In the tumultuous landscape of the Israel-Palestine conflict, international law emerges as a critical but often elusive framework for addressing the issues at hand. Its application becomes both a beacon of hope for justice and a labyrinth where legal principles intersect with geopolitical realities. 

This month’s curated book bundle unveils a series of thought-provoking works that dissect the interplay between law, politics, and human rights in the context of Israel-Palestine. These books traverse the historical, legal, and humanitarian dimensions of the conflict, offering readers a comprehensive understanding of the challenges and potential avenues for justice.

Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine by Noura Erakat contends that judicial intervention has failed to address the most pressing challenges facing the Palestinian struggle for freedom. She delves into the shortcomings of occupation law, which, rather than deterring Israel’s settlement enterprise, has proven ineffective in curbing its expansion. 

Furthermore, Erakat scrutinizes the laws of war, revealing how they have permitted the use of lethal force and widespread destruction during Israel’s military offensives in the Gaza Strip. The once-promising Oslo Accord’s two-state solution, as posited in 1993, is declared a dead letter, underscoring the need for a fresh perspective.

Justice for Some introduces a novel approach to understanding the Palestinian quest for freedom by examining the relationship between power dynamics and international law. Erakat navigates through pivotal historical moments, from the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to contemporary conflicts in Gaza, illustrating how the strategic manipulation of legal frameworks has played a pivotal role in shaping the current conditions of the region.

Erakat persuasively argues that, over the past century, the application of law has disproportionately advanced the interests of Israel, highlighting that the outcome was not an inevitable consequence but rather a product of political interventions. 

This book emphasizes that law is inherently political and that its interpretation and enforcement are contingent on the actions of states and individuals. It posits that change within the legal realm is possible and that international law can become a potent force for advancing the cause of freedom when mobilized in support of a political movement.

Noura Erakat, Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine (Stanford University Press, 2019) ISBN: 9781503613577, 352 pages

Protecting Human Rights in Occupied Palestine: Working Through the United Nations offers a brilliant and authoritative exploration of the UN’s attempts to address and expose Israeli violations of international humanitarian law and human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories since the 1967 War. 

Authored by three independent international legal experts who served as UN Special Rapporteurs, the book unveils a compelling narrative of their six-year-long, unpaid mandate to investigate and report on Israeli transgressions.

What sets this study apart is the unprecedented political independence enjoyed by the Special Rapporteurs outside the typical UN bureaucratic constraints. Despite divergent backgrounds and political perspectives, the experts unanimously confirm the routine and diverse violations of Palestinian basic rights by Israel. The book delves into their frustrations, trials, experiences, and the consensus they reached.

This collaborative effort sheds light on both the positive role the UN can play in addressing contentious issues and the geopolitical forces that hinder the implementation of international law. The vehement reactions from Israel and pro-Israeli NGOs underscore the importance of a reliable account of Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights. 

The book exposes how critics sidestep substantive charges by resorting to discrediting attacks, including accusations of anti-Semitism, aimed at undermining the credibility of the Special Rapporteurs.

While skeptics may dismiss the UN’s ability to enforce international law, this book emphasizes the impact of expert findings on shaping international public opinion and solidarity politics. The well-evidenced conclusions presented within the book have fueled transnational activism, exemplified by the growing global support for the BDS Campaign and other nonviolent external pressures.

Richard Falk, John Dugard, and Michael Lynk, Protecting Human Rights in Occupied Palestine: Working Through the United Nations (Clarity Press, 2023) ISBN: 9781949762549, 398 pages

The United Nations and the Question of Palestine: Rule by Law and the Structure of International Legal Subalternity, authored by Ardi Imseis, unravels the complexities and tensions that exist between the UN’s actions and the requirements of international law, revealing a nuanced and often contradictory relationship when it comes to Palestine. The exploration delves into the various forms that the UN’s failure to adhere to international law has taken and the far-reaching implications of such deviations. 

The book unveils a state of ‘international legal subalternity’ imposed upon Palestine and its people. It contends that the promise of justice through international law is consistently offered, yet remains elusive, perpetually withheld under the guise of political legitimacy furnished by the international community.

The book provides readers with a critical perspective on the UN’s handling of the Palestinian question. The author’s exploration invites readers to reconsider preconceptions, offering a thought-provoking analysis of Palestine’s pursuit of justice on the global stage.

Ardi Imseis, The United Nations and the Question of Palestine: Rule by Law and the Structure of International Legal Subalternity (Cambridge University Press, 2023) ISBN: 9781009076272, 303 pages

In Gaza: An Inquest to Its Martyrdom, Norman G. Finkelstein delivers a powerful and meticulously researched examination of the tragic plight befalling the Gaza Strip. As one of the world’s most densely populated areas, with a majority of inhabitants under eighteen and two-thirds classified as refugees, Gaza has been the recurrent target of eight devastating Israeli military operations since 2004. 

Finkelstein portrays the dire reality faced by its largely defenseless population, with thousands perishing and tens of thousands left homeless, exacerbated by a merciless and illegal Israeli blockade.

Finkelstein’s book, drawing on numerous human rights reports, conducts a penetrating inquest into Gaza’s martyrdom, challenging Israel’s justifications for these actions as self-defense. He convincingly argues that these assaults were blatant violations of international law. 

However, the book also unveils a disheartening narrative of the failure of international guardians, including renowned organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as the UN Human Rights Council, to adequately address Gaza’s suffering.

One of the most unsettling conclusions is the succumbing of human rights organizations to the Israeli juggernaut, particularly highlighted by Judge Richard Goldstone’s retraction of his UN report. Finkelstein’s book only serves as a tribute to Gaza’s martyrs but also stands as an act of resistance against historical forgetfulness. 

In unraveling the man-made humanitarian disaster that is Gaza, Finkelstein offers a compelling call to action, urging readers to confront the uncomfortable truths and advocate for justice in the face of ongoing tragedy.

Norman Finkelstein, Gaza: An Inquest to Its Martyrdom (University of California Press, 2021) ISBN: 9780520318335, 440 pages

Prolonged Occupation and International Law: Israel and Palestine is a significant academic study stemming from the 2018 conference on “The Threshold from Occupation to Annexation.” This collection expands the discourse on the 55-year Israeli administration of the Palestinian Territories, covering themes from colonialism to potential international criminal liability.

In response to the prevailing political inertia, the volume offers a poignant examination of international legal frameworks in the context of Palestinian life under prolonged Israeli occupation. It emphasizes the dynamism of international law, showcasing its potential, when coupled with imagination and social movements, to advance justice in Palestine and beyond.

This scholarly collection, featuring contributions from renowned experts, provides a comprehensive exploration of fundamental legal issues arising from Israel’s prolonged occupation of Palestine. It serves as a crucial resource, weaving together rigorous analysis and lived experiences to guide a nuanced understanding of the challenges posed by prolonged occupation and the quest for justice.

Nada Kiswanson and Susan Power, Prolonged Occupation and International Law: Israel and Palestine (Brill, 2023) ISBN: 9789004503922, 402 pages

In the shadow of the birth of Israel seventy years ago, the Palestinian refugee question remains an enduring and complex crisis, making it one of the most protracted post-WWII refugee issues. With over six million refugees scattered across the Middle East, their status is intricately tied to the political circumstances surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as the specific state or territory ‘hosting’ them. Despite the foundational role of international law in addressing their plight, it often takes a backseat in political discussions.

This compelling new edition builds upon the seminal work of its predecessor published in 1998, offering a clear and comprehensive analysis of various facets of international law relevant to Palestinian refugees. From refugee law and human rights law to humanitarian law, the book explores the intricacies of providing international protection for Palestinian refugees and delves into potential durable solutions. Notably, it examines the current interpretations of Article 1D of the 1951 Refugee Convention and various definitions of Palestinian refugees.

A key reference text, this book serves as an authoritative account of the subject, shedding light on the roles of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) and the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in relation to Palestinian refugees. It stands out for its innovative framework proposing just and durable solutions, drawing on recent developments in refugee law and a holistic, rights-based approach.

Francesca Albanese and Lex Takkenberg, Palestinian Refugees in International Law (Second Edition) (Oxford University Press, 2020) ISBN: 9780198784050, 608 pages

Citizenship, a pivotal determinant influencing various facets of our lives, dictates our rights, travel privileges, and, fundamentally, our life prospects. While the process of obtaining a new citizenship poses a formidable challenge for many, for the affluent, including numerous anonymous multimillionaires, the pursuit is often reduced to a matter of price. With sufficient financial resources and the right connections, one can navigate negotiations for citizenship in various places.

In her comprehensive work, The Golden Passport: Global Mobility for Millionaires, Kristin Surak, Associate Professor of Political Sociology at the London School of Economics and Political Science, delves into the expanding global market for citizenship, conducting an exhaustive examination of the dynamics surrounding the acquisition and sale of passports and citizenship. Her meticulous on-the-ground investigation sheds light on the intricate network involving wealthy elites, states, and brokers, revealing the transformation of a once clandestine practice into a prevalent and significant phenomenon.

Beyond exploring the less scrupulous practices of the affluent, Surak delves into Citizenship by Investment (CBI) programs. These programs offer a transparent and expeditious route to citizenship, requiring a defined financial investment that is within reach of anyone who can afford it. Notably, these programs adhere to legal processes that undergo thorough scrutiny and due diligence procedures. But is this too good to be true?

Drawing from six years of extensive fieldwork across four continents, Surak unveils the evolution of passport sales from a dubious enterprise to a thriving citizenship industry concentrated in over a dozen countries, particularly small islands in regions like the Mediterranean, Caribbean, and South Pacific. She systematically breaks down the diverse motivations behind these investments and identifies trends within the industry.

The annual issuance of citizenship to 50,000 individuals underscores the magnitude of this global phenomenon. Individuals opt for these schemes for various reasons, including:

Global Mobility: Seeking increased visa-free travel options for business, leisure, or personal reasons.

Business Opportunities: Opening new avenues for international trade and investment.

Political and Economic Stability: Mitigating risks associated with political or economic instability.

Education and Healthcare: Accessing superior education and healthcare systems.

Tax Planning: Exploring more favorable tax environments and managing tax liabilities.

Personal Security: Ensuring personal safety amid security concerns in the home country.

Diversification of Assets: Viewing a second citizenship as a strategy to diversify personal and financial assets.

Quality of Life: Enhancing overall quality of life through better living standards and improved social services.

The movie Sound of Freedom goes beyond entertainment to highlight a pressing global issue with terrifying implications. The film tells the true story of Tim Ballard, a former U.S. Homeland Security agent who embarks on a dangerous mission to rescue children from the clutches of the child sex trade. It opens with authentic, disturbing real-life footage of children being kidnapped off the streets and being trapped in the networks that are later portrayed.

The story is set in Honduras, where a desperate father, Roberto, unwittingly falls for the fraudulent promises of a former beauty queen called Giselle. She tricks Roberto into believing that his children Miguel and Rocío will work as models, but then they disappear into the dark world of child trafficking. Tim Ballard, stationed in Calexico, California, takes it upon himself to infiltrate the trafficking networks and pose as a predator to capture the traffickers and rescue the children.

While Tim successfully rescues Miguel, Rocío remains in captivity and is sold to Colombian rebels. Undaunted, Tim assembles a team to rescue the missing children, facing many challenges and setbacks along the way. The film underscores the horrific reality of modern-day slavery and highlights the ongoing global fight against child sex trafficking.

The film Sound of Freedom is not afraid to show deeply disturbing scenes that depict the harsh reality of child sex trafficking. While emotionally draining, these scenes show that child sex trafficking remains a lucrative industry that profits from the exploitation of defenseless children. As the film says, “Unlike drugs, which can only be sold once, children can be sold multiple times in a single day,” underlining the urgency of tackling this widespread problem.

Critiques and controversies

Despite its noble intentions, Sound of Freedom has found itself at the center of a storm of criticism and debate, with several aspects of the film coming under scrutiny. One prominent criticism revolves around the film’s alleged association with “QAnon conspiracies”. Critics argue that the film serves as a “QAnon dog whistle”, leading to debates about the film’s underlying motives and messages. This association has raised questions about the film’s ability to resonate with certain conspiracy theorists.

Peter Bradshaw’s review in The Guardian also suggested that Sound of Freedom might appeal to the QAnon community. Bradshaw criticized Jim Caviezel’s performance as Tim Ballard, describing it as wooden. He questioned the film’s underlying intentions, suggesting that it might promote ideas other than child sexual abuse and the need for intergovernmental cooperation.

Owen Gleiberman’s Variety article gives a mixed review of the film. He criticizes its overt Christian overtones and its association with right-wing media, suggesting that the film may appeal to the paranoia of the alt-right, which stems from platforms such as 4Chan and QAnon, which he sees as unfounded conspiracy theories.

Although the film has a few characters of Christian faith, what might be called ‘Christian undertones’ don’t go any further than a few lines like “God’s children are not for sale”.

Another point of contention is the film’s narrative simplicity. Viewers and critics alike have noted that Sound of Freedom takes a straightforward narrative approach, presenting Tim Ballard as an unwavering, incorruptible hero on a mission to fight pedophiles. While this narrative approach is consistent with the film’s goal of depicting real-life events, it has also sparked discussion about the lack of complexity in the narrative.

