MY article for SouthAsia Magazine:

Maldives: New Arena

Filed under: Politics Tagged: Asia, Climate Change, Global Warming, Human Rights, Maldives, South, SouthAsia Magazine

News from Libya that torture is occurring in state and militia-administered detention facilities is horrific, but should be of little surprise. Amnesty International’s recent statements assert that torture is a wide-spread practice in Libya and has resulted in several deaths. The statements further that no investigations are occurring. Add to these statements a recent announcement by Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) that it has suspended its activity in Misrata’s prisons because prisoners are being tortured and denied medical care. Moreover, MSF’s announcement asserts that it was being used, in effect, to prolong torture: prisoners were sent to MSF staff for treatment so that they could then be submitted to further torture.

MSF’s role in the conflict is sensitive because it needs to maintain access to treat the victims of conflict; however, I find it discouraging that other agencies, such as Amnesty, are not offering up constructive criticism on what should be done about the abuses. The international community let out a limited outcry following clear signs of extra-judicial killings in Libya (e.g., Muammar Gaddafi’s death) and did not move to provide Libya with assistance to ensure that similar abuses would not persist. In short, Amnesty is right to draw attention to the horrible state of human rights in Libya but, as of yet, they are not offering up any recommendations on how Libya’s clearly limited government can tackle the problem.

With this, why aren’t we seeing positive steps taken by the Arab League, Turkey, Qatar, the UN, etc. to provide the National Transitional Council (NTC) with assistance to reign in the militias, establish a substantive system to ensure the protection of detainees, and ensure the parties are meeting international humanitarian law standards?

Civilian protection is more than just drawing attention to a problem – it’s about laying out steps that states and other actors can take to effectually safeguard civilians from violence, torture, and intimidation. In this regard, we have failed those Libyans who continue to find themselves victims of violence.

(Photo Credit: Marco Longari, AFP, Fighters with the National Transitional Council from the Tripoli Brigade guard blindfolded prisoners outside Bani Walid)

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS
Commission internationale de juristes – Comisión Internacional de Juristas

” Protecting and promoting human rights through the Rule of Law”

PRESS RELEASE For immediate release – 25 January 2012
Former Pakistan Ambassador to the US faces threats to his life – ICJ

Geneva, Switzerland – The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) today expressed its
grave concern for the infringement of rights of Hussain Haqqani, former Pakistan
Ambassador to the United States of America.

Hussain Haqqani has been embroiled in a political and judicial conflict stemming from a
leaked political memorandum that he was alleged to have authored, only a few days after
al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was killed by US military forces.

“Hussain Haqqani faced a vicious media trial following which the Supreme Court of Pakistan on a petition filed debarred him from travelling abroad, despite the fact that he has not been charged with any crime,” said Sheila Varadan, International Legal Advisor at the ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Office. “Hussain Haqqani continues to receive threats and has been painted as disloyal to the country. There is, though, no proof of any betrayal of his
duties as an Ambassador of Pakistan to the United States.”

His counsel, Asma Jahangir, confirmed that Hussain Haqqani is under threat and has taken refuge in the compound of the Prime Minister’s residence.

The leaked memo, which on 10 May 2011 was delivered to the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, was said to contain promises of greater cooperation with the Americans in counter-terrorism operations from President Zardari’s People’s Party of Pakistan (PPP) Government in exchange for support from the United States to subvert a potential military coup d’état.

News of the memo was leaked to the media by an American-Pakistani businessman, Ijaz Mansoor, in early October 2011.

Hussain Haqqani was recalled to Islamabad and resigned his post as Pakistan Ambassador to the United States in November 2011. The PPP Government denied allegations of involvement in the memo scandal and a Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry was set up on 21 December 2011 to investigate the matter. A few days later, the Supreme Court of Pakistan established its own Commission of Inquiry.

There are legitimate concerns that in convening this Commission, the Supreme Court may have overstepped its constitutional authority and that this action could undermine the ongoing Parliamentary inquiry.

“We are calling on the Pakistani Authorities to respect Hussain Haqqani’s right to be presumed innocent and to remove the restriction on his right to leave the country and any other restrictions on his right to freedom of movement,” added Sheila Varadan. “They
must also ensure his personal safety at all times and respect his right to a fair and impartial hearing throughout the Inquiry process.”

For further information, please contact:
Sheila Varadan, International Legal Advisor, ICJ (Bangkok), tel + 66 2 619 83 04

A morning show broadcast in Pakistan on Jan 17, 2012, on Samaa, a Pakistani television channel, has catalysed what could well be the beginning of a media consumer rights movement.

In the show, Subah Saverey Maya kay Sath (Early Morning with Maya), the host Maya Khan, charges through a public park looking for dating couples to interrogate. With her is a battalion of other women, who join her in self-righteously lecturing the couples they come across – does your family know you are here, why don’t you meet at home if you are engaged, and, most outrageously, if you are married, where is your nikahnama (marriage certificate)?

When the harassed couples ask for the camera to be turned off, the Samaa team pretends to acquiesce but carries on filming with sound. As several people have pointed out, this intrusive behaviour could result in putting those couples in life-threatening situations in a country where forced marriages and ‘honour killings’ continue to be the norm.

The first time I saw a link to this show was on Jan 22, shared on a facebook group, on Jan 21, 2012. I, and many others, began sharing the Youtube links on facebook and twitter. As it spread, the outrage grew. People were shocked at the level of intrusion and vigilantism on display. From India, came comments on twitter about the Saffron vigilante brigade that has been known to drag couples into temples and force them into instant marriage. Which reminded me that the mentality we are protesting is not limited to Pakistan – see my article ‘Peaceful Pink Panties to Tame Right-Wing Goons‘ about the Sri Ram Sene goons in India. This was in 2009 but I hear they’re gearing up again against Valentines Day… Of course it’s always the poor, who can’t meet in secure hotels and cafes, who are always most vulnerable against this kind of moral policing.

Maya Khan’s antics on Samaa TV triggered off several articles and reports – starting with blogger Mehreen Kasana letting rip in her post (with doodles) An Open Letter to Maya Khan, Jan 22, 2012.

But most importantly, the outrage was channelized into a loosely organised protest. Dozens of people sent in complaints to the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) at the online feedback form, shared quickly via facebook. On Jan 22, lawyer Osama Siddique drafted a brief letter expressing outrage at the  :highly intrusive, invasive and potentially irresponsible behavior on the part of the host – a kind of vigilantism no different than the Lal Masjid variety” (referring to the black-robed women armed with sticks called the Hafza Brigade, associated with the Red Mosque in Islamabad, who went around beating up and terrorizing women whose behaviour or looks they deemed ‘immoral’ or ‘unIslamic’).

The letter protested this moral policing, and pointed out that “this kind of programming is likely to also lead to legal action for violation of dignity of man under the Constitution – which legal action we as signatories will support, propagate and promote.” It demanded an end to “this irresponsible programming”.

A group of citizens emailed the letter to the Samaa head Zafar Siddiqi (President CNBC Pakistan, with which Samaa is affiliated), and an expatriate Pakistani in California, Ali Abbas Taj, uploaded it to Change.org as an petition titled STOP “Subah Saverey Maya kay Sath” vigilantism like Lal Masjid.

