Archives: Articles

By Edward Snowden

02 July, 2013

@ Common Dreams

The following is the full text of a letter by Edward Snowden to the President of Ecuador, Rafael Correa. Written in Spanish, it was obtained and translated by the Press Association in London.

There are few world leaders who would risk standing for the human rights of an individual against the most powerful government on earth, and the bravery of Ecuador and its people is an example to the world.

I must express my deep respect for your principles and sincere thanks for your government’s action in considering my request for political asylum.

The government of the United States of America has built the world’s largest system of surveillance. This global system affects every human life touched by technology; recording, analysing, and passing secret judgment over each member of the international public.

It is a grave violation of our universal human rights when a political system perpetuates automatic, pervasive and unwarranted spying against innocent people.

In accordance with this belief, I revealed this programme to my country and the world. While the public has cried out support of my shining a light on this secret system of injustice, the government of the United States of America responded with an extrajudicial man-hunt costing me my family, my freedom to travel and my right to live peacefully without fear of illegal aggression.

As I face this persecution, there has been silence from governments afraid of the United States government and their threats. Ecuador however, rose to stand and defend the human right to seek asylum.

The decisive action of your consul in London, Fidel Narvaez, guaranteed my rights would be protected upon departing Hong Kong – I could never have risked travel without that. Now, as a result, and through the continued support of your government, I remain free and able to publish information that serves the public interest.

No matter how many more days my life contains, I remain dedicated to the fight for justice in this unequal world. If any of those days ahead realise a contribution to the common good, the world will have the principles of Ecuador to thank.

Please accept my gratitude on behalf of your government and the people of the Republic of Ecuador, as well as my great personal admiration of your commitment to doing what is right rather than what is rewarding.

Edward Joseph Snowden.

Whistleblower Edward Joseph Snowden is a US former technical contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee who leaked details of top-secret US and British government mass surveillance programs to the press.

ShareThisShareThis

Comments are moderated

Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu said in a statement that “the way that the protests are reflected in the media depict Turkey as a second class democracy.” He said this in response to US Vice-president Joe Biden’s comment that, “Turkey’s future belongs to the people of Turkey and no one else. But the United States does not pretend to be indifferent to the outcome.” Biden’s comment came following a State Department travel alert to the country. Earlier U.S. State Department Spokesman Jen Psaki said, “We believe that Turkey’s long-term stability, security and prosperity can be guaranteed with the protection of the fundamental freedoms. That’s what the [protesters] seemed to be doing. These freedoms are very important in a healthy democracy.” These developments lead us to raise question about democracy. What does democracy entail? How does a “first class democracy” function? What are the characteristics of a first class democracy? Why is Turkey’s democracy being categorized second class democracy?

How did the US administration deal with the Occupy Wall Street Movement? How was this movement different from Turkish Taksim Square demonstrations? Both began with insignificant number of people but were joined by thousands, in fact millions all over the world in the case of Occupy Wall Street Movement, with the passage of time. In both instances the security forces have used tear gas and pepper spray to control protesters. In both instances hundreds were arrested. The Turkish Prime Minister has labeled some protesters as being extremist and terrorist while U.S. government documents suggest that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had been monitoring Occupy Wall Street activists through joint terrorism task force. However, Turkish police are reported to have used disproportionate force, and this is a matter of concern, but there are striking differences in the nature and characteristics of the two movements.

Originally Occupy Wall Street activists wanted to hold their demonstration in front of 1 Chase Plaza but as soon as the police came to know about it a fence was put around the area in order to prevent the demonstrators. Demonstrators then decided to move to nearby Zuccotti Park where they continued to express their views until they were totally evicted by the police. The demonstrators claimed to represent 99% and wanted to curb influence of corporations in politics. It should be noted that the movement emerged in the context of 2008 global financial crisis and 2011 Arab uprisings. However, although within months this movement attracted huge attention and millions expressed their support holding demonstrations various parts of the world, it seems to have lost momentum. The White House hardly took any notice of their demands.

As opposed to Occupy Wall Street Movement the Turkish Taksim Square demonstration began with less than hundred environmentalists expressing concern about a development project. They were then infiltrated by opponents of government: among them were former vested interests known as Kemalists, leftists, ultra-nationalists, homosexuals and other marginalized minorities. They provoked the police who responded heavy-handedly creating chaos in the area. The government responded by both carrot and stick. While the Prime Minister offered to abide by court ruling on the issue and offered to hold a referendum; he also accused some protesters as being extremist and terrorist. The President and the Deputy Prime Minister came out with more sympathy for the demonstrators. Following days of violent confrontation the police seem to have succeeded in restoring order. Do the two settings say anything about democracy? I leave readers to judge, but as one who voted for Biden (he was Obama’s choice, not mine) I feel embarrassed.

In this context one may ask what happened to Obama’s pre-election commitments. I don’t want to list broken promises but my question is: Is it democratic to ignore electoral promises? Many observers blame various other centers of power in American politics for this failure of President Obama. This division of power has been viewed positively by scholars. According to Francis Fukuyama, “The American system was built around a firm conviction that concentrated political power constituted an imminent danger to the lives and liberty of citizens. For this reason, the U.S. Constitution was designed with a broad range of checks and balances by which different parts of the government could prevent other parts from exercising tyrannical control.” (The Origins of Political Order. 2012). Division of power? Yes, of course! Fukuyama has failed to comprehend how with the passage of time certain non-democratic elements have learned how to flout all centers of power and pose danger on lives and liberty of citizens. This element is called lobby: American democracy today is no more “for the people, by the people, of the people;” it is almost “for the lobby, by the lobby of the lobby.”

America and Turkey are not the only example of democracy in the world: many observers romanticize India as “the largest democracy in the world today.” How democratic is India? Hypothetically I have always felt that the caste system and democratic values don’t go together. Let us see how it has worked in practice: In 1951, when India declared holding of an election for a legislative assembly in Kashmir, based on a UN resolution the world body reminded that “the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.” Yet the Indian authorities went ahead to hold what they called a democratic election. It was a total sham: With blessings from Delhi, Sheikh Abdullah’s party won 73 seats out of a total of 75. All seats were won uncontested because the Election Commission refused to accept opposition candidates. According to opposition sources, all subsequent elections in Kashmir were heavily rigged since then. In this contest India’s incorporation of Sikkim in 1974/75 and current attempts to “democratically” absorb Bangladesh are also relevant. Whenever I see slums in large Indian cities, naked poverty in rural areas, and the victim of loan sharks committing suicide, I tell myself these Indians must be convinced of their “sins” in their “previous life.”

Role of the Media

Prime Minister Erdugan of Turkey has accused the international media of lying and exaggerating protests marches in his country. The international media on its part has accused the Turkish media of ignoring the early days of protest marches in Taksim Square. While Erdugan has held the foreign media of conspiring to destabilize his government, the international media continues to accuse the Turkish government of intimidating the national media in support of the government.

An examination of the media needs some reflections on demands of the protesters and government’s response to those demands and how they have been covered by various formal and informal news outlets. While demands of Occupy Wall Street Movement are relatively clearer; they are not as clear for Taksim Square occupants where many different groups have converged. Interestingly although the government has been repeating about the planned project that there is no design on the table to build any shopping mall or expensive residential structure, there is very little coverage of that in the media. In fact the government is claiming that there will be more green spaces in the area than before and the main idea behind the reconstruction is to revive Turkey’s rich heritage and take most communication facilities underground. The original environmentalists seem to have agreed to discuss the plan with the government, but the movement seems to have gone out of their hands. The protesters do not seem to have any other demand than seeking resignation of the prime minister. However, the government on its part has declared a referendum on the issue and also pointed out the scheduled city election due early next year. Yet neither do the protesters nor do the media see any merit in these commitments. They seem to have forgotten that democracy demands another election to bring down a democratically elected government.

