Just International

Israel Supports Al Qaeda Rebels: Syria Opposition Terrorists Treated in Israeli Hospital

By Al Manar

February 03, 2014

The Israeli occupation army established a field hospital on the Golan Heights to treat the Syrian injured militants who belong to the terrorist groups in Syria.

These groups have treated over 700 of their injured militants in that hospitals, according to Israeli media outlets.

The Zionist army prevented the media outlets from broadcasting the activities of the field hospital yet allowed the Second Channel to prepare a report about it in order to promote the “humane Israeli step towards the Syrians.”

The report mainly focused on the Israeli intentions behind treating the militants, clarifying that the Israelis aim was to strengthen and deepen their relations with the terrorist groups in Syria in order to keep the calm and stability which now prevails between these groups and Israel at Palestinian-Syrian borders.

The report also included interviews with a number of the militants who stated that “Zionism is not macabre as it has been portrayed by the Syrian regime.”

“The regime used to force us to believe that our enemy is all the surrounding world, yet after the beginning of the revolution, we recognized our real friends and  real enemies.”

 

 

‘We want to go out!’: 18,000 starving inside Syrian refugee camp

Rt.com

February 01, 2014

Mass starvation, disease and hopelessness abound in the Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp in Damascus. Although a UN agency has managed to make its first food aid delivery to the rebel-held camp in weeks, many people are on the brink of starvation.

The camp is located on the edge of the territory the Syrian government considers under its control, in a southern Damascus neighborhood, just five miles away from the capital’s center.

Rebel forces have been holding the camp for more than a year and the army started a siege in June. Nothing and no one comes in or out, as 18,000 people continue to be kept in a state of limbo.

Some of the Palestinian refugees living in the camp have been there for decades, victims of the Palestinian people’s conflict with Israel. Now they are hoping desperately for a resolution to this conflict, in Syria.

RT made it as close as possible to the edge of the camp under government supervision, to observe as the UN Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), in league with Syrian and Palestinian authorities, delivers the much-needed food aid.

There were cases when people were let out to come back with supplies; but only women and elderly men. They knew they could not leave because their families continue to be trapped inside.

“It’s as bad as it can get, I’m desperately hungry…we have nothing to eat,” one woman told RT’s Maria Finoshina. There is no free passage deeper into the camp, as snipers are on the ready to shoot anyone who ventures in.

The UNRWA hopes it will be able to continue food deliveries. On Thursday, it managed its first delivery in two weeks, consisting of 1,000 food parcels – the biggest yet.

“The distribution is ongoing. This is the first aid to enter the camp since January 21, when UNRWA distributed 138 food parcels,” UNRWA spokesperson Chris Gunness said.

Another convoy entered the camp Friday.

Speaking to Reuters, Gunness said that they hope “to continue and increase substantially the amount of aid being delivered… with each passing hour, their need increases.”

Even in this climate of desperation, versions as to what exactly is going on differ massively. So much so that Reuters claims that the UNRWA has knowledged that one of its latest convoys was fired upon by government forces determined to starve the Palestinian refugees. The same tune is being sung by opposition activists, claiming that the government is using hunger as a weapon.

Yarmouk families, meanwhile, continue to perish – and seem to be rather blaming the rebel forces.

“There is no food, nothing to eat or drink, the militants are inside,” one resident told RT. “I swear by the soul of the Prophet we want this to stop. What is our guilt? We want to go out!”

“We cannot leave – the militants prevent us,” another resident said.

A total of 85 people in the camp have died since June, and many fear the number will continue to rise if the aid situation is not restored and supplies do not start running normally.

The stalemate has been going on for months now, with no end in sight – despite the Palestinian authorities stepping in.

Palestinian ambassador to Syria Mahmoud Al Khaldi told RT that the authorities “are negotiating with the militants to convince them to go out. We tell them that this is of no importance and these are just people – they’ll not gain any strategic goal. We had three rounds of talks, but we failed. And I don’t think they’ll accept this – it’s clear.”

Sieges have been a tried and tested rebel tactic for three years now. Just outside Damascus, the town of Adra has been held since mid-December 2013, with 5,000 of those who did not flee in time held prisoner in their own homes and used as human shields, just in case the government forces decide to storm the town by force. They are now encamped just outside the town – but cannot storm it for fear of causing civilian deaths.

Anwar Raja, from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, sees the rebels’ tactics as an obvious move to insinuate the government’s complicity in the suffering of its own people.

“The Nusra Front and the Takfiri groups are trading on the hunger of the people. They want to say to the world: ‘See: the people are hungry.’ It’s like the residents are kidnapped inside their own camp, inside their own home, and the militants are negotiating over them, negotiating their souls,” Raja said.

“They claim that the Syrian state is besieging Palestinians in the camp. They want to invert the image and the truth, saying that the Syrian government is part of the killing force, as they don’t do anything to protect the people. They want people to hate the regime.”

According to Raja, an evacuation plan has been worked out with the Syrian Arab Red Crescent to evacuate “hundreds” of Yarmouk residents. The evacuees were transported to several hospitals, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said Saturday, but the Red Crescent could not be reached to confirm the details of the operation.

Burma: Govt moves to silence Rohingya MP after homes torched

Asian Correspondent

By Mark Inkey

Rohingya MP Shwe Maung has been interrogated and threatened with a defamation lawsuit after he accused local police of involvement in the burning of Rohingya homes in Du Char Yar Tan village in late January, the latest effort by the Burmese government to silence accusations of wrongdoing in the country’s ongoing sectarian conflict.

Burma’s President Thein Sein wrote to the speaker of the House, Shwe Mann, saying he said that he wanted to interrogate Shwe Maung about an interview given to Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) in which he said that he believed police were involved in the burning of 16 Rohingya homes on January 28.