Within 24 hours, the online activism had the following unexpected effects:

* In about 24 hours, there were over 2000 signatures, and by the following day 4,800 people, in Pakistan and around the world, had endorsed it.

* Maya Khan’s facebook page was closed, probably in response to the number of comments being made on it. Some of those comments were highly abusive and threatening, which we condemn and have nothing to do with.

* Maya Khan on her show of Jan 23, 2012 acknowledged that what she did could have hurt people and said that was not her intention – but she has not apologised, and appears completely unrepentant and unaware of the dangers of her actions.

* CEO Samaa TV Zafar Siddiqi wrote back to the people who had emailed him saying:  ”I have travelled to Khi to look at this matter and yesterday Maya apologised in her program for this. I can assure this will never happen again. Samaa is a progressive channel.
“There are certain other directives that have been put into place as of yesterday.
“I thank everyone concerned in bringing this matter to my attention. It’s really appreciated.”

The citizens’ response:

* We do not accept Maya Khan’s statement in her show of Jan 23 as an apology. Nor are we satisfied with Mr Siddiqi’s attempts to placate us. We want an unconditional, public apology from both Maya Khan and Samaa TV.

* We do not hold Maya Khan solely responsible for her actions; it is the producer and channel owner who set policy and allow this kind of programming to happen. We want to know what steps are being taken and what policy directives given to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

* Maya Khan should apologise publically not just to viewers but also to the couples she harassed in the park.

* There’s also outrage against a 2010 moral policing show by ARY reporter Yasir Aqeel, who is if possible even more offensive than Maya Khan, and takes harassment to another level. We protest these intrusive tactics by TV channel owners to boost ratings by harassing peaceful, law-abiding citizens.

* We would like to know what ethical guidelines TV channel owners and producers are setting down to ensure that this doesn’t happen.

* We are in contact with the commercial sponsors of television shows and will impress upon them the need to pull advertising from programmes and channels that violate basic media ethics.

BOTTOM LINE: Media is not a business like any other. It carries greater responsibility and we want its workings to be transparent and ethical.

In addition:

A college student in Karachi, started a facebook ‘cause’ on Jan 24 demanding that Maya Khan apologise to the youth of Pakistan, especially Karachi

Some activists began an sms campaign, sharing Zafar Siddiqi’s Dubai cell number with this message: Please send this sms to Mr. Zafar Siddiqui, CEO SAMAA TV if you want to raise your voice against the moral policing by Maya Khan: “Dear Mr Siddiqi, pardon the intrusion. I’m part of a citizens’ group protesting Samaa TV and its host Maya Khan’s irresponsible ‘moral policing’. We expect an unconditional apology, and this show withdrawn or at least suspended until new parameters are worked out. Thank you. “

It hasn’t all been about anger and outrage though. Predictably, Pakistanis have derived considerable mirth from the situation, some of it rather unkindly expressed. There’s this outrageous post by Urooj Zia: Things Maya Missed (relevant to my Pink Chaddis report for IPS linked above).

Some funny graphics were created – like park signs saying “Beware of dog – and Maya Khan” (unkind, yes, but then, people are angry), posted by Arif Iqbal (@eusuphxai on twitter), who also posted this, that I especially liked: a still from the old Indian film “Bobby” with its famous song “Hum tum aik kamre mein band hon…” with the next line changed to “Aur Maya aa jaye” (the original line can be translated as: “what if we were locked up in a room… and the key got lost” – changed to: “… and Maya turned up”

There have also been some really nasty shares, including videos of Maya dancing, and an animation in which she gets slapped, but let’s ignore those for now, with just this comment, that we do not condone abusive language, personal insults or threats of violence.

More important, the issue has catalysed some relevant, thought-provoking reports, analyses and discussions, including those listed here:

Wusatullah Khan in BBC Urdu website, Jan 22, 2012: ‘Aap tau naib khuda hain’

BBC Urdu report, Jan 23, 2012: ‘TV channel ka anti-dating squad’

BBC Urdu Radio report, Jan 24, 2012: ‘Sawerey ka chapa’ par sakht tanqeed’ in which Samaa senior producer Sohail Zaidi rejects civil society concerns, defends show, saying, “I am not answerable to anyone”.

Vigil-aunties (a term coined by Anthony Permal) by Bina Shah, Jan 24, 2012: ‘At the very least, the channel and the anchorperson owe an apology, if not compensation, to those two individuals who had hurt nobody on that day when they were ambushed and harassed by the television anchor and her Moral Aunty Brigade. The irony is that she describes herself on her Facebook page as “very fair and honest in her dealings”. I think that girl in the niqab, crying in the park, and her blameless friend, as well as any sane person with a conscience and a respect for other people’s privacy, would beg to differ.’

‘Big Brother (and Sister) is watching you‘ – Nadeem F. Paracha, Jan 23, 2102, on the history of what he calls ‘pussycat vigilantism’ – “This strange phenomenon is not just about simple hypocrisy, it is also and actually about glorifying this hypocrisy through gung-ho acts in which pussycat media vigilantes prey upon soft targets to exhibit their ‘bravery’ but squeak away if ever an opportunity arises to do the same to those who can and will bite back.” He says the first reported case of moral vigilantism that he stumbled upon was reported in Dawn, 1980. Must read.

In the parks of Karachi, by Ejaz Haider, Jan 24, 2012 - “From the terrible scarcity of information we now have a nauseating excess of it.”

Media ethics and responsibility at Afia Salam and Faisal Qureshi’s online talk show Off the Cuff, discussing the need for a legal framework.

p.s. Well before this issue blew up, Hosh media, which aims to bridge the gap between online and mainstream media, sat down with veteran journalist and former Editor of Dawn, Abbas Nasir to initiate “a crash course in some of the stickiest subjects that journalism in Pakistan now faces”. Four of the six part series are online at the Hosh website, that Sahar Habib Ghazi wrote about at The great ethics debate (published Jan 23, 2012).

Updates will continue to be posted on the petition link. Watch this space.

In an ideal world, the search for justice would always trump the pragmatic workings of politics. However rarely do we live in that world. Instead amnesties are granted in the hopes of a peaceful regime change, dictators are allowed to flee their counties for the permanent and well financed vacations exile while their victims remain to put back together what oppressive policies and violence broke. If enough time passes, as Haiti is now discovering with Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier, those who grossly abused their power can often act like nothing happen. Of course justice is pursued by some countries determined to make sure that past wrongs are answered to, but success in those endeavors typically requires strong support from allied countries or organizations like the UN. Even then, messy politics makes for messy justice; accusations of bias in prosecution and worries about the cost of proceedings given the typically small groups of suspects tried are common, as are serious questions about the value of such proceedings for both victims and the political process. This, and not the ideal version we dream about, is the world we live in.

Recognition of these realities is one of the reasons why the International Criminal Court (ICC) took so long to come into being and is also a constant issue facing the court. In this battle between justice and politics, the biggest debate to date confronting the court is that of Kenya where it is believed high ranking politicians were involved in promoting the post-election violence that gripped the country in early 2008. The possibility of an ICC investigation was part of the agreement reached between President Mwai Kibaki and opposition leader (now Prime Minister) Raila Odinga, but was also contingent on the inability of the Kenyan parliament to pass legislation creating a domestic tribunal to try those responsible for the violence. After parliament failed to pass such legislation, the ICC opened an investigation and yesterday the decision on which of the “Ocampo Six” – the six people deemed most responsible for the violence – would be tried officially came down.