However, renowned Canadian psychologist, author and media commentator Jordan Peterson praised the film’s unique approach to the complex issue of human trafficking. He emphasized that the script conveys complex ideas through effective particularization, focusing on a specific case to address the broader issue of slavery and human trafficking, particularly child sex trafficking. Peterson praised this approach for giving the film a solid and emotionally engaging narrative foundation.

Criticism also came from various suspicious quarters, including the controversial writer Noah Berlatsky, who articulated his concerns in a Bloomberg article entitled “QAnon and ‘Sound of Freedom’ Both Rely on Clichéd Hollywood Elements”. Berlatsky’s perspective should be viewed with caution, given his affiliation with the “Prostasia Foundation”, an organization focused on destigmatizing “MAPs” (minor attracted people). The sinister aims of this organization include attempts to reframe pedophilia in the context of “sexual orientation”.

Unmasking the horrors of child sex trafficking     

In a recent interview with Prager U, Tim Ballard gave a chilling account of a cartel-controlled region where a child sex trafficking organization had reached unimaginable proportions. This criminal group was involved in trafficking children as young as six. Their sinister method involved recruiting vulnerable children from a charitable foundation ostensibly dedicated to helping the underprivileged, offering food and clothing in exchange for access to these innocent victims. The shocking revelation came to a head during a second undercover meeting when the traffickers arrived accompanied by police. In a shocking twist, the police actively assisted the traffickers by providing them with protection in marked vehicles with blue lights while they negotiated the sale of children. This horrific account underlines the urgent need for continued efforts to combat child trafficking and protect the most vulnerable members of society.

In another interview conducted by Jordan Peterson on his YouTube program, Tim Ballard responded to various criticisms of him and his operations, shedding light on the veracity of certain claims. In particular, he addressed questions about his connection to the QAnon conspiracy theories.

Ballard said: “Over the years, our FAQs have consistently expressed our disagreement with most conspiracy theories. While some of these theories may contain elements of truth, they are often overshadowed by a variety of falsehoods. Our FAQs therefore immediately refute these claims, as they ultimately undermine the credibility of our movement. I would even consider the possibility that certain individuals with vested interests are spreading these conspiracy theories to cast doubt on our cause.”

In the same episode, Ballard recounted a conversation on Capitol Hill in which a congressman asked for advice on how to raise awareness of the problem of unaccompanied minors entering the United States without proper tracking. Ballard replied, “The challenge is that we are not connecting the dots. We need to recognize the different ways in which children are at risk.” Not only are there some 85,000 missing children potentially exposed to the largest child sex market in the world, but we also see groups trying to replace the term ‘pedophiles’ with ‘minors attracted people’. At the same time, there’s a worrying trend towards the sexualization of children. For example, teachers in California and other states are advocating these practices under the guise of sexual liberation or sex education. There are also laws that allow a 13-year-old to consent to sex-altering procedures with potential reproductive consequences.

We’ve been here before?

While Sound of Freedom has sparked discussions about child trafficking and pedophilia, the film has been scrutinized and debated for its message, narrative approach, and potential societal impact. However, some might argue that we have seen this before with the Jeffrey Epstein case. It received a great deal of media attention, but some argue that certain aspects of the media attempted to downplay the seriousness of the case through sensationalist and tabloid-style coverage. Some media outlets focused more on the scandalous aspects of Epstein’s life and his connections to high-profile figures, celebrities, and politicians, rather than the actual allegations of sexual abuse and human trafficking.

Sound of Freedom‘s unflinching portrayal leaves no doubt: the scale of this operation rivals that of the drug trade, and to dismiss it as a mere “conspiracy theory” is a disservice to those who have suffered and continue to be victimized. While the world is plagued by various sinister activities, none compares in scale or moral turpitude to those who seek to diminish the scope and significance of the child sex trade. It is a stain on humanity that demands our unwavering attention and commitment to its eradication.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine marked a pivotal moment in international relations, sparking outrage and condemnation from the global community while igniting deep-rooted tensions that had been simmering for decades. The invasion, which began in the early days of 2022, cast a dark shadow over the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. As Russian forces advanced, cities and towns across Ukraine were transformed into battlefields, with civilians caught in the crossfire and their lives altered by the devastating consequences of war.

In 77 Days of February, a group of distinguished writers from Reporters Magazine, the only Ukrainian publication dedicated to long-form literary journalism, present a remarkably powerful collection of 24 personal narratives. The anthology aims to give readers unprecedented access to first-hand accounts of the atrocities suffered during the early days of the invasion.

It also serves as a tribute to the indomitable spirit and fortitude of the Ukrainian people, who continue to demonstrate unwavering strength and pride in the face of adversity. Marichka Paplauskaite, editor-in-chief of Reporters Magazine, joins us for an interview about 77 Days of February and her accounts of enduring the war as a Ukrainian journalist.

Q. At the beginning of the book there is an emphasis on why it is important to talk about the war in Ukraine from the beginning, with a reference to memory being unreliable. Would you like to share that with our readers?

The initial months of the war presented a profoundly challenging period for us. My colleagues and I felt an overwhelming urge to contribute to the cause of our country, and given our writing skills, we set out to create narratives. The primary goal of our magazine, Reporters, was to tell the story of Ukraine through the lens of personal stories, moving away from traditional hard news and focusing on the encounters, sentiments and emotions of individuals. So when the war broke out, our choice was clear: to share these stories first with fellow Ukrainians and then with a global audience.

This book carries an intense emotional weight, because it was simply not possible to discuss this subject without emotion. It encompasses our homeland and our own firsthand encounters. At first, we wondered if it was premature to delve into such intimate experiences. However, as the war continues and the timing of victory is uncertain, we decided to tackle the subject now, while the wounds are still raw.

Human memory is indeed very fragile, especially when it comes to traumatic events. The mind tries to forget events that have caused suffering. That’s why what we have managed to capture in texts about the events and memories of the first months of the war seems very important to me.

Q. What has changed between the beginning of the war and now?

We have been living under the conditions of a full-scale war for a year and a half now. It’s unfortunate to admit it, but we have managed to get accustomed to the war. In our cities, we still hear the air raid siren every day, which always means that Russian missiles or Iranian drones used by Russia are heading towards our territory to commit new acts of violence against innocent people. Nevertheless, under these circumstances we continue our work and try to live, adapting to the conditions of war.

Q. As a journalist, you’ve had the opportunity to interact with various individuals impacted by the war, is there a story that was particularly inspiring to you?

It’s hard for me to say which story impressed me the most. Because all the stories in the book are incredibly personal. There is one change that happened to us journalists at the beginning of the war: we became the heroes of our own texts. For instance, there are two stories about Chernihiv by our author Vira Kuriko. Her husband went off to fight, and she returned twice to the city surrounded by Russians, describing the life of people under siege.

Another story is “Pasha and the Old Man” by Olga Omelyanchuk. Her acquaintance overheard a phone conversation in a basement. Someone was talking about a paralyzed old man whose relatives had left him in a flat in Irpin. At the time, fierce street battles were raging in the town. Olga found soldiers who agreed to find the old man and evacuate him. It was a risky operation. But the soldiers managed to navigate the streets where gunfire echoed and rescue the man. I am struck by the humanity of this story. It shows an example of how one can remain human even in times of war.

Another story I would like to mention is titled “The Sea”. It tells the story of fishermen from the Kiev Sea – a vast reservoir. Villages on one bank were occupied by Russians in the early days, while on the other bank there was a fishing base. In times of peace these men would have been considered poachers, but in times of war they became heroes. They would cross the sea in their boats and rescue people from the occupation. This was dangerous because the sea was still covered with ice and the Russians were shelling the boats. Nevertheless, these fishermen risked their lives to save others.

As you can see, these stories depict not only the horrors of war, but also courage, compassion, desperation, and light.

Q. How has covering these stories affected you? Have you had the space to reflect on your own grief?

When we were working on these stories, we had to prepare everything so quickly that we had no time to think. But afterwards I had some time to think and I realized that it’s not about the stories, it’s about the lessons I learned during the war and during my work as a journalist and editor living in Ukraine.

We feel that we must live now; if you want to do something, do it today. If you want to tell someone you love them, tell them today. It’s not only because of the conditions of our personal lives during the war in general, but also because there are many stories, for example about nameless graves, that remind us to appreciate what we have.

Q. What struggles do you face bringing these stories to a global audience?

It was so important for us to share our work with readers abroad because we are afraid that the war will be normalized, as I mentioned before. We still need support, and I absolutely understand that people abroad can lose interest in the war in Ukraine and think, “Well, it’s news from Ukraine again. But for us, it’s a real and ongoing tragedy, all the time, in every town.

We want people to not just read the stories, but to empathize and think about how they would feel and act in that situation. And I hope that through these stories our readers can form an emotional connection with Ukraine. I think the biggest challenge is that it’s incredibly difficult to comprehend the experience of war unless you’ve been through it. I’ve read numerous books about different conflicts around the world. But when it came to war in my own country, I wasn’t prepared.

War is the worst experience one can have. Our subconscious can block the desire to understand this experience because it’s too painful. That’s why I hope that the stories in the book, which are very emotional and personal, will give foreign readers a chance to somewhat grasp our reality.

Q. Could you tell us about networks of collaborations amongst journalists at this time?

Our team isn’t large; besides editors, we only have two full-time correspondents. However, we have a large pool of freelance authors across the country. When the war started, they all reported to me about the stories they were witnessing and wanted to describe. It was a unique time of unity for all citizens, and journalists were no exception. We worked as a single team, driven by the importance of documenting events of historic magnitude, recording the crimes of the Russians, and capturing new pages in Ukrainian history. It was a time of solidarity and professional unity within the journalistic community.

Q. How has misinformation made life more difficult for the Ukrainian people during the war?

Personally, I haven’t found this to be a problematic issue because we don’t watch or rely on Russian propaganda TV channels or anything of that sort. If we come across something that raises suspicion or doubt, we check it out. Sometimes, when we come across something dubious, we instinctively recognize its lack of credibility. We make sure to verify and re-verify; after all, we have colleagues in all regions of Ukraine.

For instance, when a Russian propaganda channel tried to dismiss the atrocities in Bucha as a hoax and labeled the alleged victims as actors, my colleagues and friends were in Bucha. They witnessed the bodies on the streets, took videos and photographs that unequivocally confirmed the reality of the situation. Russian propaganda doesn’t shake us because we are here, on the ground, witnessing everything first hand.

Q. What important remarks would you like to share with our readers?

The main message I want to convey is that the war is an ongoing reality and our struggle persists. Readers may peruse the accounts documented within the 77 Days of February and recognize the tragedies and turmoil depicted, but they have the privilege of closing the book and returning to their daily lives. The reality we face, however, remains unchanged, with analogous stories unfolding every day across Ukraine. Our need for support continues.

In his compelling book When Disasters Come Home: Making and Manipulating Emergencies in the West,  David Keen delves into the profound impact of disasters that were once perceived as distant occurrences but are now striking at the heart of the prosperous West. With crises like global warming, migration challenges, threats to democracy, the Covid-19 pandemic, and the repercussions of the war in Ukraine converging, Western societies find themselves caught in a continuous state of fear and distraction.

Keen argues that these disasters should serve as a catalyst for reform, urging us to address the systemic issues that give rise to such catastrophes. However, he reveals how frequently they are exploited for political and economic gain, sidestepping the root causes.

The interplay of various crises, whether gradual or sudden, perpetuates a toxic political landscape that exacerbates the very problems it stems from and enforces a continuous state of crisis amongst society. Politicians often take advantage of the alarm to legitimize their contribution to the disaster-producing system by creating alternate realities and “lesser evil” arguments.

A troubling aspect is the tendency to vilify those striving to alleviate the emergencies or shed light on their underlying factors. Without amplifying alternative perspectives and voices, we risk being ensnared in a self-perpetuating cycle of emergency politics, hindering true resolution and manufacturing its own justification and legitimacy.

From the economy, politics, society and war to the environment, migration, and health, When Disasters Come Home highlights nine major high profile, six abrupt and three slow-burning disasters. Lastly, it also discusses the mass contemporary flight from reality as a disaster in and of itself.

Keen’s book offers a thought-provoking exploration of the complex dynamics between disasters, politics, and the imperative need for reform. Through his incisive analysis, he challenges readers to critically assess the interconnections and potential consequences of the current crisis-ridden world.

David Keen, When Disasters Come Home: Making and Manipulating Emergencies in the West (Polity Press, 2023) ISBN: 9781509550630, 288 pages

Written by Dilara Özer.

The saying “Money makes the world go round” takes a more powerful meaning in a globalized capitalist economy. But what happens when the ones at the very top of the money chain are corrupted? In this month’s book bundle, we share with you three books that explore the influence of the rich and powerful, discuss how the world really goes round, and expose the staggering cases of how corruption hides itself often in plain sight with its effects rippling into the depth of systems, societies, and the lives of each one of us.

T

he COVID19 pandemic revealed to many an eye-opening trend of wealth centralization: the rich are getting richer, and governments around the world are hardly able to protect those who are most vulnerable from the detrimental economic and social effects of a crisis. Who is the culprit?

