UN – Page 11 – Minivan News

UN war crimes report on Sri Lanka foreign policy challenge for Maldives

The Sri Lankan government is grappling with the political fallout of a leaked UN report accusing it – and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) rebels – of potential crimes against humanity in the closing days of the civil war.

The report on the final stage of the war between LTTE and the Sri Lankan authorities was leaked to the media, containing allegations, among others, that the army shelled hospitals, UN facilities and aid workers with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The report further alleges that the government intimidated and in some cases silenced the media, even abducting journalists in “white vans”.

Meanwhile, UK television network Channel 4 last week said it will air what it claims is “probably the most horrific” footage the station has ever shown, after obtaining “trophy” videos of what it claims are Sri Lankan war crimes.

According to the network, footage obtained by the station includes “extrajudicial executions filmed by Sri Lankan soldiers as war trophies on their phones; the aftermath of shelling in civilian camps and hospitals alleged to have been deliberately targeted by Sri Lankan government forces; dead female Tamil fighters who appear to have been systematically raped; and pictures which document Tamil fighters alive in the custody of Sri Lankan government forces and then later dead, apparently having been executed.”

The director of ITN productions, Callum Macrae, told the UK’s Guardian newspaper that the filmmakers had “trawled through hours of devastating imagery shot by Tamils under attack and Sri Lankan soldiers as war trophies. The claims made by eyewitnesses in the film appear to be illustrated in each case by video footage or still images.”

The Sri Lankan government has reportedly complained to the UK’s media regulator Ofcom regarding the station’s intention to air the footage.

Channel 4’s announcement comes a week after a UN report on the closing days of the war between the Tamil Tigers and the Sri Lankan authorities was leaked to the media, containing allegations, among others, that the army shelled hospitals, UN facilities and aid workers with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The report further alleges that the government intimidated and in some cases silenced the media, even abducting journalists in “white vans”.

“The government says it pursued a ‘humanitarian rescue operation’ with a policy of ‘zero civilian casualties’. In stark contrast, the Panel found credible allegations, which if proven, indicate that a wide range of serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law were committed both by the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE, some of which would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity,” the report reads.

“Despite grave danger in the conflict zone, the LTTE refused civilians permission to leave, using them as hostages, at times even using their presence as a strategic human buffer between themselves and the advancing Sri Lanka Army. It implemented a policy of forced recruitment throughout the war, but in the final stages greatly intensified its recruitment of people of all ages, including children as young as fourteen. The LTTE forced civilians to dig trenches for its own defenses, thereby contributing to blurring the distinction between combatants and civilians and exposing civilians to additional harm. All of this was done in a quest to pursue a war that was clearly lost; many civilians were sacrificed on the altar of the LTTE cause and its efforts to preserve its senior leadership.

A former UN spokesperson for the UN in Sri Lanka was reported in the UK’s Independent newspaper as saying that the report “damns the government of Sri Lanka’s so-called war on terror, which incidentally killed many thousands of civilians. The Tamil Tigers were equally rotten in their disdain for life.”

Sri Lankan media has meanwhile been busily criticising the veracity of the report, the UN panel involved, and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon himself.

Yesterday, Ki-moon announced that he would welcome a mandate from the UN Human Rights Council, Security Council or General Assembly to launch an international war crimes investigation into the final two years of Sri Lanka’s civil war, as per the recommendation of the UN report.

Such a mandate would require consent from the Sri Lankan government – unlikely, given that it has labelled the report as “fundamentally flawed and patently biased” – or through a decision by the UN’s 192 member states.

The US Embassy in Sri Lanka has also privately expressed concerns about the Sri Lankan government’s actions during the closing days of the war.

In a leaked US Embassy cable sent on January 15 2010, Ambassador Patricia Butenis remarked there was a clear “lack of attention to accountability” following the mass killings of Tamils in the final days of the war, a situation she described as “regrettable” but unsurprising.

“There are no examples we know of a regime undertaking wholesale investigations of its own troops or senior officials for war crimes while that regime or government remained in power,” Butenis said in the cable.

“In Sri Lanka this is further complicated by the fact that responsibility for many of the alleged crimes rests with the country’s senior civilian and military leadership, including President Rajapaksa and his brothers and [then] opposition candidate General Fonseka.”

The UN report and subsequent international furore likely to be generated in the wake of the Channel 4 program places the Maldives in a difficult position, between its stated (and much promoted) human rights agenda, and its national and economic interest.