This is where the politics gets messy.  Not only was the post-election violence largely divided on ethnic terms which ended in a fragile peace, but the members of the Ocampo Six were and remain prominent political figures. For example, Uhuru Kenyatta is the current Deputy Prime Minister, Kenya’s wealthiest citizen and the son of the country’s first president, Jomo Kenyatta. On the other side is William Ruto, the former Minster for Higher Education and a prominent opposition politician. Both Kenyatta and Ruto enjoy significant support with their rural constituents and both have stated they would be running in the presidential elections later this year. Politically, these two are positioned on opposite sides of the conflict but may be facing the same fate. Unfortunately, they also have the ability to take down all of Kenya with them. Again, this is the world we live in.

So what is more important, justice or politics? By ruling that four of the six charged would stand trial, including Kenyatta and Ruto, the ICC stuck to their mandate and chose justice. Ahead of the announcement there was strong support for the court among Kenyans but also increasing fears that violence could once again break out. So far, that has not happened. But with politicians gearing up for their presidential campaigns and two of the major candidates now getting ready to stand trial for crimes against humanity, yesterday’s decision is only the start of this debate, not the end.

Abuja National Mosque in Nigeria | Photo by Kipp Jones

A series of explosions ripped through Nigeria’s second largest city of Kano on Friday, targeting government and police offices. By Saturday, the militant group Boko Haram claimed responsibility for the deadly attack whose final death toll is not yet determined but is expected to be over 200 people.

Boko Haram was founded in 2002 as an anti-Western Salafi sect in Northern Nigeria. Since then, the group has evolved into a jihadist militia opposing the Nigerian government and all contact with the West. Starting 2009, Boko Haram began to carry out attacks against government outposts and critics of their ideology. But despite their violent past, the group has only recently gained international attention as their attacks grew in size and coordination. A series of attacks in Maiduguri and Abuja in June 2011 followed by the bombing of the UN’s Nigeria headquarters in August moved Boko Haram to the front page of security briefs in the West and rumors of US military advisers being deployed to the region to help the government gained credence. With last week’s bombings, this is unlikely to change.

It would be easy to couch the existence of Boko Haram and their appeal in Northern Nigeria in terms of Muslim versus Christian, especially given Nigeria’s history of religious strife. But while Boko Haram is an Islamist group with an extreme Islamic ideology, their supporters are drawn mainly from the unemployed youth in the more impoverished northern states who are frustrated by government corruption and limited opportunities despite Nigeria’s oil wealth. In some ways the increasing prominence of Boko Haram over the past year tracks with the growth of protest movements around the world. Most of these movements, whether in the Global North or the Global South, focus on public corruption, the lack of accountability, and a quest for personal dignity. However the frustration behind these movements has been channeled in a variety of ways, from protests in Tunisia and Egypt, to riots in the UK and war in Libya. Without addressing these larger issues as well as the religious desires underpinning the movement, the world will be hearing a lot more about the chaos of Boko Haram.

This much is clear. What is unclear is what this all means for the future of Nigeria. Do these attacks mean Boko Haram has officially declared war on Nigeria? If so, will a war on these terms spark a civil war between the predominately Muslim north and the predominately Christian south? Can the country find a compromise that works for all of its diverse population? Expect these question to be repeatedly asked in the media over the next few weeks, but for now, don’t expect any easy answers.

“Transition” is the word on the tip of everyone’s lips in Afghanistan these days—a catchphrase I’ve heard employed more than any other since arriving in Kabul about two weeks ago. Why “Transition?” Because in less than three years time, Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) are expected to assume responsibility for securing the country and protecting the population. To prepare for the security transition, US and international military forces have concentrated their efforts on securing southern Afghanistan—the so-called “heartland” of the insurgency—whilst intensifying efforts to train and equip the ANSF.

The message from the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)—the U.S. led security force in Afghanistan—is that security is improving as a result of these efforts. Last spring, a Pentagon report concluded that President Obama’s strategy had produced “tangible progress” in Afghanistan. More recently, David Rodriguez, former Commander of ISAF Joint Command, wrote “there are indisputable gains everywhere we have focused our efforts.” Talk of progress and security gains has been pervasive in my early Kabul meetings.

But that message stands in stark contrast to what I’m hearing from international and humanitarian organizations. In its mid-year report released in July 2011, the U.N. political mission in Afghanistan reported that “civilians experienced a downward spiral of protection” during the first half of 2011 with civilian casualties higher than at any other time since 2001. Indeed, nearly 1,500 civilians were killed during the first half of 2011, an increase of 15% from the same period during 2010. More recently, the U.N. confirmed significant civilian casualties last month largely due to the twin suicide attacks in Kabul and Mazar-i-Sharif.

ISAF’s rosy assessment of the situation in Afghanistan is also at odds with the most recent U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), which noted that “security gains” have been undercut by “corruption, incompetent governance and Taliban fighters operating from neighboring Pakistan.” The NIE also suggests that the Afghan government “may not be able to survive as the U.S. steadily pulls out its troops and reduces military and civilian assistance.”

To be clear, the Taliban and other armed groups are responsible for the majority of civilian casualties in Afghanistan – roughly 80%, according to the U.N. Despite pledges to avoid killing civilians, armed groups have continued to resort to indiscriminate tactics, including improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks, which combined are responsible for nearly 50% of civilian casualties in Afghanistan, according to the U.N. For the past two years, armed groups have also increasingly resorted to assassinations, targeting public officials and others who cooperate with ISAF and the Afghan government.

Meanwhile, as civilian casualties caused by armed groups have spiked over the past few years, the number of civilians killed or injured by international military forces has gradually declined, largely due to the policies ISAF has put in place to mitigate civilian harm. That being said, Afghans want and expect ISAF and the ANSF to improve efforts to protect them from all acts of violence, regardless of which warring party is ultimately responsible.

Afghans I have met since arriving are very worried about the future. One former government official I spoke with voiced his concern that Afghanistan could slide back into civil war after the bulk of international military forces depart at the end of 2014. Like many others in the country, he isn’t confident that the ANSF will be able to provide security on their own, and he’s concerned about the proliferation of weapons and armed groups.

Why such disparate narratives and assessments of the security situation? One reason could be that ISAF is using different metrics than international and nongovernmental organizations. Counterinsurgent forces tend to examine territory held and the quantity of indigenous security forces trained and equipped to measure progress. And as noted, ISAF has taken very concrete steps to mitigate civilian harm, resulting in fewer civilians killed or injured by international military forces. Meanwhile, the U.N. and nongovernmental organizations are analyzing overall levels of violence and civilian casualties – which have increased over the past several years.