The New York Times‘s award-winning global economics journalist Peter S. Goodman presents a page-turning exposé of the global billionaire class, the “Davos Man,” and its hostile takeover of the world. Davos Man documents billionaires’ exploitation of the COVID19 pandemic, which turned “taxpayer-financed bailout packages into corporate welfare schemes.” This global billionaire class instrumentalized its power to conceal the truth by hiring lobbyists, PR managers, and journalists in media.

Furthermore, Goodman uncovers the concealed impacts of their oligarchic control reaching into every branch of society and modern life, from wages to housing, healthcare to everyday products and taxation. He argues that their systematic plunder ultimately destabilized democracy by widening wealth inequality, leaving governing systems vulnerable, and triggering the rise of anti-democratic nationalism. He provides the answer to the problem of wider context: how did the liberal democratic order become a breeding ground for the right-wing hate?

Goodman not only provides a vividly written description of the realm of the ultra-rich but more importantly the realities of those who are dissipated by their appropriation all around the world including accounts from a blue-collar worker in Buenos Aires, a Bangladeshi migrant in Qatar, a doctor in Seattle during the COVID19 pandemic, an African immigrant in Sweden, a textile manufacturer in Italy, and an Amazon warehouse employee in New York City. Davos Man is a must-read for those concerned about inequality, economic justice, the resilience of societies, democracy, and the great challenges of our time.

Peter S. Goodman, Davos Man: How the Billionaires Devoured the World (Custom House 2022) ISBN: 9780063078314, 472 pages

The anonymous leak of the Panama Papers in 2016 revealed millions of financial and legal documents that show how ultra-high-net-worth individuals hide their money using complex webs of offshore vehicles. How were these structures set and who plays a role?

Spiderweb Capitalism uncovers the shadow economy and the mechanics behind the illicit movement of wealth across borders through the invisible, complex networks of lawyers, accountants, company secretaries, and fixers.

Sociologist Kimberly Kay Hoang traveled the globe to follow the money through a web-like supersystem and conducted hundreds of in-depth interviews with these ultra-high-net-worth individuals, private wealth managers, fund managers, entrepreneurs, C-suite executives, bankers, auditors, and other financial professionals to find an answer.

Hoang reveals the strategies behind spiderweb capitalism and examines the moral dilemmas of making money in legal, financial, and political gray zones as she traces the flow of capital from offshore funds in places like the Cayman Islands, Samoa, and Panama to special-purpose vehicles and holding companies in Singapore and Hong Kong and risky markets in Vietnam and Myanmar. How are these smaller markets interconnected in a broader system of global capitalism?

Spiderweb Capitalism sheds critical light on how global elites capitalize on risky frontier markets.  Hoang argues that spiderweb capitalism explains the rapid rise of foreign capital in risky markets with low levels of trust and cooperation. Economic growth in such markets is a consequence of tightly embedded relations between the economic elite and political elites that result in a variety of corruptions.

Contrary to the “economic mantra that development can only occur in economies with a strong rule of law,” Spiderweb Capitalism shows a paradox of global economic growth sustained through states where the line separating the legal from the corrupt is not always clear. Hoang’s research further reveals that old paradigms like First World/Third World and Global North/Global South are no longer useful for framing the global economy.

Spiderweb Capitalism is a unique and worthwhile read, not only uncovering the dynamics of a global system of corruption but also the sociological backgrounds of playing in the grey.

Kimberly Kay Hoang, Spiderweb Capitalism: How Global Elites Exploit Frontier Markets (Princeton University Press 2022) ISBN: 9780691229119, 288 pages

I

n Philanthrocapitalism and the Erosion of Democracy, activist Dr. Vandana Shiva compiles essays and articles from more than 20 authors and organizations to show how ruthless capitalistic exploitation branded as philanthropic altruism forges a direct path to global destruction. According to David Orr, philanthrocapitalists are those who “promise to solve hunger, disease, poverty, and a rapidly destabilizing climate often by selling us more of the same things that made them very rich,” which oftentimes ignores the root causes and inequities.

How do global capitalists wield philanthropy to monopolize and privatize land use, food production, and the public health sector effectively? Through various initiatives, suborganizations, development schemes, and funding mechanisms. The book points out that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s empire, in particular, is an intricate network of power and influence solidified by targeted and well-financed PR campaigns to shape public opinion in pursuit of profit and market expansion.

Philanthrocapitalism and the Erosion of Democracy criticizes the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and similar organizations’ many privileged relationships with private companies, governments, and the World Health Organization that allow them exclusively to set the global agenda on health. The book argues that simplified solutions based on technical and scientific developments introduced by these organizations are often narrow in scope and remain insufficient in solving complex problems. Furthermore, they corrode the integrity of democratic institutions guised under a banner of future-oriented innovation.

Philanthrocapitalism and the Erosion of Democracy reveals the destructive power of overly capitalistic systems that enable mass human suffering and environmental catastrophe via the entanglement of private investment and public policy, and aims to bring forward democratic discussions about transparency, accountability, and inclusivity.

Vandana Shiva, Philanthrocapitalism and the Erosion of Democracy: A Global Citizen’s Report on the Corporate Control of Technology, Health, and Agriculture (Synergetic Press 2022) ISBN: 9780907791911, 240 pages

The market for facial recognition technology (FRT) is rapidly growing as automation continues to take the place of human capabilities. How widespread is the adoption of FRT? How is FRT utilized? What threats does FRT pose to privacy rights and civil liberties? How does FRT affect human rights? How far is too far? Today, FRT can recognize not just the identity of a person, but also decipher their psychology through analysis of their facial expressions. Increasingly, experts and activists voice concerns over methods of data collection, the exploitation of its use, and what ethical issues may arise from the adoption of such technology.

Identified, Tracked, and Profiled offers a critical examination of both the uses and issues that FRT poses while providing an analysis of its global market. Moving beyond FRT as a tool and the rising global demand, Peter Dauvergne shines a light on the anti-FRT movement. He provides information acquired through interviews with expert analysts and activists to provide an insight into the influence of the movement in different parts of the world, including Western democracies, developing countries, and autocratic regimes.

There are indeed many that are full of indignation towards the issues raised by the use of FRT, and Identified, Tracked and Profiled highlights their efforts and addresses how some corporate and state supporters are responding to the backlash.

Recognizing FRT as a source of power, and, therefore, a highly sought out commodity by powerful ruling actors and state-firm alliances, Identified, Tracked, and Profiled showcases the unequal capacity and challenges that activists face in their fight against the creeping normalization of FRT. Yet, it also attempts to show that these movements are not entirely powerless against this development by highlighting the importance of political culture and cooperation within social movements.

Constituting an important element in understanding and dealing with FRT, the global political economy of facial recognition is thoroughly dissected in Part III. Here, the author examines the corporate politics of FRT and the dynamics that are causing its globalization. With China being at the forefront of the utilization of FRT, Dauvergne dedicates a chapter into the everyday politics of FRT in China.

Part IV concludes with Dauvergne’s remarks about the future of FRT in terms of its stance against the growing size, power, and scope of its opposition.

In a timely exploration of the forces for and against FRT, Identified, Tracked, and Profiled is a worthwhile read for those who are interested in civil society activism to prevent the globalization and normalization of new technologies, and students, scholars, and policymakers who are searching for a broad reflection on the power of transnational social movements of resistance towards new technologies.

Interested readers who wish to take a look at Identified, Tracked, and Profiled may do so online for free through Elgaronline.com, as the book is open access.

Peter Dauvergne, Identified, Tracked, and Profiled (Edward Elgar, 2022), ISBN: 978 1 80392 588 2, 144 pages

Written by Dilara Özer

O

n October 15, Greece accused Turkey of abusing 92 migrants discovered naked and injured close to the Meriç River (Evros River), which serves as a natural border between the two countries.

The UNHCR demanded an urgent investigation and called the incident shocking, declaring that the images of the migrants were deeply distressing.

The Greek police stated that their investigation together with Frontex, the EU’s border agency, found evidence that the migrants crossed from Turkey to Greece in rubber dinghies.

It was claimed that the migrants had been forced by Turkish authorities to board three vehicles that took them to the border, and forcibly stripped naked before being placed in dinghies.

However, a recently leaked report by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) raises concerns about systematic misconduct from both the Greek border and coast guard authorities and Frontex.

Greek and Turkish officials exchange accusations

Notis Mitarachi, the Greek Minister of Migration and Asylum, said that Turkey’s behavior exceeds all limits. On October 16, he tweeted, “Turkey’s behavior towards 92 migrants whom we rescued at the borders today is a shame for civilization.” “We expect Ankara to investigate the incident and protect, at last, its border with the EU.”

Ibrahim Çataklı, Deputy Interior Minister of Turkey, replied to the tweet as follows, “As you couldn’t find one single case of a human rights violation by Turkey, you just seek to expose the image of your own cruelty as if Turkey did it.”

The Turkish Presidency’s Director of Communications Fahrettin Altun responded a day later with a series of tweets saying the allegations were “groundless and unfounded” with the intention of “putting our country under suspicion” and that “Greece once again showed the whole world that it does not even respect the dignity of these oppressed people, by publishing the photographs of the refugees it has deported, extorting their personal belongings.”

On October 17, Mitarachi claimed that Turkey deliberately directed immigrants across the EU border as migration has become a sensitive topic for the upcoming 2023 elections in Turkey.

He told the Greek-based channel SKAI TV that Turkey is in a very difficult position because these 92 people were found by Frontex itself which confirmed the incident.

Turkey denies the claims

Turkey’s Ministry of Internal Affairs  released a lengthy statement. In the statement, the ministry claimed that Greece was desperate on account of its inhumane treatment of migrants being made public by Turkish officials.

“It is very apparent that Greece is trying to cover up the systematic unlawful pushbacks they have been doing routinely by confiscating all the belongings of the migrants including their money, phones, IDs, and passports, throwing them into the sea, by taking all their clothing and shoes, battering them naked with batons, injuring them with electro-shock devices, shooting at them with rubber bullets or putting them on worn-out lifeboats,” the Turkish ministry said in the statement.

It added that these incidents have been documented in images and reports.

“Just last month they punctured the boat of a group of migrants including babies and infants who were trying to reach Italy from Lebanon. Having lost all their valuables, these people were left to die,” the ministry stated.

The statement also highlights that Athens is under pressure due to its violations of international law, and that a report by OLAF found abuse, irregularities, and cover-ups by the EU border agency, Frontex.

“Within this context, we underline that the fact that the Greek Minister for Migration and Asylum still holds his office and continues his baseless allegations against our country, whereas the Executive Director of Frontex was discharged from his position during the investigations and supervisions on the pushbacks, is unacceptable and we leave this to the discretion of the public opinion.”

Greek violations have become “an entrenched practice”

On October 14, a report by OLAF was leaked, in which it found individuals at Frontex, the European border and coast guard, complicit in pushbacks violating migrants’ “fundamental rights” and in partaking in misconduct.

The report shows that Frontex in collaboration with the Greek government mishandled and failed to report or investigate pushback accusations and evidence.

The investigation was conducted with information from open sources, media reports, documents from Frontex and the European Commission as well as interviews with 20 witnesses.

“OLAF concludes, based on the evidence collected during the investigation, that the allegations are proven,” the report reads. Frontex stated that it took remedial action and did not refute the accusations.

Human rights NGOs and leading media outlets have frequently reported the Greek pushbacks and other human rights breaches that violate international law.

A 2021 Amnesty report found that Greek human rights violations have become “an entrenched practice.” It revealed that especially in the Meriç (Evros) region, Greece used excessive violence against immigrants and refugees in February and March 2020.

Around 61,800 migrants have been pushed back by Greek authorities since 2020, 152 of which lost their lives, while 200 were injured, according to the Turkish Ministry of Interior Affairs.

Turkey regularly accuses Greece of violently pushing back migrants before they can file asylum claims, while Greece accuses Turkey of pushing forward migrants to pressure and destabilize the EU. Meanwhile, tensions remain high between the fallen-out neighbors due to issues such as maritime border altercations and Greece’s armament of the Aegean islands.

Written by Dilara Özer

T

he International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has published the results of its new survey on how Gaza’s youth see their future in light of the ongoing siege and closures. Nine out of 10 young people surveyed said they find their life to be abnormal in Gaza after 15 years of siege, and experience an accumulated feeling of hopelessness.

The survey revealed that nearly 30% of the Gazan youth are dependent on their families while 40% said they have no hope of finding a job in the next 15 years.

In 2012, the United Nations published a report which claimed that Gaza would be unlivable by 2020—a humanitarian catastrophe that is currently taking place.

The population in the Gaza Strip is considered to be young with 20% aged between 18 and 29. Most of the young people who participated in the survey noted that they believe they will continue to face the same challenges, which have been shaping their lives thus far, for many years to come.

After 15 years of closure and siege, it has become nearly impossible for young people to find a job. The humanitarian situation has deteriorated significantly, and scores of young people are leaving the coastal enclave, many of them educated but jobless.

Needs of the Gazan youths

“The needs of youth go beyond the economic dimension in Gaza, as half of the young people say that they have endured significant mental health issues and one-third of them face social problems. Youth residing in Gaza desperately need a pathway towards hope and opportunity, away from pain and suffering driven by hostilities and movement restrictions,” said Nicolas Geeraert, the deputy head of the ICRC’s sub-delegation in Gaza.