Sri Lanka is one of the Maldives’ key economic and regional partners, and a major transit hub for both trade and tourists visiting the country. President Mahindra Rajapaksa extended the Maldives a US$200 million credit line in November, and even travelled to the Maldives to mediate a dispute between the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party and opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) in July last year. President Mohamed Nasheed subsequently attended Rajapaksa’s swearing in ceremony.

At the same time the Maldives is a vocal member of the UN Human Rights Council and an avid proponent of human rights, with the Foreign Ministry only recently declaring that it was severing diplomatic ties with the Libyan government due of “clear evidence that the Gaddafi regime is guilty of crimes against humanity and war crimes.”

It is not inconceivable that were the UN’s case to gather momentum and international public opinion, the matter could go to vote and the Maldives could be compelled to publicly defend its neighbour from the international community.

President Nasheed’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair emphasised that the Maldives saw the end of both the terrorist attacks and the civil war in Sri Lanka as “a very positive development.”

“The government has very close ties with [Sri Lankan President] Rajapaksa,” Zuhair said. “Our position is that the Maldives has very good relations with neighbouring countries, and has hundreds if not thousands of years of trade and bilateral relationships with Sri Lanka.”

The post-war situation, he suggested, was “fluid”.

“I’m concerned the UN report is a bit belated. Why say it now? Why not when the war was going on? My point is that this report only appeared after the war was over. We support the Sri Lankan government’s desire for peace and harmony, and any government that brought about that peace should be held in high honour.”

If an investigation was to take place, Zuhair suggested, “it should happen in an independent manner, with reconciliation on both sides.”

The Maldives’ Foreign Minister Ahmed Naseem is currently in the UK and was not responding at time of press.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Fear and acclimatisation in Fares-Maathoda

In the first part of a special report from the island of Fares-Maathoda, Minivan News looks at the challenges for communities developing beyond Male’s glance as they attempt to switch to decentralised governance and overcome their natural vulnerabilities.

If the rate of development in the Maldives could be measured in the availability of Lavazza-branded espresso, then the conjoined islands of Fares-Maathoda in the Gaafu Dhaalu Atoll, while offering a very warm welcome, remain an instant coffee type-of-place.

With its sparsely populated community estimated at about 1000 people, the island is dense with jungle vegetation that rests alongside inhabited and incomplete homes, while crabs on the beach nestle between piles of coconut husk, used food wrapping and milk cartons amidst views of an apparently endless blue horizon.

The relatively unique geography of the islands could be said to reflect a wealth of challenges facing the wider country regarding waste management, coastal protection and economic development.

Since being formed back in the 1990’s via reclaimed land over a shallow passage of water linking the two islands in an attempt to create a small craft harbour for its residents, the UN has cited concerns from Fares-Maathoda’s residents that flooding has been made worse and far more frequent as a result.

While the islands may not specifically serve as a microcosm for the nation’s delicate beauty and democratic reform process, UN Resident Coordinator Andrew Cox said he believed that Fares-Maathoda was very typical in reflecting the Maldives’ vulnerability to natural elements as well as the development needs of its people.

“This counts as a vulnerable island; vulnerable economically and all the other issues that come along with that,” he said. “People make their money off fishing here and there are not a lot of other options or a strong tourism industry in the area. So you don’t get people earning money and bringing income in that way. One of the things that research shows is that islands or communities do very well if their livelihoods are good and if they are well organised.”

Since coming to power, President Mohamed Nasheed has garnered huge international coverage, as well as foreign accolades for his attempts in trying to champion the Maldives as a small nation working towards becoming a fully sustainable economy. Yet at island level, how are these commitments being seen?

Cox added that the time had perhaps come for government to be more inward looking by opening up national debate and understanding of what climate change could mean for the Maldives on an everyday basis.

“The president has been exceptional at selling climate change issues to the world. Yet I think the Maldives will benefit at every level through a basic of understanding what [climate change] is going to mean for the country and how it is that decisions are going to be made in the future about what are the best chances for economic growth. Where is it that people are going to be living? How are they going to be living?” he said. “All these things I think could be and must be fleshed out. I think it could be a very interesting national dialogue to have. There has been a certain amount already, but this about the future in the Maldives.”

Cox himself, along with representatives from the Ministry of Finance and Treasury, the Ministry of Housing and Environment, the National Office and the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) visited Fares-Maathoda on April 12 to meet with local councilors, and outline how Danish donor aid for funding climate change adaptation would be allocated on the island.

