OP-ED: Washington’s Anemic Resolve on Egypt’s Human Rights

Egypt's military rulers have set security solutions over political ones. Credit: Cam McGrath/IPS

By Emile Nakhleh

WASHINGTON, Feb 27 2014 (IPS) - The unexpected resignation of Hazem al-Biblawi, Egypt’s interim prime minister, and his government this week and the appointment of Ibrahim Mehlib, a Mubarak-era industrialist, as a new prime minister seem to pave the way for Field Marshal Abdul Fattah al-Sisi’s anticipated presidential bid.

These intriguing government shuffles, however, fail to hide the reality of the military junta’s repression and massive human rights violations.

Washington has a huge reservoir of “soft power” in the region, which it could and should use to bring about democratic transitions.

The politically motivated indictments, trials, and convictions of regime critics, including journalists, academics, entertainers, comedians, and ideologically diverse political activists have cut across large segments of Egyptian society. The regime’s initial claim that repressive measures were necessary to uproot the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters and decapitate its leadership is no longer believable.

The military junta is determined to live its “fascist moment,” in the words of Professor Augustus Richard Norton of Boston University, and to maintain its grip on power come what may. Sisi doesn’t seem worried about a potential loss of U.S. military or economic aid because he expects Saudi Arabia and Russia to fill the gap.

Perhaps the real reason that underpins his lack of concern about losing U.S. aid is the belief that the Obama administration would not certify to Congress that the junta has not made any progress toward democracy. Washington would not want to lose Egypt, which means military aid will continue; hence, no certification.

While Sisi presents his leadership style to many Egyptians as a combination of the late President Gamal Abdel Nasser and Russia’s current ruler Vladimir Putin, many in the region and in Washington are asking one key question: Does the Obama administration have the will and credibility to halt Egypt’s deepening dictatorship and promote human rights and freedom of expression?

Related IPS Articles

• Press Freedom Goes on Trial in Egypt
• OP-ED: Egypt’s Revolution Teeters as Sisi Seeks the Presidency
• OP-ED: The Arab World Has Changed, So Should Washington

This is a fair question since President Barack Obama has invoked U.S. democratic values in supporting the revolution that toppled Mubarak, in urging the Bahraini regime to engage the opposition in meaningful dialogue, and in calling for an end to the Assad regime in Syria. Additionally, most observers believe the international community cannot act decisively on behalf of human rights in any of these countries without U.S. leadership.

I have argued in the past two years in this space and elsewhere that Washington has a huge reservoir of “soft power” in the region, which it could and should use to bring about democratic transitions. Democratiation would reflect U.S. values and serve U.S. interests. Other regional experts advocated a similar approach.

The Obama administration has lost much of its credibility in the region, particularly in Egypt. It worked closely with the Mubarak regime and then abandoned him in favour of the revolution in January 2011.

Washington supported Mohamed Morsi’s presidency because he was the first ever freely elected president of Egypt. Yet the Obama administration failed to condemn his removal in a military coup led by Sisi. In fact, the administration went through all kinds of rhetorical hoops and gymnastics in order to avoid calling the military coup by its real name — a coup.

Washington has also remained silent in the face of ongoing state persecution of journalists and nationally known academics. Some academics have spent time in Washington, D.C. and other U.S. cities in the past three years consulting with U.S. officials about the prospects of democracy in Egypt.

Sadly, they are no longer walking in Washington’s halls of power but languishing in Egyptian jails.

Several factors could explain Washington’s apparent paralysis when it comes to Egypt. First, according to media reports, much uncertainly seems to characterise the administration’s policy debates on the Middle East but particularly on Egypt. The constant attempt to resolve the Values versus Interests dichotomy has left the national security community within the administration rudderless, creating an impression of impotence, confusion, and a lack of direction.

Second, the administration’s vacillation on Syria — whether to pursue a diplomatic or a military solution to the conflict — has rendered the United States a “paper tiger” in the eyes of Arab publics. Most of the world had expected Obama to strike Syria, but instead he took the case to the U.S. Congress with the promise that Syria would destroy its chemical weapons.

Syria’s delivery of the weapons for destruction has stalled, and the Geneva talks have failed. The Assad regime was playing for time, and Washington is left holding an empty bag.

The statements and rationalisations that Secretary of State John Kerry made in his TV interview with MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Feb. 26 were a pallid display of the administration’s pendulous position on Syria and by extension on Egypt. When Mitchell pushed Kerry about the human tragedy in Syria and the regime’s use of its air force to drop “barrel” bombs on the population, he demurred and said that all options are on the table.

The pro-democracy convictions Kerry expressed in the interview in support of the anti-regime uprising in Ukraine were totally absent when he spoke on Syria and other “Arab Spring” countries.

Third, Obama’s upcoming visit to Saudi Arabia must have been preceded by intense efforts at appeasing the Saudis and allaying their doubts about U.S. resolve on Syria. A palatable visit from the Saudi perspective would be for the U.S. president to support the Sisi coup and keep U.S. military aid flowing to the Egyptian military.

The Saudis also would urge Obama to ease up on the Al Khalifa regime in Bahrain and be wary of Iran’s perceived charm offensive.

The pessimistic assessment of the administration’s policy oscillation could be reversed if Washington compels Syria to ground its air force and if it publicly and unequivocally demands that Sisi chart a clear pathway to democracy.

Supporting democracy in Ukraine reflects U.S. values and serves Washington’s national strategic interests. This should be the default position toward Egypt as well.