“All we ask for is to live normally like others worldwide. We want to be able to move freely, travel, and have decent jobs,” Nouran Al-Zaeem, 23, told the ICRC.

The online survey, which aims to measure the impact of the restrictions imposed on Gaza on young people, was participated by 385 Gazans aged between 18 and 30.

Fading hopes

Suhair Zaqout, the spokesperson of the ICRC in Gaza, told Aljazeera that wars and restrictions imposed on Gaza have contributed to the deterioration of the situation including limiting access to opportunities and jobs outside the Gaza Strip.

According to the survey, 39.2% of young Palestinians in Gaza have lost a job opportunity due to their inability to travel, and 12.9% of students have lost scholarships for the same reason.

Due to the deteriorating situation, many young people in Gaza face psychological problems, in addition to economic and social ones.

The ICRC survey revealed that 95.6% of young Palestinians have been impacted negatively by the restrictions imposed on Gaza, while 49% reported feeling anxiety and depression, and 12.9% have not married due to the economic situation in the coastal enclave.

The Gaza Strip has been under a tight Israeli siege from air, land, and sea since 2007. Three major Israeli military offensives have left behind extensive destruction, with Gaza’s economy spiraling into a free fall. The youth in Gaza feel hopeless about their future, with many embarking on risky routes of migration and dozens losing their lives on the way to Europe.

According to the social and solidarity economic plan of the 2024 Olympics, the International Olympic Committee, and partner organizations are working to ensure that young people and those struggling to find work can find employment in jobs created by Paris 2024 Summer Games. However, what is the human cost of this sporting event? Recently, some alarming facts have come to life which show the dark side of this athletic extravaganza.

A dozen unlawful migrant employees were involved in the construction of the Athletes Village in the Parisian suburb of St. Denis. The recent discovery of such undocumented workers toiling at Olympic construction sites reveals the unscrupulous subcontracting network at the heart of delivering the Paris 2024 Olympics. This may just be the tip of the iceberg.

The uncovering of mostly minority ethnic undocumented labour has led to only 100 checks being carried out by authorities despite thousands being employed constructing the many venues that will be used to host the Games. Why they are reluctant to investigate the full extent of the problem remains a mystery, though one may guess as to the reason.

These undocumented workers will likely be employed on poor terms and conditions and not receive the pay and benefits that lawful employee should expect to receive in France. The discovery of the abuses of migrant labourers comes as France brands its Olympics as the ‘Games for social inclusion of refugees and asylum seekers.’ Furthermore, the French Government supports the Olympic Refuge Foundation ahead of Paris 2024.

These high-minded aspirations appear to be little more than a blatant attempt to mask the truth about French society and sport. Ground-breaking research shows that even amateur French football, along with that of other European countries, discriminates against ethnic minority immigrants.

Sports built on French double standards

Robert Oulds, Executive Director of ImpACT International, told Politics Today that “It would be ironic, if it were not so tragic, that France’s showpiece tournament aims to raise awareness as to the plight of refugees whilst exploiting those very same migrants. The French Olympic authorities are taking the hypocrisy of virtue signalling to new extremes. President Macron’s showpiece tournament may hide the trouble that France has found itself in for a few weeks, but the dishonour of exploiting labour in service of building their stadia will stain his reputation.”

“Having experienced life in France, where workers’ rights are so neglected, it is no surprise that so many migrants and refugees are choosing to cross the English Channel in search of a better life in Britain. Their hopes may, however, be dashed.”

Ultimately Oulds finds that “The bogus claim repeatedly made by Remainers that staying in the EU was the only way to protect workers’ rights was ridiculous.”

“British standards and protections exceed those set by the European Union. Working people in Britain know that aim of Brexit is about the opportunity to get a well-paying job. Indeed, Remainers’ like Lord Rose campaigned for a low-wage economy. Far from some employment Nirvana countries like France just want to continue exploiting the vulnerable while pretending that they care about migrants,” concludes Oulds.

How are the games affecting the property market?

Making matters worse, the 86,000 acre Olympic and Paralympic village is being built in St. Denis to provide athletes with a place to live and is set to be used as a residential neighborhood that is expected to provide an estimated 5,000 homes once the games end. As part of the “Grand Paris Hub” project to renovate the St. Denis suburb, a new train station, better transport links, new housing and increased public facilities will be created.

Apart from the Olympic village, the hub plans to build a high-class complex building used as office space, two forty story hotels, shopping and restaurant facilities and a grand exhibition centre. In essence, such a grand project looks extremely attractive to foreign investors and those who can afford to enjoy such luxuries.

However, the reality does not look quite exciting for those less fortunate and will hit those families who are unable to afford to live in St. Denis after the Games due to the rise in property prices that the development will cause. It is estimated that there could be an increase of 10% to 15% in property prices in the surrounding areas with a potential for apartments to increase by up to 25% around the new transport facilities created in the St. Denis suburb. Thus, with property prices already skyrocketing in Paris’s suburb towns, residents will be left scrambling to afford basic living conditions.

The northern region of Paris already suffered from years of neglect, unregulated infrastructure, and a less well-off population than that of central Paris. Therefore, this expected spike in property prices will only make matters worse by increasing the division and gap between Paris’ wealthy and poor residents. A rise in poverty levels should be expected at the cost of lavish mega sporting events.

Neighbourhood relocation

When assessing the Paris Olympic bid evaluation, the Institute for Human Rights and Business accessed that the French were indeed committed to making use of existing infrastructure meaning that there would not be a substantial risk of displacement of populations to create new game venues. Additionally, according to the IOC, the Paris Olympics will already feature 95 per cent of the existing and temporary venues in the city.

However, what can be seen since Paris won the bidding process to hold the Olympic Games, is quite the opposite of the above-mentioned statement, instead, the creation of the Olympic Village in the Northern suburb has led to the forced eviction and relocation of thousands. The human cost of a mega sporting event of such large magnitude comes as no surprise of course, however, the lack of response from the IOC and its member committees is quite shocking to say the least.

Apart from the forced relocation of residents in the St. Denis suburb, schools and local businesses have been coerced into shutting down to make space for the building process. Unsurprisingly, the IOC has not done anything to stop the destruction of over 20 businesses, 3 schools, hotels, one student accommodation complex, and housing for migrant workers.

Although residents and workers have been offered temporary housing relocation offers, local protests have been underway since the Olympic village project was announced. Alongside this, a rise in unemployment will come because of business closures and relocations, exacerbating the divisions between the rich and the poor.

One representative for the migrant workers’ hostels complained about the temporary housing relocation claiming that the location was far from transportation links, little or no access to restaurants, grocery stores, cafes, or a disable friendly environment. Students are left to find more expensive housing closer to the capital whilst business owners are concerned over damage to profit earnings.

It should go without saying that if a host country has a minimal amount of pre-allocated land for the building of the iconic Olympic Village they simply should not be considered or allowed to enter the bidding process. This means that countries who wish to host future Olympic Games should show evidence of allotted space that is available to be used for the creation of new venues. This will provide assurance that the human cost of building such grand stadiums and racetracks will be mitigated and decreased, ensuring as little harm as possible happens to those communities.

Since 2017, Judge Mario Carroza has been investigating the illegal adoptions from Chile which are estimated to number over 20,000 from the 1950s to the late 1990s. The judicial investigation so far has revealed that several professionals in trusted positions, such as doctors, social workers, religious persons and judges, were complicit in the trafficking network. So sophisticated was the network, that 19 juvenile court, 28 health centres, 24 religious or private homes, as well as 72 buildings in Chile were used as nurseries to host children pending their adoption. Mothers, meanwhile, were fed lies by professionals, including that their children were deceased, in order to sever any possibility of searches and reunification.

The US-backed Chilean dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet is well known for the neoliberal experiment unleashed upon the country. Against a backdrop of torture and disappearances which alerted the world to human rights violations in the country, the Pinochet dictatorship sought to embellish its image. Promoting a veneer of welfare was an integral part of its propaganda, and children became the unknown victims of an intricate trafficking network which facilitated the illegal adoption of minors to foreign countries.

Between 1971 and 1992, it is estimated that over 2,100 Chilean children were illegally adopted to Sweden. In October 2021, Swedish Social Affairs Minister Lena Hallengren announced an investigation into the adoptions. This comes after several years of the Swedish media reporting about irregularities in adoption documents.

Initial research in Chile pointed towards the Swedish Adoption Centre as facilitating the adoptions between both countries. Diplomatic relations between Sweden and Chile during the Pinochet dictatorship was marked by a right-wing campaign to combat the image portrayed by Chilean exiles which was vocal about the human rights violations in the country. The Sweden-Chile Society, which espoused fascist ideology and collaborated with Chile over the surveillance of exiles, was instrumental in facilitating ties between the dictatorship and the Swedish Adoption Centre.

Adoption became a policy for the Chilean state – a means through which Pinochet could establish diplomatic ties in countries where large communities of Chileans had sought exile.

Adoption became a policy for the Chilean state – a means through which Pinochet could establish diplomatic ties in countries where large communities of Chileans had sought exile. Between 1978 and 1988, the dictatorship institutionalized forced adoption through the National Plan for Minors

Charlotta Haggren was adopted to Sweden on January 1, 1974. She was the pilot case for adoptions from Chile to Sweden, according to Anna Maria Elmgren – a Swedish woman who worked for the Swedish Adoption Centre and whose name has been linked to several illegal adoptions.

CAW serves as a platform for adoptees globally. Many adoptees do not speak Spanish, having been brought up away from their home country and distant to news from Chile. The organization’s first concern was to bring news related to the illegal adoptions to the adoptees by means of their website, in English.

One of CAW’s main objectives nowadays is family searches and reunions. Alejandro Quezada, CAW’s founder, explains that a connection with the past, to establish what happened is important, notable the separation of children from the mothers and the ensuing abductions.

Currently, Quezada adds, the connection between adoptees is crucial. He explains that many adoptee groups may focus on different issues. “But one can see that one of the subjects is the “getting out of the fog”, understanding that the history they were always told about their adoption, might perhaps not be true. Or they know isn’t true because they found their biological family who tell the other side of the story which doesn’t coincide with what the adoptee was always told. Today, when adoptees get connected to our network and are looking for the truth, it is their believe there could be more to it and they look for like-minded adoptees from the same birth country to reflect with and understand their history more in depth.”

Quezada reflected upon how the investigations in Sweden are an important link in order to establish what went on Chile. “CAW as a platform is and will remain to be connected with the deputy who helped to have this investigation to start up. In case that we can offer anything in any form that can help the investigation move forward, then we will provide that, taking into consideration the privacy of the persons in case it would be personal information.”

“Because it is important that Sweden tries to get the truth to the surface like they did in the Netherlands, it is of the utmost importance that information is shared in order for the investigation team to have a clear picture of history in intercountry adoptions. We will be awaiting the outcome of the Swedish investigation while remaining actively involved in initiating similar investigations with other European countries and governments. Once the results of the Swedish investigation are being published, we will most likely have in depth conversations with the people who initiated the investigation to look into further steps towards the Chilean part of it. Taking into consideration that today, Chile is the only country who send their children away to be adopted abroad and is investigating their history towards this crime against humanity,” Quezada explained.

On the Sweden investigation, Quezada notes, “Any result of the investigation will have an impact. Not only on the adoptee but on the whole adoption environment currently in place in Sweden. Also, any investigation and their results of a government into intercountry adoptions is not only being followed by adoptees who live in that country, but by adoptees worldwide. Question remains, what will be the following steps of the government after the results have been published. Which action will be taken to future generations if any.”

The Netherlands listed a Dutch pacifist activist on a terrorism list and shared his data with Europol, the European police agency, and Interpol, the international police agency. Here are the risks the activist is now facing.

Surveillance society 

The threat of terrorism and organized crime has led countries around the world to develop surveillance systems meant to prevent attacks and crimes. Large scale databases have been set up to inform law enforcement authorities about the activities, movements, and statements of suspected persons.

Because of the movement of suspects across borders, police authorities cooperate and exchange information about their identity and whereabouts.

Interpol and Europol store information on persons in the form of alerts sent by national police authorities. Those alerts request for a particular action to be taken such as the surveillance, arrest, detention or the deportation of the person.

A Dutch pacifist activist on a terrorism list

For years, Frank van der Linde has been advocating for social justice. He has demonstrated and publicly defended anti-racism causes and the rights of the Palestinians.

In 2014, the Dutch police and the National Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Security (NCTV) started surveying van der Linde, including by recording his statements on Twitter. From 2017 to 2019, they added his personal data to a terror list alongside terrorist suspects and shared this information with Europol and Interpol. Since then, the police referred to Frank activities with a CTER-code (Counter Terrorism Extremism and Radicalization).

In October 2018, for the first time, van der Linde requested the police provide him with the information they stored about him, and he learned about being surveilled. In February 2019, police agencies including the NCTV recognized Frank’s activism as non-violent and removed him from the terrorism list.

Black Boxes of Information 

Interpol’s constitution, adopted in 1956 after the police agency had briefly fallen into Nazi hands, states neutrality as one of the main principles guiding its actions. The organization is strictly forbidden to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character (Article 3, Interpol Constitution).

Interpol’s red notices have been used by states to track and imprison political opponents who have fled their home countries.

Similarly, Europol as a European agency adheres to the key principles of good governance promoted by the Ombudsman’s European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour, including impartiality.

