Many countries considering UN proposal for ceasefires to jointly fight COVID-19 pandemic

(April 4) The UN Secretary-General Antonio Gutteres is pressing countries for a global ceasefire in all conflicts to allow a concentrated joint effort to fight against the COVEID-19 pandemic

UN head wants war only against the COVID-19 pandemic

The Pope and some NGOs have shown interest and support for the project. However, as of this Friday 11 countries were considering the idea including Cameroon, Central African Republic, Colombia, Libya, Myanmar, Philippines, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen. Quite a few of the listed nations have substantial domestic conflicts the could benefit from such a ceasefire. Successful ceasefires could also lead to peace talks that could in turn be successful. However, there will obviously be difficulties arranging the details for carrying out any ceasefire. Gutterres noted: “There are enormous difficulties to implementation as conflicts have festered for years, distrust is deep, with many spoilers and many suspicions.”

In updating his earlier appeal Gutterres said: "Ten days ago, I issued an appeal for an immediate ceasefire in all corners of the globe to reinforce diplomatic action, help create conditions for the delivery of lifesaving aid and bring hope to places that are among the most vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic. This call was rooted in a fundamental recognition: There should be only one fight in our world today, our shared battle against COVID-19."

Many of interested countries are most vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic

While the UN may no doubt hope that some bigger powers would join the list, many of the countries that have responded are very much at risk from the pandemic such as Yemen, Libya, and Syria. The civil wars in these countries have damaged their health care infrastructure. These nations are probably quite aware that aware that continued conflict in the situation will make their situation much worse and make jointly fighting the virus a positive outcome for both sides.

Gutterres noted that 70 countries, Pope Francis, NGO's and more than one million people had endorsed the UN call for a ceasefire in an online appeal.

UN report finds Crown Prince Salman was in involved in Khashoggi murder

(June 19)Agnes Callamard, UN special rapporteur found in a thorough and quite critical report that journalist Jamal Khashoggi was the victim of a brutal and premeditated killing carried out by top Saudi officials including Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

+ Add Image

Callamard's conclusion

In her report Callamard wrote: "Evidence points to the 15-person mission to execute Mr. Khashoggi requiring significant government coordination, resources, and finances. Every expert consulted finds it inconceivable that an operation of this scale could be implemented without the crown prince being aware, at a minimum, that some sort of mission of a criminal nature, directed at Mr. Khashoggi, was being launched."

Details of Khashoggi's final moments

The report of just over a hundred pages also included new details of the Khashoggi's final moments. Callamard, who listened to audio tapes provided by Turkish authorities, says that two Saudi agents Maher Mutreb and Dr. Salah Tubaigy discussed how they would dismember and dispose of Khashoggi's body only minutes before he entered the Istanbul Saudi consulate. He went there to pick up marriage papers.

Tunbaigy told Mutreb: "Joints will be separated. First time I cut on the ground. If we take plastic bags and cut it into pieces, it will be finished." Mutreb said Khashoggi was a sacrificial animal accord to an audio that Callamard obtained.

According to Callamard assessments of recording by Turkish intelligence Khashoggi may have been injected with a drug and then suffocated using a plastic bag. The Saudis immediately rejected the report: "The minister of state for foreign affairs, Adel al-Jubeir, tweeted it was “nothing new … the report of the rapporteur in the human rights council contains clear contradictions and baseless allegations.”"

Khashoggi's body or body parts have not yet been found. In spite of all the evidence the Trump administration has not blamed the Crown Prince. Trump has even smeared Khashoggi and warned that it would not be a good idea to break relations with the Saudis as this could result in higher oil prices.

Callamard wants further investigations

Callamard said her findings, after five months of investigation, suggest there should be further probes into the Saudi Crown Prince's role in the murder along with those of other Saudi officials. The report also calls for the US government to have the FBI launch an investigation into the execution of Mr. Khashoggi and even suggests that criminal prosecutions within the US would be appropriate.

Callamard recommends that trial of 11 suspects be suspended

Callamard said that the trial of the eleven suspects identified by the Saudis should be suspended, as the trial was shrouded in secrecy and lacked credibility. Callamard said: “Some eight months after the execution of Mr Khashoggi, the determination and assignment of individual responsibilities remain clouded in secrecy and lack of due process...To date the Saudi state has failed to offer public recognition of its responsibility for the killing of Mr Khashoggi, and it has failed to offer an apology to Mr Khashoggi’s family, friends and colleagues for his death and for the manner in which he was killed."

The CIA had already concluded Salman was involved in the killing last fall as reported on the appended video. However, this has not influenced Trump's attitude.

Trump to bypass Congress to sell arms to the Saudis

Trump appears to take the view that Saudi Arabia is an important ally and a big purchaser of arms from the US. He thinks that this is more important than Saudi's involvement in the murder of Khashoggi and its terrible human rights record.

A recent article notes: "President Donald Trump's administration on Friday bypassed Congress to sell $8.1 billion in arms to Saudi Arabia and other Arab allies, citing a threat from Iran, infuriating lawmakers who fear the weapons could kill civilians in Yemen. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the administration would circumvent the required review by Congress to approve 22 arms transfers to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan, saying that the freeze on sales by Congress could affect the Arab allies' operational abilities."

Previously published in the Digital Journal

122 countries sign on to treaty to ban nuclear weapons at UN meeting

To loud cheers Elayne Gomez, president of the UN conference that has been negotiating the legally binding treaty announced that 122 nations had signed on to the ban while the Netherlands was opposed and Singapore abstained. Gomez said: "The world has been waiting for this legal norm for 70 years" the time period from when the first atomic bombs were dropped by the US on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in August of 1945. Gomez noted that this was the first multilateral nuclear disarmament treaty in more than 20 years. The treaty comes into effect 50 countries ratify it.

Last December UN member states voted overwhelmingly for a treaty that would ban nuclear weapons even though there was strong opposition from all the nations that have nuclear arms. Every one of them refused to even participate in the talks.All NATO members boycotted the negotiations except for the Netherlands which attended but voted against the resolution. The Netherlands has US nuclear weapons on its territory and parliament urged that a delegation be sent to the meetings.

Countries that ratify the treaty must "never under any circumstances to develop, test, produce, manufacture, otherwise acquire, possess or stockpile nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices." The transfer of nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices is also prohibited or even the threat to use nuclear weapons.

Richard Moyes, managing director of Article 36, a UK-based group that works to prevent harm from nuclear and other weapons, claimed that it was not plausible to believe that security could be secured by threatening to kill hundreds of thousands with nuclear weapons. He said we  know that there have been errors of judgment, accidents, and also a degree of instability in leadership in the world.