الأسباب غير الاقتصادية في الثورة السورية.. عن الخبز والحرية

انصب التركيز أثناء الفترة الماضية من عمر الثورة على الحرية، ولا شك في أن الحرية ضرورة في ظل سلطة استبدادية شمولية حظرت السياسة عقودا واستحكمت الأجهزة الأمنية بكل شيء، وعملت على "تنميط" الشعب وفق منطقها من خلال الخطاب الموحد والزي الموحد والمؤسسات "الموحدة"، أي التي تخضع للأجهزة الأمنية، من النقابات إلى الاتحادات إلى المؤسسات، وأيضا منظمات الطلائع والشبيبة، وحتى "الجبهة الوطنية التقدمية". إذن، كل هذا العبء على الشعب سوف يشعره بالكابوس الذي يجثم عليه، ويؤسس لحالة خوف وهلع من الميل إلى السياسة. وكان الهدف من الاعتقال الطويل لكل من ينشط في حزب ليس تدمير الحزب فقط بل "تربية المجتمع"، حيث إن الخروج على السلطة يعني السجن الطويل أو حتى القتل. وهذا ما كان يبعد الشعب عن السياسة، ويحصر السياسة في مجموعة قليلة من الناشطين، والذي أدى مع العنف المستمر الممارس ضد كل من يحمل رأيا أو ينضوي في حزب، إلى أن تحدث قطيعة بين الشباب والأحزاب التي بدا أنها تضم مجموعة من "كبار السن". عبء السلطة الأمنية على الشعب كان يظهر من خلال الممارسات اليومية، حيث كانت الحاجة للموافقة الأمنية ترافق المواطن من الولادة إلى الممات، مرورا بالمدرسة والجامعة والعمل، وكل أشكال الحياة اليومية. "وعي الحرية هو الذي يدفع إلى الثورة من أجلها كما في بلدان أوروبا الشرقية، وهذا لم يتأسس في "الوعي الشعبي" بعد لأنه يكرس القمع وينفي الحرية " هذا هو العبء الحقيقي الذي كان يشعر به الشعب، والذي كان يؤسس الاحتقان ضد السلطة كسلطة، أي أن العبء أتى من طريق الحياة العادية وليس من طريق السياسة، من المعيش وليس من الوعي والفهم، من الممارسة الضدية وليس من وعي معنى السلطة، وفهم تكوينها. والسلطة وهي تفعل ذلك دمرت السياسة في المجتمع أولا، لا يتعلق الأمر بالأحزاب التي دُمرّت فعلا، بل يتعلق بالثقافة السياسية كذلك، ودمرت الثقافة عموما ثانيا، حيث انهار التعليم وتسطحت كل المسائل التي تتعلق بالمعرفة العامة تحت شعار "تبعيث التعليم"، وبات خطاب الرئيس هو أساس دراسة الفلسفة والاجتماع والتاريخ والجغرافيا واللغة، وحتى الدين، وهو في كل الأحوال "خطاب سياسي" (بمعنى حدثي لا يتضمن أي عمق معرفي)، وبالتالي هيمن "الوعي التقليدي" البسيط على قطاع كبير من الشباب (وكان يتخذ في الفترة الأخيرة طابعا دينيا). ولكن قادت أزمة فقدان المقدرة على التوظيف (حتى في الدولة كما كان يجري سابقا) وتضخم عدد طالبي العمل من خريجي الجامعات إلى ترك الأجيال الجديدة التعليم في مراحل مبكرة، وهو الأمر الذي زاد من نسبة الأمية كثيرا، وبالتالي أبقى "الوعي التقليدي" مسيطرا على قطاعات مهمة من هؤلاء. لا بد من ملاحظة أن "الوعي التقليدي" هو وعي غير سياسي، وضد السياسة، نتيجة الموروث الطويل لـ"رهاب السلطة" الذي انبنى على الخوف من السلطة ذاتها، وهو ما أسس لوجود "مجتمع طبيعي" هم البشر الذين يعيشون حياتهم "الخاصة" التي تسمى "حياة اجتماعية"، ويؤسسون "وعيهم" وعلاقاتهم على أساسها. وهنا ينشأ "الوعي الشعبي" والعلاقات "الشعبية" في إطار البيئات الاجتماعية، العائلة والمنطقة والقرية أو المدينة، وهو التكوين غير السياسي رغم أنه يتلقى ضغوط السلطة وتحرشاتها، وهو تكوين يفرض الهرب من السياسة كثقافة وكمتابعة بشكل عام، وبالتالي يصبح المجتمع في وضع من "يتقي شر السلطة" رغم أن ضغوطها تؤسس احتقانات متعددة. هنا كان الاحتقان من تغوُّل السلطة يوقفه الخوف منها من جهة، ومن جهة أخرى كان يقود إلى غياب السياسة (بالمعنى الحزبي والمعرفي) في المجتمع (حتى حزب البعث كان قد هجر السياسة من زمن طويل، وأصبح حزب مصالح). بالتالي قاد عبء السلطة الذي يراكم الاحتقان إلى التفكير بالتخلص منها، لكن دون وعي سياسي، ولهذا لا يقود إلى تفجّر الشعب في ثورة، بل يجري التكيف مع تغول السلطة ما دام "الوضع