Interpol’s red notices have been used by states to track and imprison political opponents who have fled their home countries. Recognized refugees fleeing persecution have been targeted with alerts asking for their detention and return.

Vivid criticism from members of civil society led to the reform of Interpol and to the creation of the Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files (CCF) that reviews whether alerts are in line with Interpol’s rules. In practice, however, plenty needs to be done, and the vetting system remains inconsistent and secretive.

The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), the supervisory authority for Europol, admonished the European police agency last year for collecting information outside of its mandate. Large scale databases were sent by member states to Europol’s big data case for analysis. Due to the number and complexity of the information, the police agency stored them all before reviewing them.

Vivid criticism from members of civil society led to the reform of Interpol and to the creation of the Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files (CCF) that reviews whether alerts are in line with Interpol’s rules

The decision to transfer personal data to a police agency should not be taken lightly. To protect the principle of impartiality and individual rights, police agencies should review all data shared by states before making them available in their system.

Who polices the police?

Van der Linde’s information has been removed from the Dutch terror list.

However, there is no automatic deletion from Interpol and Europol systems after the data has been deleted from the national database.

Europol has decided in this case to keep the data in its database. The EDPS is currently reviewing Europol’s decision to refuse van der Linde’s request for information. The supervisory authority has nonetheless no enforcing power on Europol. Indeed, Europol’s big data case has not been followed by corrective measures from the police agency. On the contrary, the recent reform proposal by the commission regarding Europol regulation will legalize the unlawful practices of the police agency.

In May, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on the case of a German citizen who after suspicion of fraud had his personal information recorded in a red notice by Interpol. After settling the case in Germany with the payment of a fine, he complained that his data continued to be stored by Interpol due to an alert based on the same fraud in the United States.

Moazzam Begg was a former detainee who was imprisoned by the U.S. government in Guantanamo Bay from 2002 to 2005. He is currently the Outreach Director at CAGE (a non-profit that conducts research and provides a platform for survivors of the war on terror), where he challenges the dominant narrative of suspecting minority communities and the threat of terrorism. Ayan Mohamed Ali spoke to him about how he overcame adversity and how, despite the hardships he endured, and he was not only able to not only reclaim his freedom but also empower and educate marginalized British Muslims.

Q. For people who may be hearing about you for the first time, could you tell our readers about yourself and what you do?

I am the director for an advocacy group called CAGE, which campaigns against ‘war on terror’ policies. I’m an author and former Guantanamo prisoner, media commentator and lecturer.

Q. Could you perhaps elaborate on the events surrounding your arrests and subsequent release?

I’ve been arrested a couple of times. One, the main one, of course, was in Pakistan in 2001, in January. That was by the U.S., CIA and the Pakistani intelligence services. I always say it wasn’t an arrest, it was a kidnapping because there were no uniformed officers. Nobody showed me an identification card, everybody was in plain clothes, and there was no warrant. They took me from my house in the middle of the night in Pakistan, which is where I was living.

Our friend evacuated from Afghanistan, where I had been working on a project to build schools and wells in Afghanistan. From there, they took me to secret locations in Pakistan, then into Afghanistan into Kandahar, Bagram, and then ultimately Guantanamo, where I was held in total, between Afghanistan and Guantanamo, for three years without charge or trial, and released in January 2005.

The ultimate thing about why I was taken into custody was primarily because of the role of British intelligence that offered false and fake information to the Americans, suggesting that I was a member of al-Qaeda, which I was not. That was used to hold me, as I said, without charge or trial. Eventually when I did return, I had a case against the British government and MI5 for complicity in my torture, and in 2010 I won an out of court settlement against them.

Q. What impact has your experience had on today’s young British Muslims? Has it gotten to the point that people don’t know what is and isn’t legal?

I think the impact really has spanned over the past 20 years, so you’ve seen Muslims targeted intentionally by anti- terror legislation almost with a new form every year and people are living in a state of being afraid of not knowing what they can or can’t say, what they can or can’t post on social media out of fear of being branded a terrorist or a terrorist sympathizer, having views on Palestine or similarly Afghanistan or a number of things around that.

I grew up in a generation where there was open racism and hatred towards all people of color. Whereas the past 20 years, there’s been very specific anti-Muslim hatred, Islamophobia that will target you even if you were white, it doesn’t matter. The effects of this has been only seen a generation that has been raised on the ‘war on terrorism’ and the result of legislation.

Q. What advice would you provide to young British Muslims who disagree with the assumption that Islam is synonymous with terrorism?

Well, first of all, terminology, because the terminology that’s used to describe terrorism in the Muslim world actually comes from the word ‘to frighten those who are the enemies of Allah’ but this is in a war context with frightening those people who are involved in killing, raping, oppression, and torture. In the western context, terrorism is the use of violence for a political or ideological goal and of course we can see that translates in some places to people that the government is not happy with and in other places where the government itself would fit that definition, but it’s involved in the use of violence for political aims, for example in Iraq, Afghanistan and so forth.

But Islam is not a religion of terrorism, it’s a religion of human beings, it’s a religion of submission to God. It’s not a part of our faith to be connected to violence for political aims but neither are we a passive religion, we’re not a religion of pacifism – we’re in between. Speaking truth to power from a religious perspective should never be synonymous with terrorism, and we must reject it at every level.

On October 21, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz announced the issuance of a military order designating six prominent Palestinian human rights groups as ‘terrorist organizations’. Gantz claimed that they are secretly linked to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a socialist political group that Israel considers, along with most Palestinian political parties, ‘a terrorist organization.’

The Palestinian organizations included in the Israeli order are Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights, Al-Haq, the Bisan Center for Research and Development, Defense for Children Palestine, Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC) and the Union of Palestinian Women’s Committees.

Considering the significance of these organizations in Palestine and their global networks among like-minded civil society organizations, the Israeli decision provoked a public outcry. One of the many statements of condemnation was a joint statement by rights groups, Amnesty International (AI) and Human Rights Watch (HRW), in which they called Gantz’s move an “appalling and unjust decision”, which represents “an attack by the Israeli government on the international human rights movement.”

Strong Words, but No Actions

AI and HRW, which have documented Israeli human rights violations of Palestinians for many years, fully understand that the ‘terrorist’ designation is consistent with a long trajectory of such unlawful moves:

“For decades, Israeli authorities have systematically sought to muzzle human rights monitoring and punish those who criticize its repressive rule over Palestinians. While staff members of our organizations have faced deportation and travel bans, Palestinian human rights defenders have always borne the brunt of the repression. This decision is an alarming escalation that threatens to shut down the work of Palestine’s most prominent civil society organizations.”

Equally important in the world’s leading rights groups’ statement is that it did not fail to highlight that the “decades-long failure of the international community to challenge grave Israeli human rights abuses and impose meaningful consequences for them has emboldened Israeli authorities to act in this brazen manner.”

True to form, the international community did react to Gantz’s decision, albeit it was the kind of ineffectual reaction, which persisted in the realm of rhetoric that is rarely followed by substantive action.

A joint statement by UN experts called the Israeli decision “a frontal attack on the Palestinian human rights movement, and on human rights everywhere”.

Raids, Arrests and Death Threats

Addameer – In December 2012, the Israeli army raided the headquarters of Addamer in Ramallah, confiscating laptops and a video camera. The offices of the Union of Palestinian Women Committees were also raided by Israeli occupation forces on the same day. The organization is one of the six now designated by Israel as ‘terrorist.’

In September 2019, Addameer’s offices were raided, once again. The Israeli military raid at the time, however, did not generate as much attention or outrage, despite the accompanying violence, let alone the blatant violation of human rights. Then, Al-Haq – also one of the other six effectively banned Palestinian groups – issued a statement warning that “the private property of human rights organizations in occupied territory is especially protected under Article 46 of the Hague Regulations (1907).”

In March 2009, Jabarin was prevented by Israel from traveling to the Netherlands to receive an award on behalf of his organization. Again, in November 2011, this time, Jabarin was now allowed to travel to Denmark.

Expectedly, such legal constraints mattered little to Israel.

Al-Haq – Al-Haq’s staff have faced many restrictions throughout the years. Shawan Jabarin, the General Director of Al-Haq, has been banned from travel on various occasions, starting in 2006.

In March 2009, Jabarin was prevented by Israel from traveling to the Netherlands to receive an award on behalf of his organization. Again, in November 2011, this time, Jabarin was now allowed to travel to Denmark.

The Israeli obstacles began taking even more sinister turns when, in March 2016, Jabarin began receiving death threats over the phone. These anonymous calls began arriving “in the context of increasing harassment of Al-Haq and its members, amid their recent work at the International Criminal Court (ICC) seeking justice for human rights violations being committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territories,” the Front Line Defenders website reported.

Defense for Children International-Palestine – In July, and again August 2021, Israeli forces raided Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCIP) offices in Al-Bireh, in the occupied West Bank. They seized computers, hard drives and other material, alleging a link between the organization and the PFLP.

This allegation had already been advanced in 2018, when UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) persuaded Citibank and the Arab Bank PLC to stop providing banking services to DCIP, providing what they defined as “evidence of the close ties” to the PFLP.

While it is true that the recent Israeli measures against Palestinian NGOs are a continuation of an old policy, there are fundamental differences between the growing perception of Israel, now, as an apartheid state and the misconstrued perception of the past, namely Israel as an oasis of democracy.

Even international entities and groups that are yet to brand Israel an apartheid state are becoming familiar with the Israeli government’s undemocratic nature.

A ‘Tectonic Shift’

In December 2019, and after years of haggling, the ICC resolved that “there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation into the situation in Palestine, pursuant to Article 53(1) of the (Rome) Statute.” Despite intense Israeli and western pressure, the last hurdle in the way of the investigation was removed last February, as the ICC has finally approved the Prosecutor’s request to open legal proceedings regarding war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories, including Gaza.

This legal milestone was cemented by major declarations, one made by Israel’s own rights group, B’tselem, in January, and another by HRW in April, both slamming Israeli policies in Palestine – not just the occupied territories – as ‘apartheid’.

This critical change in the international legal position regarding Israel’s new, unflattering status, was boosted by Israel’s own violent actions in East Jerusalem, Gaza and throughout Palestine in May. Unlike previous wars, the May events have shifted sympathy mostly towards Palestinians, who are fighting for their freedom, homes and other basic human rights.

The change was also notable within the US government itself, which is unprecedented by any account. An increasing number of US lawmakers are now openly critical of the State of Israel, due to a radical change in the US public opinion and, again, unprecedently, they are not paying a heavy price for it as was often the case in the past due to the great influence of the Zionist lobby in Washington.

“The shift is dramatic; it’s tectonic,” the BBC, on May 21, quoted US pollster, John Zogby, as saying. “In particular, younger generations are considerably more sympathetic to the Palestinians – and that age gap has been on full display with the Democratic Party,” the BBC noted.

Over the months of May and June 2021, hundreds of unmarked graves of Indigenous children have been exposed in Kamloops, Brandon, Marieval, and Cranbrook across what is today called Canada. Many more are sure to be exposed in the coming months. All of them were near the former sites of Canadian “Indian Residential Schools,” which were fundamentally institutions of forced assimilation and genocide, more appropriately called prisons than “schools.”

I want to emphasize the word “exposed” here because none of these stories of children murdered by Canada’s structural violences, abandoned and disposed in unmarked graves, are new to Indigenous people. They have known, lived, and survived these stories for decades. The Canadian state itself also knew about these stories but has been for years actively trying to conceal the horrific crimes it has committed. This story is only “new and shocking” to a Canadian and international public that has bought into Canada’s projected self-image of an enlightened and progressive state and society.

Canada promotes itself on the world stage as a progressive model of “liberal democracy” in which ideals of “reconciliation,” “tolerance,” “multiculturalism,” “justice,” and “truth-seeking” flourish within its state structures. This diplomatic image is misleading though, and Canada’s crimes against Indigenous Peoples are only properly understood, not when they are posited as “dark chapters” or “historical mistakes,” but when they are situated within the historical and ongoing context of the imposition of a genocidal settler colonial sovereignty.

In today’s political discourse, the term sovereignty has become associated with the modern nation-state, where a central sovereign political body practices, at least in theory, supreme authority over a specified land and people. This is especially the case in settler colonial contexts like Canada, where Indigenous people are largely viewed as another minority group that must be assimilated into the supreme sovereignty of the Canadian state, as opposed to what they in fact are: sovereign original Peoples.

Throughout their long history and until today, Indigenous Peoples from First Nations, Inuit, and Métis have developed complex societies with complex systems of social and political organization

Sovereignty did not always follow this Euro-American colonial meaning or practice. Throughout their long history and until today, Indigenous Peoples from First Nations, Inuit, and Métis have developed complex societies with complex systems of social and political organization. Within these rich traditions and societies, multiple forms of sovereignty were imagined, theorized, and practiced.

It is impossible to fully explain what Indigenous sovereignty means in a short piece. But what we can say is that Indigenous sovereignty that flourished prior to colonization and still survives today in the values, praxis, and indeed existence of Indigenous people, is generally layered and shared.