Interestingly the international media paid almost no attention to another protest uprising, which was brutally suppressed at the beginning of May in Dhaka, Bangladesh. The main difference between the two protest marches in Bangladesh and in Turkey was that the former, was staged by a group called Hefazat-i-Islam which demanded strict Islamic law in the country. According to activists, the authorities in Bangladesh killed thousands of their supporter using live bullets after midnight of May 5 by means of creating electricity blackout. The method in which the Turkish Taksim Square movement has been covered by the international media only suggests their Islamophobic approach in covering news.  In this there is no difference between Socialistworker.org and The New York Times, CNN, BBC: all mainstream news channels ignored Hefazat-i-Islam’s peaceful protests and their consequences.

What is more interesting is that there is new information about the so-called miracle girl saved after 17 days from the garment factory disaster that happened a few days before the Hefazat-i-Islam crackdown. According to a new investigation, the story was a staged one. In order to divert public attention from the brutal action against Hefazat-i-Islam activists the government staged this story. Sadly the international media has paid no attention to this new investigation.

The international media has turned a “Standing Man” into an icon of protest in Taksim Square. I remember standing in front of Topkapi Palace some years ago for more than five minutes to observe the standing guard whether he was a real man or a statue. It was only his eye blinking that convinced me that he was a real human being.

Taksim Protest and Turkey’s Image

Although the protesters have not succeeded in destabilizing the government in Turkey, they have succeeded in tarnishing Turkey’s international image. This seems to have been the objective of the international media and, I think, they have succeeded. During the past decade Turkey had emerged as a financial giant by ending IMF/ World Bank loans, by tripling its GDP and bringing millions out of poverty. Many international observers were citing Turkey’s success story as a model for development in the 21^st century. This seemed to have become an eyesore many islamophobic elements all over the world.

Prime Minster Erdugan has reacted sharply to this attempt of tarnishing of Turkish image and has accused Turkey’s foreign enemies of conspiring against his country through Taksim uprising. Is there anything new in this allegation? Is economic progress and good governance enough to neutralize conspiracies? Were there no conspiracies against the prophet of Islam?

Many observers have raised questions about PM Erdugan’s approach in handling this crisis. Apparently he feels this as a challenge to his person. As opposed to his approach one may note those of Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc and President Abdullah Gul. I am not a member of the ruling AKP of Turkey, nor am I a Turkish citizen of the country. I don’t think I am in any position to comment on which approach is better to handle this situation. However I strongly believe that institutions should be based on principles not individuals. The Qur’an has taught us not to depend even on the personality of the prophet when it comes to one’s mission and responsibility: It says: Muhammad is no more than an apostle: many were the apostle that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah, but Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude (3:144).

Dr. Abdullah al-Ahsan is the Vice President of JUST.

By Countercurrents.org

30 June, 2013

@ Countercurrents.org

Artists and intellectuals in Egypt are heroically struggling against “brotherhoodization” of Egypt ‘s culture. It has turned out as their daily struggle. They are joining the June 30 protest in Tahrir Square .

Since Morsi’s appointment as president of Egypt in June 2012, his policies have triggered discontent in the arts and culture community in the country. The following timeline prepared by Ahram Online on June 27, 2013 points to the main developments in Egypt ‘s arts and culture scene in the last 12 months. The incidents show the continuing struggle within the society.

During the year of his rule, several protests have been staged by the cultural community, opposing the government’s attacks on the Egyptian cultural identity, as perceived by the artists.

The appointment of Alaa Abdel-Aziz as the new Minister of Culture has only additionally fuelled the enraged cultural scene.

2012

September 1

Sheikh Abdallah Badr says on El-Hafez television channel that actress “Elham Shahin is cursed and she will never enter heaven.” Shahin later files a case against the conservative sheikh who criticized her several times.

September 2

Hundreds of Egyptian writers and artists stage a protest in front of the Shura Council (parliament’s upper house) building to protest the first leaked drafts of the constitution that was being written by the Constituent Assembly.

Protesters demanded the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, which they described as “illegitimate.” Protesters argued that the members of the current Assembly were not elected and do not represent the wide range of Egyptian society. They said that the Assembly is part of the ‘Brotherhoodisation’ of the country, as its members only reflect the views of the Muslim Brotherhood.

September 6

President Morsi meets a group of prominent artists and intellectuals to discuss the future of art and creativity in Egypt . A number of the artists invited, however, refused to attend the event. According to the attendees, the president expressed that he appreciates ‘meaningful’ arts, yet did not discuss any clear plans for the culture field. He condemned the attack on actress Elham Shahin by a Salafi sheikh.

October 28

A concert that was to be held in Minya to affirm the unity of Muslims and Copts during Eid Al-Adha (the Muslim feast of sacrifice) is cancelled. Entitled “From the Heart of Egypt, Hand in Hand,” the concert included performances by several alternative bands; it was reportedly stopped by a group of Salafists and other Islamists who stood at the entrance to the concert, preventing people from going in after the event had already begun.

November 9

Underground musicians stage a protest outside of El-Sawy Culturewheel centre in Cairo to press for a resolution of the pending issues between the syndicate and independent musicians.

November 17

A Cairo misdemeanor court sentenced Islamic preacher Abdullah Badr to a year in jail and set bail at LE20,000 for insulting known actress Elham Shahin on El-Hafez television channel.

November 27

Anti-Morsi opposition march by several hundred artists moves from the grounds near the Cairo Opera House to Tahrir Square . The crowd included members of the music and film syndicates, among many others.

December 13

Several cultural coalitions, along with independent artists and intellectuals march to Tahrir Square in support of freedom of expression and against the referendum on Egypt ‘s constitution.

Artists march to Tahrir for freedom of expression on 13 December 2012 (Photo: Rowan El Shimi)

2013

May 7

President Morsi’s cabinet reshuffle includes the appointment of Alaa Abdel-Aziz as Egypt ‘s sixth minister of culture since January 2011 Tahrir Square uprising.

Following the appointment, Abdel-Aziz was rejected by the community of artists and intellectuals, on grounds of allegedly attempting to ‘Brotherhoodise’ the Egyptian arts scene. Days after his appointment, Abdel-Aziz placed five members of the Freedom and Justice Party inside the Ministry of Culture. One of them took charge of all external communication of the ministry, according to the employees at the Ministry of Culture.

May 12

Culture Minister Alaa Abdel-Aziz sacks the head of the General Egyptian Book Organization (GEBO) Ahmed Megahed without explanation, outraging intellectuals and writers. Writer and journalist Osama Afifi resigned from his post as the Chief Editor of Al-Majalla cultural magazine, published by the GEBO in protest for sacking Megahed.

May 13

An old dispute between Arts academy director Sameh Mahran and the Culture Minister Abdel-Aziz surfaces quicker than expected, taking a scandalous bend. The Egyptian Academy of Arts hosted a conference to protest President Morsi’s appointment.

May 14

Members of artists and intellectuals community march from Cairo Opera House to newly-appointed minister’s office to protest alleged ‘Brotherhoodisation’ of Egyptian culture.

May 27

The minister dismisses Salah El-Meligy, head of the Fine Arts Sector.

May 29

Minister of Culture fires Ines Abdel Dayem, chairperson of the Cairo Opera House.