الطبيعي" محتملا، أي ما دامت مقدرة الشعب على تحمّل العيش قائمة، وهو الأمر الذي حكم الشعب لعقود، حيث كان الهروب من مواجهة السلطة هو الموقف الأساس، رغم الاستبداد الذي طال الأحزاب السياسية والضغط الأمني وتدخلات الشرطة في حياة الشعب. طبعا في ظل هذا الوضع لم يكن معنى "الحرية" كمفهوم حاضرا، وذلك نتيجة غياب السياسة، والفكر السياسي الذي ما زال أبعد عن "الوعي الشعبي" نتيجة ما أشرنا إليه للتو، وهو الأمر الذي يجعل المسألة تتعلق بالحاجة إلى التخلص من العبء للتخلص من ضغط وتحرشات وخوف. الحرية هنا هي التخلص من عبء إذن، وهذا غير كافٍ للقيام بثورة من أجل ذلك، وعي الحرية هو الذي يدفع إلى الثورة من أجلها كما شهدنا في بلدان أوروبا الشرقية وروسيا، وهذا لم يتأسس في "الوعي الشعبي" بعد، نتيجة أن الوعي التقليدي يكرس القمع وينفي الحرية، وأيضا نتيجة أن التعليم يكرس القمع كذلك على الضد من الحرية. ولدى شخص يسكنه الخوف من السلطة تكون الحرية حالة خوف لأنها سياسة وضد السلطة، ولهذا يبقى متقوقعا في "مجتمعه الطبيعي" يتحاشى قدر المستطاع الصدام مع السلطة، وهو في ذلك يهرب من الحرية التي ستضعه في صدام معها، ويهرب من الثقافة السياسية التي سوف "تورطه" في الصدام مع السلطة، وبهذا لا يريد فهم معنى الحرية، رغم أن ضغوط السلطة توجد احتقانات ضدها -كما أشرنا- لا تصل إلى حد الثورة، رغم أنها تؤدي إلى احتكاكات موضعية في بعض الحالات. "مسألة الحرية ليست "خارج الموضوع"، بل هي جوهر الثورة، حيث إن الثورة هي تمرد من أجل الحرية، ولهذا فإن البديل الحقيقي هو البديل الذي يتضمن تحقيق الحرية بالضرورة " هذا الأمر يعني أن للثورة أساسا آخر كما أشرنا قبلا، أي حين يتعرض "المجتمع الطبيعي" لخطر الاندثار نتيجة العجز عن العيش بفعل غياب العمل أو الأجر الذي لا يعيل. هنا يكون أمر آخر، بالضبط لأنه يتعلق بالحياة ذاتها، وليس فقط بتحمّل ضغوط السلطة، وفي هذه الحالة يطلق الشعب كل مكنوناته ضد السلطة، ويفتح على كل تعدياتها. حينها، يجري "نكش" كل ممارسات السلطة، وتصبح هي المستهدفة، فـ"الشعب يريد إسقاط النظام" الذي بات يعني هنا ليس تغيير النظام السياسي وتأسيس نظام قائم على الحرية فقط، بل وتغيير كلية النمط الاقتصادي الذي فرض الاختلال الذي بات يطيح بحياة الشعب، والذي يجعل الدولة الديمقراطية حلا غير كافٍ على الإطلاق بل يجب أن ترتبط بحل مجمل المشكلات الاقتصادية (البطالة والأجر والتعليم والصحة والبنية التحتية) التي بات تفكيكها يفترض بالضرورة تغيير النمط الاقتصادي، من هنا تأتي جذرية الثورات الراهنة. لكن هذا لا يعني أن مسألة الحرية هي "خارج الموضوع"، بل هي في جوهر الثورة، حيث إن الثورة هي تمرد من أجل الحرية، ولهذا فإن البديل -الذي يجب أن يكون حقيقيا- هو البديل الذي يتضمن تحقيق الحرية بالضرورة، فالحرية ضرورة، والتحرر من البنى التقليدية ضرورة، والتحرر من الاستبداد العائلي والديني والمجتمعي والسلطوي هو ضرورة أيضا، وتحرير فعل البشر وتحقيق فاعليتهم يفترضان الحرية كضرورة. غير أنه لكي نعي ما جرى من أجل أن نحدد ما يجب أن نفعل يجب أن نفهم الأساس الذي حرك الشعب لكي ينهض في لحظة بكل هذه القوة الخارقة، وبالتالي أن نعرف أن هدف الثورة ليس الحرية فقط، بل أولا وأساسا تغيير النمط الاقتصادي السائد لمصلحة اقتصاد منتج يسمح بحل مشكلات البطالة والفقر، وهذا ما كان يراد له أن يتهمش ويخفى من قبل المعارضة، وذلك بالضبط لأنها لا تختلف مع السلطة على "اللبرلة"، وإن اختلفت على من يهيمن من الرأسماليين. وهذا الأمر هو الذي فتح المجال لأن يتحقق الانحراف من مطلب الحرية إلى الأسلمة، وإلى تمسك قطاعات من الأقليات الدينية بالسلطة، لهذا لا بد -والثورة تكمل عامها الثالث- من إعادة صياغة الرؤية لكي تطرح مطالب الشعب وتتجاوز أوهام النخب. وهذا الأمر يفرض أن يكون تغيير النمط الاقتصادي مرتبطا بالضرورة بتأسيس دولة الحرية.