As we learn from the writings of Indigenous scholars like Audra Simpson, Leanne Betasamosake Simpson, and Glen Coulthard, decolonial Indigenous sovereignty gleans its authority from living with the land and in openness towards difference and the plurality of people. It asserts a communal type of freedom and a responsibility to each other and to the land. Whereas the settler colonial state sees the self-determination of the nation as exclusive to an imagined homogenized and purified racial identity, Indigenous sovereignty in its foundation is open and attentive to difference, plurality, and sharing.

Foundationally speaking, Canada is an ethnonational state because it refuses to acknowledge the political rights of Indigenous Peoples as sovereign Nations, and asserts instead exclusive sovereign authority for what it imagines as the British and French “founding nations” of Canada.

Under the veneer of Canada’s image as a multicultural liberal democracy is the ongoing operation of structural settler colonial violences.

In short, under the veneer of Canada’s image as a multicultural liberal democracy is the ongoing operation of structural settler colonial violences, which eliminate Indigenous people and sovereignty and replace them with settler colonists and exclusive European settler colonial sovereignty.

Where is Canada’s truth and reconciliation?

Responding to the Chinese government’s call for the United Nations to investigate Canadian crimes against Indigenous Peoples, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had this to say:

“The journey of reconciliation is a long one, but it is a journey we are on. China is not recognizing even that there is a problem. That is a pretty fundamental difference. In Canada, we had a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Where is China’s truth and reconciliation commission? Where is their truth? Where is the openness that Canada has always shown and the responsibility that Canada has taken for the terrible mistakes of the past, and indeed, many of which continue into the present?”

Trudeau is referring here to China’s “systemic abuse and human rights violations against the Uyghurs.”

It is of course highly doubtful that the Chinese government is genuinely concerned about the well-being of Indigenous Peoples, any more than the Canadian government is genuinely concerned about the well-being of the Uyghurs. It seems to me that both are using each other’s state violences as a means through which they can advance their own state strategic interests.

Putting that aside, and more to the point, is Canada really interested in the truth? And has it taken serious responsibility for its ongoing structural settler colonial violences? The answer for both is clearly, no.

First, it is important to clarify that the Canadian government did not, as Trudeau’s quote seems to suggest, initiate the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) because it wanted to do the right thing and uncover the truth. Survivors of the Canadian forced assimilation prisons were successful in forcing the Canadian state to create the TRC, among other things such as issuing a public apology.

After long legal battles, in May 2006, parties which included, legal counsel for former students, legal counsel for the Churches, the Assembly of First Nations, other Indigenous organizations and the Government of Canada approved the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement which began in September 2007. A critical part of this agreement was that the Canadian state would establish the TRC. Thus, it wasn’t Canada’s moral compass that drove the public inquiry into the truth of these “schools,” but rather pressure from Indigenous people and organizations, which forced the truth out of the Canadian state.

Second, many of the TRC’s Calls to Action are yet unfulfilled, and reconciliation remains an empty promise. In a recent analysis, Tom McMahon, former general legal counsel to the TRC and previously executive secretary to the Manitoba Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, lists some of the many Calls to Action that have been completely ignored by the Canadian government, including simple ones, such as creating a monument to honor the Survivors and the victims of “Residential Schools.”

More damning still, scholars Eva Jewell who is Anishinaabekwe and Ian Mosby in a recent special report concluded from their study that “In 2020 … our analysis reveals that just 8 Calls to Action have been implemented, this is down from 9 in 2019. Ultimately, we find that Canada is failing residential school Survivors and their families.” To put it bluntly, that’s a pathetic number: 8 out of 94 Calls to Action. Given this reality, how can anyone take Canada’s proclaimed commitment to reconciliation seriously?

On May 27, the Austrian government presented an Islam Landkarte (Islam Map) as a novel contribution and a breakthrough tool to fight “political Islam.” However, this map has been around for years. The project was initiated back in 2012, by Ednan Aslan, the head of the Institute for Islamic Theological Studies at the University of Vienna and the Documentation Center for Political Islam which was set up by the government.

Nine years later, Susanne Raab, minister for integration from the ruling conservative party (ÖVP), launched a website with an interactive map listing the names and locations of more than 600 mosques and Muslim organizations in Austria as well as their alleged connections abroad.

The map is designed to serve as a monitoring tool for the Documentation Center for Political Islam which is a data-collecting center for integration policy and security agencies. However, the data it collects is problematic to the extent that it is outdated and incorrect; some of the names recorded on the website are no longer actively in service. The most problematic part, however, is that it publishes private addresses of organizations.

When starting a non-profit organization in Austria, individuals have the possibility to register the organization using their personal address. As a result, when the Islam Map was published, not only the addresses of organizations but also personal addresses of individuals were made public.

In her presentation, Minister Susanne Raab (ÖVP) further explained that the “Islam Map” does not mean a general suspicion of all Muslims and the intention is exclusively to fight “political ideologies, not religion.”

Even though, Austrian officials categorize the map as an instrument of combatting “political Islam,” which is an ambiguous term as adopted by the Austrian government that describes any Islamist movement seeking to restructure society according to religious ideas and opposing democratic principles, there is no general agreement on what exactly can be labelled as an Islamist movement.

This has resulted in the listing of cultural centers for Bosnian and Albanian immigrants, youth organizations or even sports clubs, without any proof or any links to extremism. Faika El-Nagashi, the spokeswoman for integration of the Greens party which is part of the ruling coalition, affirmed that “no Green minister or MEP was involved or even told about it. The project mixes Muslims with Islamists and is the contrary to what integration policy should look like.”

There was a massive backlash against this action, not only from the Muslim community in Austria but also from the University of Vienna, which was added as a partner to this project.

There was a massive backlash against this action, not only from the Muslim community in Austria but also from the University of Vienna, which was added as a partner to this project. University officials have since distanced themselves and prohibited the use of the university logo on the map’s page with the argument that “the logo on the site gives the impression that the University has scientifically edited and reviewed the contributions, which is not the case.” Meanwhile, the logo has been removed and instead “A project of the University of Vienna – Institute for Islamic Theological Studies – Islamic Religious Education” has been added to the website.

Muslim Youth Austria announced legal action against the violation of personal and data protection rights. An announcement or complaint does not exist yet, however, as a spokeswoman of the organization has declared that “the publication of all names, functions and addresses of Muslims and Islamic institutions represents an unprecedented border crossing and the organization will exhaust all legal possibilities against it.”

While Muslim Youth Austria demands the end of this criminalization of Muslims and that the Islam Map be removed from the internet, the association for Jewish Austrian Students in Austria showed solidarity and sharply criticized the map.

While Muslim Youth Austria demands the end of this criminalization of Muslims and that the Islam Map be removed from the internet, the association for Jewish Austrian Students in Austria showed solidarity and sharply criticized the map. The students told Politics Today that Muslims must not feel “observed and placed under general suspicion and at the same time fear because locations of Muslim institutions are exposed to the public, which is a handbook case of discrimination.”

On May 31, the spokesperson for the secretary general at the Council of Europe, Daniel Holtgen, stated that “[u]nfortunately, the ‘Islam Map’ of Austria overshoots the mark, serves existing resentments and therefore has a potentially counterproductive effect. Many Muslims perceive the form and timing of the publication as extremely discriminatory. They feel stigmatized and feel their security threatened by the publication of addresses and other details. The ‘Islam Map’ of Austria should therefore be withdrawn in its current form.”

In fact, the launching of an interactive “Islam Map” serves as a watch list or a blacklist. The map will only serve as another blow to the presence of Islam in the country, as the map disclosing Muslim organizations not only caused controversy in the country but also led to a spate of Islamophobic incidents. Moreover, the map stirs up prejudices and puts all Muslims under general suspicion. Prior to the introduction of the “Islam Map,” the Documentation and Counseling Center Islamophobia and Anti-Muslim Racism – also known as the Dokustelle Österreich – released the “Anti-Muslim Racism Report” with 1,402 cases of racism against Muslims in 2020 alone. This records an increase of approximately 33% from the previous year.

After barely a week since the website of the controversial map was launched, the government decided to take the map offline. Not only was it criticized by Austria’s Muslim community, various people from all walks of life reacted on the website. The Catholic Church, for example, joined the criticism and rejected the map. The head of the church stated that Islam is now “under general suspicion.” He wondered why Islam has a map and other faith communities do not.

Ümit Vural, the head of the IGGOE, warned against stigmatizing all Muslims living in Austria as a potential danger. His organization stated that several Muslims had already been attacked and a mosque was vandalized since the map became available online. Muslim Austrians Initiative chairman Tarafa Baghajati told broadcaster ORF, “Imagine if we had a Judaism map or a Christianity map in Austria.”

It is without doubt that this map is an indirect attack on all Muslims in Austria, many of whom are of Turkish descent. Tanju Bilgiç, spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey, who has been calling for an end to Islamophobia for a long time now, declared the map to be “xenophobic, racist, and anti-Islamic.”

Although the “Islam Map” has been taken offline, the attention it got from anti-Muslim, racist groups is worrying. The map definitely signifies a general suspicion of the Muslim community. The growing Islamophobia in Austria and the rest of Europe makes Muslim Europeans, and especially young Muslim Europeans, feel concerned about their future. The social pandemic of hate crimes against Muslims is destroying European values, which once were held in high esteem.

The Canadian public has not been immune from globalized Islamophobic and anti-Arab discourse in popular media. However, we have a problematic local political history that we need to contend with. It was in 1975 that the Globe and Mail published a false story during Montreal’s hosting of the 1976 Olympics, claiming that the Mounties had uncovered a conspiracy by fourteen Canadian Arabs to commit terrorism at the Games. The justice minister and the RCMP commissioner denied the story, but it was picked up by every newspaper and TV and radio station across the country.

During the first Gulf War, Canada joined forces with the United States and began targeting its own Iraqi-Canadian population with CSIS interrogations as it was receiving intelligence from Canadian posts in Iraq. Iraqi-Canadians were pulled out of workplaces, called at home and asked pointed questions about whether they supported Canadian “allies” in the gulf war. At this time, stories of “internal threats” in Canada were rampant in the media, filtered through often less than rigorous journalistic standards.

On January 6 1991, ten days before the United States began bombing Baghdad, the Toronto Sun published a story identifying 12 “pro-Iraqi agents” in Toronto, planning a “disturbance” in case war began in Iraq. A few days later, the Sun ran a headline that read “Police Task Force Targets Agents of Terror.” A slew of “terrorism alerts” were published in various newspapers in Toronto, feeding off of each other, unverifiable by their purported sources.

Discourse about anti-terrorism rang through media without much activity to qualify it, sensationalizing banal threats and connecting it to the language of the “war on terror,” which many Canadians often think began after 9/11. The stories ended up focusing more on security alerts than terrorist activities. The Canadian government did little to dispel this paranoia and CSIS continued to interrogate Iraqi Canadians.

Decades later, when—in the same week—a Muslim family of 5 (the Afzaal family) is run over in London, Ontario (leaving a nine year old boy as the only survivor); three white people show up at a mosque in Toronto, threatening to detonate a bomb, and a black Muslim woman is attacked in Edmonton,  the Canadian public is asking, “How did we get here?,” “How did this happen?” When the Quebec shootings during which six Muslims were killed and eight injured in prayer in 2017 happens in cold blood; when mosque caretaker Mohamed-Aslim Zafis was brutally slain by a white supremacist in Toronto last year, politicians state: “this is not our Canada” and other similar rhetorical repulsions of this violence.

The truth is that Islamophobia has been a fundamental part of the Canadian political fabric and public discourse for decades, operating to help define Canadianness through the very abjection of Muslims, Arabs and other minorities who are read as Muslim or Arab. And this abjection is reproduced and protected by state systems and institutions.

The Toronto Police have been recently reacting in a biased fashion, protecting white supremacists during their marches of propaganda while at the same time CSIS is often found undercover at university campuses in the greater Toronto area, trying to entrap Muslim students into saying something hateful, sometimes even knocking on their doors.

Islamophobic discourse in Canada is often closely linked with “anti-immigration” discourse in politics. Indeed, many extremist groups like the Yellow Vest movement in Canada (to be distinguished in content and nature from the Yellow Vesters in France), and PEGIDA, the Three Percenters have an affinity to politicians who express anti-immigration rhetoric.

In recent years, the tenets of Canada’s Multiculturalism Act have been articulated through the accommodation model—that “Old Stock Canadians” are accommodating Muslims and require of them full cultural assimilation (relying on misleading tropic binaries of cultural differences).

In April 2009, the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, Jason Kenney delivered a speech entitled, “Good Citizenship: The Duty to Integrate” at Huron University College’s Canadian Leaders Speakers’ Series. The minister noted that The Multiculturalism Act and The Citizenship Act and programs are “pathway[s] through which people must pass to join our Canadian political community.”

Anchoring the concept of old stock Canadians, Kenney cites The Unfinished Canadian, which “deplores the way Canada is becoming…‘The greatest hotel on earth.’” Kenney urges his audience “to take this metaphor of ‘Hotel Canada’ very seriously.” Quoting Rudyard Griffiths, he goes on that this phenomenon “is undermining the very strengths and underpinnings that have made Canada a great country. The lack of knowledge of what has given us the country we know, he warns, is potentially disastrous.”

The idea of “race suicide” is a common rhetoric of extremist groups who are often prophesizing about an imminent so-called Islamicization of Canada. Islamophobic violence is seen as a kind of “defense” or necessary evil to stop this takeover, however, this fear and hate is quite literally born out of the decades of Islamophobic myth creation—supported by Canadian media and the state—that would come to validate Western hands in imperial projects in the Middle East.