The nine countries that are known to or believed to possess nuclear weapons are: US, Russia, UK, China, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel. None support the treaty or even sent delegates. The US and a number of other nuclear powers want to strengthen the nearly five-decade old Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty(NPT). This of course retains the nuclear club as the only countries allowed to have nuclear weapons. Israel was able to develop nuclear weapons in spite of the treaty. Neither Israel, Pakistan, nor India have signed the treaty. North Korea withdrew from it in 2003.

The NPT wss originally intended to prevent the spread of nuclear arms from the five original countries that had such arms: US, Russia, China, UK, and France. The agreement included a provision that the five powers move towards nuclear disarmament and provisions that would allow non-nuclear states access to nuclear technology in order to produce energy.

US ambassador Nikki Haley said when the nuclear talks began in March that:"  "there is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons, but we have to be realistic."She asked if anyone thought North Korea would give up its nuclear weapons, stressing that North Koreans would be "cheering" a nuclear ban treaty — and Americans and others would be at risk."Of course North Koreans may feel at risk because the US has nuclear weapons. It might very well give up nuclear weapons if was assured the US and others opposed to it did. Yet the US has pointed to the escalation of  North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes as a reason to retain its nuclear capability. One could argue that it is US nuclear capability that leads the North Koreans to believe that they also need to develop nuclear weapons in defense.

The UK did not attend the talks although it claims to support multilateral disarmament. Canada voted against the UN resolution to begin negotiations on the treaty. It did not send anyone to the negotiations. A leaked memo the US wrote to other NATO countries last year show why Canada and other NATO countries opposed the treaty and did not attend them except for the Netherlands. The memo said: "If negotiations do start, we ask allies and partners to refrain from joining them". Passage of the ban would increase pressure to meet disarmament obligations. The US and UK in particular are both planning to modernize their nuclear arsenals a move that is even against the old NPT.

Statement by 22 countries EU, UN, and others on situation in Libya

22 countries plus the European Union, the United Nations, the League of Arab States and the Arab Union all signed a joint statement on the situation in Libya after a meeting of the UN General Assembly on Thursday.

The statement reiterates positions often taken by members of the international community. In spite of the fact that under the leadership of Faiez Serraj the Government of National Accord (GNA) has been unable to convince the House of Representatives (HoR) to vote confidence in the GNA, the statement praises his leadership. There are many other problems Serraj has not solved, such as hydro outages, and cash shortages that Serraj has not yet solved.

The statement also supports the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) and the work of the Special Representative of the Secretary General (SRSG) although the statement does not mention Martin Kobler by name. While many of the countries are actively intervening in Libya, the statement says that Libyans should decide their own future without foreign interference. The statement also promises: "The international community will not provide support to or maintain official contact with parallel institutions that claim to be the legitimate authority, but which are outside the LPA as specified by it."

It could be argued that the HoR government of Al-Thinni and the LNA under General Haftar are parallel institutions as of now since they do not recognize the GNA and consider themselves legitimate authorities. While many of the signatories give lip service to the monopoly of the GNA to legitimate power, in practice many countries deal with the government and officials of the HoR as well as Haftar.

The statement calls once more for the Presidency Council (PC) of the GNA to present a new cabinet to the HoR. For once, the necessity for amending the constitutional declaration of 2011 is also mentioned. There is no mention of the fact that the HoR has already twice rejected the GNA, as well as having had numerous meetings which were without a quorum. Two were disrupted without a vote. Unless there is some agreement to change the LPA so that Haftar does not lose his job it is not likely that a vote of confidence in the GNA will be taken. It is not clear that the PC will ever be able to come up with a satisfactory cabinet. The vote which rejected the GNA was on August 22. The deadline for the presentation of a cabinet with only eight members has long passed and there is no new deadline presented in the statement.

The significance of the statement is in a large degree what is left out. The statement notes:Given recent tensions in various parts of the country, we urge full de-escalation and avoiding provocative actions. We share the Libyan people’s desire to transform Libya to become a secure, democratic, prosperous, and unified state, where state authority and the rule of law prevail. This can only be achieved peacefully through inclusive political dialogue and national reconciliation.

There is no specific mention of the seizure of the four oil export ports of the Oil Crescent from the forces of the Petroleum Facilities Guard headed by Ibrahim Jadhran. This group already had a deal with the GNA and National Oil Company before being seized by the Libyan National Army of General Haftar. The statement already accepts the provocative actions of Haftar and is in effect urging that there be no counter attack. Earlier six of the countries had urged that Haftar withdraw. No further mention of withdrawal is made.

In a recent article Mattia Toaldo, a Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, notes that the altered situation on the ground had changed the situation considerably and perhaps brings into question the policy that the west has been pursuing up to now:First, the House of Representatives (HoR, the internationally recognised parliament based in Tobruk) has rejected the list of ministers for the GNA. The EU and some member states had been engaging with the ministers designated as if they were already in charge. It is hard to predict whether a new list will be submitted soon, how different it will be from the current one and whether it will stand any chances of being approved by the parliament. At the moment, the implementation of the LPA is blocked while the government in Tripoli seems to be suffering from lack of domestic political support and an inability to deal with the many economic challenges it faces.

The joint statement neglected to mention the failure of vote of confidence on August 22 by HoR. This is already the second failure, after numerous meetings which were without a quorum and two that were disrupted without a vote. Toaldo could have noted that the list of new members is long overdue. There is no sign of it. No deadline. Just urging that it be done. Western states have been dealing with ministers and other officials for ages as if there were no question that they were legitimate. There seems no good reason to think that a new list will fare any better than former ones. There is some doubt that the PC can even arrive at a new reduced list of eight cabinet ministers, as there are no doubt divisions within the PC itself, especially as two boycotters who favor Haftar have returned to the PC. Toaldo is certainly correct to point out that the GNA has been unable to gain support by solving the economic challenges it faces. It also faces other failures such as constant power outages.

Toaldo mentions another key change in the situation that is virtually ignored in the statement:The second development is that the main force which remained outside of the LPA - namely general Khalifa Heftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA) and his political supporters in the HoR - have made significant progress both politically and on the ground. On 11 September, the LNA seized the main oil terminals in the so-called Oil Crescent from the Petroleum Facilities Guards of Ibrahim Jadhran, a backer of the government in Tripoli who had demanded payment in exchange for unblocking exports.Haftar gave control of the terminals to the Tripoli-based National Oil Company. Toaldo fails to mention that negotiations for the merger of the Tripoli and Bayda-based NOC's are still ongoing with the heads of the two NOC's working on the final agreement. The HoR had rejected the earlier agreement. Even under the existing agreement the revenues will ultimately go to pay civil servants in both governments and armed forces including the LNA as well. Far from causing parallel institutions to wither and collapse for lack of funds, the GNA has created a stituation where its oil revenues provide funding for an opposition government and forces. No wonder Haftar can hand over control to the NOC. However, if the arrangement goes awry, Haftar has the upper hand through control of the oil ports and fields.