Du Char Yar Tan (also spelt Duchira Dan) is a Rohingya village in southern Maungdaw Township, Rakhine State.

The incident in late January follows an alleged massacre in the village earlier in the month in which at least 40 Rohingya are believed to have been killed. There were also reports of rapes.According to the UN, which condemned the incident and called for an investigation, at least 48 people were killed.

The Arakan Project said many people were stabbed rather than shot, suggesting they were not killed by the security forces who would have used guns, but killed by the mob as the security forces looked on.

Then, on January 28, a fire tore through the village and destroyed between 16 and 22 homes, according to DVB.

In his controversial interview, Shwe Maung said that on January 27 the Rohingya men who were guarding their neighborhood were replaced by policemen. That evening, according to Shwe Maun, at around 8.45pm fire broke out in one house and quickly spread as the police looked on.

(MORE: Another Rohingya massacre, another media problem for Burma)

He said: “It happened after the police took over guard duty of that part of the village.”

“Also, I have solid information from locals in nearby villages who phoned me and said they saw the police setting the houses on fire,” he added.

He also claimed that the police prevented villagers from trying to put out the fires.

Shwe Maung is a Rohingya MP in Burma’s Lower House representing Buthidaung constituency, which is next to Maungdaw Township where the fire broke out.

He denied all the charges against him.

He said: “I never did anything to defame the State and Myanmar Police Force. What I do is for the good of my nation and people according to the Constitution and Pyithu Hlutraw Law. I always emphasize tability, peaceful existence, development, rule of law, justice and equal rights.”

The government appears intent on shutting down any reporting or discussion of the events in Du Char Yar Tan.

In January it accused AP (Associated Press), which originally broke the story of the murders, of false reporting.

Chief Minister of Rakhine State, Hla Maung Tin, also talked of “false news published and aired by foreign media that children and women were killed in the violence” on the Ministry of Information website.

The Burmese government also reacted angrily when UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay called for an investigation into the deaths.

Ye Htut, spokesman for the office of President Thein Sein, told The Irrawaddy: “It was sad to see a statement issued by the UN, not using information from their local office staff, but quoting unreliable information and issuing the statement. These accusations are unacceptable.”

The US and British embassies have also called for independent investigations into the killings.

Ms. Wahyuningrum (Yuyun) I E-mail: wahyuningrum@gmail.com

Thailand’s political crisis: Is it time up for Thaksin?

By Nile Bowie

3 February, 2014

General elections are widely seen as the answer to Thailand’s crippling political impasse, though Yingluck Shinawatra’s embattled government may be removed through either judicial or extra-legal means regardless of her performance at the polls.

Protestors calling for the ouster of Thailand’s caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra have disrupted the February 2 polls by obstructing traffic and blocking access to voting sites, forcing authorities to postpone further voting until a later date is decided upon. Thailand has been marred by political upheaval since November, and the country’s two rival protest movements accuse each other of launching anonymous attacks on one another, usually by targeted shootings or by the use of small explosives, leaving several dead. The consensus of independent analysts and others who have monitored the attacks suggest that they were mostly launched by government supporters, who have used insurgent tactics in the past to support the Shinawatra political clan. Thai political movements have been characterized in recent times by color affiliations. Protestors wearing yellow shirts represent the faction aligned to the all-powerful Thai monarchy and the royal establishment that has traditionally wielded tremendous social, political and economic power over the country.

 

Yellow shirt demonstrators typically come from the established middle class, and in the present scenario are aligned with the People’s Democratic Reform Council (PDRC) protest group. Protest leader and former Democrat Party secretary-general Suthep Thaugsuban has mobilized massive numbers to clog Bangkok’s streets and occupy government ministries in a bid to force Yingluck’s resignation and purge her family’s influence from Thai politics. Protestors wearing red shirts represent supporters of Yingluck Shinawatra and her brother and former PM Thaksin Shinawatra, who was deposed in a 2006 military coup. Thaksin, a billionaire businessman and telecommunications tycoon, lives in exile in Dubai to avoid facing criminal charges and arrest in Thailand for the deep-rooted corruption that occurred during his tenure as prime minister. Supporters of Thaksin are aligned with the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) protest group and typically come from Thailand’s rural north and northeast, regions that have benefited most from populist policies and transformative medical programs, culminating in steadfast support for Thaksin-backed political parties that have won every election since 2001.

Rule by remote control

Thaksin’s tenure as prime minister saw business interests and wealthy politicians vie for control over commercial interests as they asserted themselves against the military hierarchy, who are regarded as defenders of the monarchy. Though the military were more likely motivated to move against his government in 2006 because Thaksin was promoting his loyalists and working to reduce the military’s political and economic muscle, his style of leadership can be likened to running Thailand as a family-business, making him one of Asia’s richest men in the process. Thaksin’s family and political confidants attempted to dominate all sectors of the economy and state, and ruled as if they were above the law. While it’s true that Thaksin-backed parties are the only political force in recent times to uplift the rural underclass and give them some measure of political representation, electoral benefits were the clear motivating factor as these policies ensured the continued perpetuation of Thaksin’s family-rule through the ballot box. Red shirt supporters of Thaksin generally acknowledge his clear vested interests, but feel that they at least benefited through social policies of virtually free healthcare, attractive student-loan schemes, and land redistribution.

 

Thaksin arguably remains the de-facto prime minister despite being a convicted fugitive in exile from Thailand since 2008. Officials from Yingluck Shinawatra’s ruling Pheu Thai Party have conceded to foreign media that Thaksin formulates the party’s policies and makes most of the important political decisions by constantly keeping in contact with the government in Bangkok using Skype and various instant messenger services. The current wave of protests erupted in November, when Yingluck pushed for a blanketing amnesty bill to pardon anyone facing almost any charge arising from period of political crisis from 2004 to 2010, allowing Thaksin to return to Thailand while whitewashing his criminal corruption conviction and other pending cases against his family members and political allies. The bill was met with mass outrage from anti-government protestors and opposition supporters, reflecting how Thaksin’s return from exile is still deemed as non-negotiable by royalists and traditionalists, even considering Yingluck’s deference to royal authority and her notable non-intervention in military affairs.