Sisi: The Butt of Jokes Around the World. Egypt's military leaders unveil devices they claim can detect and cure Aids

Devices, made public by the chief army engineer, are dismissed by experts around the world and called 'shocking to scientists'

• Associated Press in Cairo
• theguardian.com, Thursday 27 February 2014 20.36 EST

General Abdel Fatah el-Sisi, who is expected to run for president of Egypt, attended the launch of the new device. Photograph: ITAR-TASS / Barcroft Media

Egypt's military leaders have come under ridicule after the chief army engineer unveiled what he described as a "miraculous" set of devices that detect and cure Aids, hepatitis and other viruses.

The claim, dismissed by experts and called "shocking to scientists" by the president's science adviser, strikes a blow to the army's carefully managed image as the saviour of the nation. It also comes as General Abdel Fatah el-Sisi, who toppled Mohammed Morsi in July after the Islamist leader ignored mass protests calling for him to step down, is expected to announce he will run for president.

The televised presentation – which was made to Sisi, the interim president Adly Mansour and other senior officials – raised concerns that the military's offer of seemingly inconceivable future devices will draw Egypt back into the broken promises of authoritarian rule, when Hosni Mubarak frequently announced grand initiatives that failed to meet expectations.

"The men of the armed forces have achieved a scientific leap by inventing the detecting devices," the military spokesman Colonel Ahmed Mohammed Ali wrote later on his official Facebook page. Ali said a patent has been filed under the name of the Armed Forces Engineering Agency.

Well-known writer Hamdi Rizk noted that video clips of the presentation had gone viral on social media, with tweets and blogs saying the military had made a fool of itself and put its reputation in jeopardy. "The marshal's camp has been dealt a deep moral defeat," he wrote in a column in Thursday's Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper. "God give mercy to ... the reputation of the Egyptian army, which became the target of cyber shelling around the clock."

Professor Massimo Pinzani, a liver specialist and director of the Institute for Liver and Digestive Health at University College London, said he attended a demonstration of the devices during a visit to Egypt but "was not given convincing explanations about the technology" and was not allowed to try it for himself.

"As it is at present, the device is proposed without any convincing technical and scientific basis and until this is clearly provided it should be regarded as a potential fraud," he wrote in an email to The Associated Press. None of the research has been published in a reputable journal.

The uproar escalated when a scientific adviser to Egypt's interim President Adly Mansour denounced the claim and said it has no scientific base. "What has been said and published by the armed forces harms the image of the scientists and science in Egypt," Essam Heggy, a planetary scientist at the California Institute of Technology, told the daily newspaper El-Watan in remarks published on Wednesday. "All scientists inside and outside Egypt are in a state of shock."

He added that both Mansour and Sisi were surprised and their presence in the audience did not indicate approval. The furore started when major general Taher Abdullah, the head of the Engineering Agency in the Armed Forces, gave a widely televised presentation to Sisi and other senior officials on what he calls an "astonishing miraculous scientific invention."

Abdullah said two of the devices named C-Fast and I-Fast used electromagnetism to detect Aids, hepatitis and other viruses without taking blood samples while the third, named Complete Cure Device, acted as a dialysis unit to purify the blood. He also said the C-Fast, which looks like an antenna affixed to the handle of a blender, detected patients infected with viruses that cause hepatitis and Aids with a high success rate.

A short film aired during the presentation showed the engineering team's leader major general Ibrahim Abdel-Atti telling a patient: "All the results are great, showing you had Aids but you were cured. Thank God." The patient replies: "Thank God."

The next day, Abdel-Atti and his team held their own press conference at which the scientist said "I take Aids from the patient and nourish the patient on the Aids by giving him a skewer of Aids kofta". .

Gamal Shiha, head of the Association for Liver Patients Care, one of Egypt's prominent centres that worked alongside with the military, said he was angry about the "hasty" announcements. He said only one of the devices – C-Fast – underwent thorough testing.

Shiha said the C-Fast uses electromagnetic frequencies similar to those used in bomb detectors and radars and had been tested on more than 2,000 patients with a high success rate. "The technology of C-Fast is effective without doubt," he said. However, he dismissed the claims that the other two devices detect Aids and cure viruses.

Despite the scepticism, health ministry spokesman Mohammed Fathallah said the ministry recognises the devices as legitimate. Egypt's former Health Minister Amr Helmi, a liver surgeon by profession, said C-Fast had been approved by the ministry two years ago but he had never before heard of the other two devices.

For the general public, the uproar added to the uncertainty already fueled by years of turmoil since Mubarak's overthrow in February 2011. "I hope that the invention turns out to be true but I don't have confidence this is the case," said 35-year-old taxi driver Ahmed Morad. "I don't believe anyone ... everything is very confusing. It is like a salad."

Tel Al-Zaatar and Yarmouk refugee camp sieges, the similarities

On all three occasions, the media was told that the level of hunger in the camps was a lie, that eyewitness accounts were delusions and that the hunger victims were hungry for fame. In all of these instances, the forces imposing the siege on the camps would eat and drink in front of the cameras of the news agencies on the outskirts of the camp, in order to further humiliate and insult the people

By Tamim Al-Barghouti
 The Yarmouk camp for Palestinian refugees in Damascus has been under siege for months, exposed to ground and air strikes, causing several of the refugees to die of starvation and resort to eating leaves and cacti, as well as the spread of intestinal and skin diseases due to the lack of clean water.

This has also resulted in the death of new-borns, their mothers, the elderly, the ill and the wounded because of the shortage of medicine. Anyone trying to leave the camp is killed and the camp has been bombed numerous times.

Even when the Syrian regime allowed some aid to enter the camp, after pressure from foreign media, they restored the siege as soon as the pressure stopped or when the media attention is no longer present.

The attempts of Syrian regime supporters to deny responsibility for the camp are really sad. The Yarmouk camp is a neighbourhood in Damascus. The legal, ethical, local and regional responsibility for the camp rests with the army who controls the city, the regime's army.

Although supporters of the regime claim they have a cause or right, doing evil is a thousand times better than claiming to do evil in the name of a cause.