In the light of these changes Toaldo suggests that the sky may be falling on existing plans. The international community may consider alternative scenarios and adapt their policies to the changed circumstances. Toaldo argues that the changed conditions make it actually possible that Haftar's Operation Dignity that would see many of the miitia associated with the GNA defeated. As Toaldo points out Haftar already has advanced to within 50 km of Sirte which is now occupied by brigades mostly from Misrata. There are forces in Bani Walid and other cities east, south and west of Tripoli that might side with him. Of course there are Zintan militia near Tripoli and others who might make deals with him such as non-aggression pacts.

Any deal with Haftar will involve giving him a strong mililtary role that would marginalize the Islamist and anti Haftar forces that support the Presidential Council. Indeed, this would surely destroy the PC and the GNA government altogether. It could very well result in an all out civil war with constant clashes between pro-Haftar and anti-Haftar forces. Toaldo puts the matter quite aptly: "Europeans and Libyans should consider whether having avoided a new Raqqa on the Mediterranean, they are ready to have another Cairo."

Toaldo says that there will likely have to be a renegotiation of the terms of the LPA, either formally or informally, and there could be fighting. Toaldo says external stakeholders such as the EU should try to ensure that the negotiation happens without the fighting. Toaldo claims the renegotiations cannot just reflect Haftar's goals. Presumably, Toaldo wants a new model with more control on the armed forces. Toaldo says of Haftar. " He hasn’t clarified how different his model would be from Sisi’s Egypt in which the armed forces are unaccountable and therefore above civilian authorities." Surely Haftar's actions in replacing civilian local authorities such as mayors by military commanders should make his views clear. Haftar admires Sisi and takes him as a role model. He even replaced civilian corporate officials in the electric company with military figures.

Toaldo suggests that the U.K., France, and Italy could use the handover of the oil terminals and resumption of oil exports "to build a shared economic governance, help factions agree on a budget, and guarantee transparency on how oil revenues are spent." Haftar surely has the upper hand on this. He will share only in a way that he regards as favorable to him and his supporters or else he will shut down facilities. It is not clear that the "factions" as they exist now can reach agreements on sharing or if they do that the agreement would be stable.

Toaldo also suggests a rewriting of the ground rules for the interim statement. He notes that the joint statement suggests quick approval for a new constitution. However, Toaldo claims it is not clear that in the current environment Libyans could approve a definitive constitution. The existing draft and the process of generating it are also questionable I should think. Toalda thinks that the call by in the statement for amending existing constitutional rules is the way forward. However, this would be going beyond the LPA which only requires an amendment to incorporate the GNA into the constitution as I understand it. Elections would be held under the new constitution. Nevertheless it seems a possible way forward.

Finally, the EU and others should provide logistical and technical support to create a dialogue on reconciliation over issues that could create further hostilities. This would include the fate of prisoners, conditions of detention centres, and monitoring of ceasefires. All of this presupposes that the UN and others are willing to completely abandon a policy that they have invested in very heavily. What appears to be happening is that the same formulae about the LPA and the GNA are being mouthed and supported officially while in practice, many countries are in effect switching sides, and giving more support to Haftar. I expect that anti-Haftar forces are going to be sidelined if there is any agreement with Haftar. The State Council has already tried to assume the power of the HoR as legislature of the GNA in order to assert its power. The situation appears very fluid but Haftar is growing constantly stronger and the GNA and the international community are simply accepting that fact. There is absolutely no sign that the international community will confront Haftar. Haftar is probably not interested in negotiations. His agenda is the completion of Operation Dignity.

Iranian aid ship offloads Yemen aid in Djibouti while Iranian plane denied permission to land

An Iranian news agency said an Iranian Red Crescent plane carrying 20 tonnes of food for Yemen was denied permission to land in Djibouti the location of a UN food distribution hub.

+ Add Image

The IRNA, official Iranian news agency, quoted the Red Crescent official as saying: “Despite coordination with the United Nations and the World Food Programme, the plane was not granted permission to land in Djibouti." The plane is now in south-eastern Iran awaiting authorization of the foreign affairs ministry of Djibouti to land. Djibouti is the site of a key U.S. military base, the only permanent U.S. base in Africa. Drone missions are launched from the base as well as other flights.

An Iranian cargo ship, the Nejat, carrying 2,500 tonnes of aid to Yemen that had been heading for the port of Hodeida held by the rebel Houthis, changed course and docked in Djibouti after arriving late Friday night. The cargo was being handed over to the World Food Program (WFP) in Djibouti. The port authority chief, Abur Hadi, said: “The ship will be completely unloaded and reloaded onto other vessels, everything is transparent." WFP spokesperson, Abber Etefa, said Saturday: "The ship carries 2,500 tonnes of humanitarian aid and that includes mainly rice and wheat flour, as well as medicine, water, tents and blankets."

The ship diverted from its route to Hodeida after warnings from both the U.S. and the Saudi-led coalition who feared that the ship might be delivering arms to the Houthi rebels.

The U.N. could have monitored the unloading at Hodeida and assured a quicker delivery of the aid instead of having to divert to Djibouti. However, it is clear that the U.S. and Saudis simply do not want any deliveries to be made by Iran of any kind to Houthi-controlled areas. When the ship arrived in Djibouti, it was not just inspected but unloaded and the aid given over to the WFP. There is no guarantee that the aid will even go to Hodeida now.

General Ali Ahmadi, Secretary of the Iranian Red Crescent Society (IRCS) said:“We are coordinating with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to deliver Iran’s humanitarian aid to the oppressed Yemeni people in Hudaydah port after making sure that the route is safe. The Nejat ship has been dispatched to Djibouti in order to assess the situation. We are sending humanitarian supplies to Yemen needed by its people and we do not want to face any problems in this regard,”There are a number of international journalists, doctors, and foreign anti-war activists aboard the ship.