The Middle Way versus Thaksin’s way

Personal and social relations in Thailand are overwhelmingly dominated by Theravada Buddhism, and by extension, notions of Buddhist philosophy have shaped political norms. The concept of the Middle Way calls on one to live moderately between the extremes of excessive indulgence and abstinence or self-abasement, which cultural analysts say has contributed to the cycle of moderately corrupt traditional elites who have come and gone without clinging to their authority or excessively enriching themselves since the end of absolute monarchy in the 1930s. Thaksin Shinawatra is so vehemently rejected by large sections of society because his rule has violated the norms that Thais have come to expect from their political leaders, primarily because of his attempts to cling to power and continually dominate the state and the economy despite his fugitive status, thereby undermining the position of the military, and by extension, the monarchy. For this reason, the suspension of democratic formalities to uproot Thaksin’s faction is more-or-less politically acceptable to a large section of society. Thaksin’s political clan has attempted to downplay beliefs that he is a perceived enemy of the king, who wields enormous influence over Thai society, acting as its moral backbone and a politically neutral (but peerlessly powerful) leader.

Followers of the PDRC and its leader Suthep Thaugsuban seek nothing less than purging Thaksin’s family from political power by forcing Yingluck into making an unconditional resignation, threatening even to detain her and fellow cabinet members if she does not quit. The opposition Democrat party – which has not won an election in more than two decades – backs the PDRC, both of whom boycotted the February 2 polls and endorsed the protest movements that disrupted it. The PDRC wants an unelected ‘people’s council’ to replace the democratically-elected government for a period of up to two years, allowing it to usher in reforms designed to permanently nullify Thaksin’s power and influence, perhaps by nationalizing Thaksin-owned businesses to send a message to Yingluck’s political allies. Suthep’s movement is extremely well funded by the anti-Thaksin business and political elite, and backed by powerful forces in Thai society that want to restore the traditional order under the guise of vague democratic reforms. Suthep also has a legacy of corruption that forced him to surrender his seat in parliament and is implicated in murder charges for a brutal crackdown on protesters in 2010 during his stint at deputy PM in a non-elected, military-supported government led by the Democrat Party. Suthep has a warrant out for his arrest after being charged with insurrection when his protesters occupied government offices, but the police have made no attempt to arrest him, an indication that powerful forces support his movement.

Are Yingluck’s days numbered?

From a macro perspective, the political stalemate in Thailand is a struggle between two business enterprises vying for political control over the lucrative national economy for personal gain, and the government side is quickly running out of options. Thaksin and Yingluck sought to counter the protest movement against their rule by opting for an immediate electoral solution, despite warnings from the country’s Electoral Commission not to hold the polls over security concerns. As expected by many analysts, the February 2 elections have ended in disarray, and even if the government can organize additional rounds of voting, establishment-aligned agencies and courts will likely declare the results null and void, fueling momentum for the PDRC and Democrat Party to force Yingluck’s resignation. In addition to facing mass opposition protests, Yingluck’s government is marred by a scandal linked to its populist rice-price support scheme, resulting in massive financial losses that prevent the government from compensating over one million rice farmers for their yields. The scandal has created resentment against the government in Thaksin’s traditional strongholds, and may very plausibly lead to Yingluck’s impeachment and the dissolution of her Pheu Thai Party.

The PDRC ‘people’s council’ would face many obstacles if Yingluck was toppled by a military coup that would prevent the new government from being internationally recknogized, so her eventual removal will come through either judicial or extra-legal means and the PDRC would likely usurp authority in the ensuing power vacuum, legitimized by mass people power. The biggest immediate concern facing Thailand is not the suspension of democratic formalities, but the backlash from Thaksin supporters, some factions of which have vowed to respond with violence to any attempt to remove Yingluck; any drawn-out insurgency campaign would threaten the integrity of the Thai state.

After years of political upheavals and attempts to cooperate, the two rival political factions appear unwilling to compromise and the Thaksin sibling pair is short on survival options. The aristocratic opposition has traditionally been unconcerned with rural uplift and the kind of social programs that Thaksin-backed parties brought to the table, and the if the royalist-establishment cannot find an answer to the rural question by introducing policies that empower the pro-Thaksin electorate, deeper class divisions may become a defining obstacle to stability in Thailand.

Nile Bowie is a political analyst and photographer currently residing in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He can be reached on Twitter or at nilebowie@gmail.com

 

Colonial Partners In Israel’s Crimes

By Vacy Vlazna

30 January, 2014

Countercurrents.org

“Imperialism after all is an act of geographical violence”: Edward Said

Is it just me, or do you also see a thread of colonial superiority and racism binding US, Australia, Canada to Israel?

Think about it. All are ex-British colonies and like Israel, have a shameful history of genocide committed against their respective Indigenous Peoples and all continue to treat their First Peoples as third class citizens.

I can’t speak for the US and Canada, but, apart from realpolitik and arms trade, an underlying colonial arrogance goes a long way to explain why my ‘civilised’ ‘democratic’ Australian government is complicit in granting Israel impunity to daily perpetrate war crimes and crimes against humanity against generations of Palestinian families.

The tragic past and near narratives of the suffering of unspeakable colonial atrocities against Indigenous Palestinians and Indigenous Australians bear close resemblance and are written in blood and great injustice.