In response, artists hold a large protest at the Cairo Opera House grounds and freeze performance of the opera Aida with an on-stage strike.

May 29

Said Tawfiq, secretary-general of the Supreme Council for Culture, resigns from his post in protest against the series of dismissals by Alaa Abdel-Aziz and opposing the minister’s alleged ‘Brotherhoodisation’ of the Egyptian culture.

May 30

Bahaa Taher, renowned Egyptian novelist and winner of the International Prize for Arabic Fiction in 2008, resigns from the Supreme Council for Culture, where he was a honorary member. Taher’s resignation came as a protest against the culture minister’s decision to fire a number of key culture officials in recent days, including the head of the opera house.

Egyptian artists and intellectuals protest recent culture ministry decisions and demand dismissal of Morsi-appointed minister.

June 1

Cairo Symphony Orchestra carries out on-stage strike. Artists from the Cairo Symphony Orchestra, supported by the Opera’s musicians and staff, announced their continuation of their strike in place of concert by world-class pianist Ramzi Yassa. Several crucial figures from Egypt ‘s arts and culture scene joined on stage.

June 2

Angry Egyptian artists trap culture minister in ministerial building in Cairo for hours.

June 3

Head of the ministry’s foreign relations sector, Professor Camillia Sobhy resigns. She resigned to add her voice to the protesters that accuse the culture minister of implementing an agenda to destroy and Islamize Egyptian culture, thus changing the national identity to serve the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood.

June 5

Artists storm the Ministry of Culture building in Cairo .

The employees of the Ministry of Culture use the general commotion to expel the members of the Freedom and Justice Party from the ministerial building.

June 6

Artists launch artistic activities on the street in front of the ministry in Cairo as the sit-in inside the ministry continues.

June 9

National Archives head Abdel-Wahed El-Nabawe is sacked by Culture Minister Alaa Abdel-Aziz.

Dancers perform Zorba ballet as part of the protest outside the occupied Ministry of Culture in Cairo .

June 10

The new head of the Egyptian National Library and Archives, Khaled Fahmy, states openly that he has Islamist leanings.

June 11

Muslim Brotherhood supporters try to break up sit-in by artists outside Ministry of Culture in Cairo , several police injured.

June 14

Shababeek Culture Centre in Cairo hosts events to raise awareness on artists’ and intellectuals’ ongoing protests.

June 15

Ongoing protests against newly-appointed culture minister and alleged ‘Brotherhoodisation’ of culture spread to Egypt ‘s second city, Alexandria .

June 17

Following a meeting, Egypt ‘s Supreme Culture Council members declare they do not recognize the Morsi-appointed Culture Minister Abdel-Aziz and will sue him for libel.

June 18

Ahram Online visits sit-in at Beram El-Tonsy theatre in Alexandria as it enters fourth day; artists insist movement bigger than culture minister discontent.

June 21

Joining world celebrations of music, many artists from the Cairo Opera House perform on the street in front of the culture ministry in Cairo where ongoing protests against the minister’s policies enters a third week.

June 24

Unidentified assailants attack a nine-day-old sit-in at Alexandria ‘s Beram El-Tonsy Theatre, injuring several activists.

June 26

Rehearsals for the ballet Zorba, scheduled to run at the Cairo Opera House from July 4 to July 8, continue – despite statements by Shura Council MP calling ballet “art of nudity.”

Artists’ march

A group of Egyptian artists and intellectuals who have been protesting the appointment of a new culture minister since May are joining the June 30, 2013 anti-government protests.

Earlier, Maha Effat, the spokesman for the group of artists and intellectuals who have been occupying parts of the ministry of culture since 5 May, informed of their planned march to Tahrir Square .

The artists were joined by other groups of artists. Then they all marched to Tahrir Square .”

Effat stressed that the occupation of the culture ministry will continue.

Effat said: Artists and intellectuals will not give up until ” Egypt is completely liberated from the current regime.”

“Over the past 25 days of the ministry occupation, we showed the Egyptian people that we are entitled to claim our institutions. Neither ministry of culture, nor any other governmental institution, can be taken by the hands of the current regime,” Effat said, referring to the Muslim Brotherhood. “We have to liberate the whole Egypt from their influence.”

Art performances including concert by renowned musician Ali El-Haggar and performance of parts of the ballet Zorba are being held daily in front of the occupied cultural ministry that.

On June 5, dozens of prominent artists and intellectuals broke into Egypt ‘s ministry of culture, declaring an open-ended sit-in inside the building until minister Alaa Abdel-Aziz is replaced.

The current crisis in Egypt ‘s cultural scene started in May when the culture minister Alaa Abdel-Aziz took office, despite opposition to the relatively unknown figure’s appointment from many within the culture scene. The opposition became more heated when Abdel-Aziz began a series of dismissals of key figures within

By Countercurrents.org

30 June 30, 2013

Countercurrents.org

Masses of people are assembling from the early hours of June 30, 2013 in the Tahrir Square in Cairo and in other cities and towns of the country to voice their rejection of the Muslim Brotherhood rule led by president Morsi that signify a deep crisis the country is facing. Protesting people started to assemble since June 29 in major squares in other cities including the country’s second city Alexandria , Suez , Port Said , Mahalla, Sharqiya, Menoufia. The situation is tense.

The Rebel signature drive announced on June 29, 2013 that 22 million people – almost half of Egypt ‘s eligible voters and 9 million more than voted Morsi into office – have signed a petition calling for the president’s removal. The 22 million signatures surpass Rebel’s original goal of 15 million before 30 June. The aim of the campaign was to outnumber the amount of votes Morsi had garnered in the presidential elections.

Unrest over the past week left at least seven dead and hundreds others wounded in factional street fighting between both rival camps.

Media reports from Egypt said:

Thousands and thousands of anti-Islamist government protesters started flocking to the iconic Tahrir Square early morning – the first day of planned countrywide rallies and protest marches aimed at unseating Islamist Morsi, whose rule is marked with failures. The situation has given birth to a political uncertainty.

Carrying a 70 meter national flag, protesters roamed the square, the seat of the 2011 popular revolt that toppled strongman Mubarak, chanting anti-Muslim Brotherhood and anti-Morsi slogans.

The Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party catapulted Morsi into the presidency last year and has since been seen as the ruling party.

Dozens of volunteers set up checkpoints on the side streets that open to Tahrir Square to search anyone wanting to enter so as to ensure security. Protesters vowed to camp out at Tahrir Square and major squares in governorates across Egypt until Morsi leaves.

Cairo streets, usually known for standstill jams, was virtually traffic-free on June 30, 2013 morning, since some people stayed home from work to avoid the expected turbulence, others took the day off to take part in the protests.

In Nasr City , a densely populated Cairo suburb, Morsi’s Islamist backers are camping out for the third consecutive day to defend the “the president.”

Also in Nasr City , tens of anti-government demonstrators settled outside the defense ministry chanting pro-army slogans urging the military to assume power from the beleaguered president.

Opposition is divided principally along this line; however, as revolutionaries condemn the army for the atrocities they committed during its year and half in power immediately following Mubarak’s ouster.

The Brotherhood is on alert to protect their offices, some of which have been set on fire recently or have seen clashes. In fact, some have also been camping out for three days at the Ittihadiya palace, steeling themselves for the big protest day spearheaded by the anti-Morsi petition drive, Rebel Campaign.

Outside of Cairo

Protesters have been camping since yesterday in major squares in Suez , Port Said , Mahalla, Sharqiya, Menoufia and Egypt ‘s second city, Alexandria .