The Syrian regime has a long history of starving Palestinians, perhaps longer than any other Arab regime. Three of the four countries surrounding Palestine have been involved in the death of Palestinians once: September, Sabra and Shatila and the siege on Gaza, but only one country of the four were involved in the shedding of Palestinian blood three times: Tel Zaatar, the War of the Camps and Yarmouk today.

On the three occasions, the scene is the same; the Syrian regime uses allied militias and orders them to surround the camp. In the case of Tel Al-Zaatar refugee camp in 1976, they used Maronite Lebanese Christian militias, consisting of the main Christian militia, the Phalangists, but also the Kataeb Forces, the Guardians of the Cedars and the Marada movement.

In the War of the Camps, between 1985 and 1988, the regime recruited the Shia Lebanese Amal Movement, which, at the time, was in armed conflict with Hezbollah over influence in Beirut and the south. Hezbollah did not participate in the War of the Camps, but the Amal movement opened fired on the Palestinians and Hezbollah at the same time.

As for today, the Syrian regime relies on the army directly, as well as some loyal Palestinian militias such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command and Fatah Al-Intifada.

On all three occasions, the water and electricity supplies were cut off from the camp, they were deprived of supplies and ran out of them, and people began to starve to death. On all three occasions, hunger drove the people to eat leaves and ask for fatwas to eat cats, dogs and dead animals; the women who walked to the working wells and water pumps on the outskirts of the camp were killed by snipers surrounding the camps.

According to the testimonies of Hussain Ayyad and Maysa Khatib, residents of Tel Al-Zaatar, the women who were shot by snipers fell into the wells and people were forced to use the wells while the martyrs' bodies remained in them. They were unable to remove the bodies because snipers continued to shoot at them.

On all three occasions, the media was told that the level of hunger in the camps was a lie, that eyewitness accounts were delusions and that the hunger victims were hungry for fame. In all of these instances, the forces imposing the siege on the camps would eat and drink in front of the cameras of the news agencies on the outskirts of the camp, in order to further humiliate and insult the people.

One of the Lebanese television stations supporting the Syrian regime broadcast a report on the Yarmouk refugee camp, showing the soldiers imposing the siege eating with one of the station's correspondents and denying the fact that the people were hungry, while repeating scenes of spilt children's milk during the sieges of the Sabra and Shatila and Burj El-Barajneh camps in the eighties, the former sieges imposed by Lebanon and backed by Israel and lasted three months, from June to September 1982. The latter siege was imposed by Lebanon and supported by Syria, lasting four years, from 1985 to 1988.

On all three occasions, the Syrian regime claimed it killed the Palestinians because they are radical and resistant, but they never clash with Israel, not even when they bombed the capital. In all three cases, humiliating the Palestinians in the media was an essential part of the war against them. This was not only to demoralise the people in the camps and those defending them under the siege, but also to distort the image of Palestine and the Palestinian political and cultural symbols and confuse the Syrian and Lebanese public opinion and reactions to such actions, or, at the very least, delay them from taking action to oppose the siege on the camps.

On January 9, 2014, UNRWA spokesperson Christopher Gunness said, "The profound civilian suffering in Yarmouk deepens, with reports of widespread malnutrition and the absence of medical care, including for those who have severe conflict-related injuries and women in childbirth, with fatal consequences for some women."

Britain's The Guardian reported the same UNRWA spokesperson saying, on February 9, 2014, a month after his first statement, that Dr Ibrahim Mohammed, who works with UNRWA, saved the life of a 14-month-old baby boy named Khaled, who was suffering from severe malnutrition. The baby was living almost exclusively on water for two months. His mother, Noor, who is 29 years old, said that they would boil water and spices and eat it, and when they ran out, they starting eating grass, but they even ran out of that.

In a documented message from the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), an organisation based in Geneva working in coordination with UNRWA to bring food into the camp, the EMHRRN reported that a 15-year-old girl named Heba, along with her five-month old child, told the UN food distributors that they hadn't eaten for three days and she has not been able to breastfeed her child. When the paramedics gave the baby water to drink, he became so bloated because he hadn't had anything in his stomach for days that the paramedics were concerned for him and one of the Red Cross International doctors was summoned to treat the baby.

These instances of hunger were followed in the past by killings of anyone trying to leave the camp. In the case of Tel Al-Zaatar camp, for example, after starving the camp for months, the Phalangist militias, backed by the Syrian regime, announced that it would allow the Palestinians to leave in order for the Red Cross to transport them to their shelters. When the Palestinians started to leave the camp, the militiamen began killing the Palestinians, according to Maysa Al-Khatib, one of the survivors of the massacre whose testimony, along with Hussain Ayyad's, was published in the Palestinian appendix to Lebanon's Al-Safir newspaper on August 12, 2013 and September 15, 2012.

"A massacre was committed against every young man and boy over the age of 10 who tried to leave the camp, as well as dozens of girls, women, and the elderly. A woman carrying her two-day-old baby was approached by one of the murders, who grabbed her baby and threw him far away; he fell onto some trees and she was unable to see where his body landed.

"A young woman with wounded legs was crawling through the crowds and one of the killers told another, 'Take her under the fig tree and make her happy'. She said: 'Death is a thousand times better', so he said, 'Then die,' and shot her.

"Ghazi, my cousin, was carrying my grandmother on his shoulders, thinking that carrying her would save her from death and they killed her before they killed him. An old woman slipped and fell into a ditch and while she tried to climb out of it, one of the killers said, 'Where are you going? Stay where you are' and he shot her in the head several times.

"Abu Yaseen Freijah, an UNRWA nurse, was dressed in his white uniform and was holding his wife, who was shot in the shoulder and the killers snatched his wife away from him, tied his legs to two cars, and they drove off in opposite directions.