Another reason may be that ISAF is setting a tone for its departure. With the U.S. elections less than a year away, the Obama Administration would like to reassure a war weary public that it has turned the Afghan war around. While not ill – intentioned, the U.S. and its allies may simply be focused on highlighting what they have achieved, including reduced levels of civilian casualties caused by international military forces as well as reinvigorated efforts to improve the quality of Afghan security forces. But the problem still remains – while ISAF has improved its own civilian casualty statistics, the number of civilians harmed or killed in Afghanistan is increasing. Indeed, if “security gains” are to be measured by fewer civilian casualties, then security is deteriorating in Afghanistan.

As international military forces prepare for withdrawal, they should be clear-eyed about the toll the war is taking on civilians and what needs to be done to better protect ordinary Afghans. Over the next six months, I will be taking this message to ISAF on behalf of CIVIC. More specifically, I will be assessing the efficacy of the mechanisms ISAF has put in place to mitigate civilian harm as well as urging the Afghan government to take concrete steps to better protect civilians. I hope we’ll soon be able to agree that security is improving in Afghanistan.

This post originally appeared on CIVIC From the Field.

Photo: Afghan National Army (ANA) doing a route clearence patrol exercise at the Kabul Militairy Training Centre (KMTC).

Released under the Creative Commons License: Courtesy of the U.S. Army.

By Carlos Harrison for The Huffington Post

It’s been a troubled – some might say, tragic – 10 years for the detention camps at the Guantánamo Naval Base in Cuba. And as they slouch into their 11th year on January 11, there’s no end in sight.

“We say to ourselves, in sort of gallows humor: Guantánamo will close when the last detainee there dies of natural causes,” Jeremy Varon, an organizer with Witness Against Torture, told the Huffington Post on Wednesday.

Franz Kafka himself would have been hard-pressed to concoct a more bewildering and brutal contradictory reality. Allegations over the years have included sexual humiliation, waterboarding, and the use of dogs to scare detainees. Released detainees reported being locked in in sensory deprivation cells, beaten repeatedly, and forced to race while wearing leg shackles. If they fell, they were punished.

If it sounds like Abu Ghraib, it should. The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee found that intelligence teams transported the “aggressive” interrogation techniques perfected at Guantánamo to Afghanistan and Iraq.

The link between Cuba and the war zones, the New York Times reported, was Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, then the head of detention operations at Guantánamo. At his insistence, the Times wrote, the Defense Department sent training teams on 90-day tours in Iraq, showing the soldiers there the techniques utilized on the island. The timing, Amnesty International points out, happened to coincide with when the worst abuses occurred at Abu Ghraib.

Thanks to reports like those, the detention camps have become an international symbol of what democracy and justice are not. They’ve been plagued by suicide attempts by desperate detainees and condemned by the United Nations, human rights groups, even former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who called for the immediate closing of the camps in 2006.
“The value of holding prisoners there was unclear, but the price we were paying around the world for doing so was obvious,” Powell said.

The camps were created in 2002 as a deliberately “extraterritorial” place to extract information from captives in the “War on Terror.” By putting them at Guantanamo, the United States, meant to be beyond the jurisdiction of both the Geneva Conventions and U.S. courts.

That didn’t put them outside the range of public opinion. The camps sparked outrage on day one. Pictures flew around the world of shackled and handcuffed detainees on their knees on the ground with black hoods over their heads and mittens on their hands.

The indignation grew as the first 20 captives went into wire cages at Camp X-Ray, described by critics as “kennels.” Soon, though, the detainees were transferred to permanent cells, and Camp X-Ray was closed.

But the human rights complaints continued, even from some of America’s closest allies.
In 2006, speaking on BBC radio, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said:

“I am absolutely clear that the U.S. has no intention of maintaining a Gulag in Guantanamo Bay. They want to see the situation resolved and they would like it other than it is. However, that is the situation that they have.”

In all 779 detainees have been held in the camps. Eight have died there, including six suicides. One man died of colon cancer, another after an apparent heart attack.

And, in the 10 years since it opened, only six detainees have been convicted of war crimes.
The last 171 still there are caught at the conflicting conjunction where bureaucracy, politics, and military regulations collide – offering little chance, at least for the foreseeable future, of gaining their release.

Forty-six are classified as “indefinite detainees,” held without charges, but considered too dangerous to be released; 89 are eligible for release or transfer but in perpetual custody because there is no place to send them. Five more have been convicted of war crimes; and six face trial – perhaps this year – for the 9/11 attacks and the October 2000 U.S.S. Cole bombing.
That makes Guantanamo, as Carol Rosenberg of the Miami Herald described it in a piece for Foreign Affairs, “arguably the most expensive prison camp on earth, with a staff of 1,850 U.S. troops and civilians managing a compound that contains 171 captives, at a cost of $800,000 a year per detainee.”

But even the budget conscious Congress resists closing the base. In fact, it has used its spending oversight powers to thwart the president’s efforts to do just that. It has used that authority to prevent the trial of detainees on U.S. soil and to block the purchase of a dedicated prison facility in Illinois to house transferred detainees.
And no one wants to risk having a released captive later become involved in an act of terrorism or insurgency, which happened with at least one-fourth of the 500 detainees set free under President George W. Bush.

So, the captives remain in Guantanamo. Until when no one knows.
As Marc Thiessen, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told CNN:

“We have the right to continue to hold them as long as al Qaeda is at war with us.”

Having the right, though, doesn’t make it right, said Geneve Mantri, government relations director for national security, Amnesty International.

Speaking to The Huffington Post on Wednesday, he said the 89 cleared for release by both the Bush administration and a review ordered by President Obama, “represent little or no threat.”

“This has always been sold as a question of the worst of the worst and the reality is that a large number of the people that have been picked up, I hate to say it are in the insignificant and rather pathetically sad story category,” he said.

“There is a minority of people (in the camps) that no one doubts are truly dangerous. That minority of people should be placed in front of a US court. Because we have the most efficient system, the fastest and cheapest and best system for looking at all the evidence. You produce it all in a court of law. Have a real defense — an internationally recognized defense. And then put them away forever.”

Filed under: Afghanistan, Democracy, Freedoms, Hate Crime, homegrown terror, Middle East, Pakistan, Pakistani Taliban, President Obama, United States Tagged: Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights, Cuba, GITMO, Guantanamo, Guantanamo Bay, Gulag, Human rights, NDAA, President Obama, United Nations

The following story (part 2, the 1st instalment as it were, was published at http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2011/11/16/a-window-into-womens-world-in-yemen/) is that of Amal Hassan, a young Yemeni woman who from the time she drew her first breath has had to fight for what many in the West take for granted: freedom, education, pursuit of happiness.

Raised in a conservative Muslim Yemeni family, Amal came across society’s biased view of what a woman should be, should do and should most importantly NOT want.
A free spirit and a brave soul, Amal fought all her life. Now facing an injustice she can no longer fight alone, she needs your help, our help.
Will you step up or simply let her fire extinguished in Yemen’s Great prison?

Written by Mogib Hassan on behalf and for Amal Hassan, Edited by Catherine Shakdam

“After years of silence and darkness I feel I must speak out the truth and paint to the world the harsh reality of living in Yemen. All over the world women seem to be enjoying freedom and independence…where I come from, where I was raised, Yemen, those words have no meaning. The reality of being a woman in Yemen is pretty bleak. No Freedom, no choice, no independence, only obedience to men-made rules in a men-made system.
For I was born a girl I spent all my waking hours in shackles, a prisoner in my own home, my own heart and my own mind.
Yemen, my country, my home is and always has been my prison.