Protests have already started in governorates such as Suez , Sharqiya, Menoufia and Gharbiya.

Traffic in Egypt ‘s second-largest city, Alexandria almost came to a standstill in the late hours of Saturday after thousands of protesters held sit-ins in some vital districts.

In Suez , a city known for being somewhat volatile, the army distributed flyers among demonstrators urging them to stay away from state institutions and prisons.

“We all feel we’re walking on a dead-end road and that the country will collapse,” said Mohamed ElBaradei, former IAEA director, Nobel laureate and liberal party leader in a video message supporting 30 June protests.

“All Egypt must go out tomorrow to say we want to return to the ballot box and build the foundations of the house we will all live in.”

Defense Minister Abdel Fattah El-Sisi stressed the army will respect the “will of the people,” and urged politicians to forge consensus.

The anti-Morsi protesters are demanding early presidential elections.

Expats’ voices

The Egyptian embassy in Australia saw the first expat protests outside their doors, chanting for them to join the anti-Morsi protests. Likewise, France , Germany and the UK are expected to see expats protesting.

By Glen Ford

30 June, 2013

@ Black Agenda Report

The President and his family are spending a week in sub-Saharan Africa, with Senegal, Tanzania and South Africa on the itinerary. The focus of the trip, if you believe the White House, is trade, an arena in which the United States has been eclipsed by China since 2009. China, by some measurements, now does nearly twice as much business with Africa as the U.S., and the gap is growing. It is now commonly accepted that the Chinese offer far better terms of trade and investment than the Americans, that they create more jobs for Africans, and their investments leave behind infrastructure that can enrich their African trading partners in the long haul.

No one expects Obama to offer anything on this trip that will reverse America’s declining share of the African market. That’s because the U.S. is not in the business of fair and mutually beneficial trade – it’s about the business of imperialism, which is another matter, entirely. The Americans ensure their access to African natural resources through the barrel of a gun.

So, while the Chinese and Indians and Brazilians and other economic powerhouses play by the rules of give and take, the U.S. tightens its military grip on the continent through its ever-expanding military command, AFRICOM.

To justify its rapid militarization of Africa, Washington plunges whole regions of the continent into chaos. U.S. policies, under presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama, have utterly destroyed Somalia, made the Horn of Africa a theater of war, drawn the northern tier of the continent into America’s cauldron of terror, and killed six million people in the eastern Congo.

The face of America in Africa is war, not trade; extraction of minerals by military intimidation, not conventional commerce. Washington’s priority is to embed AFRICOM ever deeper into the militaries of African states – rather than configuring more favorable trade relationships on the continent. But you won’t learn that from the U.S. corporate media, which chooses to focus on the $100 million cost of Obama’s African trip, or to look for human interest angles on Obama’s decision not to touch down in his father’s homeland, Kenya. However, even that angle is too sinister for deeper exploration by the corporate press, because Kenya’s absence from the itinerary is meant as a threat.

The United States is angry because Washington wanted the Kenyan people to elect a different president, one more acceptable to U.S. policymakers. The Americans expected the whole of Kenyan civil society to bend to Washington’s will, and reject the candidacy of Uhuru Kenyatta, simply to please the superpower. When that didn’t happen, it was decided that Kenya must be shunned, despite its past services to U.S. imperialism.

Skipping Kenya was a warning that more serious repercussions may lurk in the future – which is a potent threat, because the U.S. controls most of the guns of Africa. As the U.S.-backed warlord in Somalia said in Jeremy Scahill’s excellent film The Dirty War, “The Americans are masters of war.” War, and the threat of war, is the reality behind every U.S. presidential visit, to Africa and everywhere else. Whether the terms of trade are good or bad, the declining U.S. empire will get access to the resources it needs, or thousands – millions! – will die.

Back Agenda Report executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.

© 2013 Black Agenda Report

By Emrah Guler

30 June, 2013

@ Hurriyet Daily News

Despite the anxiety over Gezi Park , creativity has been on watch. Filmmakers and musicians have been voicing their concerns here and across the globe. Creative visuals, songs and videos have been an integral part of the protests

The pictures and videos emerging from Gezi Park for the last 18 days are, among many other things, of great contradiction to the world trying to make sense of the protests and the clashes. The live coverage of police brutality to protesters and civilians with tear gas and water cannons alternate with scenes of peace and solidarity the next day, like a piano concerto in the park where thousands watched and applauded, including the riot police.

German musician Davide Martello carried his piano to the center of the park on June 12 for a spontaneous performance with Turkish musician Yigit Özatalay. The reaction was emotional, the feelings overwhelming, and the inspiration instant. Soon after, New York ‘s Zuccotti Park , home to the Occupy Wall Street movement, had its own baby piano.

As much as the protests against the Turkish government’s increasingly autocratic regime have been a source of angst and anxiety since its first days, it has also been a source of creativity and artistic inspiration. Protesters in social media have coined the term “disproportional wit” or “disproportional creativity” in an answer to the much-used term “disproportional violence” throughout the protests.

In the first days of the protests, pictures of graffiti, street art and posters put smiles across faces of those across their computers, surfing frantically on social media. Within the week, short films, animations and videos were circulating on social media. Some of these were the works of young, passionate amateurs, others products of professionals who contributed to the fight for democracy and freedoms through putting their talents in use.

If you visit the website capulcular.bandcamp.com, you’ll be able to listen to over 80 songs written, performed and recorded during these 18 days. Some of these songs are the covers of famous songs, like Sting’s “I’ll Be Watching You” or the rebel song from the musical “Les Misérables,” “Do You Hear the People Sing?” with the lyrics appropriate for the protests.

Do you hear the people sing?

But more than half of these songs are original songs, showing the diversity of the groups that have become part of the Gezi Park protests in Istanbul and across Turkey . You will listen to ethnic music of Laz and Alevi, classical Turkish music, rock, electro-pop, rap and anthems. Some of these songs were written and performed by acclaimed Turkish musicians like the momsy doyenne of Turkish pop, Nazan Öncel, and the rock heartthrobs Duman. Even the world-famous classical music pianist Fazil Say, a recent target of the government’s crackdown on free speech, gave a concert in the Aegean city of Izmir with a pan, a popular tool of protest of those at their homes. Many filmmakers and actors have also become the voices of the resistance, going as far to set up a Filmmakers’ Tent in the colorful tent city in Gezi Park (to be broken by a raid by the police with tear gas last week). More than 700 film professionals, including directors like Özcan Alper, Fatih Akin and actors like Halit Ergenç and Cem Yilmaz, as well as 13 film associations, issued a call to the government last week, urging for “the termination of police violence, an end to threats of intervention and continuation of the dialogue.”

The concerned voices from the world of arts not only came from Turkey , but across the globe. The photo of a smiling Tilda Swinton, holding a paper that read, “Right now police is violently attacking citizens in Istanbul ,” made the rounds in social media.

To reconcile (or not) with the art world

Other messages came from acclaimed musicians Patti Smith, Joan Baez, Roger Waters and Thom Yorke. An open letter to prime minister Tayyip Erdogan began with, “We, citizens of the world, are deeply saddened and concerned by the severe violence against citizens of Turkey by the Turkish police over the last couple of days in Turkish cities including Istanbul .” The letter was signed by American political critic and activist Noam Chomsky, British author Hanif Kureishi, actress and activist Susan Sarandon, British filmmaker Terry Gilliam, among other renowned names. The ruling Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) ignorance, disregard, and often disdain, for the arts have been a major concern of Turkey’s intellectuals, artists, and educated, urban citizens for some time now.