"My 17-year-old cousin Ali, who was meek and harmless, was tied to the back of a car that set off at full speed onto the asphalt. Abu Akram, the well-known textiles seller, tried to stop the killers from taking his son by giving them all the money in his possession, but they killed his son in front of him before shooting him and they picked up the money he threw."

Those who committed the Tel Al-Zaatar massacre and starved the people during the War of the Camps have not been punished to this day and some have even gone on to become ministers and heads of representative councils in Lebanon and leaders in Syria. These tragedies are being repeated in Yarmouk refugee camp. Although the beginning of the tragedies in Yarmouk is similar to the ones in Tel Al-Zaatar, we must all take action in order for them not to end in the same manner.

Tamim Al-Barghouti is a Palestinian poet and political scientist. Al-Barghouti comes from a literary family. His father is the Palestinian poet Mourid Barghouti, and his mother is the Egyptian novelist and scholar, Radwa Ashour. This article is a translation of the Arabic text published by Shorouk newspaper on 25 February, 2014.

Let us not repeat the great disasters of the Arab revolutions

Dr Faisal Al-Qassim 

(The original Arabic version was posted earlier)

I say once again that I'm not saying this to question the Arab revolutions, as they are needed and overdue. What I'm afraid of is for this spring to be exploited and changed to dirty international projects in which we are the biggest losers. As God is my witness, I informed people of my concerns

No one can doubt the legitimacy of Arab revolutions. They have been overdue for the purpose of ridding the Arab world of the tyranny, injustice, oppression and suppression they face. But day after day, facts from all the countries that took part in the Arab Spring show that our area is still being exposed to remote sabotaging colonial attempts in order to stop any development projects that may transfer the people of this area from the stage of dependence and underdevelopment towards real independence and freedom.

Perhaps the biggest evidence is that almost all revolutions were, and still are, subject to sabotage and distortion operations, which no one can miss. These try to cause them to fail and return the people back to the stage of obedience with means everyone knows well.

Even if the actions of the colonising powers are not clear in our countries, the old colonial powers are not happy with any real transformations in this strategic part of the world.

We have noticed how everyone is meddling with the Tunisian, Egyptian, Yemeni, Libyan and Syrian revolutions. The goal, which is to change the path of the Arab revolutions from liberating projects to international projects which bring us back to square one, if not back to a colonial level zero, has become clear to all of us.

Many powers, in cooperation with the collaborators in the region, have been trying to divert the revolutions away from their paths, drown them in blood and extremism. Through turning the lives of those who rebelled into a living hell they force people to hate the start of the revolutions.

Through these sabotaging policies, these powers can achieve two goals at one time: the first is to frustrate people and take them back to obedience for decades to come. The second is the restructuring of the area's map, dividing power among emerging world powers.

Perhaps the biggest evidence to this is the raging international conflict in Syria which is not only working to transform the Syrian revolution into a living hell for Syrians but is also trying to divide Syria, dividing what's already been divided.

Dividing Syria has become a widely discussed topic in the media and political circles, while everyone knows that the last thing Syrians want is to lose their nation, after they have lost hundreds of thousands of victims, not to mention the displacement of more than half of the population.

In light of international involvement in the Arab revolutions, it's become a must that we warn against the possibility of repeating what happened to the Arabs after the Great Arab Revolution, when old colonial powers such as France, Britain and Russia deceived us and instead of fulfilling their sweet promises of freedom and liberty, they tore the region apart into small weak entities as per the infamous Sykes-Picot Agreement.

Do these powers, who weep for the victims of the revolutions and call for the achievement of their goals, really want freedom for us, or are they doing the same thing their predecessors did in 1916? Then, Englishmen were inciting Arabs to rebel, while in reality they were working on dividing the region among different colonial powers.

Between 1914-1918, Sir Henry McMahon encouraged Hussein bin Ali, Sharif and Emir of Mecca, to lead a revolution against the Ottomans promising the Arabs freedom, dignity and liberty, with the condition that they help the Allies bring down the Ottoman Caliphate.

We all remember the infamous Lawrence of Arabia who became a personal friend of Sharif Hussein and his children, especially Faisal. Lawrence of Arabia convinced the Arabs that he supports their revolution and that he really wants them to become free from the Ottomans. All the while knowing that those who sent him to Sharif Hussein were working behind the scenes to tear the region apart and swallow it.

At the time the English were pushing Arabs towards revolution and promising them freedom, Sykes and Picot, the Englishman and the Frenchman, along with Russia, were dividing the inheritance of the Ottoman Empire amongst themselves.

Sykes and Picot had not visited the area and knew nothing of its nature, or the nature of its people or its demography, however they cooperated with Russia to divide the area in an unacceptable manner.

The Sykes-Picot Agreement was not all that happened, Britain, also from behind the scene, was negotiating with the Zionists for a homeland for them in Palestine.

We hope that history will not repeat itself this time and become a terrible tragedy.

Today, the situation is not different, where America pretends to be standing to the side of Arab revolutions, while behind the scene Russian Foeign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry are preparing secret deals and only God knows what they hide.

Perhaps the most dangerous of these deals is what is called the Kerry-Lavrov Agreement, which concerns Syria and the region in general, especially because some believe it is worse than the old Sykes-Picot Agreement.

I say once again that I'm not saying this to question the Arab revolutions, as they are needed and overdue. What I'm afraid of is for this spring to be exploited and changed to dirty international projects in which we are the biggest losers. As God is my witness, I informed people of my concerns.