Just as Israel’s Independence Day and the Palestinian Nakba Day (in remembrance of deportation and dispossession) have a bloody symbiosis, Australia Day or Invasion Day, on the 26th January, is celebrated or mourned according to the victors or the vanquished.

Both Israeli and British colonists took the ‘terra nullius’ doctrine – empty land’ approach to justify their brutal occupations and wholesale land theft of Palestine and Australia. Israel boasts it made the desert bloom though for centuries Palestine traded in olives, oil, quinces, pinenuts, figs, carob, cotton, dates, indigo, artichokes, citrus fruit, almonds, mint sumach and much more. In Australia the Aborigines maintained their food supply with a sophisticated management of the land with fire.

The island, named Australia by British invaders and colonists, was home to almost a million peoples of, at least, 200 nations that traced their ancestry back 60 millennia along spiritual songlines of the land to the Dreaming – to Creation.

The imperial genocidal wars and massacres (guns vs spears) such as those at Hawksbury, Nepean Richmond Hill, Risdon Cove, Appin, Bathurst, Port Phillip, Swan River (Battle of Pinjarra), Gravesend, Vinegar Hill, Myall Creek, Kinroy, Rufus R, Long lagoon, Dawson River, Kalkadoon, Cape Grim, The Black war, McKinley River, West Kimberely resisted by Aboriginal warriors like Pemulwuy, Winradyne, Multuggerah, Yagan, Jandamarra as well as starvation and western diseases decimated the dispossessed Aboriginal population to about 70,000 by 1920.

By then violent genocide was replaced by the more covert cultural genocide, or the genocide of indigeneity, through the government policy of assimilation intended to eradicate indigenous identity by cruelly and systematically destroying connections to family, the tribe and ancestral lands.

Australia’s First Peoples were marginalised onto reservations and missions, restricted entry into white towns, exploited as unpaid slave labour, their indigenous languages and sacred rituals forbidden, and mixed blood children (The Stolen Generations) were forcibly kidnapped from their parents for resocialisation – ie to be made ‘white’.

Assimilation is where Australia, USA and Canada differ with Israel. The assimilation of Palestinians for Israel is an anathema. The Zionist goal is a pure Jewish state, rid of all Palestinians from the river to the sea. The whole of historic Palestine, home to the Chosen People is a goal pursued with, ironically, an ideological fervour akin to Hitler’s Herrenrasse and Germanisation aspirations. Ergo, Israel perpetrates a slow motion brutal genocide and a relentless push of Palestinians over the exile cliff.

Until the 1967 Referendum, Aborigines were government property: “The right to choose a marriage partner, to be legally responsible for one’s own children, to move about the state and to socialise with non-Aboriginal Australians, were just some of the rights which Aboriginal people did not have.”

Sound familiar? Israel’s apartheid policies similarly impact on Palestinians. Israel has passed racist laws that impose severe movement restrictions dividing families, preventing family reunification and obstructing the marriage of couples who come from different zones. At least a third of Gazans have relatives in Israel and the West Bank. The personal pain of such enforced separations which deny Palestinians the shared and cherished moments we enjoy freely is immeasurable…grandparents have never seen their grandchildren who may live 5 kilometres away… adult children are denied the right to be with a dying parent…births…weddings…funerals ..are overshadowed by painful absences.

The Native Title Act, 1993, finally acknowledged that some Indigenous Australians ‘have rights and interests to their land that come from their traditional laws and customs.’ But, as mining boomed on resource rich indigenous lands, corporate colonialism reared its greedy head undermining this landmark act with the Northern Territory Intervention.

It was initiated by the Howard government in 2007 and maintained by successive governments including that of Kevin Rudd who made the historic apology to the Stolen Generations even though indigenous communities were suffering the humiliation of quarantined welfare payments and struggled to survive in third world conditions.

The Intervention was imposed “on the pretext that paedophile gangs were operating in Indigenous settlements. Troops were sent in; townships were compulsorily acquired and native title legislation ignored. Yet no prosecution for child abuse resulted, and studies concluded that there was no evidence of any systematic child abuse.” Marcus Waters, Review: Pilger’s Utopia shows us Aboriginal Australia in 2014

As the Prawer Plan was debated in the Israeli Knesset, the sound of the Australian government salivating with envy must have been deafening while imagining the power to evict, from their ancestral lands, 40,000 pesky Bedouins hindering Israel’s land expansion or the power to simply bulldoze Palestinian villages to build settlements for Zionist colonists.

Notorious for her death stare, Julie ‘Medusa’ Bishop, the Australian Foreign Minister, on January 15, speaking for her government, with colonial panache dismissed Israeli settlements as war crimes with this vacuous statement,

“I would like to see which international law has declared them illegal.”

 

Not a good look coming from the FM of a nation privileged to have a seat on the UN Security Council, when even the gardener at Parliament House has heard of the Geneva Conventions.

Like its mate, the rogue state of Israel, Australia doesn’t give a toss for honouring its obligations under international law.

It tossed aside its obligations to the Refugee Conventions with its inhumane offshore asylum seeker policy, forcing asylum seeker boats back to Indonesia, refusal to compensate people who have been held for prolonged periods in mandatory detention, ‘breached its international anti-race discrimination obligations by continuing for almost three years it’s intervention policies with indigenous communities of the Northern Territory.’ the high instance of Aboriginal deaths in custody, the breaching of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in the matter of Guantanamo inmate, David Hicks, the unresolved allegations that Australian intelligence officers were complicit in the torture of Mamdouh Habib when he was held in Pakistan Egypt and Guantanamo Bay, the Queensland bikie laws that fail to meet international fair trial standards.

Then there is the present case in the International Court of Justice against Australia spying on Timor Leste during the oil and gas treaty negotiations in an alleged attempt to rip off the poorest nation in Asia.