Most Yemeni men have a very clear vision of what a woman should do and should be: a devoted and submissive object which only purpose in life should be to serve and obey.
If there is one thing that unites men in my country it is that belief that women have to be kept in check and prevented from bringing shame to the family.
I wish men would use this energy and dedication to bring down injustices rather than stand up for a system which is not only unjust but also obsolete.

Strangely enough Islam is the only religion which clearly enounces women’s right, given them a status which on many aspects is far greater than men. Rather than belittle women as many westerners would believe, Islam gives women their rightful place within society, Islam puts women at the centre of it all, since women are after the pillars of any society.

But men in my country chose to turn a blind eye, preferring to assert their own predominance through violence and repression.

The corrupt regime under which my countrymen are living under has managed to turn my nation into a vile and jungle like world where only the powerful and mighty are allowed to oppress and abuse the weak without fear of consequences.
Most of all, women are suffering. But maybe most troubling of all, women are conditioned in such a way that they live in the belief that thing are the way they should be.

For they fear for their “honour” men are locking their wives, daughters and mothers away. In the world I grew up in, women are always responsible, always to blame…we are the root of all evil it seems.
This circle went on for too long. I stand today to say no more repression, no more shackles and no more fear. Today I stand for me and my sisters, I stand for freedom and justice.
Today I reclaim my life, not as a Muslim or a Yemeni and not even as a woman but as me, Amal Hassan.”

It took Amal many years to gather up the courage and the necessary strength she needed to embark on this revolutionary journey. For many her plight might seem benign and foreign, but to so many Middle Eastern women her plight will ring true.

Beyond feminism and a simple stand for rights equality, Amal is defying a millennia old misogynist system where women have no place but behind the walls of their homes.

Beside her brother, her entire family has turned its back on her.

Despite the risks and maybe because of them, Amal decided that she would see her fight through, that she would stand the course of her life no matter the outcome.

She said: “I knew it was going to be an endless war between me and Society. But I also knew that I had to start even though I ventured onto unknown territory. I am doing my utmost not to lose in a society where women are always the losers.”

Though Yemeni law is based on Islamic sharia (inspired from the Quran and the teachings of Prophet Mohamed PBUH) it has been interpreted in such a way that men have gained the advantage, corrupting the very essence of Islam’s position on women.

Even though she knew she stood no chance, Amal decided back in 2010 to end her nightmare of a life with her abusive husband.
She urged her family to stand by her and support her while she was seeking a divorce.
Although she argued her spouse was treated her more like a possession than the woman with whom he had built a home with, constantly beating her and lying to her, she failed to gain her family’s support.

In many families, divorces are seen as shameful, a dent in one’s stature and morality.
Of course no matter the circumstances women are to blame for the split.

In Yemen and to an extent the Arab World, a woman is expected to stay married. The fact that her husband might turn out to be a cold blooded murderer is of very little importance for Society. The words ‘till death do us part take on a whole new meaning in Yemen as in essence only in death can women escape their husbands.
This is not to say that many families do not live in perfect harmony, in respect and understanding of each other. But for those marriages which do fail, there is no hope of escape for women. They are doomed to endure a life of misery for Society frown upon divorce the same way the West did on those who contracted Syphilis.

Most young women in Yemen do not even have the luxury of meeting their future husband as men and women should not mix. Some do not even have the luxury to choose whom they will be linked to for the rest of their life.

“In Yemen, marriages are business transactions where a father trades his daughter to the highest bidder and where the groom tries to bank a discount bride. The then sold bride has to honourably stay by her husband’ sides forever holding her tongue.
If the man however feels unsatisfied he can always send back his possession back to her family where she will bury her shame.
And if in Islam men and most importantly husbands are meant to protect, cherish and provide for their other half, Yemeni laws have translated those duties into something much sinister, allowing men to physically punish their wives if they feel they failed to obey them. Battery is a man’s right, his prerogative where I was born.
Luckily some men prefer not to exercise that right!
I gradually realised that there was something illogical in that way of thinking.
After years of suffering I took up the challenge. My protector was my abuser, and I was going to fight to pry myself from him.”

Amal filed for a divorce after 14 years of abuse.

For more than a decade she lived his prisoner, forced to stay at home while he was away on holiday with other women, forced to live from the scraps he was given her and her children for he cared little for their wellbeing while he was living large elsewhere.

“He was feeding me and the children the way he wanted, allowing us out when he wanted and not showing the slightest respect to me as a person with a mind, interests, rights and feelings which is in a way typical of the average marriage in Yemen. No one would seriously consider women’s feelings or rather winnings.”

Amal appealed to several NGOs in the hope that they would help her get her freedom as she knew that without proper legal representation she did not stand a chance of appearing to Court.
Sadly she never heard back from any of them.

“Despite being an Academic my husband refused to understand my thirst for knowledge preventing me from exploring my interests. I felt trap, condemned to live in misery for my own parents refused to see my unhappiness.”

After years of struggle Amal claimed her freedom. For that she had to outcast herself from her family, becoming a pariah within her own people.

“The price paid was accepting the fact that I was no longer part of my own family but at the same time no longer under threat from my brothers who were supposed to be the decision makers in my life.”

After obtaining her divorce and paying a rather high sum of money to her husband in exchange for her release she was finally able to take flight, free to do what she wanted.
While planning her future she moved in with her brother, Mogib Hassan the one man who had constantly supported her and encouraged to be her own person no matter what anyone else said.

In a matter of months Amal learnt how to drive and enrolled herself at University to complete her Master degree, hoping to then be able to provide for her 3 children.

At the time Amal did not know that Yemen’s justice system gave men a 3 month timeframe within which they could unilaterally revoke the divorce, without even informing or consulting their wives.
To do this the man needs only to go to a notary and write a letter claiming his wife back unconditionally. Unfortunately it is what Abdul Malek Almamary (Amal’s ex-husband) did.

From that moment on Amal was legally obliged to return to her husband.

“This confirms my great regret of being a woman in such an abusive culture. No matter the risk I will never go back to him. I am a free human being, and if I am ever forced to go back I would kill myself.”

Amal then turned to human rights organizations, hoping that they would intervene on her behalf and free her forever from her master. Time and time again she appealed; time and time again she was let down.

Although Amal’s husband had failed for years to provide for her and their children preferring to pursue other pleasures, he was never held accountable for his actions. Yemen justice system had declared him the winner from the” get go”, for Amal had no means to pressure anyone into defending her interests and her rights.

Things got even more complicated when the Revolution broke out.
Her brother, Mogib who was so far financially supporting her lost his job as a journalist and was threatened by the regime for speaking out against President Ali Abdullah Saleh.
Soon enough Mogib and Amal realized that they had to flee in order to remain safe.

Their apartment became one of the regime’s target and they both feared that Homeland Security would come one day and imprison them all.

Problem is, in Yemen a woman cannot travel out of the country without a written authorization from her guardian, in which case her husband.
After many trials and tribulations, Mogib managed to bribe enough government officials for his sister to be let through at the airport.