The author is a British-Syrian Al-Jazeera presenter. This article is a translation of the Arabic text published by Al Quds Al Arabi on 21 February 2014

Al-Jazeera Video: استمرار الجدل بشأن اختراع للقوات المسلحة المصرية

Emad Hajjaj's Cartoon: The Little Fascist

2000-06-13 أضف تعليقك أرسل لصديق عماد حجاج

‘Trigger-happy’ Israeli army and police use reckless force in the West Bank

Amnesty International

Bilal Tamimi being attacked by an Israeli soldier at a protest in Nabi Saleh in May 2013.

© Tamimi Press

At a Glance

• Amnesty International documented the killing of 22 Palestinian civilians in the West Bank in 2013. At least four were children.
• According to the UN, more West Bank Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces in 2013 than in 2011 and 2012 combined.
• In the last three years at least 261 Palestinians, including 67 children, have been seriously injured by live ammunition fired by Israeli forces in the West Bank.
• More than 8,000 Palestinians in the West Bank, including 1,500 children, have been wounded with rubber-coated metal bullets and the reckless use of tear gas since January 2011.

“

The frequency and persistence of arbitrary and abusive force against peaceful protesters in the West Bank by Israeli soldiers and police officers – and the impunity enjoyed by perpetrators – suggests that it is carried out as a matter of policy.

”

Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Director at Amnesty International.

"Israeli forces have displayed a callous disregard for human life by killing dozens of Palestinian civilians, including children, in the occupied West Bank over the past three years with near total impunity, said Amnesty International in a report published today.

The report, Trigger-happy: Israel’s use of excessive force in the West Bank, describes mounting bloodshed and human rights abuses in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) as a result of the Israeli forces’ use of unnecessary, arbitrary and brutal force against Palestinians since January 2011.

In all cases examined by Amnesty International, Palestinians killed by Israeli soldiers did not appear to be posing a direct and immediate threat to life. In some, there is evidence that they were victims of wilful killings, which would amount to war crimes.

“The report presents a body of evidence that shows a harrowing pattern of unlawful killings and unwarranted injuries of Palestinian civilians by Israeli forces in the West Bank,” said Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Director at Amnesty International.

“The frequency and persistence of arbitrary and abusive force against peaceful protesters in the West Bank by Israeli soldiers and police officers – and the impunity enjoyed by perpetrators – suggests that it is carried out as a matter of policy.”

Deaths and injuries

Amnesty International has documented the killings of 22 Palestinian civilians in the West Bank last year, at least 14 of which were in the context of protests. Most were young adults under the age of 25. At least four were children.

According to UN figures, more West Bank Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces in 2013 than the total number killed in 2011 and 2012 combined. Forty-five were killed in the past three years.

Peaceful protesters, civilian bystanders, human rights activists and journalists are among those who have been killed or injured.

In the last three years at least 261 Palestinians, including 67 children, have been seriously injured by live ammunition fired by Israeli forces in the West Bank.

An astonishing number of Palestinians in the West Bank - more than 8,000, including 1,500 children – have been wounded by other means, including rubber-coated metal bullets and the reckless use of tear gas, since January 2011. In some cases documented, victims have also died as a result of their use.

“The staggering numbers of wounded provide a sobering reminder of the relentless daily danger faced by Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank,” said Philip Luther.

Several victims were shot in the back suggesting that they were targeted as they tried to flee and posed no genuine threat to the lives of members of Israeli forces or others. In several cases, well-armoured Israeli forces have resorted to lethal means to crack down on stone-throwing protestors causing needless loss of life.

Investigations 

More than a year later, the findings of investigations by the Israeli authorities into a number of suspected unlawful killings have yet to be revealed.

“The current Israeli system has proved woefully inadequate. It is neither independent nor impartial and completely lacks transparency. The authorities must conduct prompt, thorough and independent investigations into all suspected instances of arbitrary and abusive use of force, especially when resulting in loss of life or serious injury,” said Philip Luther.

“A strong message must be sent to Israeli soldiers and police officers that abuses will not go unpunished. Unless those who commit violations are held to account unlawful killings and injuries are bound to continue.”

Protests

In recent years, the West Bank has seen continuing protests against the prolonged Israeli occupation and a litany of related repressive policies and practices. These include the ever-expanding unlawful Israeli settlements, the 800km-long fence/wall, forcible house demolitions, forced evictions, Israeli military checkpoints, roads reserved for use by Israeli settlers from which Palestinians are excluded and other restrictions on the movement of Palestinians in the OPT.

Protests are also held against the detention of thousands of Palestinians and in response to Israeli military strikes in Gaza and the killing or injury of Palestinians in protests or during arrest raids.

Arms transfers

Amnesty International is calling on the Israeli authorities to instruct their forces to refrain from lethal force, including the use of live fire and rubber-coated bullets, except when strictly necessary to protect lives. They must also respect the right of Palestinians to peaceful assembly.

It urges the USA, the European Union and the rest of the international community to suspend all transfers of munitions, weapons and other equipment to Israel.

“Without pressure from the international community the situation is unlikely to change any time soon,” said Philip Luther.

“Too much civilian blood has been spilled. This long-standing pattern of abuse must be broken. If the Israeli authorities wish to prove to the world they are committed to democratic principles and international human rights standards, unlawful killings and unnecessary use of force must stop now.”

Case study: A child killed for protesting

In the West Bank, the tragic consequences of Israel’s policy of supressing Palestinian protest have become a familiar story.

Samir Awad, a 16-year-old boy from Bodrus, near Ramallah, was shot dead near his school in January 2013 while attempting to stage a protest with friends against Israel’s 800km-long fence/wall, which cuts through their village. Three bullets struck him in the back of the head, the leg, and shoulder as he fled Israeli soldiers who ambushed his group. Witnesses said the boy was directly targeted as he ran away.