I expect that the Nejat will not be allowed to journey to Hodeida at all. The aid has already been offloaded. If the UN, the US, and Saudi coalition were going to allow the Nejat to dock in Hodeida, they would have simply inspected the cargo in Djibouti and sent it on its way with perhaps UN monitors to ensure it did not pick up weapons on the way. The process is transparent. The powers that count, the US and Saudis, ensured that the ship not only did not sail directly to Hodeida but will never go there and will not deliver the aid. The aid could very well end up in Aden to be given to areas controlled by Hadi loyalists. As Etefa from the WFP put it:“The cargo of the ship will be handed over to WFP in Djibouti and will be transferred to WFP-chartered vessels for shipment to the Yemeni ports of Hudaydah and/or (the southern port city of) Aden, It will be delivered to humanitarian partners on the ground for distribution."Saudi Arabia has already stopped an Iranian cargo plane from delivering aid from landing in Sanaa by bombing the runway, preventing any aid planes from landing no matter where they were from. Clearly the aim is not just to prevent arms from being provided by Iran but humanitarian aid to rebel-held areas as well. Some aid will still get in because the UN will need to show some concern for the humanitarian needs of those in rebel areas.

Houthi rebels try to extend their control while UN tries to broker political deal in Yemen

Houthi rebels who have taken control of the government in Yemen have extended their control into areas where they now face resistance from well-armed Sunni tribesmen as well as the Al Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula (AQAP). Nadwa Dawsari, a researcher on Yemeni tribe, said of the Houthis who have expanded their influence from their base in North Yemen east to the Red Sea and south to capture the capital Sanaa and even south into territory where Sunnis dominate:" "Traditional Yemeni political actors used to find middle ground and didn't let their clashes lead to a full-blown civil war. The Houthis don't seem to be interested in compromising. They mix a lack of experience in politics with, as their own leader has said, limitless ambitions. The fact that Iran is involved aggravates things and brings in a regional dimension that makes a conflict harder to avoid.""

While there may not have been a full-blown civil war in Yemen for some time there was an extended conflict in which radical jihadist groups were dislodged from areas they controlled. This conflict continues as AQAP and other jihadist groups use guerrilla tactics against the government. In some areas AQAP appears to be joining up with local Sunni tribes against the Shia Houthis. This can only strengthen AQAP. Dawsari rightly notes that intermittent government attacks in the past on areas of Houthi control in the north destroyed whole villages. Ironically, the former president Saleh, who attacked the Houthis while in power, now appears to be allied with them. He still has considerable influence in the army. The Houthis were able to take control in Sanaa, the capital, without much resistance from Yemeni armed forces.

 The Houthis would like to extend their control to areas that have resources that could provide revenue to operate the government. The Houthi leader, Abdel-Malek al-Houthi, warned leaders in areas not under Houthi control: "If people try to play games which affect the economy, the people will resist them. The revolution, the people, the army and the security forces will stand against them." Saudi Arabia withdrew all aid from Yemen late last year. The High Revolutionary Council which at present is running the government is busy trying for create state institutions that confirm to the Constitutional Declaration as well as "drawing up the conditions and standards as well as mechanisms to select members of the National Council."The Council is the group that will form a transitional government before new elections.

As well as facing opposition from Sunni tribes in the south, the Houthi government faces a problem of finance to pay public salaries and grow the economy. They need control of areas such as Marib province that contains not only oil but generating plants for electricity. The Houthis may face fierce resistance by Sunnis who are well armed with Grad and Katyusha rockets and anti-aircraft missiles. Sheikh Hamad Wuhayt leader of a group of Sunni fighters in Marib said: "We'll blow up the oil and gas wells if the Houthis use planes after the air force fell into their control, and we'll cut off the road to the capital." Tribal leaders claim that Saudi Arabia continues to pay them cash allowances even though aid has been cut off to the Yemen government. They deny that Saudi Arabia provides them arms. Saudi Arabia may worry that as Sunni tribes forge alliances with AQAP that some arms provided to Sunni tribes could end up with AQAP. Already AQAP over ran a military base in the south capturing many weapons as the Yemen forces who manned the base put up little resistance as they did not want troops supporting the Houthi government to take it over.

The UN has opposed the Houthi coup:"The United Nations Security Council on Sunday unanimously adopted a resolution demanding that Shiite rebels immediately relinquish control of Yemen’s government in a crisis that has pushed the Arab world’s poorest country near collapse." The resolution is not under Chapter 7 of the UN charter allowing military enforcement of the resolution. The resolution condemns what it calls the group's illegitimate seizure of power. Actually the Houthis were hoping that the UN talks would produce a government that they could accept but they made little progress. The U.S.-allied president Hadi and his whole cabinet resigned after they were unable to produce a solution acceptable to the Houthis. The Houthis realize that they are a minority in Yemen and would like to control the makeup of the government rather than rule themselves. Only when the UN talks appeared not to be able to work out a political solution did they step in and take power. They probably realize that they will need allies in areas where they lack control. The group even sacked one of its top military commanders who failed to reach a settlement with other political factions.

The southern secessionist movement, Al-Hirak, has offered to work with the Shiite Houthi movement to ease the political crisis. The group may see the Houthi power grab as an opportunity bargain for more autonomy for the south. Both the Houthis and southern secessionists rejected the division of Yemen into six federal areas. Mohamed Helboub, a senior member of Al-Hirak, claims "“The Houthis are not ready or capable of carrying out the task they have taken up, particularly as they did not think they would reach this position so quickly. They have now crossed a line and they will find it very difficult to go back..[However], as the Houthis are part of Yemen’s political makeup, we are ready to work with them to find a way out of this quagmire."" Al-Hirak has been pushing for a possible complete separation and the formation of an independent state in the south such as existed previously before unification. Helboub went on: "We are looking for a comprehensive national solution, and if this solution is incumbent on Yemen to be split into two separate states, then that is what we will do." The Houthis may see granting considerable autonomy or even independence might be preferable to trying to rule in an area quite hostile to them.

 The increasing unrest in Yemen has led to the US evacuating their embassy personnel and also for the Philippines to order an evacuation of all Filipino nationals from Yemen. Recently, there are reports, as exemplified by the appended video, that UN-sponsored talks have brought the parties close to a political deal. It remains to be seen whether the Houthis will accept or respect any such deal.

Islamic State offensive creates flood of new refugees in Iraq

There have been many internally displaced Iraqis in Iraq during the Saddam Hussein era and ever since. The offensive of the Islamic State that overran most of several provinces has exacerbated the situation with many refugees now outside Iraq as well.

Ammar Younes is an example of one internally displaced Iraqi. Younes sits in a frigid refugee camp in the Kurdish region busy picking shrapnel from a wound in his legs. He was hurt when Islamic State radicals placed a bomb under his car in Mosul. He was a trainer for the Iraqi armed forces and had worked for three years with US forces in Iraq. He was still in the hospital when the Islamic State took over and had to flee still wearing his medical gown. Younes is just one of an estimated more than 2 million Iraqis who have been added to the already huge number of internally displaced and refugee Iraqis.