Amal, Mogib and the 3 children left for Cairo, Egypt.

Her husband has now taken several steps towards “recovering” Amal as he now knows that she is in hiding in Egypt.
Potentially Amal could be deported back to Yemen against her consent since she is still legally bound to her husband and given he has the final say.

Her only hope now lies in being granted a refugee status by the UN or having Yemeni officials stand up for her rights and pronounces an irrevocable divorce for which there are legal grounds.

On Monday Januray 10th, Amal is meeting with UN officers in relation to her case (UN reg NO: 28031).

Citizens’ statement of concern about the democratic process in Pakistan democratic and safety of human rights defenders, to be released to the media on Jan 5, 2012 (to endorse, please enter your information in the form at this link)

We, the undersigned, express our grave concern that Pakistani human rights defenders are being threatened and intimidated for their stance in the ‘memogate’ case. We are also concerned at the danger this crisis poses to Pakistan’s democratic political process that had taken a step forward with the elections of 2008.

No elected civilian government in Pakistan has yet completed its tenure and handed over power to the next government following democratic elections. If the current government manages to do this, it will be a first step in an ongoing process that is essential to Pakistan’s peace, progress and prosperity in the long run.

Those under threat include former Ambassador of Pakistan to the US, Husain Haqqani, who returned to Pakistan and tendered his resignation in order to ensure a free and fair inquiry into the ‘memogate’ matter that he is accused of engineering.

The so-called ‘memogate’ affair revolves around a letter that Amb Haqqani is accused of sending to then US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen allegedly at the behest of Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari, seeking American help to prevent a military coup in Pakistan. Mansur Ijaz, an American businessman of Pakistani origin, delivered the note to former US National Security Advisor Gen. James Jones to pass on to Adml Mullen allegedly at Amb Haqqani’s behest. Amb Haqqani has denied writing any such memo at anyone’s behest or asking Ijaz to deliver it to anyone.

Amb Haqqani has been barred from leaving the country, which is a denial of his fundamental right as a free citizen of Pakistan. Under threat both by the ‘religious’ extremists and the security agencies, he is currently a virtual prisoner confined for his own safety to the Prime Minister’s residence.

Also facing threats is his lawyer, former Supreme Court Bar Association President, Asma Jahangir, who has termed the Supreme Court judgment of Dec 30, 2011 a “victory” for the security establishment that she alleges is behind the case.

Amb Haqqani’s wife, Farahnaz Ispahani, a Member of Pakistan’s Parliament, also threatened, is currently in the US where she had come for medical checkups. Columnist Marvi Sirmed, who has written fearlessly against the ‘religious’ extremists and in support of Amb Haqqani, has also been receiving threats, Columnist Marvi Sirmed, who has written fearlessly against the ‘religious’ extremists and in support of Amb Haqqani, has also been receiving threats, as has senior journalist Najam Sethi. There are numerous other journalists and activists who live under threat for their outspoken views; some are forced to seek politial asylum abroad. This is essentially the case with anyone in Pakistan who counters or challenges the narrative of the ideological security state.

Without going into merits of the case, obvious contradictions in the ‘evidence’, or political motivations behind it, it is evident that it is at the crux of a matter vital to Pakistan’s politics, that is, whether Pakistan is going to be run by a civilian elected government along the lines of a parliamentary democracy that ensures fundamental rights, or along the lines of a ideological narrative dictated by the security establishment that holds fundamental rights subservient to its interpretation of ‘national security’.

Too many people in Pakistan have fallen to the ideological monster unleashed by the establishment pursuing a narrow, ideological interpretation of ‘national security’. It is time for a fundamental paradigm shift in Pakistan’s politics, to allow the nation to fulfill its potential as a progressive, forward looking South Asian nation at peace with its neighbours and the world. We urge the Pakistan government, judiciary and security establishment to play their constitutional roles, cooperate with each other and focus on re-establishing the rule of law and in order to make this possible.

In the meantime, be aware that the world is watching to ensure that no harm comes to those who are taking a stand towards this end.

Endorsed (listed alphabetically; names still coming in are being updated; please endorse at this link):
• A. Chhachhi, Sociologist, Netherlands
• Abdul Ghafoor Chaudhry Social Activist Canada
• Abdul Hamid Bashani Khan, Barrister, Solicitor & Notary Public, Canada
• Abdullah Hussein Novelist Lahore
• Afzal Tahir Kashmir International Front/United Kashmir Journal, London, United Kingdom
• Ahmad Rafay Alam, Lawyer
• Ali Kazmi Student Islamabad, Pakistan
• Ali Arqam Blogger, Social Activist Peshawar
• Ammar Yasir, Marketing Head, Tea Break Networks Karachi
• Annie Syedah Student United States
• Anushka Jatoi Student Karachi
• Asif Khan Earth Day Network Washington DC
• Ayesha Humayun Khan Citizen of Pakistan Dubai
• Ayesha Jalal, historian, Boston/Lahore
• Ayesha Siddiqa, Political Scientist, Pakistan
• Beena Sarwar, journalist
• Faisal Mahmood Officer in National Bank Malir
• Faraz Sheikh, social activist, Lahore
• Farooq Tariq, spokesperson Labour Party Pakistan, Lahore
• Fazil Jamili, Poet, Journalist
• Fakhar Ul-Islam Project Manager United Kingdom
• Fayaz Ahmad Historian Peshawar
• Ghazi Salahuddin, journalist and columnist, Karachi
• Hamad Ur Rehman CEO/ a human and social rights activist. Lyallpur.
• Haris Gazdar, researcher
• Harsh Kapoor, South Asia Citizens Web (sacw.net)
• Ibrahim Sajid Malick, Technologist, New York
• Dr. Ijaz Khan Professor of International relations University of Peshawar
• Dr. Ilmana Fasih, physician, health activist, blogger Canada
• Iqbal Alavi, social activist
• Irfan Mufti South Asia Partnership Pakistan Lahore, Pakistan
• Kamyla Marvi Citizen Karachi
• Khawar Mumtaz, Shirkat Gah. Pakistan
• Kiran Nazish Journalist, Activist, Lahore
• Karamat Ali, Labour Rights and Peace activist
• Meera Ghani, Environmental and Peace Activist, Belgium
• Mehmal Sarfraz, Journalist, Lahore
• Mehr Alwy Finance Manager UK
• Michael Renner Researcher U.S. / Germany
• Dr. Mohammad Taqi, Physician & Columnist
• Muhammad Idris Khattak Researcher OSI Pakistan
• Mohsin Sayeed Journalist Karachi
• Moniza Inam, journalist, Dawn, Karachi
• N. D. Pancholi, Secretary, Indian Renaissance Institute, Ghaziabad (UP), India
• Nadeem Yousafi Businessman Peshawar, Pakistan.
• Noman Quadri, student
• Noorjehan Bilgrami Artsist Karachi
• Dr. Osama Siddique, Law Professor, Pakistan
• Pervez Hoodbhoy, Physicist
• Dr Pritam Singh DPhil, Reader in Economics, Faculty of Business, Oxford Brookes University, UK
• Qurratulain Zaman Media Consultant, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung
• S. Abbas Raza, Editor, 3QuarksDaily.com
• S. M. Naseem, economist
• Saba Hamid, Actor, Pakistan
• Saba Quraishi, activist, United States
• Sabahat Ashraf (“iFaqeer”) Communcator. Citizen. Fakir. Silicon Valley, California
• Sadiqa Salahuddin, educationist, Indus Resource Centre, Pakistan
• Saleha Haque Student University of Salford, UK
• Sana Saleem Activist, Blogger Karachi
• Sarah Suhail Lawyer
• Sehba Sarwar Writer
• Shahla Haeri, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Boston University
• Shandana Mohmand, Political Scientist, UK
• Shahnawaz Student Karachi
• Shama Noman Educationist
• Shayan Afzal Khan, Citizen and activist, Pakistan
• Shahzad Ahmad Country Coordinator, Bytes for All, Pakistan
• Siddharth Nayak Managing Director , The Jurists ; President : All India Law Students Association New Delhi
• Soulat Pasha director Titan Energy Karachi
• Tahera Ahmad Physician Germany
• Tahir Saeed Senior clinical psychologist Ireland
• Tazeen Project Director, Intermedia
• Waqas Ali CRSD Peshawar
• Yasser Latif Hamdani, Lawyer
• Zeeba T. Hashmi Citizen Lahore
• Zohra Yusuf, human rights activist
• Zulfiqar Shah, The Institute for Social Movements, Pakistan Hyderabad