The allocated funding, which totals 5 million Danish Krone (Rf12 million) will be put into a scheme to support a wider number of future development projects targeted at offsetting the potential impacts on the country from climate change and rising sea levels. On Fares-Mathooda, some of the funds are being set aside for drainage and waste management projects.

Beyond president Nasheed’s international sustainability pledges, positioned on the other side of the country, and indeed the political spectrum, Fares-Mathooda, which elected five councillors into power from the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) in February’s local council elections, claims to have a great need for assistance in reducing its vulnerability to the sea and the elements.

Speaking to Minivan News, councillor Hussain Rasheed claimed that aside from the long-term threats of rising seas and freak natural disasters such as the 2004 Asian Tsunami, seasonal occurrences such as high tides were proving to be problematic for the island’s development.

The low-lying nature of the island had meant that storms and tidal swells were major problems for residents on the Fares side of the island, whom had in the past been forced to vacate to the Mathooda side for safety in certain circumstances.

“This is a very big problem, for instance, many people suffered psychologically when there was a tidal wave, and with many people affected, we needed a lot of assistance to relieve this suffering,” he said.

An engineer present at the meeting, as one of the bidders hoping to work on the climate change adaption projects for Fares-Mathooda, claimed that the low-lying geography of the island meant that waves of even a metre in height posed a huge flooding risk. The engineer added that the problem was made worse by the reclaimed land between the two formerly separate islands that had since been combined physically and administratively, limiting natural drainage options for water building up on the land.

In trying to address these concerns, Andrew Cox said that it was vital to focus on the specific vulnerabilities facing a community, island or an entire atoll in the case of the Maldives, rather than solely looking at large scale energy investments in a bid to provide national solutions to environmental and coastal management.

“What is it that people need? That is the bottom line,” he said. “People have been talking about climate change for a long-time, but it has been mostly focused around international negotiations to try and reverse carbon into the atmosphere. But so far there has not been an international deal,” he said.

Cox added that this failure for international agreement still hadn’t dampened interest from politicians, donors and NGOs in being seen to be “doing something” about climate change around the world.

“The big question that I think the Maldives can answer about climate adaption is, how do you do that? In real life what do these changes mean?” he asked.

According to Cox, like almost every other nation in the world, the Maldives does not have any large-scale examples of climate change programmes, but rather a great deal of smaller pilot projects designed to try and limit potential vulnerability to environmental changes. This he said, was often seen in a variety of areas such as water or waste management.

The UN representative said these smaller projects might be present on a number of islands in the form of different waste management projects that resulted in various levels of success.

“The central concept that we need to talk about and agree, is what happens when you bring all these things related to climate change together in one place? How do you make a material change in the vulnerability of one atoll?” he asked. “Even an atoll is too small, because the Maldives doesn’t have that much time, but you have to start somewhere. You take an atoll and see what it needs as a whole to get from point X on the vulnerability scale to point Y, which is hopefully above the minimum level of security.”

Just as important though, according to the UN Representative, would be the country’s attempts to overcome poverty through economic development measures, reducing a country’s vulnerability beyond investing in infrastructure alone.

“This is a concept that makes a lot of sense, but it hasn’t been done. The exciting thing for the Maldives is if you can go down that path, you can show donors the way. This will hopefully benefit the Maldives as well as international projects as well,” he said.

“It doesn’t necessarily mean all the answers will be here, but a lot of them might be.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Salaf attacks government’s decision to deploy MNDF soldiers as UN peacekeepers

Jamiyyathul Salaf, one of the Maldives’ largest and most active religious NGOs, has called on the government to withdraw a decision made by the cabinet to sent Maldives soldiers to UN conflict zones and take part in UN peacekeeping operations.

The Cabinet during last Tuesday’s meeting decided to finalise the participation of Maldivian soldiers in United Nations peacekeeping operations, noting that it was be” important for the Maldives to contribute to the efforts of these international agencies and institutions to ensure every country, every society and every individual had the opportunity to live in peace and security.”

However, “Taking part in the UN peacekeeping operations will force Maldivian forces to fight against Muslims which is unacceptable,” said Salaf in a statement. ”Everyone understands that the most of the wars against Muslims have been started without reasonable grounds, just because they are Muslims.”

Salaf claimed that biological weapons were used in these wars despite UN prohibitions concerning their use or manufacture.

“The history of such wars proves that non-believers have gathered and committed inhumane activities against Muslim women and children,” Salaf argued. ”The war in Iraq and Afghanistan are examples of places where such activities were practiced.”