In 2015, Kellie Leitch and Chris Alexander (politicians and former members of the Conservative Party) implemented The Barbaric Cultural Practices Act (a snitch line through which one could call about their Muslim neighbors’ violence against women), framing domestic violence as particularly unique to Muslim families. This was following the tragic “honor killing” of Aqsa Parvez. In the same year, there were 84 domestic homicides in Ontario related to Intimate Partner Violence, not to mention horrific structural violence against indigenous women.

Yet, Parvez’ murder is seen to have been exceptional to this national epidemic of violence against women, across identity group categories. Leitch’s policies framed Gender Based Violence as exceptional to Muslim cultures, further dichotomizing Islam and Canadianness. Islamophobia is not growing in some seedy corner of Canadian society—it is being nourished in the public eye, for all to see. It is stitched in the fabric of our political atmosphere.

Kenney’s anti-immigration rhetoric, Stephen Harper’s introduction of Bill C24 (essentially creating a second class citizenship system, disproportionately affecting the Muslim community), and more overtly, Paul Fromm’s (Hamilton mayoral candidate) public celebratory description of the 2019 New Zealand massacre (wherein a white male killed 51 Muslims and injured 40 during Friday prayers) as “cogent” and the alarmingly significant amount of votes for Faith Goldy’s run for Toronto mayor despite her right wing extremist work with the Daily Stormer all illustrate the banality of Islamophobic hate speech in mainstream politics—legitimating the “race suicide” thesis. Such an environment sews the seeds of hate, no matter how covertly this normalization hides behind immigration restriction or integration policies.

Many in the Canadian Muslim community were uncomfortable with the ways in which politicians from the liberal and conservative parties showed up to the emotional vigil for the Afzaal family in London, Ontario last week, arguing that it felt like they were using it as a political platform and not addressing the culpability of Canadian institutions in fear mongering and vilifying Muslims.

Currently, Quebec’s Bill 21 bans religious symbols prohibiting Muslim women from wearing hijab in positions of authority in the workplace as well as public sector jobs; and there appear to be hesitant and murky debates about opposing anti-Islamophobia legislation. The M-103 motion which condemns Islamophobia has seen some debate within the Conservative Party since 2017; and Doug Ford (the Premier of Ontario) blocked a motion on Islamophobia two days after the June 2021 London vigil (even if another was put forth, afterwards).

“A deliberate domination of the Israeli Jewish population over the Palestinians,” Human Rights Watch (HRW) has denounced Israel’s policy towards Palestinians on its soil and those in the Occupied Territories as apartheid on Tuesday, April 27, 2021. The report is the first of its kind from an international human rights organization and comes after repeated Palestinian calls to adopt such as a discourse to describe Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

In recent months, Israeli NGOs such as B’Tselem had begun to use the term “apartheid” to refer to Israel’s policies towards Palestinians living in Israel – who remained on their land after the creation of Israel – and Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. But this is the first time that a major international human rights NGO has described Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians as “apartheid.”

Human Rights Watch denounces the “systematic oppression” of Palestinians and “inhumane acts,” which define a “crime of apartheid.”

“We base our work on two years of investigation and two decades of work in Israel and the occupied territories. In using the term “apartheid” we are not making a historical analogy, but applying international law.” says Kenneth Roth, executive director of HRW, in an interview for Le Monde.

In more than 900 small communities in Israel, admission committees allow Jews to live there, but not Palestinian citizens of the country. “

The report also shows that the crime of apartheid only occurs in the Occupied Territories. In more than 900 small communities in Israel, admission committees allow Jews to live there, but not Palestinian citizens of the country. “An effort is being made to cluster Palestinian communities in limited areas, while Jewish communities are allowed to flourish,” continues Roth.

The need for an international investigation

The NGO, whose headquarters is based in New York, also urges the UN to set up an “international commission of inquiry” on the situation in Israel and the Palestinian Territories, and foreign states to “not be complicit” in the Israeli policy towards the Palestinians, according the Omar Shakir, the Director of Palestine/Israel Director at Human Rights Watch, who was expelled from Israel on November 25, 2019 over his critical work of Israeli violations of human rights of the Palestinians.

The fresh report caused much anger among Israeli political circles, which feel increasingly encircled following the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) decision to start an investigation of possible war crimes in the Occupied Territories. Even before the publication of the report of HRW, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted by describing it as a “propaganda leaflet.”

For its part, the Palestinian Authority (PA) of Mahmoud Abbas described the report as “a strong and credible testimony of the suffering of the Palestinians.” In a press release published by PA, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates noted “this detailed affirmation of the reality a test to the international community’s determination to end all forms of discrimination and racism.”

The Istanbul Convention (IC) is a convention by the Council of Europe on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. It has been signed by 45 countries, but 11 – including the United Kingdom – are yet to ratify it. Countries such as Poland, Bulgaria, and Slovakia have been planning to halt their plans to ratify the convention because of “elements of ideological nature,” which the Polish Minister of Justice has declared to be harmful.

Bulgaria, too, is struggling with constitutional troubles regarding the convention. The U.K. government signed the convention nearly a decade ago but is progressing slowly toward its ratification. Turkey was the first country to ratify the convention but recently officially withdrew from it.

The U.K. and the Istanbul Convention

When a government decides to ratify a convention, the state is legally bound to follow it and there is a time frame granted to enact the necessary legislation in order to give a treaty domestic effect. With regard to the U.K.’s progress towards the ratification of the Istanbul Convention, there are three articles whose terms the country hasn’t fulfilled; these are Articles 44, 59, and 4(3).

Article 44 rules that “(1) parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to establish jurisdiction over any offense established in accordance with this Convention, when the offense is committed: a) in their territory; or b) on board a ship flying their flag; or c) on board an aircraft registered under their laws; or d) by one of their nationals; or e) by a person who has her or his habitual residence in their territory.”

This means that Article 44 of the Istanbul Convention gives provision for countries to initiate jurisdiction over a crime committed by one of their nationals outside the country. However, the United Kingdom already exercises territorial jurisdiction over crimes such as forced marriage, female genital mutilation (FGM), and trafficking, which are also crucial parts of the convention. Besides these, there are crimes such as rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence where the U.K.’s jurisdiction does not apply and in order to comply with the convention, changes in its domestic laws are required.

Articles 59 and 4(3)

Currently, people with certain visas (such as spousal or fiancé visas) in the U.K. have “no recourse to public funds” which means that as foreigners they might not be able to apply for all U.K. benefits or services. For this reason, the Istanbul Convention’s Articles 59, which refers to residency status, and 4(3) remain marked as “under review” since the European treaty demands that services and support for victims must not discriminate on the basis of residency or immigration status.

Ratifying the Istanbul Convention would mean that the U.K. government has to take serious actions to change its domestic legislation. Even though these changes need time, it is remarkable that the U.K. has been struggling – or has been passive – regarding changing its domestic laws regarding this issue for nearly a decade. According to the progress report published in 2017, the UK government stated, “We will only take steps toward ratification when we are absolutely satisfied that the UK complies with all articles of the Convention.”

The progress report includes information on the measures to be taken and legislation required to enable the U.K. to ratify the convention. The IC Change, which is a volunteer-led campaign calling on the U.K. government to ratify the Istanbul Convention, criticized the report as being short and missing a series of points. In June 2021, the U.K. will mark eight years since the government signed the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence.

In Belgium, 300,000 women are victims of domestic violence and around 150 women are murdered every year.

How Effective Is the Istanbul Convention?

In the Netherlands and Belgium, the Istanbul Convention entered into force in 2016. According to a Dutch research in 2020, every ten days a woman in the Netherlands dies as a result of domestic violence. Kirsten van den Hul, former member of parliament for the Labour Party (PvdA), stated that there is a misconception about the nature of the problem. She claims, “People often think of certain cultures or classes, but violence against women and girls happens everywhere. This includes Europe and the Netherlands. Even with highly educated white people.”

In Belgium, 300,000 women are victims of domestic violence and around 150 women are murdered every year. Magda De Meyer, Chairman of the National Women’s Council, stated, “If you see that femicide claims more victims than terrorism, why isn’t it higher on the agenda?” Journalist and writer Kris Smet stated that the femicide of women is “absolutely ridiculous in this civilized country” and that “there is still a lot of work to be done here.”

According to French Minister of Justice Éric Dupond-Moretti, last year in France, “106 domestic crimes were committed in which 90 of the victims were women.” All the women victims were killed by their ex-spouses.

In Germany, according to Deutsche Welle, every day, a man tries to kill his partner or ex-partner. One in three attempts is successful in the country. Vanessa Bell from the NGO Terre des Femmes has claimed that “femicide is still a taboo topic in Germany.”

Even though all the above countries have ratified the Istanbul Convention for a while now, it is remarkable that there has not been a dramatic change or decrease in offenses and cases of femicide. It is also clear that conservative intellectuals in several countries feel that the current direction of the European Union on societal issues will mean a further crumbling of its Christian or Islamic identity and conservative values.

Slovakia, for example, joined the Istanbul Convention in 2011, but hasn’t ratified it yet. According to Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico, the government maintains the right not to ratify the convention. He added that Europe can’t implement measures against the sensitivities and beliefs of individuals in member states. Fico stated that as long as he is prime minister, if concerns regarding the interpretation of controversial provisions are not addressed and, in particular, if the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman is not adopted, he will “never ever” give consent to submit this agreement for ratification.

Krasimir Karakachanov, the Bulgarian Minister of Defence, claimed that through the convention “international lobbies are pushing Bulgaria to legalize a ‘third gender’ and introduce school programs for studying homosexuality and transvestism and creating opportunities for enforcing same-sex marriages.” In addition, the Bulgarian Socialist Party and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church have turned against the convention as well.

National armed forces typically do not use snipers, heavily armed infantry divisions, and fighter-bombers to quell all unarmed peaceful protests – and during peace time. But Myanmar’s Tatmadaw, or the defense services, do.

Consequently, as evidenced in the thousands of social media comments, the overwhelming majority of public opinion in Myanmar has irreversibly turned against the armed forces. The multiethnic public views the Tatmadaw as a ruthless occupying force at best – and a downright terrorist mafia at worst.

For the country’s non-Burmese ethnic nationalities or national minorities such as the Karen, Kachin, Shan, Chin, Mon, Rakhine, Rohingya, and so on, the Tatmadaw – primarily commanded by majoritarian Burmese and exclusively by Buddhists – has been an alien colonial occupier.

If these communities in distress self-organize armed resistance, the Tatmadaw typically resorts to a variation of the old British era “pacification” military campaigns. It has burned entire ethnic minority villages, forcibly relocated villagers into controllable areas, or simply violently deported them across the borders into neighboring Thailand, India, or China.

To date, Myanmar under the military’s dominance is home to possibly the longest low-intensity civil war in the world, which ensued after World War II ended. There are about two dozen ethnic armed organizations, with varying troops all across the border regions, which are the ancestral homelands of myriad of ethnic minorities. The Tatmadaw’s war crimes and crimes against humanity are well-documented, and include rape as a weapon of communal subjugation, forced labor, summary execution, torture, murder, and so on.

In Myanmar’s western region of Rakhine that is adjacent to Bangladesh, the army has been engaged in systematic and sustained campaigns of terror against the Rohingya ethnic minority for the last 40 years. One of the major reasons the United Nations General Assembly established the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar as early as 1993 was the credible news reports of crimes against humanity against this Muslim minority.

In 2016 and 2017, the Burmese army waged the largest genocidal attacks on this unarmed, destitute, and vulnerable Muslim population of roughly two million. The attacks made the international community stand up and pay attention to the situation.

According to the report of the UN International Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, in the span of 10 months, the army destroyed about 39,000 homes, mosques, schools, rice warehouses, and businesses while killing an estimated 10,000 Rohingyas of all ages and mass-raping women. The two campaigns of genocidal terror triggered the survival flight of a total of 840,000 survivors into neighboring Bangladesh.

The Burmese army has built expansive prison complexes and interrogation or torture centers all across the country where human rights activists, journalists, pro-democracy dissidents, and all types of regime critics are forced to confess to crimes they did not commit.

The Burmese military leaders have long discarded the pledge of the founder of the Myanmar Armed Forces Aung San to build a democratic federated union of multiethnic nations.

Since the commercial opening which followed the collapse of the one-party military dictatorship of General Ne Win with its economically ruinous socialist economy, the military in Myanmar has become the most dominant economic player. The generals, their families, and cronies have raked in their ill-gotten gains to the tunes of billions of dollars while the public at large remained pauperized. Roughly five million working-age Burmese of all backgrounds have left the country as migrant workers for greener pastures across Southeast Asia’s middle-income countries such as Thailand, Malaysia, and Singapore.

Politically, the Burmese military leaders have long discarded the pledge of the founder of the Myanmar Armed Forces Aung San to build a democratic federated union of multiethnic nations who join voluntarily along the principle of ethnic group equality and the right to self-determination. Successive generations of military leaders since the first coup of 1958 have typically been scornful of liberal democratic principles. They view the federal, power-sharing arrangement as a formula for Balkanization.