  You would have to be exceptionally callous to be able to forget the image of a woman being shot in broad daylight; unarmed and seven month’s pregnant. She was amongst the five foreigners, who were shot in Kharotabad by security officials. … Continue reading →

Egyptian women marching during the January 25 revolution. Photo by Hossam el-Hamalawy

Many things could be said about the past year, but at the very least it could not be considered boring. Within two weeks of the new year, protests over government corruption in Tunisia ousted its long standing dictator, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali. That event, which took many observers by surprise, triggered a wave of protests throughout the region. As the year went on, protests in Egypt overthrew Hosni Mubarak and brought on a NATO intervention in Libya while the Yemeni, Syrian and Bahraini governments responded to discontent in their countries with increasing violence and Morocco introduced a new constitution. Of course such protests were not limited to North Africa and the Middle East; as early as January similar protests against corruption and authoritarianism were seen in Gabon before spreading to Mauritania, Djibouti, Uganda, Malawi, Swaziland and Senegal. Further north, protest movements emerged in Spain and Greece against government austerity measures and high unemployment, while Israelis took to the streets over the summer in record numbers in the name of social justice and protests grew in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. By the end of the year, the Occupy movement broke out in the US and Canada against the large involvement of money in politics and the lack of economic opportunity for the average citizen while large student protests over educational reform broke out in Colombia and Chile. And finally, in December protests against government corruption reached all the way to the doors of the Kremlin in Russia. So numerous and active has the protest calendar been over the past 12 months, it is quite possible to narrate the entire year only in major protest movements and events.

Of course, other events happened in the field of human rights. The drama of last year’s contested presidential elections in Cote d’Ivoire continued into 2011 with open fighting between parties loyal to each of the candidates. Just two weeks after the UN Security Council approved a no-fly zone over Libya, it also adopted Resolution 1975 which allowed the French-supported peacekeeping mission there to use all necessary measures to protect civilian life. Two weeks later, incumbent president and 2010 election loser Laurent Gbagbo was arrested by UN forces in his home, ending the standoff. In late November, Gbagbo was transferred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague following an arrest warrant for crimes against humanity. His transfer means that it is likely he will be the first former head of state to stand trial at the ICC.

Both the UN intervention in Cote d’Ivoire and the NATO intervention in Libya gave the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine a boost. While some debate whether NATO overstepped its UN authorization in its campaign, possibly hurting the effectiveness of the doctrine, these two events illustrated that even the international community can learn from its past mistakes when facing imminent civilian carnage, even if the application of the policy is uneven.

Elsewhere in Africa, the Republic of South Sudan officially became independent in July after a referendum in January that saw over 98% of the population vote for independence. Yet as South Sudan celebrated a new chapter of their own history and the end of a six-year long peace process, the UN declared a famine in parts of Somalia following an ongoing drought throughout the entire region and new violence broke out along the just created border between Sudan and South Sudan.

Of course, disasters – both manmade and natural – were not limited to the Global South. In July, Anders Behring Breivik set off a car bomb in Oslo and attacked a summer camp on the Norwegian island of Utøya, killing 87 people and shocking the normally calm Nordic country. In August, a small protest against police brutality spun out of control and set off four days of rioting across the United Kingdom.

Looking at this brief summary of the past year, it is easy to understand why the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, Navi Pillay, declared 2011 as the year where “human rights went viral.” However not all of year’s events treated human rights kindly. The execution of Muamar Gaddafi at the hands of rebel forces in Libya, and the cheers that came from some corners at the online footage of his abuse at the hands of his captors, reminded us that even monsters deserve compassion and we all have it in us to deny others basic dignity. In the US, the execution of Troy Davis brought the death penalty back into the spotlight, but even a sustained media campaign on the apparent shortcomings of the case against him could not save his life. The year was also not a good one for journalists, as the Committee to Protect Journalist announced that 45 journalists were killed in 2011, with Pakistan being the most dangerous country for journalists this year. And while some claimed 2011 to be the year of social media, that also came with tragic consequences as citizen journalists and online activists found themselves in the crosshairs of various groups, from drug cartels in Mexico to government forces in North Africa and the Middle East.

Finally, while there were many positive developments over the past 12 months, the year ended on a sour note with news that President Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act, including the troublesome provision that allows the government to indefinitely detain US citizens in the United States if they are suspected of terrorism. There are many problematic aspects to this provision, not just for human rights but also for the basic principles of democracy and due process in the US. If nothing else, this quiet act at the end of 2011 will give activists a new cause to start 2012 with.

Protester in Bahrain. Photo by Al Jazeera English.

As no Year in Review would be incomplete without a list, here are some of my top picks for 2011:

Most Unexpected event

As I noted at the start, this year has been an incredibly active one for protests, the type of year that probably hasn’t been seen since 1968. Even still, 2011 has been more remarkable in many ways because of the diverse locations where these movements have sprung up and in how they built upon each other throughout the year, aided by relationships forged through social media and increased global communications. While analysts may have suggested that major uprisings or protests were due in some of these countries for a while, I doubt that any of them would have – or even could have – predicted the way these protests merged and multiplied, both online and in the streets. There is no single name for this trend or phenomenon, but that is my choice for most unexpected event of the year.

Most important person or group

Closely related to my choice for most unexpected event, my pick for the most important person or group is actually a generation. Whatever you choose to call them – Generation Y, Millennials, Generation Next, or some other iteration – their presence has been undeniable in shaping major events of the past year. In 1966, Robert F. Kennedy gave a speech at University Cape Town where he memorably stated, “Few will have the greatness to bend history, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events. And in the total of all those acts will be written the history of a generation.” After years of being mostly defined by their consumer habits and entertainment choices, this past year saw this generation find its voice against injustice, as well as the courage to work towards a different world.