Salaf noted that the Maldives had a very high crime rate and that civil defence was a higher priority than contributing to overseas peacekeeping operations.

”Disregarding our own society and getting involved in these matters for the sake of earing respect from powerful countries shows how much the future of this nation is being disregarded,” Salaf said. ”It will invite dangerous attacks on the country, from outside and within.”

Jamiyyathul Salaf furthermore claimed that any Muslim who assisted non-Muslims in a war against Muslims would themselves be branded infidels.

”Muslims will be obliged to treat him as a non-Muslim in all ways, such as if dead, burying without enshrouding the body, burying the body with other non-believer, and when dealing with inheritance matters the terms and condition that applies to a non-believer who dies in a war against Muslims will be applied to him,” the NGO said.

Referring to the incident where Prophet Mohamed’s (PBUH) uncle Abbas Bin Abdul Muthalib secretly embraced Islam and was forced to fight against Muslims in a battle where he lost his life, Salaf said the Prophet applied the same procedure as to what would be applied to non-believer if he died in a battle against Muslims.

During last week’s meeting, Cabinet agreed that participating in UN peacekeeping operations would enhance the country’s security capability through an improved understanding of the international security environment and integration with the international security architecture, according to the President’s Office.

”The Maldives’ participation in peacekeeping operations would also consolidate the country’s credibility on the international stage,” the President’s Office said.

UN peacekeepers include 98,863 uniformed personnel from 114 countries. The organisation’s limited terms of engagement led to widespread criticism of its inaction during the 1994 Rwandan genocide, in which 800,000 people died.

Since then UN peacekeepers have been more proactive in troubled countries, such as its current siege and helicopter strikes on the palace belonging to Ivory Coast President Laurent Gbagbo, who refused to step down and launched a campaign of ethnic cleansing after losing the country’s 2010 Presidential Election.

Correction: An earlier version of this story translated the Dhivehi term used in Jamiyyathul Salaf’s statement, ‘Kaafarun’, as ‘Christians’. A more accurate translation is ‘non-believers’.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

JCI president optimistic over Maldives development awareness following visit

The President of Junior Chamber International (JCI) has claimed that humanity is in a unique position for the first time in its history to be able to overcome development challenges and other restrictions on “Human Security” that may have been previously beyond its collective abilities.

The claims were made JCI World President Kentaro Harada following his visit to the Maldives last week to look at the organisation’s involvement in local development projects.

The JCI, an NGO which describes itself as a UN-affiliated network of young people and entrepreneurs in their 20s and 30s, claims to have over a quarter of a million members worldwide that work to collaborate on community development projects in their respective countries.

Harada said he believed that the country’s work and awareness of global development projects in fields such as the environment reflected the wider international acceptance and improved technical knowhow for overcoming challenges that once seemed insurmountable – even a few decades ago.

“We can all begin working together with small and medium enterprises in order to find solutions to major development goals,” he said. “There is a very high mountain to climb, but we can achieve this I am sure.”

The JCI president said that while showing such optimism in the 19th or 20th century may have seen him derided as a “crazy person”, he believed that there was a much greater acceptance today of the role young people and enterprises could play in working towards meeting goals outlined by organisations like the United Nations.

Maldives visit

Harada himself spent two days in the Maldives last week as part of a wider tour of JCI member nations during 2011, having already visited 13 countries since New Year. He used his Maldivian visit to view initiatives such as education and environment programmes that were being managed locally.

Visiting certain projects along with JCI Maldives President, Shaneez Saeed, Harada said that he had been pleasantly surprised during a school visit by statistics that claim 40 per cent of the Maldivian students were aware of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals.

“In most countries, around just one percent of the similar population know these goals,” he said.

Rather than a spot of last minute revision, Harada believed that the Maldives’ apparent success in detailing the eight UN objectives, based around attempts to try and globally cut poverty and hunger, combat diseases such as HIV/AIDS, improve child health and universal education and ensuring gender equality, all stemmed from concerns about the country’s long-term geographic stability.

“The main reason I believe [that these goals are commonly known in the Maldives] is down to environmental sustainability,” he said. “I remember breaking news all over the world of your government having underwater meetings. It is the efforts of groups and business working to these goals that have made these objectives well known.”

Although the JCI aims to work with business and organisations at local level to try and encourage various development programmes, the organisation claimed that the growing ease of connecting with others through social networking and the internet made communication about development challenges much easier.