Colonial terrorism, disguised as civilised democracy, is not only perpetrated by the hollow men and women in authority. They are the monsters for whom you and I vote and without us they are powerless.Until our moral conscience, intelligence and compassion determines how we vote, we too are their accomplices.

– Dr. Vacy Vlazna is Coordinator of Justice for Palestine Matters. She was Human Rights Advisor to the GAM team in the second round of the Acheh peace talks, Helsinki, February 2005 then withdrew on principle.

The Syrian Team In Geneva

By Franklin Lamb

28 January, 2014

Countercurrents.org

Damascus: As a new workweek begins here is Damascus many citizens across a fairly broad spectrum appear to be backing, and even exhibiting a kind of pride for their diplomatic team at the Geneva II conference. It might appear flippant for this observer to suggest that returning to Damascus after recent events in his neighborhood of Haret Hriek in Dahiyeh, South Beirut sort of feels like one has arrived in a peaceful holiday local rather stress free, but others have told me the same thing once they crossover from Lebanon. Damascus is currently the most quiet and ‘normal’ appearing that I have found this historic city for more than two years.

Damascenes to a person it appears, despite differing political views, are hoping for breakthroughs that just might bring an end to the carnage that has left virtually no one unaffected and has driven 9.5 million people from their homes, killed close to 140,000 and with more than 18,000 missing. These and many more tragedies creating a major humanitarian crisis both within Syria and among this birth place of civilization’s neighbors.

At the Set al Cham (Grandmother of Damascus) a home style cooking small restaurant around the corner from the Dama Rose hotel, close to where a rocket hit 30 yards outside the front entrance of the five star hotel last week and ignited half a dozen cars and shattered windows in this ‘security zone’, there are currently animated conversations about the Geneva II conference. They focus on the prospects for a ceasefire which all here apparently agree is the first essential step to ending the carnage ravaging this country for the past three years. The apparent imminent release of women and children from the more than 500 families who have for many months been trapped in the old city of Homs, Syria’s third largest city, has created some inchoate hope. According to UN Mediator, Lakhdar Brahimi , men also will be allowed to leave once their names are vetted to screen ‘terrorists’ from slipping out, a common security measure around this region during siege lifts and mass evacuations. The population allowed to exit Homs will be received immediately by volunteers from the courageous and deeply humanitarian Syrian Arab Red Crescent Society (SARCS) and other humanitarian organizations that have stockpiled a range of urgently required necessities close by. As in the case with Yarmouk Palestinian camp in south Damascus, itself still under tight siege this evening with snipers on rooftops scanning the streets and alleys below through their gun sites seeking targets, baby formula is one of the foodstuff items most in demand and urgently needed in order save infant lives since their starving mothers generally are no longer able to produce milk.

With respect to Yarmouk camp, which if of grave concern here in Syria as it is internationally, this observer had an informative three hour meeting today at UNWRA HQ on Mezzeh Autostrda with Chief Field Education Program Director, Mohammad Ammouri, and Abdullah Al Laham, Deputy Director of UNWRA in Syria. These gentlemen, Mr. Ammouri from Tantura village near Haifa, and Mr. Al Laham, from Bethlehem Occupied Palestine, devote their full schedules these days trying to get aid into Yarmouk, and to bring those under siege out. Both gentlemen gave this observer some reason to believe that finally an agreement, after more than half a dozen failed ones, might just stick tonight so that tomorrow UNWRA trucks, waiting nearby with more than 40,000 aid parcels can finally enter. Each aid box, contains rice, sugar, flour, dried milk, cooking oil and other basics and are designed to feed a family of five for two weeks (families up to eight in number will get one and one-half UNWRA boxes every two weeks) can finally enter. Syrians trapped in Yarmouk, who number more than 2000, will also receive the emergency parcels from UNWRA no questions asked. Mr. Al Laham raised his eyebrow a bit and did a sort of double-take when this observer asked him if like SARCS, UNWRA distributed the well-known World Food Program (WFP) or International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) or OCHA (Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs) family aid parcels. “No! No. My dear. You see, we at UNWRA have our own aid parcels, in fact ours are bigger and better” he quickly exclaimed and then smiled a bit sheepishly.

Three days ago UNWRA believed they would finally be allowed to enter Yarmouk with aid but at it turned out only about 3% of the aid parcels they were trying to deliver to the more than 18,000 starving Palestinian refugees and Syrians still trapped was able to be distributed because all aid is still being blocked by various militia who themselves appear to be rather well fed, financed, and armed. We should know by tomorrow (1/28/14) if substantial aid will be allowed into Yarmouk and whether dying residents can be evacuated. UNWRA literally has the engines of its trucks idling nearby tonight and ready to move into the besieged camp on less than a minutes notice if they get a green light, this observer has just been advised.

One senses in Damascus that much of the population believes that what is happening at Geneva, are admittedly “half-steps” to use UN envoy Brahimi’s description for the progress so far in the desperate effort to save Syria, just might result in a breakthrough of sorts and then move toward a cease-fire and the opening up of humanitarian aid corridors. A few hours ago, Syrian delegation member Dr. Bouthania Shaaban commented that today’s talks had been ‘professional’. This is a modest achievement even though both sides speak only to Envoy Brahimi and tend to avoid eye contact with their “negotiating partners” while entering and exiting the meeting room from doors at opposite ends.

Syria’s delegation in Geneva is led by a seasoned, smart, deeply knowledgeable formidable delegation that includes the power-house Foreign Minister Walid Muallum, a former Syrian Ambassador to Washington who has a reputation in the West and here as wily, profoundly intelligent, tough at times and no-nonsense. “If no serious work sessions are held by [Saturday], the official Syrian delegation will leave Geneva due to the other side’s lack of seriousness or preparedness,” state television quoted Muallum as telling UN mediator Lakhdar Brahimi last Friday. Mr. Muallum is credited with brokering the deal with by Russia to remove Syria’s chemical weapons enabling the Assad regime to present his government as a partner in the project and thus to strengthen its claim to legitimacy.