Estimation of earlier numbers can be found here. Almost 1.7 million Iraqis fled their homes during the period of 2006 to 2008 during the sectarian violence after the US led invasion and occupation of 2003. Most of them have still not been able to return home. Now the Islamic State offensive has created more displaced persons. Added to this, there are more than 3.2 million Syrian refugees some of whom sought refuge in Iraq as well.

The Iraqi government is facing a financial crisis with war costs and plunging oil prices. Added to all this is the upcoming winter season that in some areas sees temperatures fall below freezing adding to the misery of those in refugee camps. A map showing the relative numbers of refugees in different areas can be seen here. Almost half of this year's refugees have crowded into Iraqi Kurdistan which is already dealing with 200,000 Syrian refugees. Aid agencies claim that Kurdish authorities are now tightening entry to refugees. People trying to flee from Mosul, controlled by the Islamic State, claim that checkpoints run by the Iraqi army or Shiite militias turn them away.

CBS News puts the earlier number of Syrian refugees in Kurdistan at 250,000 but since the Islamic State began its offensive in June of this year there are now more than 1.5 million in the area. While many are in specially built camps, others are forced to live in unfinished buildings or makeshift shelters. As winter closes in, there is no hope of return to areas occupied now by the Islamic State. The UN and the Kurdistan government have issued an urgent call for a further $152.2 million to provide food, shelter, and medical assistance for displaced persons in the region.

The UN assistance program is chronically underfunded with only 31 percent of the planned spending received. The World Food Program is so short of money that it has even stopped procuring supplies for those displaced. The present distribution of food boxes for families will end by next February unless more funds are forthcoming. Barbara Manzi, the outgoing representative of the UN Office for the Coordination for Humanitarian Affairs, that runs the program said:“It’s not that we can do more with less; it’s that we don’t have anything and the needs on the ground are immense.”

Unidentified jets attack Tripoli airport in Libya twice in two days

If an unidentified jet bombed an international airport in Jerusalem or even Kiev it would be headline news. In Tripoli, the capital of Libya, however unidentified bombings have happened several times. No one even expresses surprise let alone outrage.

Back in August there were a series of bombings by unidentified planes on Islamist positions in Tripoli. The planes were of a type that were not among the few planes that remain in Libya's air force after the west bombed Gadaffi's air force. Destruction of Gadaffi's air force was designed to avoid having any interference with the extensive bombing, that was supposed to protect the people from Gadaffi's forces. The recent Tripoli bombings were claimed to be a joint venture of CIA-linked General Khalifa Haftar and the international community according to the general himself. The rebels blamed Egypt and the UAE with the latter providing the planes and Egypt the air bases for the attacks. The silence of the international community was deafening until finally on August 25 2014 a New York Times article made a sort of unofficial statement: Twice in the last seven days, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates have secretly launched airstrikes against Islamist-allied militias battling for control of Tripoli, Libya, four senior American officials said, in a major escalation of a regional power struggle set off by Arab Spring revolts. The UAE and Egypt denied the charges. The US officials also claimed that they were not informed about the raids and that they regarded them as unproductive. The Islamist militias were not deterred from driving the Zintan brigades, allies of Haftar, out of Tripoli. Now it seems that someone is attempting the same game.
No doubt it is Haftar who was given the "green light" by the Libyan government to liberate both Benghazi in the east and the capital Tripoli from the control of rival groups, who have also set up their own rival government in Tripoli with their own prime minister Omar al-Hassi. The internationally recognized government is meeting in the far eastern city of Tobruk. It was supposed to move to Benghazi the beginning of August but met in Tobruk since Benghazi by that time was in control of an umbrella group of Islamists. The government now supports Haftar's Operation Dignity, directed against Islamists even though as part of that operation an earlier parliament was burned and ransacked. Hafter was then described as leading a coup and a warrant was out for his arrest. The present prime minister Al Thinni was prime minister then but listen to his change of tune: Prime Minister Abdullah al-Thani’s cabinet said in statement posted on Facebook that the armed forces have the green light to “liberate” Tripoli “and state institutions from the grip of armed groups.” The cabinet also urged Tripoli residents to launch “a civil disobedience campaign until the arrival of the army.”
 Egyptian planes were also reported to have been involved in attacks by Haftar on Benghazi beginning in October. The government at the time also reported that it supported Operation Dignity. Again Eygpt denies any involvement. However Egyptian president al-Sisi who led a coup that ousted former Muslim Brotherhood-supported President Morsi and declared the Islamists group terrorists has asked for foreign intervention: Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi urged the United States and Europe on Thursday to help the Libyan army in its fight against Islamist militants now to save the country from requiring intervention on the scale of Iraq and Syria.
 The Libyan army is now hardly to be distinguished from Haftar's militia which he always called the new Libyan army. There are so far two separate attacks that targeted the Mitiga International airport, the only functioning airport in the capital. The airport is under control of the alternative government and protected by the Libya Dawn militia. The Libyan National Army declared airports at Tripoli and Misrata as "military zones". The first strike is reported by Al Jazeera. The second report of an attack today comes from Reuters: An armed group loyal to Libya's internationally-recognized government, which has transferred to the east of the country, claimed responsibility for the air strikes."We bombed the airport a second time," said Saqer al-Joroushi, head of the air force for the group, which is controlled by former general Khalifa Haftar.
The main international airport in Tripoli has been closed since July after battles between Haftar-allied Zintan brigades and Libya Dawn with the latter winning the battle. Somehow in recent reports on these conflicts there is no mention of the Libyan Suprerme Court ruling November 6, that declared the June elections unconstitutional and ordered the Tobruk government dissolved.
 The UN has been studying the decision and has asked that the parties not do anything to exacerbate the situation. The UN envoy is also meeting with parties on both sides to reach a political solution. The alternative government has suggested elections after a referendum on a new constitution. Western powers have been silent on the legitimacy issue since they are acting as if the Court had never made a ruling at all. Most international media narratives are following suit for some reason. The UN has asked that both sides refrain from any violence that would exacerbate the situation and make a political solution more difficult. The Tobruk government and Haftar have paid no attention to this demand in its attacks in Benghazi and now Tripoli.

Turkish envoy to Libya urges elections as a way out of Libyan crisis

Emrullah Isler, the Turkish Special Envoy for Libya claims the political crisis in Libya can be overcome by holding general elections.

