لکھنے کے قابل بھی نہیں ہیں۔
انہوں نے کہا کہ نااُمیدی بڑھ رہی ہے، وجہ 50 لاکھ گھر،1 کروڑ نوکریوں کا وعدہ کرنے والا شخص ہے۔
پی پی چیئرمین نے مزید کہا کہ سلیکٹڈ حکومت اور وزیراعظم عمران خان اپنے امیر دوستوں سے فائدہ بٹورنے میں مصروف ہیں۔
اُن کا کہنا تھا کہ بہبود کا وعدہ کرنے والوں نے عوام کو بے یارومددگار چھوڑ دیا ہے، قوم موجودہ نااہل اور ناقابلِ قبول حکومت کا بوجھ اُٹھا رہی ہے۔
The government sleeps while the nation weeps, says Bilawal Bhutto Zardari
Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has said that the government’s empty promises are not worth the paper they are written on. The person, who promised the people 5 million houses and 10 million jobs, is the very reason for the growing hopelessness in the country. He said that in this environment of economic constraints faced by the people, he feels for the poor countrymen who are suffering from the acute poverty, unemployment and price-hike of the daily use commodities.
Chairman Bilawal said that the selected government and prime minister are busy benefitting from their rich cronies and do not care about the poor. The selected thinks that the country can be run by opening shelters and food trucks but are unable to comprehend the difficulties faced by the common salaried population. The common people are finding it enormously difficult to stay afloat economically and raise their children.
The callous government of selected Imran Khan has made it impossible for a common citizen to buy medicine for the elderly. The people are lagging behind in payment of the school fees of their children. The people are unable to feed their children twice a day. Malnutrition is creating an ailing nation because the children cannot get enough nutrition required for their growth. The people have been left deserted by those who had taken oaths promising their welfare.
Chairman Bilawal said that the longer this callous and selected regime stays in power; the darker seems to be the future of the country. The nation is bearing the burden of incompetence and incapability of this government which has failed in all fronts. The selected are turning a blind eye towards the biggest challenge faced by this nation, which is the ever-increasing food inflation and poverty. This cannot continue as the people deserve better. The people of Pakistan want a real democratic government, he concluded.