Another delegation member is Syria’s Minister of Information Omran al- Zoubi. Mr al-Zoubi has been indefatigable these past many months and is well known to the international media for his personal warmth and direct talk and incisive articulations of his government’s interpretations of the crisis. During literally hundreds of media interviews Mr. Zoubi has earned a reputation internationally and in Syria as being an insightful political analyst and a skilled lawyer, who does not mince or sugar his words but who is respectful of his audience. From Derra next to the Jordanian where the crisis began and a Sunni Muslim, the Ministers commented late this afternoon that “We will stay here until we do the job. We will not be provoked. We will not retreat and we will be wise and flexible.” And he added, anyone at Geneva II expecting the President’s removal was living “in a mythical world, and let them stay in Alice in Wonderland.”

Syrian delegation member and FM Muallum’s Deputy, Feisal Mdkdad, was described to this observer by one of his colleagues today as a deeply knowledgeable, unflappable career diplomat with deep knowledge of foreign policy issues facing Syria. Mr Makdad explained at Geneva today that his administration has been trying to send essential supplies to help beleaguered residents but not as much as they would have liked had got through, for two reasons: “The armed groups had kept firing at those who tried to take in aid and the weather has not been conducive to making the movement.” He pledges that his government will persevere. He also insisted that “we don’t hold any children prisoners at all. We categorically deny that.” He claimed that the list supplied by the opposition was full of errors. “I have studied this list; 60 to 70 per cent of the names are not in prison, 20 per cent have already been freed. About the rest, we don’t know anything.”

In one sense, Syria’s diplomatic team in Geneva is anchored by Professor Bouthaina Shaaban who is Political and Media Adviser to Syrian President Assad. Syria’s former Minister of Expatriates, she is also a mother and recently a grandmother, writer and professor at Damascus University and earned her Ph.D. in English Literature from Warwick University in the UK. Dr. Shaaban was Hafez al Assad’s personal interpreter, is well known internationally and has studied and taught in the USA and earned her Doctorate at Warwick University in the UK. She has authorized several well received books including her latest volume on Syrian diplomacy. Many media critics concede that, as the New York Times wrote, that she is stellar when explaining Syrian governments views on foreign policy. Dr. Shaaban is the most sought after delegation member from either side for interviews partly because of her quality of humanizing the conflict and her obvious love of country and dedication to stopping the carnage while possessing a quality of connecting with interlocutors emotionally and intellectually.

It would not be shocking were the Syrian delegation were to feel a bit on the defensive given the lineup of those who want them to falter, but there is so far little sign that the Syrian delegation is exuding a temerity at all similar to the defense team in The Hague trying to hold its own before the Special Tribunal on Lebanon (STL). Rather it acknowledges that it has come to represent Syria and to struggle through a cumbersome, slow diplomacy to achieve a cease-fire, open corridors of humanitarian aid, participate in prisoner’s exchanges with various militia, hold a presidential election in the spring, and begin reconstruction of the massive war damage.

We will likely learn soon if Syria and indeed can work through a myriad of opposing deeply antagonistic negotiating adversaries to achieve a sustainable cease-fire, reconciliation, and reconstruction. Its long suffering population demand and deserve no less.

Franklin Lamb is currently a visiting Professor at the Faculty of Law, Damascus University and volunteers with the Sabra-Shatila Scholarship Program.

Is Netanyahu Certifiable?

By Alan Hart

28 January, 2014

Alanhart.net

The expanded and most explicit form of my headline question is this. Is Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu of sound mind and knowingly talking propaganda nonsense about threats to Israel’s security in order to fool the world including most of its Jews, or, is he unbalanced, mentally disturbed, even clinically insane? I ask because his rubbishing in Davos of the most important speech any Iranian leader has made since the revolution which brought the mullahs to power 35 years ago sent me to bed recalling something my father said to me when I was a very young boy. “There are none so blind as those who don’t want to see.”

What was there in President Rouhani’s address to the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting for Netanyahu to see if he was of sound mind?

Rouhani’s main message to the region, and probably Saudi Arabia in particular, was that his government is fully prepared “to engage with all neighbouring countries to achieve shared practical solutions on a range of issues.”

His main message to the world, and probably President Obama in particular, was this.

“In recent years a dominant voice has been repeatedly heard. ‘The military option is on the table.’ Against the backdrop of this illegal and ineffective contention, let me say loud and clear that peace is within reach. So, in the name of the Republic of Iran, I propose, as a starting step, consideration by the United Nations of the project The World Against Violence and Extremism, WAVE. Let us all join in this WAVE. I invite all states, international organizations and civil institutions to undertake a new effort to guide the world in this direction… We should start thinking about a Coalition for Enduring Peace across the globe instead of the ineffective Coalitions for War in various parts of the world.”

Of course he was on a charm offensive and taking full advantage of being at the Davos meeting to appeal to the major investors present, but in my view that did not dilute the integrity of his vision of the new politics needed to create a better world. He was surely speaking for most citizens everywhere when he said: “People all over the world are tired of war, violence and extremism. They hope for change in the status quo.”

His message on nuclear matters was unambiguous.

“The Iranian people, in a judiciously sober choice in the recent elections, voted for the discourse of hope, foresight and prudent moderation – both at home and abroad. In foreign policy, the combination of these elements means that the Islamic Republic of Iran, as a regional power, will act responsibly with regard to regional and international security, and is willing and prepared to cooperate in these fields, bilaterally as well as multilaterally, with other responsible actors… Iran’s nuclear program – and for that matter, that of all other countries – must pursue exclusively peaceful purposes. I declare here, openly and unambiguously, that, notwithstanding the positions of others, this has been, and will always be, the objective of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction have no place in Iran’s security and defense doctrine, and contradict our fundamental religious and ethical convictions. Our national interests make it imperative that we remove any and all reasonable concerns about Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.”