Despite upholding differences between countries like the Maldives and Harada’s native Japan in terms of cultural identity, the NGO’s president said he still believed that it was vital for groups like the JCI to help try and foster mutual understanding between different nations and communities.

Shaneez Saeed, who heads the work of the JCI in the Maldives, told Minivan News following last week’s visit how training schemes brought to the country from other nations were highlighting possibilities for mutal understanding.

Saeed, used the example of a training programme held this month where parents were being encouraged to listen more to the views of children as successful examples of overturning nationally held beliefs.

Harada conceded that despite his overall optimism for global development initiatives such as those promoted by the JCI, there was significant work required to improve human security both nationally and internationally to ensure that everyone was able to have a “daily peaceful life”.

“This is true not only in the Maldives, but in Asia, Africa and all over the world. We cannot ignore that awful things happening in this world that require attention,” he said. “Since the end of the cold war, we have seen national governments trying to evade human rights.”

Nonetheless, Harada claimed that governments, businesses and everyday citizens had unprecedented opportunities to achieve significant steps forward in human development globally.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Comment: We should not stand aside while this dictator murders his own people

The following is a statement given by British Prime Minister David Cameron to the British Parliament in a bid to justify the UN Security Council’s resolution to authorise international military intervention in Libya, ahead of today’s air strikes. Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed was among the first world leaders to urge intervention.

Over three weeks ago, the people of Libya took to the streets in protest against Colonel Gaddafi and his regime, asking for new rights and freedoms. There were hopeful signs that a better future awaited them, and that, like people elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa, they were taking their destiny into their own hands. Far from meeting those aspirations, Colonel Gaddafi has responded by attacking his own people. He has brought the full might of armed forces to bear on them, backed up by mercenaries. The world has watched as he has brutally crushed his own people.

On 23 February, the UN Secretary-General cited the reported nature and scale of attacks on civilians as “egregious violations of international and human rights law” and called on the Government of Libya to
“meet its responsibility to protect its people.”

The Secretary-General said later that more than 1,000 people had been killed and many more injured in Libya amid credible and consistent reports of arrests, detention and torture.

Over the weekend of 26 and 27 February, at Britain’s instigation, the UN Security Council agreed Resolution 1970, which condemned Gaddafi’s actions. It imposed a travel ban and asset freezes on those at the top of his regime. It demanded an end to the violence, access for international human rights monitors and the lifting of restrictions on the media. Vitally, it referred the situation in Libya to the International Criminal Court so that its leaders should face the justice they deserve.

In my statement to the House on 28 February, I set out the steps that we would take to implement those measures. Our consistent approach has been to isolate the Gaddafi regime, deprive it of money, shrink its power and ensure that anyone responsible for abuses in Libya will be held to account. I also told the House that I believed contingency planning should be done for different scenarios, including involving military assets, and that that should include plans for a no-fly zone.

Intervening in another country’s affairs should not be undertaken save in quite exceptional circumstances. That is why we have always been clear that preparing for eventualities that might include the use of force—including a no-fly zone or other measures to stop humanitarian catastrophe—would require three steps and three tests to be met: demonstrable need, regional support and a clear legal basis.

First, on demonstrable need, Gaddafi’s regime has ignored the demand of UN Security Council Resolution 1970 that it stop the violence against the Libyan people. His forces have attacked peaceful protesters, and are now preparing for a violent assault on a city, Benghazi, of one million people that has a history dating back 2,500 years. They have begun air strikes in anticipation of what we expect to be a brutal attack using air, land and sea forces. Gaddafi has publicly promised that every home will be searched and that there will be no mercy and no pity shown.

If we want any sense of what that might mean we have only to look at what happened in Zawiyah, where tanks and heavy weaponry were used to smash through a heavily populated town with heavy loss of life. We do not have to guess what happens when he has subdued a population. Human Rights Watch has catalogued the appalling human rights abuses that are being committed in Tripoli. Now, the people of eastern Libya are faced with the same treatment. That is the demonstrable need.

Secondly, on regional support, we said that there must be a clear wish from the people of Libya and the wider region for international action. It was the people of Libya, through their transitional national council, who were the first to call for protection from air attack through a no-fly zone. More recently, the Arab League has made the same demand.

It has been remarkable how Arab leaders have come forward and condemned the actions of Gaddafi’s Government. In recent days, I have spoken with the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan. A number of Arab nations have made it clear that they are willing to participate in enforcing the resolution. That support goes far beyond the Arab world. Last night, all three African members of the UN Security Council voted in favour of the resolution.