Two years ago, the prime minister had called well-known artist Mehmet Aksoy’s sculpture in Kars , a symbol of Turkish-Armenian friendship and reconciliation “a freak,” and asked for its demolition. Last year, Erdogan condemned Turkish intellectuals of “despotic arrogance” after his daughter was insulted during the staging of a play. He threatened to cut state funding of country’s theaters, and he is making good of his word as the funding cuts for state theaters, ballet and opera are imminent.

So out of touch are Erdogan and his colleagues from the AKP with the world of arts and culture, that their attempts to reach out and reconcile became a source of joke when he invited Necati Sasmaz, the leading actor of the now-canceled ultra-nationalist TV series “Kurtlar Vadisi” (Valley of the Wolves), and the popular actress and diva Hülya Avsar, a public figure of indifference and insensitivity towards women’s issues and ethnic minorities. Sasmaz’s lack of coherence and poor Turkish during a televised press statement following his meeting with the prime minister flooded Twitter with thousands of jokes. “World of translators and linguists unite,” said one tweet.

For Avsar’s meeting with Erdogan, another tweet said it all, “Imagine Obama calling Kim Kardashian to the White House after a civil uprising.”

By Chris Marsden

29 June, 2013

@ WSWS.org

The United States is to officially begin arms shipments to Syria, after months of doing so through third parties, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

A story placed with the Wall Street Journal cited CIA sources relating plans to start supplying arms directly to the opposition Free Syrian Army “within a month.”

The CIA has already begun shipping weapons to a secret network of warehouses in neighbouring Jordan, in an operation backed by European and Arab powers. It will provide training to forces that are supposedly “moderate” and “separate” from Al Qaeda-linked forces such as the Al Nusra Front.

The shipments will fuel an August offensive against the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

The Obama administration cited unsubstantiated US and French claims that pro-Assad forces have used chemical weapons such as sarin on ten separate occasions to claim that a “red line” has been crossed justifying an open policy of arming the opposition.

Vast quantities of weaponry have already been sent via Saudi Arabia to Islamist groups. Washington now claims that weapons sent to “moderates” are the best means of ensuring that Al Nusra’s dominant role can be challenged. This is supposed to be guaranteed by CIA oversight and training by US special operations forces. But the CIA will spend a mere two weeks vetting and training an initial group of fighters.

The US already has 1,000 troops in Jordan providing training.

France is considering sending arms “to balance” the military aid received by the Assad regime from Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, according to Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius.

In Britain, there is substantial domestic political opposition to sending arms, including within the ruling Conservative Party and its Liberal Democrat coalition partners. This has forced Prime Minister David Cameron to promise a vote in parliament on the issue that might make him dependent upon the opposition Labour Party.

Labour Leader Ed Miliband was invited Wednesday to discuss Syria at the National Security Council in 10 Downing Street. He was last invited to attend a National Security Council meeting in 2011, to sign off on the government’s decision to take military action against former Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

Cameron has also said the government reserves the right to act in the national interest without parliamentary assent.

Washington’s reliance on Saudi Arabia to arm the opposition gives the lie to all claims that it is seeking to prevent Al Qaeda securing weapons, given Saudi intelligence agencies’ close ties to far-right Islamist forces throughout the region.

On Tuesday, speaking alongside US Secretary of State John Kerry, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said that Saudi Arabia would help the Syrian opposition fight in an “invaded country” that was facing “genocide” in “the most effective way we can.”

Saudi Arabia and Qatar will provide heavy weaponry, including hand-held surface-to-air missiles.

Kerry said, “We share a belief with Saudi Arabia and many countries that … this next period of time is an important period of time where decisions could be made that could affect the region for years to come.”

His only caveat on supplying weapons was that “we want to make sure that’s being done in a coordinated way.”

Reinforcing the demand for arms shipments, a team of United Nations inspectors are in Turkey, supposedly to gather information about the possible use of chemical weapons, headed by Swedish scientist Ake Sellstrom. He is expected to deliver an interim report in July, without any basis for doing so other than to justify a predetermined course of action and, in particular, the military offensive planned to begin in August.

A Turkish official admitted that it is not possible to establish anything conclusively, “As [Sellstrom] cannot travel to Syria.” All he will have will be intelligence and interviews provided by Turkey and alleged victims.

In Saudi Arabia, Kerry made the appropriate noises about seeking a negotiated solution and denied that there were any US or Saudi troops “on the ground” in Syria, because he is formally committed to a peace conference in Geneva—that again will not take place until after the planned military offensive.

Russia is an ally of the Assad regime and is insisting that it will be represented at the Geneva talks alongside Iran. The US also faces opposition from its allies including Italy and Germany to arming the opposition.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Friday that Russia is committed to arranging a peace conference, but other countries and groups are trying to set preconditions. “The opposition, which is supported by the West, and other countries in the region, announced they are not going to the conference as long as the regime doesn’t agree to capitulate,” he said.

On Wednesday, outgoing US ambassador to the UN Susan Rice attacked Russia and China for vetoing action against Syria, calling the UN Security Council’s inaction “a stain” on its reputation. “The council’s inaction on Syria is a moral and strategic disgrace that history will judge harshly,” she pontificated. Rice is set to become President Barack Obama’s national security adviser.

Russia this week announced that it has withdrawn all its military and non-diplomatic civilian personnel out of Syria, including an evacuation of the 70 people at its naval supply station in the Mediterranean port of Tartus. The move does not affect Russia’s ability to operate militarily in either the Mediterranean or in Syria, as Cyprus has agreed the use of its ports. A 16-ship naval task force is still in the eastern Mediterranean.

Politically, however, it indicates an assumption that an escalation of the war is imminent.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel made a diplomatic but nevertheless firm statement that Berlin would not supply weapons to the opposition. Speaking in parliament Thursday, she said that “The hardship of the people of Syria is immeasurably great, their situation is unbearable” and that “anyone with a heart” would want to help them.

“In this desperate situation, which is increasingly threatening the entire region, surely each of us can understand that our friends and partners the US, Britain and France are considering helping parts of the Syrian opposition with weapons shipments,” she said, but added, “Whether this approach can succeed is an entirely different question.”

“The risks, in my view, would be almost impossible to assess,” she said. At the G8 summit in Northern Ireland, she continued, “I made it unmistakably clear that Germany for legal reasons sends no weapons into civil war zones, including Syria.”

Washington, Berlin, London and Paris all face majority domestic opposition to their warmongering in Syria, with only the various pseudo-left groups such as the US International Socialist Organisation, Germany’s Die Linke, Britain’s Socialist Workers Party and France’s New Anti-capitalist Party still denying the obviously sectarian character of the opposition militias.

This week and last, new videos have emerged on YouTube of opposition fighters beheading and shooting Syrian civilians, including two women. Two men, beheaded with a small knife before a cheering crowd, were accused of aiding Assad and were reportedly a priest and another Christian.

On Thursday, four people were killed in a suicide blast in a Christian neighborhood in the Syrian capital, Damascus. The blast took place near the Greek Orthodox Virgin Mary Church in Bab Sharqi. Several people were wounded.

By Countercurrents.org

27 June, 2013

@ Countercurrents.org

The Muslim Brotherhood asked Egypt’s former intelligence chief Omar Suleiman to nominate himself for presidency in 2011, Hussein Kamal, former head of Sulieman’s office, said on June 25, 2013.

Kamal said in a press conference in Cairo that a representative of the Brotherhood – from which current President Mohamed Morsi hails – visited Suleiman in Alexandria in the summer of 2011 and asked him to nominate himself for presidential elections.