What was Netanyahu’s response?

President Rouhani’s speech was, he said, “A change of words without a change of deeds… Rouhani is continuing with the Iranian show of deception.” With an engaging smile and giving the impression that he was authorised to speak for the rest of the world, Zionism’s Grand Master of Deception added, “We all know that.”

So as Netanyahu says he sees it, Iran is hell bent on developing nuclear weapons for the purpose of wiping the Zionist (not Jewish) state off the face of the earth. As I have pointed out in the past, the real madness of Netanyahu’s assertion is that even if Iran did posses a few nuclear bombs and the missiles to deliver them, it would not launch a first strike on Israel because to do so would guarantee its own complete destruction. All Iranians know that.

IF Netanyahu was of sound mind he would not only have given Rouhani’s Davos speech the consideration it deserved, he would take full account of Israel’s growing isolation in the world and, also, the fact that an increasing number of American Jews are no longer sympathetic to what one Jewish-American has called “the blood-and-soil nationalism of Zionism”. The conclusion such introspection would invite in a sound Netanyahu mind is that if he doesn’t want to go down in history as the leader who approved Israel’s suicide plan and confirmed that Zionism is (as the title of my book asserts) the real enemy of the Jews, he had better be serious about peace on terms the vast majority of Palestinians could accept.

As to Netanyahu’s actual state of mind… He is obviously deluded (my dictionary tells me that means he is “holding or acting under false beliefs”), but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is certifiable. What it does most probably mean is contained in a truth revealed to me way back in 1980 by then retired Major General Shlomo Gazit, the best and the brightest of Israel’s Directors of Military Intelligence. I put it to him that Israel’s existence had never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab military force. Through a sad smile he replied, “The trouble with us Israelis is that we have become the victims of our own propaganda.”

Though I am not an expert on the subject, it seems to me that what Netanyahu needs most of all is some psychiatric help.

President Obama recently said in an interview with the New Yorker that the chances of getting a real Israel-Palestine peace process going were “less than 50-50“. Perhaps he should take Secretary of State Kerry off the case and put a leading psychiatrist on it.

Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent.

The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly In Syria Talks

By Dr Ismail Salami

25 January, 2014

Countercurrents.org

 

A five-minute audio message by al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri went viral on the internet in which he enjoins the rebels in Syria to end their infighting and focus their energies on battling against President Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

A veritable testimony to the fact that the militants fighting against Bashar al-Assad are affiliated to the terrorist al-Qaeda and as a result, they are stripped of any cloak of legitimacy, it further reinforces the notion that there is more than meets the eye in Syria.

Interestingly, the warring factions decided to patch up their differences and sit down at the negotiating table once they heard their leader’s bezels of wisdom.

The negotiations started on Wednesday in an ambience charged with vitriol and spite. While Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem was trying to clarify the real situation in Syria and give a “Syrian version of facts,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon interrupted him and tried to deny him the chance to continue with his speech.

The western media say that he had exceeded his time and that he should not have clashed with the UN head but the fact is that they had gathered together to resolve a Syrian crisis which has been largely engineered by the West and the al-Qaeda elements. In other words, they were there to resolve a West-fomented crisis and the Syrian foreign minister was utterly entitled to finish his speech.

Here’s the exchange:

Ban: Can you just wrap up please.

Moallem: I came here after 12 hours in the airplane. I have few more minutes to end my speech. This is Syria.

Ban: How much do you have left now?

Moallem: I think 5-10 minutes.

Ban: No, no. I will give you another opportunity to speak.

Moallem: No, I cannot divide my speech. I must continue … I will do my best to be fast.

Ban: Can you just wrap up in one or two minutes?

Moallem: No, I can’t promise you, I must finish my speech. … You live in New York, I live in Syria. I have the right to give the Syrian version here in this forum. After three years of suffering, this is my right.

Ban: We have to have some constructive and harmonious dialogue, please refrain from inflammatory rhetoric.

Moallem: It is constructive, I promise you, let me finish.

Ban: Within 2-3 minutes please. I will give you another opportunity.

Moallem: You spoke for 25 minutes, at least I need to speak 30 minutes.

The talks do not seem to yield any fruits as there is a substantial gap between what the government of Bashar al-Assad demands and what the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) and its Western allies want. The opposition group insists that President Bashar al-Assad must relinquish power and that a transitional government be formed in Syria.

On the other hand, Damascus says that Assad will leave office only if he is voted out of office. That is, free elections will be held in the country and people will determine their own fate. Damascus also says the coalition does not represent the Syrian opposition.

As Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem told the audience in Montreux, Switzerland, “No one in the world has the right to confer or withdraw the legitimacy of a president, a constitution or a law, except for the Syrians themselves.”

However, the idea of Assad staying in power was tossed away when Syrian opposition leader Ahmad al-Jarba said the “rebels will never accept a negotiated settlement that keeps Assad in power”, and he suggested that “further talks are pointless if the regime rejects the premise of a transition government.”

In a threatening voice he said, “Time is like a sword. And for the Syrian people, time is now blood.” The simile that ‘time is like a sword’ is sort of awkward and absurd. But once we think of the crimes committed on a daily basis by the a-Qaeda elements in Syria, the simile becomes grotesquely impregnated.

To make matters worse, the SNC sources said on Friday they will not hold direct talks with the Syrian delegation headed by Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem unless Damascus endorses the Geneva I communiqué, which was signed in 2012 and calls for a transitional government.

These are indeed strange times. A country is brazenly invaded and the invaders and those who support the invasion seek to determine the fate of the nation.