At present there are two rival governments, one in Tobruk, that is internationally recognized, the House of Representatives, consisting of representatives elected in elections last June. Some of those elected have not attended and do not recognize the legitimacy of the Tobruk government. The UN through its envoy Bernardino Leon held talks with those elected but boycotting the parliament in order to reach some type of political settlement. However, the alternative government formed in Tripoli by a bloc of Islamist and other militias who control Tripoli and part of Benghazi were not involved in the dialogue nor were the rival Islamist-led militias and those led by CIA-linked General Khalifa Haftar. The General National Congress was recalled by the Islamist bloc and appointed a rival prime minister Omar al-Hassi, who then formed an alternative government. The situation was complicated when the Libyan Supreme Court ruled on November 6 , that the June elections were unconstitutional and that the Tobruk parliament should be dissolved. The Tobruk government rejected the ruling immediately. The UN claims to be studying the decision. The decision has led the UN to begin a dialogue with figures associated with the Tripoli government, although the language used by the UN still refers to Abdullah Al-Thinni of the Tobruk government as the Libyan "prime minister," even more than a week after the Supreme Court decision. The recommendation by the Turkish envoy had already been suggested by prime minister Omar al-Hassi of the Tripoli government and a spokesperson for that government suggested that there should be a referendum on a new constitution that is being drafted and then general elections. Both sides appear to accept the committee drafting the constitution, so this could be a basis for a partial solution. However, there also needs to be a transitional government of some sort up until the referendum and elections. Jason Pack, suggests that there should be a Unity Government composed of representatives from the competing groups.So far the Tobruk government has not shown any interest in the suggestion that there should be elections. They claim they are the legitimate government, internationally recognized and want it to stay that way even though they hold sway in only a few areas of Libya. The UN has achieved a break-through of sorts as the UN's envoy Leon was able to get the Islamist militias and General Haftar's forces to agree to a 12 hour humanitarian truce. The truce will allow the Red Crescent to evacuate citizens from the battle areas and also retrieve bodies of those killed. Haftar launched an offensive with the blessing and support of the Tobruk government to try to retake Benghazi. He has retaken some areas but not others, with many casualties. The truce is significant in that the UN was able to convince the Tobruk government, Haftar and the Islamist militias to cease fighting. As spokesperson for the UN mission Samir Gattas said that "this and other confidence-building measures would certainly help in creating an atmosphere conducive for dialogue." Perhaps the UN should be pushing the Tobruk government and Haftar towards accepting elections after a referendum on the new constitution. The UN should make it clear that they will not simply accept the legitimacy of the Tobruk government but demand a political settlement that avoids the issue of which government is legitimate entirely. In spite of the conflicts between different militias in different parts of the country most of the country manages to function. Even if the warring factions are unable to agree on a unity government as recommended by Pack, they may be able to work out some practical sharing of powers that will allow a period of relative peace until a referendum on a new constitution and then elections, or alternatively there could be elections agreed upon even before a referendum on a new constitution. The truce in Benghazi provides at least a flicker of hope since the legitimate government sanctioned Haftar's offensive. By agreeing to a truce, the Tobruk government is recognizing the Islamist Shura Council militia as at least a force that can be part of negotiations and also it for once has paid heed to the UN demand that fighting must stop as a condition for dialogue to work. Don't expect the mainstream media to say much about all this. What is important for them is that jihadists in the city of Derna have pledged loyalty to the Islamic State. This is true enough but of little significance. Radical jihadists typically ally themselves with the most prominent radical jihadist group, which is no longer Al Qaeda but the Islamic State. Derna has been under control of radical jihadists for ages. Yet CNN makes a big deal of the situation which really has not changed at all. See the appended video. There are articles on the issue in Time, , Washington Times, and UPI, just for starters. What is important is the radical Islamist threat narrative. This will hardly be conducive to working out any political settlement between the Islamist bloc and Haftar's militias. If what counts is the war on terror, this emphasis could result in a bigger mess in Libya through foreign intervention directed first at the Islamic State but no doubt would soon be widened to attack any Islamists who do not recognize the Tobruk government

Mali asks UN for rapid response force to deal with jihadist attacks in the north

Mali has requested that the UN send more troops, specifically a rapid intervention force, to fight Islamist militants after recent attacks on UN peacekeepers in the north of the country.

The Malian Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop told the UN Security Council that the rapid intervention force was needed following the killing of a Senegalese soldier only days after nine peacekeepers had been killed. Diop warned that northern Mali again ran "the risk of becoming the destination of hordes of terrorists." Both French and African troops occupied northern Mali in January 2013 after radical jihadists who captured most of the north threatened to move south towards the capital Bamako.While the rebels were driven out of the main towns in the north, they continue attacks against the UN force that is designed to stabilize the situation.
The 9,000-member UN force, MINUSMA, took over peacekeeping back in July of last year. Since the mission was established 31 peacekeepers have been killed and 91 wounded according to the chief of the mission Herve Ladsous. The attacks were by rockets, mortar shells, suicide attacks, and ambushes. He said that the mission was to receive combat helicopters and drones in the coming months.
 The Tuareg who were originally driven out of the north by jihadists were able to gain control of the town of Kidal and after presidential polls were held have been holding peace talks in Algeria that are attempting to settle how the north should be governed.
In some areas such as the exotic town of Timbuktu, at least journalists and UN workers are returning and help out the local economy. In February of 2013 the Hotel La Colombe (Dove Hotel) re-opened. During occupation by the jihadists the hotel had been closed. Hotel manager Mohamed Toure could not believe that a group of Westerners wanted to stay in the hotel where nothing was working. While it took a while to improve conditions the journalists were able to enjoy a treat, foreign beer, that had been buried when the Islamists banned alcohol and was now dug up. Toure said that since the journalists had arrived he was able to provide his family three meals a day instead of one.
An officer from Niger with the MINUSMA mission claimed that the al-Qaeda-linked militia Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa(MUJAO) mounted the attack. The attackers were on motorbikes and ambushed the peacekeepers from Niger. A statement from MINUSMA said it was the worst attack yet against the Mali mission.

US National Security Agency spied on both the UN and the European Union in US and Brussels

The well-known German newspaper Der Spiegel claims that the US National Security Agency spied on European Union computer networks in Washington and also at the the UN.The source of the claims are a September 2010 "top secret" document that whistleblower Edward Snowden had taken with him. Journalists from Der Spiegel had read the document in part. The document shows how the NSA  bugged offices and spied on internal EU computer networks in both Washington and the United Nations. The NSA not only listened to conversations and phone calls but were able also to peruse documents and emails. The document specifically referred to the EU as a target. These reports, if confirmed, could be highly damaging to relations between the US and the EU.
Not surprisingly,[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/10150905/NSA-suveillance-US-bugged-EU-offices.html t=_blank] EU officials [/url]have already demanded that the US explain the alleged bugging.  The NSA also targeted telecommunications at a building in Brussels that houses the European Council, the group of European Union governments.
 US officials have yet to comment but the European Parliament chief Martin Schulz said that more information was needed , but if the charges of spying were confirmed, it would be a huge scandal. [url=http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/06/20136300321519491.html t=_blank]Schultz [/url]said in statement: [quote]"On behalf of the European Parliament, I demand full clarification and require further information speedily from the US authorities with regard to these allegations".[/quote]  The Foreign Minister of Luxembourg said that it the reports are true it is disgusting.[quote]"The United States would be better off monitoring its secret services rather than its allies. We must get a guarantee from the very highest level now that this stops immediately."[/quote]

  Snowden is apparently still in a Moscow airport transit area. President Corea of Ecuador revoked his transit papers to Ecuador where he seeks asylum. However Snowden first has to reach Ecuador which will be difficult without the transit papers.[url=http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2013/06/20136291811995947.html t=_blank] Joe Biden[/url] spoke to president Corea and has asked Ecuador to refuse the request for asylum.