Against the founding principles extensively worked out and articulated well by Aung San, who is widely viewed as the primary architect of the country’s independence from Britain, the top military commanders, who have had a disproportionate share of power and influence over this nationalist institution, have built a radically different version of the armed forces.

The new incarnation of the Tatmadaw sees itself as the only cohesive national organization capable of keeping the fractious multiethnic country together. The military officer corps sees itself as ideologically “pure”- as a nationalist and selfless body of competent men vis-à-vis bickering, incompetent politicians and unruly activists.

Half a century of total control over society, politics, and the economy is long enough for this ruling and/or dominant institution to forge itself as a distinct social class, with its class, economic, and political interests. Typically, in military-controlled polities, the military is referred to as a state within the state. In the Burmese case, the military has become a separate society within the society at large.

Historically, the Tatmadaw was founded as a local proxy against the British in Burma in December 1942 under the patronage of fascist Japan with the nationalist Aung San, Aung San Suu Kyi’s martyred father, as its first commander-in-chief.

Aung San’s vision of this force was that it would be a crucial instrument in the wider popular struggle for liberation to end a century of British colonial rule and, post-independence, to turn it into a professional military, in a federated democratic union of multiethnic peoples.

Suu Kyi herself has repeatedly identified herself with the armed forces – even while the troops have been engaged in vicious military operations – expressing her “genuine affection” for the generals whom she called “my siblings because they are my father’s sons.” She has defended the Tatmadaw against genocide allegations at numerous international fora – most shockingly at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). She has publicly praised this institution as it launched brutal military operations against other minorities such as Buddhist Rakhine on the western coast.

Since she was first elected MP in the 2012 by-elections, Suu Kyi has sought to help open the doors for the hermit-like army leaders, particularly with respect to the militaries in western democracies. Apparently, she was motivated by her desire to trigger some kind of re-professionalization of the Tatmadaw so that it will be a cooperative partner in her main project of democratic reforms. But her reforms were becoming a serious threat “the military elite’s institutional and personal interests – in terms of political influence, bureaucratic dominance, and financial interests.

Shocked, angered, and globally friendless (save for Russia and China), the coup leaders in Myanmar responded to the protests at home in the only way they know: organized terror. Over the last 36 days, the Burmese military has gone on to commit widespread crimes against humanity against completely unarmed, peaceful protesters – estimated to be over 20 million across the country.

On March 4, 2021, Michelle Bachelet, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva, officially called on the Myanmar army to end the murder and enforced disappearances of civilian populations in over 570 locations throughout Myanmar. Over 50 civilians have been murdered – some by military snipers from roof tops of urban buildings – while over 1,750 have been detained. What is more, an unknown number of protesters and citizens alike have been forcibly disappeared by the Tatmadaw and other security units deployed by the State Administration Council (SAC), the military junta.

It is a great irony that the Tatmadaw, which was founded in December 1942 as a nationalist armed liberation force for the colonized, ethnically diverse peoples of colonial Burma by the revolutionary democrat Aung San, has categorically morphed into the country’s most universally hated and feared organization used as the primary instrument of repression and exploitation against humanity by criminals in generals’ uniforms.

This once venerable institution is now at war with the entire society, who now cheer gleefully at the latest news of a soldier being killed in the Rohingya area in a bomb blast, assumed to have been committed by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, dubbed as “Muslim terrorists.”

Whatever the immediate outcome of this violent confrontation between civil society and the military will be, one thing is certain: the Burmese military has lost the nation irretrievably. Without a nation that supports it the Tatmadaw once and for all has stopped being a national defense service. The overwhelming majority in Myanmar view and treat the Tatmadaw as terrorists that must be repelled by any means possible.

Ever since visiting Belfast a year ago I have been struck by how the Irish revolutionaries, despite these vast differences in circumstances and goals, regard their struggle as being reproduced in its essential character by the Palestinian struggle, and have a robust solidarity movement that regards Palestinian freedom as one of the incomplete aspects of their own struggle. The wall murals in the Catholic neighborhoods of Belfast exhibited these affinities, recognizing that oppression is not confined within the sovereign space of nations, but is a transnational reality. Solidarity and opposition express an unarticulated global humanism. While the Palestinian challenge may be more epic in quality, the Irish struggle was also waged as a matter of life and death, and even more fundamentally, as an insistence that humiliation and indignity were unendurable conditions that produced and justified martyrdom.

Among the great differences in these two national narratives that form the background of these separate renderings of the hunger strikes concerns the impacts of the international context, and especially the role of the United States. With regard to Ireland, American public and even elite opinion was strongly supportive of Catholic resistance in Northern Ireland, and the U.S. mediational role was exercised with in an impressive spirit of neutrality. With respect to Israel, the U.S. pretends to play a similar role as intermediary or ‘honest broker,’ yet with zero credibility. It should surprise no objective observer that these diplomatic maneuvers produced only frustration and disappointment for the Palestinians, in part, due to Washington’s unabashed and unconditional material and diplomatic partisanship, including siding with Israel even when it flagrantly violates international law or repudiates the UN consensus on the contours of a just peace.

We notice in the experiences of Irish and Palestinian hunger strikers, that the Irish contributions situate their recourse to hunger strikes protesting prison conditions more explicitly in the wider struggle of the Irish Republican Army (IRA), while Palestinians stories tell more graphically of the agonies of prolonged imprisonment in Israeli prisons. Our attention is drawn to the denial of minimal international standards of treatment, including failures of medical treatment, bad food quality, denial of family visits, inadequate exercise, and sadistic prison responses ranging from force-feeding to putting tantalizing foods in prison cells. Yet both Irish and Palestinian testimonies emanate from the same source, how to respond to the desperation felt by intolerable abuse in conditions of imprisonment, and yet carry on the wider struggle for freedom and rights that landed them in prison.

Reading their harrowing statements of broken families and broken hearts, we should not be deceived into thinking that we are reading only about events in the past. There are currently about 4,500 Palestinian prisoners, including 350 imprisoned under ‘administrative detention’ provisions copied from the British Mandate colonialist administration of Palestine, under which Palestinian activists and suspects can be jailed indefinitely without any specific charges or even a show of some evidence of wrongdoing. Many of the individual hunger strikes take this dire step of a prolonged hunger strike to protest against the acute and arbitrary injustices associated with administrative detention, which appears to be a technique used by Israel to demoralize the Palestine people to an extent that makes their resistance seem futile.

As I write, Maher Al-Akhras was close to death in an Israeli prison, having mounted a hunger strike for an incredible period of more than 103 days to protest administrative detention, and yet hardly anyone outside of Palestine and the Israeli Prison Service knows about it. Al-Akhras words while teetering on the brink of death encapsulate the common core of these unforgettable shared stories: my hunger strike “is in defense of Palestinian prisoners and of my people who are suffering from the occupation and my victory in the strike is a victory for the prisoners and my Palestinian people.” In other words, although such an extreme act of self-sacrifice, while being intensely individual, is above all an expression of solidarity with others locked within the prison walls but at the same time often the only form of resistance available to an imprisoned political militant. Such a commitment has its concrete demands relating to prison conditions, but it should also be understood as a metaphor encouraging a greater commitment by all of us, wherever situated, to the struggle that needs to be sustained until victory by those on the outside who are daily subjugated to the policies and practices of the oppressor state.

The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor issued a statement on Wednesday, November 4, 2020, stating that Greek refugee camps lack the minimum standards for human life, and that refugees and asylum seekers are forced to endure unbearable conditions which in turn “poses serious risks to their physical and mental safety and well-being.”

The Geneva-based organization noted that Greek refugee camps are “dangerously unsustainable” and that refugees and asylum seekers face an imminent threat to their lives.

A fire broke out recently at Vathy refugee camp on the Greek island of Samos. The camp is home to 4,500 refugees and migrants who are overcrowded in a building that only fits 650 people. Greece’s Ministry of Migration and Asylum claimed that the fire that caused the burning of 15 tents at the camp caused no injuries, adding that at least 150 people were rendered homeless. The cause of the fire is still to be determined.

Euro-Med Monitor noted in the statement that in September alone, two other fires broke out in the same camp, as the island was hit by a 6.7-magnitude earthquake causing a mini-tsunami, which also hit the Turkish city of Izmir.

Not only this, Doctors Without Borders have noted that more than 100 residents of the camp have tested positive for COVID-19. Despite this, refugees still lack proper access to healthcare and live in a continuing lockdown without access to the outside world.

“The fire has once again revealed how desperate and unsafe the situation in Greek refugee camps is,” said Michela Pugliese, legal researcher at the Euro-Med Monitor. “The restriction of movement, the overcrowding, the lack of proper infrastructure, the rise in COVID-19 cases, and the unhygienic and inhumane conditions of Vathy camp make such an outcome predictable.”

Pugliese added that the dire conditions at Vathy camp, which only got worse with the outbreak of the fire, violate international human rights law, including the right to adequate housing and health, which is also stipulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts, “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of (…) lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.”

Euro-Med Monitor concluded by calling on Greece “to immediately close Vathy camp and other similar overcrowded, unsafe and unsanitary camps in the Aegean islands and transfer the asylum seekers to adequate accommodation centres in Greece or in other EU states.”

Euro-Med Monitor called on the European Union “to respect, protect and fulfill international and regional law concerning asylum seekers and migrants’ rights.” The Geneva-based organization concluded by reminding the EU that Article 17.2 of the Directive 2013/33/EU lays down standards for the reception of refugees who lack protection and calls on EU member states to “ensure that material reception conditions provide an adequate standard of living for applicants, which guarantees their subsistence and protects their physical and mental health.”

In late September, an UNDP representative hailed Turkey’s decision to grant Syrian refugees access to healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. Claudio Tomasi, representative of the United Nations Development Programme told Anadolu News Agency, “As we highlight in our joint report, Turkey stands out compared to other countries, as early on it adopted a comprehensive policy framework to grant Syrians under temporary protection not only access to services but also to the labor market.”

Social media companies are becoming increasingly involved in political affairs. This involvement has different dimensions to it, but most importantly, it is limiting the right to access information, increasing restrictions on the freedom of expression, and disregarding personal rights. Zoom’s, YouTube’s, and Facebook’s claims to neutrality have become a matter of question.

Now, being a progressive company or person has exceptions. One example is the well-known Progressive Except on Palestine (PEP) position. Recently it was reported that Zoom and some other video-conferencing applications are selectively imposing restrictions on issues and one of these is the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine.

Zoom Cancels Leila Khaled’s Webinar

Born to a refugee family in Haifa that ended up in Lebanon in 1948, Khaled joined the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) to become the first female plane hijacker. Khaled was scheduled to give remarks on September 23, 2020 at a virtual open classroom titled “Whose Narratives? Gender, Justice and Resistance: A Conversation with Leila Khaled” organized by Prof. Rabab Abdelhadi and Prof. Tomomi Kikukawa. The event was sponsored by San Francisco State University’s Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies Program, and the Women and Gender Studies Department. The event was blocked by Facebook, and was taken down by YouTube twice, which caused outrage and anger on social media, with people questioning the commitment of these three platforms to free speech.

In the same context, Zoom commented on its cancellation of the event by saying, “Zoom is committed to supporting the open exchange of ideas and conversations, subject to certain limitations contained in our Terms of Service, including those related to user compliance with applicable U.S. export control, sanctions, and anti-terrorism laws.” The Zoom spokesperson continued, “In light of the speaker’s reported affiliation or membership in a U.S. designated foreign terrorist organization, and SFSU’s inability to confirm otherwise, we determined the meeting is in violation of Zoom’s Terms of Service and told SFSU they may not use Zoom for this particular event.”

The General Union of Palestine Students at SFSU issued a statement stating, “This is a clear attempt to censor Palestinian voices, especially Leila Khaled.” Rabab Abdelhadi, director of the Arab and Muslim Ethnicities and Diasporas Studies program at SFSU, issued a statement declaring, “Zoom has threatened to cancel this webinar and silence Palestinian narratives.”

Following this, on October 23, 2020, Zoom canceled Leyla Khaled’s webinar at Hawaii University, which was co-sponsored by the Departments of Ethnic Studies and Political Science, and the Students and Faculty for Justice in Palestine. The event was part of the “Day of Action Against the Criminalization and Censorship of Campus Political Speech” by the US Campaign for the Academic Boycott of Israel (USACBI). It was a reaction by the students of Hawaii University to Zoom, Facebook, and YouTube to the cancellation of Khaled’s event at SFSU in September.

U.S. College Students React to Zoom Censorship

Students at the University of Hawaii at Manoa reacted to Zoom’s cancellation of Leila Khaled’s webinar. The students expressed their frustration by saying, “We as UH students, faculty staff and community members are offended by our university’s complicity and its failure to protect our freedom of speech.” The participants in the video repeated the words of Khaled: “We are not afraid of struggling, we are afraid of giving up. Our people never gave up in the past and not now and not in the future. It’s because we have supporters all over the world.”

The Zoom cancellation of events on Palestine in the U.S. is not the first of its kind. In the past, Facebook and YouTube have shut down Palestinian pages and accounts. Facebook, which has its Middle East headquarters in Israel, has signed an agreement with the Israeli government to censor the Palestinian content. The Zoom cancellation of pro-Palestinian events is part of a larger campaign to crack down on free speech on Palestine in which Facebook and YouTube also take part.