Book of the year

My choice for book of the year highlights the aborted Persian Spring rather than this year’s Arab Spring. “Then They Came For Me” by Maziar Bahari tells of his months in Iran’s infamous Evin Prison for his journalistic coverage of the 2009 Iranian Election Protests. While his period in prison was Kafkaesque at times, the story also highlights the humanity of the protestors and ordinary Iranians in their search for dignity in a country that they love.

What to look for in 2012…

While 2011 was a major game-changer in some ways, on the other hand I find that my outlook for 2012 is not much different from what I predicted last year. I’m comfortable with that since much of what I predicted for 2010 came true this past year (and being only a year off is fine with me).

Digital rights and what freedom of expression means in the 21^st century will continue to be a major human rights issue, especially after the EU quietly passed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Act earlier this month and the possibility that the US House of Representatives will pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the new year.

Likewise protests are also likely to continue in 2012. The four countries that managed to overthrow their dictators this year – Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen – still face significant battles in stabilizing their governments and bringing about a full democratic transition. Protests and subsequent crackdowns by the government continue in both Bahrain and Syria, with no end in sight for either. The only country in North Africa to largely escape the protests that swept the region is Algeria, but already some are predicting that may change soon. Similarly, the Occupy movement is determined to not fade away in the new year as they come up with new methods of protest even as many of their camps are disbanded. As this past year demonstrated, protests movements in one corner of the globe can bring about new movements elsewhere, so what is in store for 2012 remains a mystery to even the most astute analysts.

Corporate involvement and influence in politics is also likely to be an ongoing issue. This is the central focus of the Occupy movement, but there have been other indications that more people are focusing on corporate accountability as well. In particular, the increasing evidence of Western technology firms selling surveillance equipment to repressive regimes have raised new questions about what responsibility for-profit organization have in the consequences of their products. Elsewhere, there is growing attention on the long term impact that increased involvement of Chinese firms in Africa may have for both political and economic democracy in the region and the growth of human rights. No matter where you look, corporations are facing more scrutiny which in unlikely to go away anytime soon.

In the end, what I am left with in the final hours of 2011 is how much more optimistic I am about this coming year than I was last year. So much has happened in the past 12 months that it can boggle the mind. But while some events were heartbreaking, most of the past year has been uplifting and at times, even inspiring. If 2011 was the year when “human rights went viral” then it is now on us to make 2012 the year when the world finally consolidated those rights and made them count.

The Pakistan Medical Association, Karachi has strongly condemned the brutal murder of Dr. Baqir Shah, Police Surgeon, Quetta… The reason for his killing is obvious: that he was the key witness of the Kharotabad incident. He had conducted the post-mortem examination of the victims and had given the factual version that the victims had died due to the indiscriminate firing of the LEAs and not due to an explosion… PMA condemns colleague’s murder | Dr Baqir Shah.

It is an outrage and a violation of freedom of expression that Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) continues to block Baloch Hal in Pakistan at a time when this voice needs to be heard across the country now, more than ever.  Reproduced below, BH editorial pegged on the target killing of Dr Baqir Shah (emphasis added):

Editorial: War Against Baloch Doctors

Balochistan: Doctors sit in protest at the murder of their colleagues. Photo: Baloch Hal

The late police surgeon was somewhat an easy target for terrorists for a host of reasons. His situation could enable any murderer to immediately vanish in thin air because of the circumstances that shrouded the late doctor. He gained enormous national and international media attention after conducting the postmortem of five foreigners who were killed on May 17 in what is now remembered as the infamous and tragic Kharotabad incident.

Dr. Shah impressed everyone with his absolute honesty and professionalism when he contested the unconvincing official description of what had actually happened in Kharotabad. He contradicted the version of the events as narrated by the Frontier Corps (FC) and the police.

Police in Quetta say it is premature to say whether or not Dr. Shah’s murder was a case of targeted killing. Such assertions are simply meant either to delay investigations or exempt the government from its accountability. What have the law enforcement agencies been doing in the past two months regarding the murder cases of two other Baloch doctors? It is not a coincident that all doctors being killed in Balochistan are Balochs. While we do recognize the government’s limitations given its poor and slow investigation apparatus but does it mean that the law enforcement authorities have utterly failed to make an inch of progress in chasing elements who killed Dr. Mazhar Baloch, the provincial president of Pakistan Medical Association (PMA) on October 15? Whether these killers linked to each other and share a common hit-list of Baloch doctors and professionals remains unknown but still guessable.

In another similar case two weeks ago, on December 16th to be precise, Dr. Naseem Baloch, the chief medical officer of Gwadar’s District Headquarters Hospital, was shot dead by unidentified persons.

These killings have triggered a wave of insecurity among Baloch doctors and also tremendously infuriated the already enraged Baloch population. Besides the common Baloch in the streets even professional doctors and seasoned politicians are holding the government and its certain shadowy wings responsible for this wave of fatal violence. Even some Baloch members of the the provincial cabinet have criticized their own government.

During a session of the Balochistan Assembly on December 17th, one could see the level of legislators’ powerlessness that they walked out the assembly session against the killing of Dr. Naseem Baloch.

“The provincial government allocates Rs11 billion for the maintenance of law and order, but still police and other law enforcing agencies have failed to give an output or a positive result,” said Asadullah Baloch, minister for agriculture who is also the secretary general of the Balochistan National Party (BNP-Awami), “The senior police officers must be held accountable for their failure to protect the life and property of the people”

The Pakistan Medical Association and Baloch Doctors’ Forum (BDF) have jointly announced three days of mourning and a strike in Quetta’s Bolan Medical College Complex and the Civil Hospital. Yet, the strike is likely to have a deeper impact in the Bloch-dominated districts where it may prolong for more than three days. The BDF has also highlighted the cases of two disappeared Baloch doctors, Dr. Din Mohammad Marri and Dr. Akbar Marri whose families hold the state intelligence agencies responsible for their disappearance.

Doctors in any society deserve profound respect for their commitment to serving the humanity. In a backward area like Balochistan, where the health indicators are extremely murky, very few young men and women manage to accomplish their medical education. They strive tirelessly for at least seven years to get a degree in medicine. The first thing most of the non-local medical students (do) who study on reserved seats at the province’s lone medical college, Bolan, quit Balochistan as soon as they complete their eduction. Only some  professionally committed doctors, who surely receive a number of better offers and opportunities to go to Europe and USA for a better personal and professional life, turn down these attractions and agree to serve in the conflict-stricken province of Balochistan.

Hence, it is total senselessness to subject doctors to enforced disappearance for several months and deny him the primary human right of free trial. International human rights groups and Doctors Without Borders should quickly take up the issue with the provincial and federal authorities to ensure the recovery of the missing Baloch doctors.

Doctors like Mr. Shah are role models for our society because they selflessly cure the ailing humanity and also firmly and professionally stand against all pressures intended to urge them to compromise on their professional integrity.

Chief Minister Raisani’s intervention and approval of an inquiry into the murder is a welcome decision although dozens of such investigation committees formed in the past have culminated into stark failure. Yet, we wonder what apologies to Balochistan from leaders like President Zardari or Imran Khan mean when elements responsible for Baloch genocide are not exposed and brought to justice.

(MALIK SIRAJ AKBAR)
Editor-in-Chief
The Baloch Hal