UN to investigate legality of drone strikes and civilian casualties

The UN will launch a formal investigation into the legality of drone strikes and also of the casualties that result from them.

The announcement came as there is a report that the latest US drone strike in Yemen is claimed to have mistakenly killed two children. Ben Emmerson, the UN's special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism said at a press conference in London that he will lead a group of international specialists who will examine drone attacks in Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan by the CIA and Pentagon. However, the group will also examine drone use by UK and US forces in Afghanistan, as well as Israel's use of drones against Palestinians.

The senior UK lawyer will work with international criminal lawyers, a senior Pakistani judge, and a leading UK forensic pathologist as well as other experts. A serving judge-advocate with the US military will be "assisting the inquiry in his personal capacity." More about the members of the team can be found at the end of this article.

Emmerson told reporters at the new conference:

’Those states using this technology and those on whose territory it is used are under an international law obligation to establish effective independent and impartial investigations into any drone attack in which it is plausibly alleged that civilian casualties were sustained.’

Neither the US nor others have carried out such investigations so the UN is doing so as a last resort. The UK Minister of Defence is already said to be co-operating with the investigation. The US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice has indicated that Washington "has not ruled out full co-operation". We shall see. The US has refused so far even to admit officially that any such program exists.

Back in May 2010, Philip Alston had already presented to the UN a detailed report on the legal questions of targeted killing. Most of the recommendations he suggests have not been carried out by the Obama administration nor anyone else.

The UN Human Rights Council is taking action after a number of nations including, Russia, China, and Pakistan requested action be taken on covert drone strikes. Emmerson said:

‘It’s a response to the fact that there’s international concern rising exponentially, surrounding the issue of remote targeted killings through the use of unmanned vehicles.’

The group is expected to make recommendations to the UN general assembly this fall. The team will also recommend further UN action should it be justified by the findings of the inquiry. Of course nothing will get through the UN security council unless the US approves it, so there will not be any teeth in what the UN says or does. If there are any UN resolutions condemning the attacks, they will come from the General Council. Many countries ignores those resolutions since they are interpreted as advisory and consdiered non-binding, whenever they demand something a country does not want to do.

A particular area the inquiry may examine is the alleged practice of the CIA of deliberately targeting rescuers and even funeral goers in Pakistan strikes, a practice revealed in an investigation by the Bureau for the SundayTimes. In October 2012, Emmerson said:

‘The Bureau has alleged that since President Obama took office at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims and more than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners. Christof Heyns [UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial killing] … has described such attacks, if they prove to have happened, as war crimes. I would endorse that view.’

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised the inquiry and requested that the US cooperate with and aid the invetigators. A spokesperson noted:

‘Whether it does or not will show whether it holds itself to the same obligation to co-operate with UN human rights investigations that it urges on other countries”

The Obama administration has rejected requests from the ACLU for information on its targeted killing programs or the basis for the legality of its drone attacks. The ACLU made a Freedom of Information Act request two years ago on January 13, 2010. Two years later having gone to court as well, the group still has not been able to get the information.

The Obama administration will have to decide whether to cooperate with the UN investigation. Perhaps it will in order to try and influence the investigation but on the other hand it may decide just to take a hard line as it has so far all along about releasing any information except what could be used for propaganda purposes.

Kofi Annan of the UN and Russia's Vladimir Putin make no progress on Syria

     Although the Russian President claimed that he would do everything he could to support Anna's six point peace plan meant to end the violence in Syria neither side seems to be willing to make the plan work or  follow its directives. Violence has been constantly increasing. There is now an obvious civil war in Syria.
    This is Annan's first meeting with the Russian president since Putin won a third term. Annan hopes to avoid a Russian veto of a new resolution that threatens Syria with new sanctions. Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov insisted he could "see no reason why we cannot also agree at the UN Security Council. We are ready for this". However, so far there is no sign Moscow is willing to take a harder line against the Syrian president or his regime.
   Putin maintained: "From the very start, from the first steps, we supported and continue to support your efforts aimed at restoring civil peace,"  However, Annan's efforts have so far come to naught as the fighting continues to increase rather than decrease. There is a Friday deadline for the monitors mission to end or receive an extension.
     A western backed resolution is being presented on Wednesday that threatens Syrian authorities with sanctions if they use heavy weapons in towns. Russia promises to block this move. The west insists that Assad step down as a condition of any resolution of the conflict. However Assad shows no sign of willingness to do so even though some officials who were part of his inner circle have now defected. For more see this article.

UN human right head questions legality of U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan

At the end of a fact finding visit to Pakistan Navi Pillay raised serious questions about their legality under international law. U.S. officials constantly praise the program and parade names of Al Qaeda leaders killed in the raids.

When human rights agencies try to seek information on the strikes the fact that they even exist becomes classified information but when there is propaganda value to be gained by releasing information there are names of leaders killed and the numbers of suspected militants eliminated.

The general mantra justifying the attacks is present by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta as defending the U.S. However the notion of self defense in this case is surely a stretch as there may be no immediate threat.

Pakistan summoned the U.S. ambassador to Pakistan to complain of the attacks. Pakistan complains the attacks violate its sovereignty. The parliament has demanded the attacks cease. However at the same time it would seem that Pakistani intelligence may help out with targeting. Recently the U.S. has stepped up attacks even in the face of the Pakistani demand that the drone attacks cease as a condition of reopening NATO supply routes. By deliberately snubbing their noses at the Pakistani demands the U.S. makes it politically difficult for the Pakistani government to compromise.