The third and essential condition was that there should be a clear legal base. That is why along with France, Lebanon and the United States we worked hard to draft appropriate language that could command the support of the international community. Last night, the United Nations Security Council agreed that Resolution.

Resolution 1973 “Demands the immediate establishment of a ceasefire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against, and abuses of, civilians”. It establishes “a ban on all flights” in the airspace of Libya “in order to help protect civilians”. It authorises member states to take “all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban”.

Crucially, in paragraph 4, it “Authorises member states… acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements, and acting in co-operation with the Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures…to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack… including Benghazi”.

The resolution both authorises and sets the limits of our action. Specifically, it excludes an occupation force of any form, on any part of Libyan territory. That was a clear agreement between all the sponsors of the resolution, including the UK, and of course, the Arab League. I absolutely believe that that is the right thing both to say and to do.

As our ambassador to the United Nations said, the central purpose of this resolution is to end the violence, protect civilians, and allow the people of Libya to determine their own future, free from the brutality unleashed by the Gaddafi regime. The Libyan population want the same rights and freedoms that people across the Middle East and North Africa are demanding, and that are enshrined in the values of the United Nations charter. Resolution 1973 puts the weight of the Security Council squarely behind the Libyan people in defence of those values. Our aims are entirely encapsulated by that resolution.

Demonstrable need, regional support and a clear legal base: the three criteria are now satisfied in full. Now that the UN Security Council has reached its decision, there is a responsibility on its members to respond. That is what Britain, with others, will now do. The Attorney-General has been consulted and the Government are satisfied that there is a clear and unequivocal legal basis for the deployment of UK forces and military assets. He advised Cabinet this morning, and his advice was read and discussed.

The Security Council has adopted Resolution 1973 as a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security under chapter VII of the United Nations charter. The resolution specifically authorises notifying member states to use all necessary measures to enforce a no-fly zone and to protect civilians and civilian populated areas, including Benghazi.

At Cabinet this morning, we agreed that the UK will play its part. Our forces will join an international operation to enforce the resolution if Gaddafi fails to comply with the demand that he end attacks on civilians. The Defence Secretary and I have now instructed the Chief of the Defence Staff to work urgently with our allies to put in place the appropriate military measures to enforce the resolution, including a no-fly zone. I can tell the House that Britain will deploy Tornadoes and Typhoons as well as air-to-air refuelling and surveillance aircraft. Preparations to deploy those aircraft have already started and in the coming hours they will move to air bases from where they can start to take the necessary action.

The Government will table a substantive motion for debate next week, but I am sure that the House will accept that the situation requires us to move forward on the basis of the Security Council resolution immediately. I am sure that Members on both sides of the House call on Colonel Gaddafi to respond immediately to the will of the international community and cease the violence against his own people. I spoke to President Obama last night and to President Sarkozy this morning. There will be a clear statement later today, setting out what we now expect from Colonel Gaddafi.

We should never prepare to deploy British forces lightly or without careful thought. In this case, I believe that we have given extremely careful thought to the situation in hand. It is absolutely right that we played a leading role on the UN Security Council to secure permission for the action, and that we now work with allies to ensure that that resolution is brought about. There will be many people in our country who will now want questions answered about what we are doing and how we will go about it. I intend to answer all those questions in the hours and days ahead, and to work with our brave armed services to ensure that we do the right thing, for the people of Libya, for the people of our country and for the world as a whole.

Tonight, British forces are in action over Libya. They are part of an international coalition that has come together to enforce the will of the United Nations and to support the Libyan people. We have all seen the appalling brutality that Colonel Gaddafi has meted out against his own people. And far from introducing the ceasefire he spoke about, he has actually stepped up the attacks and the brutality that we can all see.

So what we are doing is necessary, it is legal, and it is right. It is necessary because, with others, we should be trying to prevent him using his military against his own people. It is legal, because we have the backing of the United Nations Security Council and also of the Arab League and many others.

And it is right because we believe we should not stand aside while this dictator murders his own people. Tonight, of course our thoughts should be with those in our armed services who are putting their lives at risk in order to save the lives of others. They are the bravest of the brave. But I believe we should all be confident that what we are doing is in a just cause and in our nation’s interest.

David Cameron is the Prime Minister of the UK.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Leaked cable shows Maldives’ behind-the-scenes politicking in Washington

The Maldives was offered US$85,000 to assist with the “resettlement expenses” of a Guantanamo Bay inmate, sought increased access to “liberal western education” in a bid to tackle growing fundamentalism and vowed that it would “not let relations with India impact relations with the United States.”