Malik Murar, 16, Samir’s friend who witnessed his killing, told Amnesty International:“They shot him first in the leg, yet he managed to run away… how far can an injured child run? They could have easily arrested him… instead they shot him in the back with live ammunition.”

Amnesty International believes Samir’s killing may amount to extrajudicial execution or a wilful killing, which is considered a war crime under international law.

“It’s hard to believe that an unarmed child could be perceived as posing imminent danger to a well-equipped soldier. Israeli forces appear in this and other cases to have recklessly fired bullets at the slightest appearance of a threat,” said Philip Luther.

Under international law, the police and soldiers enforcing the law must always exercise restraint and never use arbitrary force. Security forces may only resort to the use of lethal force if there is an imminent risk to their lives or the lives of others. Israel has repeatedly refused to make public the rules and regulations governing the use of force by army and police in the OPT.

Israeli soldiers have a long history of using excessive force against Palestinian demonstrators in the West Bank extending back to at least the first Intifada in 1987.

Current Al-Jazeera (Arabic) Online Poll

Do you believe Iraq's denial of an arms deal with Iran?

So far, 92% have voted no.

Egypt: End military trial of journalists

"Egypt’s armed forces must end the military trial of two journalists, release them immediately and unconditionally, and drop all charges against them, Amnesty International said as it named both men prisoners of conscience. 

Amr Al Qazaz and Islam Farahat are to appear before the North Cairo Misdemeanour Military Court on 26 February 2014, on charges of illegally obtaining and publishing classified military documents and videos – including interviews with Egypt’s Defence Minister Abdel Fattah Al Sisi. If convicted, both men could face up to three years in prison. 

“The two journalists are prisoners of conscience detained solely for peacefully exercising their right to freedom of expression by performing their jobs,” said Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Programme Director at Amnesty International. 

“The Egyptian authorities must release them immediately and unconditionally, and drop all charges against them. Journalism is not a crime, and civilians, including journalists, should never face trial in military courts.” 

The Egyptian military authorities maintain that the videos and documents – which the journalists allegedly published on the internet – could destabilize the security situation in the country.

According to Egyptian human rights lawyer Ahmed Helmy, the journalists’ case file alleges that the classified military information they published includes videos of the Defence Minister being interviewed by the Egyptian daily Al-Masry Al-Youm as well as of a meeting he held with other senior military officials under his command. 

The journalists are also accused of publishing 21 documents which include details of the government’s planned response to the banned Muslim Brotherhood’s attempt to defend its legitimacy and the legitimate rule of ousted President Mohamed Morsi. 

Amr Al Qazaz’s family has told Amnesty International that plain-clothes armed security officers arrested him at his home on 12 November 2013. They searched his flat and confiscated his laptop, phones, camera, papers and books. Six days later, Military Intelligence officers reportedly arrested Islam Farahat on a Cairo street and took him away in a car with civilian licence plates.  

The two men were taken to the Military Intelligence Unit in the Hadayek El Kubba area of Cairo, where they were held for at least 10 days while the military prosecutor carried out investigations. According to their families, they were blindfolded and handcuffed throughout their interrogation in the Military Intelligence office.

The imprisonment of Amr Al Qazaz and Islam Farahat is a violation of international and Egyptian law. The newly adopted Egyptian Constitution in its article 71 prohibits imprisonment in cases involving “crimes” related to publishing. 

Both families told Amnesty International that they could not visit the two men until they were transferred from the Military Intelligence office to Al Mahkoum prison in Tora, reportedly on 25 November. At Al Mahkoum, Amr Al Qazaz was reportedly beaten, confined to a small cell with 11 other detainees, and had his blankets confiscated. 

Lawyers representing Amr Al Qazaz and Islam Farahat did not receive a full copy of their case file until after the first trial hearing on 24 February, undermining their ability to prepare an adequate defence.

“Pending their release, the Egyptian government must allow Amr Al Qazaz and Islam Farahat access to their lawyers and families,” said Philip Luther. 

Background

Amr Al Qazaz and Islam Farahat were arrested in November 2013 on charges of revealing military secrets in case no. 3558/2013. The military prosecutor referred the case to the North Cairo Misdemeanour Military Court on 22 February 2013 and the trial was set to begin on 24 February 2013. On 24 February, the court postponed the trial to 26 February. 

The current Egyptian Constitution adopted in January 2014 allows for the trial of civilians by military courts. It grants military courts jurisdiction over attacks on military personnel and military installations, camps, zones and borders. It also leaves the door open for the “law” to determine other possible crimes falling under the jurisdiction of military courts. 

Under the Egyptian armed forces’ 17-month rule from February 2011 to June 2012, more than 12,000 civilians, including a number of journalists, were tried by military courts. 

Such military trials continued during and after the rule of ousted President Mohamed Morsi. Since 2013, at least two journalists have faced military trials: Al-Masry Al-Youm correspondent Ahmed Abu Deraa and freelance journalist and blogger Mohamed Sabry were detained for respectively a month and a few days before both receiving six-month suspended prison sentences. 

Amnesty International opposes the trial of civilians by military courts, which are fundamentally unfair and breach a number of fair trial safeguards, including the right to a fair and public hearing before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law; the right to have adequate time to prepare a defence; the right to be defended by a lawyer of one’s choosing; and the right to appeal against conviction and sentence to a higher tribunal."

Al-Jazeera Video: مخيم اليرموك.. مسلسل التجويع والذل مستمر