Pillay was concerned about several aspects of the attacks. Pillay noted:"Drone attacks do raise serious questions about compliance with international law, in particular the principle of distinction and proportionality," She continues:"Ensuring accountability for any failure to comply with international law is also difficult when drone attacks are conducted outside the military chain of command" Pillay argues that the attacks carried out by the CIA are"beyond effective and transparent mechanisms of civilian or military control". Of course somehow or other the New York times is able to get a lot of background information which shows that a committee assess who is to be on the kill list and the President of the U.S. makes the final decision. These are all the marvelous accountability provisions. Of course one knows only what is revealed by the New York Times from material fed to them by the U.S. administration. Pillay will no doubt rile the U.S.since she suggested that Pakistan should ask the UN Special Rapporteur on Summary or Arbitrary Executions to investigate some of the incidents. Many critics claim that significant numbers of innocent people are killed in the strikes. For more see this article.

UN chief sees Yemen as model to achieve peace in other areas of Middle East

Yemen's new government is praised by the UN chief Ban Ki-Moon and seen as a model to achieve peace in other areas of the middle east. The new president was the only candidate in the recent presidential election. Now the UN says that the nation's transition to democracy is largely on track.

The new president Major General Mansour Hadi was originally vice-president under former president Saleh. After protracted protests during which many protesters were killed some opposition politicians and Saleh loyalists came to a deal brokered by the Gulf Cooperation Council which gave Saleh and his relatives immunity for any prosecution for crimes committed during the protests. Pro Democracy activists opposed the deal strenuously but they do not count.

Power was transferred to then vice-president Hadi. Later he would become president in an uncontested race and supported by the U.S. and neighboring states. There has been a transition to the old guard. Meanwhile democratic reforms take a back seat to the war on terror and battle against militants.

The special UN envoy to Yemen Jamaal Omar also praised the government but worried about "serious security concerns". He urged all factions to support Hadi in the name of stability. As well as pro-democracy groups who want Saleh and his cronies to face justice, there are two separatist movements one in the north and one in the south, and a growing Islamic insurgency that had seized large swaths of territory. A fine model for peace and democracy in the Middle East. For more see this article.

UN report: 60 civilians killed in Libya NATO air strikes

A report released by the UN Human Rights Council concludes that NATO air strikes killed 60 civilians and wounded 55. NATO had insisted it had not killed or wounded a single civilian and that every attack was against a legitimate military target. The full article can be found here. I had not realized that NATO made these claims but then the same accuracy claims are made about drone attacks in Pakistan.

The report did say that the air campaign was mostly precise but also said that the alliance refused to provide information on attacks that killed civilians. Some attacks did not seem to have any evident military target.

One wonders how accurate even this report is. Presumably many Libyans would not be anxious to provide any information that discredited the forces that helped them win over Gadaffi. The report also noted that there were serious human rights violations by members of anti-Gadaffi factions. These groups participated in the same sorts of crimes as Gadaffi loyalists.

Bahrain delays visit by UN torture investigator

The Bahrain government is also imposing restrictions on groups that are attempting to monitor reforms in the country. The UN Human Rights office reports that Bahrain had requested the investigator's visit be delayed until July. A report commissioned by the Bahraini government has claimed that some protesters had been tortured after being arrested.

The UN investigator Juan Mendez had been scheduled to visit from March 8 to 17th so the investigation has been put of for several months. Mendez will request new dates.

Bahrain claims to be undergoing major reforms. The government says it wants those reforms to be in place before Mendez visits. It is not clear what the relationship between torture and these reforms would be.

Bahrain is a U.S. ally and base for the U.S. fifth fleet. It is ruled as a monarchy by the al Khalifa family. The rulers are Sunni while the majority of the population are Shia. The Shia complain of discrimination. In turn the government accuses Iran of promoting protests.

The government has requested human rights organisations to delay trips to Bahrain until after Feb. 22. But new restrictions are being placed on visitors.

The government has begun a series of reforms. These include compensation for torture victims. One wonders if there is any punishment for those who did the torturing! There is also a process of national reconciliation.

The government said it needs more time to carry out the measures suggested by the government report on the protests. Protests continue in Bahrain often in villages around the capital Manama. For more see this article.

Russia claims western countries arming Syrian rebels

    The Russian foreign minister Sergey Ryabkov claims that western states are sending arms secretly to Syrian rebel groups. As everyone knows Russia is arming the Assad regime as well as defending it at the UN.
    Ryabkov did not name the countries involved but the Turkish government has openly supported the Free Syrian Army consisting mostly of defectors from Assad's forces. The leader of the group Col Riad al-Assad. Turkey is granting media access to the leadership.
    Russia complained that arming the rebels was contributing to the crisis. The crackdown by Assad is doing the same thing. The situation is spiraling out of control into civil war. Russia also condemned NATO and the Arab league for trying to use the UN to promote regime change in Syria. In the U.S. Steve Chabot who is head of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East has called for arming the rebels. For more see this article.

UN demands Israel cease demolitions of Palestinian homes

 In 2011 Israel demolished 622 Palestinian homes in the West Bank. This is a dramatic rise and the demolitions displaced about 1,100 people many of them children.
  A UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs report claims: "The current policy and practice of demolitions cause extensive human suffering and should end," Many more people remain under threat of demolition of their houses in the future.
   For its part,  Israel says it only demolishes structures that have been built without required permission. The problem is that Palestinians have difficulty getting building permits and rarely are able to get them.
    On the 23rd of January bulldozers and troops arrived in the middle of the night in the village of Anata that is close to Jerusalem. 52 people were evicted from their homes which were then destroyed. Included in the destruction was a peace center that was destroyed for the fifth time since 1994. Again Israelis simply say that  that destroyed homes lacked a building permit. For more see this article..
.

UN Human Right's Chief criticizes Obama

   Navi Pillay is the chief of Human Rights for the UN. She criticized Obama for not following through on his promise to close Guantanamo three years ago.
    In a statement Pillay said:  “It is ten years since the US Government opened the prison at Guantanamo, and now three years since 22 January 2009, when the President ordered its closure within twelve months,”“Yet the facility continues to exist and individuals remain arbitrarily detained – indefinitely – in clear breach of international law.”  The U.S. considers that the detainees are unprivileged combatants in hostilities between the U.S. and Islamic terrorists and it is legal to hold them indefinitely. However many legal analysts would side with the UN position that holding people indefinitely with no charges is against international law.
   Certainly the practice entails that anyone suspected of terrorism has no right of habeas corpus and can be detained indefinitely without charge. A considerable number of detainees have been released. However in many cases the U.S. cannot find countries willing to receive those who are released. Only six trials have been held so far. Obama has said that some of those detained will probably spend the rest of their lives in custody without trial.
    Eight people detained died in custody. Six of those committed suicide. Advisers to Obama claim he is still committed to closing Guantanamo. I doubt it will be a prominent issue in the upcoming election campaign as the Republicans for the most part are quite happy that the facility remains open. For more see this article.