These and other diplomatic revelations emerged yesterday with the publication of a leaked diplomatic cable detailing consultations between Washington and the Maldives’ Ambassador to the US, Abdul Ghafoor Mohamed.

Dated February 26 and stamped by US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, the cable document reports on Ghafoor’s first consultation with US officials on February 23, 2010 ahead of presenting his credentials to US President Barack Obama the following day.

Assistance with UN Human Rights Council seat

According to the cable, Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake asked Ghafoor about the country’s progress towards gaining a seat on the UN Human Rights Council (which it later obtained).

In response, Ghafoor said he was confident that the Maldives could obtain one of the four Asia Group seats, as he did not believe Iran had enough Arab support. But he expressed concern that a vote split between Thailand and Maldives left the possibility open for Iran to win by “working African capitals.”

“As such, Maldives is not only lobbying Asian missions, but also African missions,” the cable stated.

Blake offered “quiet” US assistance “if it would be helpful”, however Ghafoor said that while he appreciated the offer “the Maldives needed to be seen as earning the seat in its own right.”

“As a small country, [Ghafoor] said, Maldives can’t play other countries against each other; it needs to take principled positions.”

Guantanamo Bay

The cable discusses arrangements for the transfer of a Guantanamo detainee to the Maldives and refers to an individual named ‘Fried’, presumably the Special Envoy to facilitate the closing of Guanatanamo Bay, Daniel Fried.

Information on the matter would be “kept close until we transfer the detainee”, Fried said in the cable, and referred to an offer “of US$85,000 to assist with [the detainee’s] resettlement expenses.”

“Fried stressed the importance of working out more detailed security arrangements for the detainee, along the lines of those applied in other countries that have accepted Guantanamo detainees for resettlement; Embassy Colombo could work directly with the Maldivian government on those arrangements,” the cable stated.

Vulnerability to extremism

Seeking additional US support from the US towards tackling fundamentalism, Ghafoor pressed for increased access to “liberal western education”, which he suggested would also help to combat growing fundamentalist trends.

In the leaked cable, Ghafoor explained that rising fundamentalism stemmed partly from students travelling to places such as Pakistan and Egypt for a free education in Islamic studies, and returning with extremist views. This, he said, had altered the Maldives’ traditionally peaceful and tolerant culture: “‘It used to be simply a question of faith; now you must show that you are more Muslim than others,’ he said.”

The cable also articulated the Maldivian government’s concern about the impact of an attack on an island resort, such as by Somali pirates, which Ghafoor noted “would cripple the country’s economy.”

In response, the US expressed interest in “expanding bilateral defense and security engagement, continuing training, and helping build the Maldives’ maritime security capabilities to counteract the threat from terrorism, piracy, and trafficking.”

Defence probing

Robert Scher, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for South and Southeast Asia, asked Ghafoor how US military training compared with that of India “in terms of quantity and quality.”

Ghafoor avoided committing to an answer, instead stating that “both were substantive and substantial.”

“Scher indicated that the US did not want to get in the way of Maldivian relationships with its neighbors,” the cable read.

In addition, “Ghafoor assessed that [India’s] perception of the US has evolved and that Male’ would be able to address any concerns. He stated that [the Maldivian] government would not let relations with India impact relations with the United States, reflecting the Maldives’ attempt to ‘show balance’ in the past. Ghafoor replied that, if necessary, Maldives would explain that neither India nor Pakistan need suspect anything ‘untoward’.”

Climate dealing

In a meeting with Deputy Special Envoy for Climate Change Jonathan Pershing, Ghafoor said that the Maldives would like to see small countries at the forefront of the climate debate “receive tangible assistance from the larger economies. Other nations would then come to realize that there are advantages to be gained by compliance.”

Ghafoor then identified several projects including harbour deepening and the strengthening of sea walls that he said would cost “approximately US$50 million.”

“Pershing encouraged Ghafoor to provide concrete examples and specific costs in order to increase the likelihood of bilateral assistance and congressional appropriations,” the cables said.

The Maldivian Ambassador also suggested that President Obama use the “dramatic backdrop” of the Maldives “to deliver a speech on climate change when he next visits the region.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Tolerance guards against the politics of polarisation: UN Secretary General

Tolerance is “especially necessary to guard against the politics of polarisation,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has said in a statement to mark the International Day of Tolerance.