According to Kamal, the representative told Suleiman, who passed away in July 2012, that this would be on the condition that his vice-president and executive office be made up of Brotherhood members.

“They wanted him to be a puppet president who would implement the orders of the [Brotherhood’s] guidance office,” Kamal said.

“They gave [Suleiman] three months to think about it, but he refused,” he added.

Suleiman announced in 2012 that he would run for presidential elections. However, his presidential bid was turned down by the Supreme Presidential Electoral Committee (SPEC) because he failed to acquire the number of recommendations stipulated by the electoral law.

In a conference held to “reveal information about the Brotherhood’s rule,” Kamal, who currently does not hold any official position, said that he does not represent the Egyptian General Intelligence Service and is speaking for himself as an “Egyptian citizen.”

Kamal, who was also Suleiman’s office head when the former intelligence chief was appointed the country’s vice-president during the 18-day January 2011 uprising, talked about Morsi’s November 2012 constitutional decree, saying that it was sent to the presidency “in an envelope from the [Brotherhood’s] guidance office.”

Kamal described the performance of the Brotherhood and its political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), who have a parliamentary majority, as a “failure.”

In addition, Kamal attacked Qatar calling it a “statelet.”

Qatar has been a prominent source of foreign aid to Egypt since Morsi came to power.

“Who is Qatar’s [prime minister] to say that his country will not leave Egypt bankrupt?” he asked.

Qatari prime minister Hamad bin Jassem said in January that his country would not see Egypt’s economic situation deteriorate to the level of bankruptcy.

The Qatari-owned Al Jazeera Mubashar Masr news channel cut off the broadcast of the conference as Kamal made the comments.

Kamal said that former president Mubarak helped the father of former Qatar emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani when the sheikh overthrew his father in 1995.

Kamal claimed that by helping Egypt financially, Qatar wants to abuse its economy as “it is the Egyptian people who will repay these loans.”

Protests hit all-time high in Morsi’s first year

Egypt experienced 9,427 protests during president Morsi’s first year in power, representing seven-fold increase from those seen during final year of Mubarak regime, International Development Centre claims. [2]

Egyptian dissent has hit an all-time high “since the pharaonic era,” said the Cairo-based Organization.

The IDC’s ‘Democratic Indicator’ report showed an in the number of monthly demonstrations from 176 a month in the last year of the Mubarak regime – which climaxed with January 2011 uprising – to 1140 protests per month in 2013.

The report covers the first year of Morsi’s term in office, from 1 July of last year to 20 June 2013.

The number of protests seen during the first half of the year doubled in the second half, from 500 protests to 1140, eventually culminating in mass anti-government demonstrations on 30 June, the report stated.

The anti-Morsi ‘Rebel’ signature campaign has capitalized on the wave of public discontent, collecting 15 million signatures in support of the president’s ouster, the report notes. The signature drive is spearheading calls for the 30 June protests.

According to the Democratic Indicator, labor protests (4,609) have made up 49 percent of the total number of protests, in which 60 different socio-economic segments took part.

In an indication of this, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) has added Egypt to its black list of countries that violate labor rights.

Grassroots support was behind 27 percent of the protests, while participation by political and civilian activists made up 13 percent, the report stated.

Cairo came first in terms of the number of protests seen, followed by the Nile Delta cities of Gharbiya and Sharqiya. The Mediterranean city of Alexandria came in fourth.

“The categories that took part in the protests reflected the hostility of the current regime towards almost all sections of Egyptian society,” the report argued.

The report went on to claim that such hostility had found its way into state institutions, including the judiciary and the interior ministry, “constituting a model of dictatorship by the ruling regime and its hope to dominate authority.”

The chorus of protests throughout the year was predominantly the result of economic and social grievances (67 percent) and labor demands (49 percent).

According to the Democratic Indicator, demands for better housing and public services, along with shortages of fuel, bread and electricity, also acted as catalysts for protest activity.

Attempts by the regime to cement control over the state bureaucracy, marginalization of the political opposition, and clampdowns on freedoms, the report alleges, caused 31 percent of the protests.

The Democratic Indicator went on to claim that Egyptians employed 62 innovative methods to express their dissent, peaceful at times and violent at others.

These ranged from strikes (1,013), sit-ins (811), marches (503), human chains (80) and horn-blowing campaigns (21), as well as 18 no-bill-payment campaigns. The blocking of roads, meanwhile, accounted for 16 percent of the techniques used to voice discontent with the government.

The report claims that an outpouring of public frustration, coupled with dissatisfaction with the regime’s policies among large swathes of the public, has provided fertile ground for violence during planned anti-government protests on 30 June.

The report went on to urge the president to step down before the planned protests in light of the widespread outrage he faces.

The day is expected to include an open-ended counter-demonstration by the president’s Islamist backers, heightening fears of violence.

Source:

[1] June 25, 2013,

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/74921/Egypt/Politics-/Brotherhood-asked-exspy-chief-Suleiman-to-run-for-.aspx

[2] Ahram Online, Jun 25, 2013,

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/74939/Egypt/Politics-/Egypt-protests-hit-alltime-high-during-Morsis-firs.aspx

By Graham Peebles

27 June, 2013

@ Countercurrents.org

Dancing to the tune of their corporate benefactors, governments of the ruling G8 countries are enacting complex agriculture agreements delivering large tracts of prime cut African soil into the portfolios of their multinational bedmates.

Desperate for foreign investment, countries throughout Africa are at the mercy of their new colonial masters – national and international agrochemical corporations, fighting for land, water and control of the world’s food supplies. Driven overwhelmingly by self-interest and profit, the current crop of ‘investors’ differ little from their colonial ancestors. The means may have changed, but the aim – to rape and pillage, no matter the sincere sounding rhetoric, remains more or less the same.

Regarded by her northern guides as agriculturally underperforming, Sub-Saharan Africa is seen The African Centre for Biosafety (ACB)i relate, as a “new frontier”, a place to “make profits, with an eye on land, food and biofuels in particular”. Africa, then, is the new Wild West; smallholder farmers and indigenous people are the natives Indians, the multi nationals and their democratically elected representatives – or salesmen – the settlers.

Various initiatives offering what is, indisputably much needed ‘support and investment’ are flowing north to south. Key amongst these is The New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition in Africa (NAFSNA), designed by the governments of the eight richest economies, for some of the poorest countries in the world. The New Alliance was born out of the G8 summit in May 2012 at Camp David and, according to, War on Want (WoW)ii, “has been modelled on the ‘new vision’ of private investment in agriculture developed by management consultants McKinsey in conjunction with the ABCD group of leading grain traders (ADM, Bunge, Cargill and Louis Dreyfus) and other multinational agribusiness companies.” (Ibid) It has been written in honourable terms to sit comfortably within the Africa Union’s Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP), bestowing an aura of international credibility.

The New Alliance… in land and seed appropriation

At first glance, The New Alliance, with its altruistically-gilded aims, appears to be a worthy development. Who amongst us could argue with the intention as reported by the United Nations (UN)iii, to “achieve sustained and inclusive agricultural growth and raise 50 million people out of poverty over the next 10 years”. The means to achieving this noble quest however, are skewed, ignoring the rights and needs of small-holder farmers and the wishes of local people – who are not consulted during the heady negotiations with government officials local and national, and the multi zillion $ corporations who are swarming to buy their ancestral land. Alliance contracts and deals-done favour wealthy investors, revealing the underlying, unjust G8 initiatives objective, to “open up African agriculture to multinational agribusiness companies by means of national ‘cooperation frameworks’ between African governments, donors and private sector investors”, WoW report.