“Tolerance is the foundation for mutual respect among people and communities, and is vital for building a single global society around shared values. It is a virtue and a quality, but above all, tolerance is an act – the act of reaching out to others and seeing differences not as barriers, but as invitations for dialogue and understanding,” Ki-Moon stated.

“Tolerance does not mean accepting all practices and views as equal. On the contrary, its value lies in instilling greater awareness of and respect for universal human rights and fundamental freedoms.

“Tolerance cannot be taken for granted. It has to be taught, nurtured and communicated. Education, inside and outside the classroom, is essential for strengthening tolerance and for combating hatred and discrimination.

“On this International Day of Tolerance, let us recommit to dialogue and understanding among all peoples and communities, and let us focus our minds and hearts on those who face discrimination and marginalisation. A single humanity means living together and working together on the basis of mutual respect for the great wealth of human diversity.”

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Comment: Maldives introduces landmark UN Resolution on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association

The Maldives played a key role in recent weeks for the fruition of this new resolution which was adopted by the UN Human Rights Council without a vote last Thursday. The resolution, which was jointly introduced by the United States, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Mexico, Nigeria, Indonesia and the Maldives, reaffirms that “the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are essential components of democracy … to, inter alia, express their political opinions, engage in literary and artistic pursuits and other cultural, economic and social activities, engage in religious observances or other beliefs, form and join trade unions and cooperatives, and elect leaders to represent their interests and hold them accountable.”

“Only a few years ago, these rights (to freedom of assembly and association) were strictly curtailed and there were no legal channels to hold leaders accountable. The current leadership of His Excellency President Mohamed Nasheed began as an opposition movement where he was regularly arrested while trying to assert his rights”, said Ambassador Iruthisham Adam, Permanent Representative of the Maldivian Mission in Geneva, when she introduced the draft resolution at the UN Human Rights Council last week, which decided to create the first-ever Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association.

The efforts at the UN level by the Maldives, which has made progressive strides in the transition from an essentially autocratic state after the fall of former President Maumoon Abul Gayoom’s 30-year term, have been widely welcomed amongst human rights groups.

In view of this landmark development contributed by the Maldives, the country should continue to lead in this initiative by ensuring that the provisions for the rights to assemble in peaceful demonstrations are consistently represented in the Maldivian legislation, to address the incidents of the violations of freedom of assembly and association in practice by law enforcement authorities.

The domestic regulation known as the “regulation concerning assembly” requires three organisers of public assemblies to submit a written form to the police 14 days prior to gathering. This appears to be in contradiction to Article 32 of the Maldivian Constitution which enshrines the right to freedom of assembly “without prior permission from the State”.

This irregularity has at times been used by authorities who selectively apply the provisions of the regulation for the purpose of ending peaceful demonstrations.

Ahmed Irfan, Executive Director of the Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN), stressed that “the Maldives in addition to all other co-sponsors of the resolution must act swiftly to ensure that domestic laws and regulations regarding freedom of assembly and association fully respect and adhere to those rights.”

The newly established mandate of the Special Rapporteur includes, among others, studying trends, developments and challenges in relation to the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association and making recommendations.

The Special Rapporteur will also report on violations of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, as well as discrimination, threats or use of violence, harassment, persecution, intimidation or reprisals directed at persons exercising these rights. This mandate is one of the most relevant for Asian countries, particularly for human rights defenders, trade unionists and migrants in the region. Time and again, civil society organizations throughout Asia have faced brutality, suppression and severe restrictions when exercising their rights to assemble and associate.

The UN resolution has the potential to usher in new opportunities of significant importance, particularly if the provisions outlined in the resolution are implemented at the national level and close cooperation is sought by the State with the Special Rapporteur.

It is clear that the international community has benefited from contributions of the Maldives at the UN Human Rights Council, also exemplified by the groundbreaking resolution on “Human Rights and Climate Change” which was tabled by the Maldives in March 2008.

At the sub-regional level, human rights groups have been encouraged by the proposal of President Nasheed during the SAARC Summit in April 2010 to establish a South Asian human rights mechanism. It remains to be seen how the innovative and dedicated approach of the Maldives in its international capacities will resonate in the country for a full implementation of its human rights obligations, which is currently being compromised due to the political deadlock in the People’s Majlis.

As the Maldives will stand before the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in coming November, it would be prudent to view this as a national opportunity to raise awareness and publicity of human rights challenges and obligations with the view to overcome the deadlock so that the promotion and protection of human rights can be fully realised in the Maldives.

Yap Swee Seng is Executive Director of the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA).

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)