Poverty reduction (the principle stated aim of the Alliance), will be achieved we are told, not by rational methods of sharing and re-distribution, but USAIDiv 18/05/2012 reveal, by “aligning the commitments of Africa’s leadership to drive effective country plans and policies for food security”. ‘Plans and policies’, drafted no doubt in the hallowed meeting rooms of those driving the ‘New Alliance’: the G8 governments and their cohorts including The World Bank and, pulling the policy strings, the agriculture companies sitting behind them, nestling alongside the pharmaceutical giants and the arms industry magnates. With African governments anxious to eat at the head table, or at least be invited into the cocktail chamber they have little choice but to sign up to such unbalanced ‘plans and policies’.

To date, nine African countries (from a continent of 54 nation states), have committed to The New Alliance. First to sign up were, Tanzania, Ghana and the West’s favoured ally in the region Ethiopia – where wide ranging human rights violations, including forced displacement and rapes have reportedly accompanied land sales, and where over 250,000 people in Gambella have been forced into the Orwellian sounding ‘Villagization Programmes’. Then came Burkina Faso, Mozambique and Cote d’Ivoire, followed by Benin, Malawi, and Nigeria. It is an agreement dripping with strings that promise to entangle the innocent and uninformed. After “wide-ranging consultations on land and farming”, with officials from potential partner countries, the results of which were “ignored in the agreements with the G8”, deals “between African governments and private companies were facilitated by the World Economic Forum”, behind, The Guardian report, firmly closed doors.

Conditional to investment promised by The New Alliance, African leaders, USAID tell us are ‘committed’ – forced may be a better word – “to refine [government] policies in order to improve investment opportunities”. In plain English, African countries are required to, change their trade and agriculture laws to include ending the free distribution of seeds, relax the tax system and national export controls and open the doors for profit repatriation (allowing the money as well as the crops to be exported). In Mozambique, as elsewhere across the continent, local farmers have been evicted from their land under land sales agreements, and The Guardian 10/06/2013v report, “is now obliged to write new laws promoting what its agreement calls “partnerships” of this kind”. A polluted term, disguising the real relationship between African governments and the multi-national ‘investors’, which is closer to master and maid than equal collaborators.

The Alliance offers a combination of public and private money to African countries willing to take the G8 plunge into international political-economic duplicity, with, ACB relate “the large multinational seed, fertiliser and agrochemical companies setting the agenda … and philanthropic institutions (like AGRA and others) establishing the institutional and infrastructural mechanisms to realise this agenda”. Britain has pledged £395 million of foreign aid whilst, according to the UN “over 45 local and multinational companies have expressed their intent to invest over $3 billion across the agricultural value chain in Grow Africa countries [a Programme of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) established by the African Union in 2003.].” In order to get their hands on some of the corporations billions however, African nations are required to “change their seed laws, trade laws and land ownership in order to prioritise corporate profits over local food needs”, Mozambique e.g. is contracted, The Guardian tell us to “systematically cease distribution of free and unimproved seeds”, and is drawing up new laws granting intellectual property rights (IPR) of seeds, that will “promote private sector investment”. In other words, laws are being written that allow foreign companies – ‘investors’ (a word used to mislead and bestow legitimacy) – to grab the land of their African ‘partners’, patent their seeds and monopolise their food markets. In Ghana, Tanzania and Ivory Coast, similar regulations sit on the table waiting to be rubber-stamped.

The re-writing of seed laws, along with the fact that these unbalanced deals allow “big multinational seed, fertiliser and agrochemical companies such as Yara, Monsanto, Syngenta and Cargill to set the agenda”, is a major concern expressed by environmental NGO’s and campaigners, Reuters 20/06/2013vi report. These are concerns that the initiating G8 governments, were they at all troubled by the impact of their meddling, should share.

The wide ownership, by a small number of huge agro-chemical companies of the rights to seeds and fertilisers, is creating, the UN in their report on the Right to Foodvii, state: “monopoly privileges to plant breeders and patent-holders through the tools of intellectual property”. This growing trend, facilitated through the support of the G8 governments is placing more and more control of the worldwide food supply in their hands, and is causing, “the poorest farmers [to] become increasingly dependent on expensive inputs, creating the risk of indebtedness in the face of unstable incomes.” India is a case in question where farmers strangled by debt are committing suicide at a rate of two per hour.

Investment Support Sharing

African farmers, and civil society along with 25 British campaign groups including War on Want, Friends of the Earth, The Gaia Foundation and the World Development Movement, have declared their objections to the New Alliance and asked that the government withhold the £395 million so generously pledged by Prime Minister Cameron. The African civil society are in no doubt that “opening markets and creating space for multinationals to secure profits lie at the heart of the G8 intervention”, they “recognise the New Alliance is a poisoned chalice, and they are right to reject it”, asserts Kirtana Chandrasekaran of Friends of the Earth (FoE).

Having made a continental mess of their own countries’ economies, not to mention the environmental mayhem caused by their neo-liberal economic policies, It is with unabashed colonial arrogance that the G8 governments deem to tell African countries what to do with their land and how best to do it. Not only do they have no genuine interest in Africa, save what can be gained from it, but they have “no legitimacy to intervene in matters of food, hunger and land tenure in Africa or any other part of the world”, as WoW make clear. The New Alliance, according to David Cameron, is “a great combination of promoting good governance and helping Africa to feed its people”. He and the rest of the G8 sitting comfortably club, are, FoE state, “pretending to be tackling hunger and land grabbing in Africa while backing a scheme that will ruin the lives of hundreds of thousands of small farmers”. This new deal is “a pro-corporate assault on African nations”, providing ‘investment and support‘ opportunities for greedy investors, looking to further expand their corporate assets with the support of participating governments obliged to provide a selection box of state incentives.

The ending of hunger in sub-Saharan Africa, India and elsewhere, will not be brought about by allowing large tracts of land to be bought up by corporations whose only interest is in maximizing return on investment. Far from providing investment and support for the people of Africa, The Alliance is a mask for exploitation and profiteering: True investment in Africa is, investment in the people of Africa; the smallholder farmers, the women and children, the communities across the continent. It involves working collectively, consulting, encouraging participation and crucially sharing. Sharing of knowledge, experience and technology, sharing the natural resources – the land, food and water, the minerals and other resources equitably amongst the people of Africa and indeed the wider world. Such radical, commonsense ideas would go a long way to creating not only food security but harmony, trust and social justice which just might bring about peace.

Graham Peebles is Director of The Create Trust, www.thecreatetrust.org A UK registered charity (1115157). Running education and social development programmes, supporting fundamental Social change and the human rights of individuals in acute need. Contact , E: graham@thecreatetrust.org

ShareThisShareThis

Comments are moderated

The town is back in the hands of Syria’s army but the move says more about local disillusion than military defeat

By Patrick Cockburn

25 June 2013

@ The Independent

Once a rebel stronghold, the town of Tal Kalakh on the Syrian side of the border with Lebanon changed sides at the week-end and is now controlled by the Syrian army. The switch in allegiance is the latest advance by government forces into areas where they have had little or no authority since the start of the revolt in Syria two years ago.

The government is triumphant at the surrender of 39 local leaders of the rebel Free Syrian Army with their weapons, which were ceremoniously stacked against the outside wall of the town’s military headquarters. The exact terms of the deal are mysterious, but there is no doubt that the regular Syrian army now holds all parts of Tal Kalakh, which had a pre-war population of 55,000 and is an important smuggling route for arms and ammunition from Lebanon a couple of miles to the south. Syrian army commanders claimed the reason the rebels had given up in the town so easily was because of their defeat in the battle for the similarly strategically important town of Qusayr, 20 miles away, earlier in June.

The Syrian opposition denied that the town had fallen, saying that there was still fighting going on there. In a three-hour visit, I saw no sign of it. Soldiers and civilians looked relaxed and there were no indications of recent destruction, though there are plenty of buildings damaged by shellfire or pockmarked with bullet holes from fighting in 2011 or 2012. The pro-rebel Al-Jazeera Arabic satellite television channel claimed smoke was rising from the town. I did not see or smell any.

The rebels’ strenuous denial that they had lost an important town without a fight may show a certain desperation on their part. Ahmed Munir, the governor of Homs province, which includes Tal Kalakh, pointed out in an interview that the Syrian army had moved into the town just as 11 major powers, including the US, Britain, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, meeting in Qatar, had promised the rebels more weapons and equipment.

A local FSA commander, who said his name was Khalid al-Eid, explained that he had gone over to the government side along with 20 men he led because of general disillusionment with the uprising. A paunchy man in his early thirties with a black beard and a red baseball cap, he appeared self-confident and almost truculent as he talked about his life as an FSA leader.

He said that before the uprising, he “used to work as a policeman during the day-time and in the family perfume shop in the evening”. He seemed assured he would be able to return to his old routine.

Listening to him impassively were Syrian army officers and some civilians, including Khalid al-Eid’s father, who expelled his son from the family home when he joined the FSA. The deal that brought the army back into Tal Kalakh appears to have been brokered by leading citizens of the town who did not want it to become a battleground again. The devastating destruction at Qusayr when it was stormed over two weeks by the Syrian army and the Lebanese Shia militia Hezbollah gave a sense of urgency to the final negotiations.

Tal Kalakh may be peaceful now but it has seen much fighting in the recent past. There is an elaborate military checkpoint at the entrance to the town just off the Homs-Tartus main road where documents are checked. The atmosphere in the military headquarters housed in an administrative building of a large grain silo was relaxed, as if nobody expected to do more fighting. The buildings immediately in front of the army’s positions had been wrecked by cannon fire and looked as if they had been abandoned. Armed rebellion had started early in Tal Khalak in May 2011, probably because its position on the Lebanese border made it easy to smuggle in weapons.

The cache of weapons on show by the army – a few mortar bombs, rockets and explosives – were not very impressive. There was also a truck of furniture looted from the local hospital by the rebels on show, but the aging white-painted beds and chairs looked unsaleable.

Beyond a zone of outright destruction in front of Syrian army’s front line there was an area which looked as if shops and houses had been abandoned a long time ago. A government guide who tried to explain why there was nobody on the streets said “it is because it is siesta time and they are all in bed”. But this did not explain the absence of cars or clothes drying on lines in backyards.

The shutters of shops were rusty in places and there was grass growing in cracks in the pavement. Most local inhabitants are likely to have become refugees in Lebanon over a year ago.

Even here there were some government loyalists. Umm Said al-Masri, a woman surrounded by her family, was reopening a vegetable shop. “God bless the army,” she said, confirming that it had reasserted control three days earlier. Her children chanted slogans in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and there were new-looking posters of him on the walls. Deeper into the town more people appeared on the streets and most of the small shops were open, selling everything from fruit to shoes.

Close to the border there are Christian Maronite villages along the steep sides of the hills, houses often having small statues of the Virgin Mary in blue and white robes facing the road. The land falls away quickly to the al-Kabir river at the bottom of a deep wooded valley, which is the frontier between Syria and Lebanon. In this area a donkey specially trained to carry smuggled goods and cross the border without human assistance is said to be worth more than a car.

Everybody seemed to accept that the Syrian army is back for good. The soldiers in checkpoints were not wearing helmets and often not carrying their weapons, as if they did not expect anybody to attack them. Khalid al-Eid said there had been 300-400 FSA in Tal Kalakh before the army’s return but they must have melted back into the local population under an unofficial amnesty or have gone to Lebanon. Soldiers or guerrillas who have switched sides are often an unreliable source of information about their former colleagues because they denigrate them in a bid to impress their new masters. But Khalid al-Eid did say that his men were “paid between $100 and 300 a month and we got an extra $1,000 if we carried out an operation”. He described how he would make Youtube films – “sometimes they show us firing when there was nothing to shoot at” – which would later be shown on al-Arabiya and al-Jazeera satellite television.

What were the exact terms of the deal that replaced the FSA with the Syrian army? Peace did not break out all of a sudden and it had been preceded by a series of local ceasefires and negotiations arranged by leading local townspeople. Monsignor Michel Naaman, a Syriac Catholic priest in Homs, who has often taken part in mediating such agreements said that “older people in the town had seen much of it damaged and did not want it destroyed”.

He adds that there are many other such deals and agreements in the making. For instance in Homs many people have moved to the al-Waar district for safety, its population rising from 150,00 to 700,000. The Old City, which once had 400,000 people in it is almost empty aside from rebel fighters. He says that ceasefires or agreements for rebels to put down their weapons in return for an amnesty are much easier to arrange when all the rebels are Syrians. “When there are foreign Salafi or Jihadi fighters present, as there are in the Old City, an agreement is almost impossible.”

The Governor Ammed Munir believes “one should try to make a deal in each case without a special military operation”. He says that the Old City of Homs is particularly difficult to deal with because “you can’t have an agreement with so many gangs and in case, there are many tunnels into and out of the Old City”. Overall, there is little fighting in Homs province because of the government success at Qusayr and because these local ceasefires are holding. An injection of more arms and money, which may be the result of last weekend’s Doha meeting of the 11 Friends of Syria could bring a new surge in violence but would not produce a decisive result in the civil war.

The Tal Kalakh peace deal is important because no serious negotiations on who holds power in Syria can take place given the present level of violence in the country as a whole. The only way to bring the political temperature down is by local ceasefires and peace deals. The government is gaining ground this year as the rebels did in 2011 but nobody is going to win on the battlefield.

Assad’s uncle sells Paris mansion for knock-down price

The uncle of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has sold his sumptuous seven-storey Paris mansion for a knock-down price, just as French authorities have stepped up investigations into the alleged misuse of public funds by foreign leaders.

Rifaat al-Assad’s Paris property on the exclusive Avenue Foch, overlooking the Arc de Triomphe, had been on sale since last year for €100m (£85m). He abruptly dropped the price three months ago and it was sold for €70m, reportedly to a Russian oligarch.

Rifaat al-Assad – known as the “butcher of Hama” – is the younger brother of the late Syrian president Hafez al-Assad, Bashar’s father. Rifaat has spent three decades in exile in France after an attempted coup to oust his sibling, but he owns properties elsewhere in Europe, including a mansion in Mayfair. He earned his bloodthirsty nickname after allegedly masterminding the 1982 crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood which destroyed  the Syrian city of Hama and left an estimated 20,000 people dead. “Rifaat al-Assad has a fortune calculated in billions of euros, for which opponents of the Assad family would love to know the origin,” Libération said. France has begun investigating acquisitions stemming from the suspected ill-gotten gains of foreign leaders, in particular three from Africa.

A mansion belonging to the son of Equatorial Guinea President Teodoro Obiang Nguema, close to Mr Assad’s 12,000 foot property on Avenue Foch, was seized earlier this month by French police.

Anne Penketh