Crisis is crippling the country and a solution should be carved out to best serve the interests of the Syrian people. One reasonable solution was brought up by Iranian President Hassan Rouhani at the World Economic Forum in Davos when he called for a new election in Syria, saying Iran would respect the results.

“The best solution is to organize a free and fair election in Syria. And once the ballots are cast, we should all accept the outcome. Decision-making is for the Syrian people to do and they are the ones who should determine their own future, and in doing so, the first condition is that bloodshed be stopped and certain countries give up supporting terrorism,” the Iranian president added.

To put it succinctly, the only workable roadmap for Syria to exit crisis is to be engineered in evicting the al-Qaeda militants generously funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar and in holding democratic national elections.

Dr. Ismail Salami is an Iranian writer, Middle East expert, Iranologist and lexicographer. He writes extensively on the US and Middle East issues and his articles have been translated into a number of languages.

Top Three Media Lies About The Syrian Peace Talks

By Shamus Cooke

25 January, 2014

Countercurrents.org

The media spin machine is again kicking into high gear, perfectly timed to accompany the “Geneva II” Syria peace talks. The lies are necessary to give the Obama administration an upper hand in the peace negotiations, which are not being used to pursue peace, but instead, to accomplish the Obama administration’s longstanding goal of Syrian regime change. Here are the top three Western media lies about the Syrian peace talks.

 1) The removal of Syrian Bashar al-Assad was an agreed upon “precondition” for the Geneva II peace talks.

This lie has been repeated over and over by government and media alike. It has zero basis. The Obama administration claims that this precondition was expressed in the “Geneva communiqué,” which was a road map agreement meant to guide the Geneva II peace talks, agreed upon by some of the major parties of the negotiations, including Russia.

The communiqué does indeed call for a negotiated political transition, but nowhere does it state that such a transition cannot include President Assad. Such a condition would have been outright rejected by Russia.

In fact, the Geneva communiqué includes this crucial statement:

“[a transition government] could include members of the present [Syrian] government and the opposition and other groups and shall be formed on the basis of mutual consent.” Nowhere does it specifically mention or imply President Assad.

The Los Angeles Times recently stepped out of line and exposed this lie:

“[John] Kerry regularly cites the “Geneva communiqué,” a kind of peace road map hammered out in June 2012 during a United Nations-organized summit. But the document does not explicitly call for Assad’s ouster.”

The Obama administration’s constant repeating of this lie only causes divisions in the peace process, undermining the chances that the peace process will succeed.

The Obama administration is especially adamant about this “Assad must go” pre-condition because it knows that, if free and fair elections were held tomorrow in Syria — as part of a UN-backed “transitional process”— President Assad would likely win. This is the result of the ethnic and religious minorities in Syria that have rallied behind President Assad, since they’ve witnessed the consistent religious sectarian atrocities committed by the U.S.-backed rebels (which the U.S. media loves to ignore or minimize).

Assad would probably win an election since there is also simply no one else on the government side or the opposition side with his name recognition or popularity. The U.S.-backed rebel war in Syria has vastly strengthened Assad’s political hand, but you wouldn’t know it from the Western, anti-Syrian media.

Demanding Assad’s ouster also does not reflect the situation on the ground. The U.S.-backed rebels have never controlled more than one Syrian city, namely Raqaa, which is dominated by al-Qaeda and is governed under a Taliban-style interpretation of Islamic law, which includes a strict ban on music. Thus, the rebels don’t have the ground power that would even enable them to make the demand that “Assad must go”.

 2) The U.S.-backed rebel militias are “moderate” Islamic groups.

The fact that this lie can even be uttered publicly without encountering ridicule is a major success of Western media propaganda. The media narrative paints the U.S.-backed “good” rebels fighting both the Syrian government and the “bad” al-Qaeda linked rebels.

But the “good” rebels in the U.S.-backed Islamic Front share the same vision for Syria’s future as the al-Qaeda rebels: a fundamentalist version of Sharia law, where women live in virtual house arrest and where religious minorities are second class citizens (non-Sunni Muslims would simply be butchered, as they are on a regular basis in Syria, which is again minimized or ignored in the Western media.)

The “moderate rebel” lie was further exposed recently when a top leader in the most powerful militia, Ahrar al Sham, within the Islamic Front declared Ahrar al Sham to be the “real” representative of al-Qaeda in Syria, as opposed to the rival al-Qaeda faction that the Islamic Front had recently begun fighting.

Ahrar al Sham has long been known to be an al-Qaeda type Islamist extremist group; the Western media simply chose to ignore it. But when it was recently made official, the U.S. media chose to continue its ignoring stance, since actually reporting on it would destroy their “moderate rebel” lie. The Western media also continues to ignore the fact that the “moderate” U.S.-backed Islamic Front issued a joint statement that aligned itself to the extremist views of Ahrar al Sham, the “real” al-Qaeda.

 3) New Evidence of Syrian government “industrial scale” torture.

The Western media recently blasted the “breaking news” of brand new evidence showing massive “NAZI-like” torture and murder by the Syrian government, released at the beginning of the Syrian peace talks. This may or may not be true, but the lie here is that the Western media promoted the “evidence” as being unquestionably true, when the story doesn’t reach first base when it comes to evidence-based journalism.

All we really know is that there are hundreds of pictures of dead people that a “trusted source” says were killed by the Syrian government. The trusted source was designated as such by pro-Western intellectuals, who have earned professional “credibility” by helping convict war criminals in the International Criminal Court [ICC]. But as author Diane Johnstone pointed out in her excellent book “Fools Crusade,” about the war against Yugoslavia — as well as in other articles — the ICC has long been used by western powers as a tool to create a pretext for war, or a tool to justify a war after the fact.

The evidence of the “NAZI-like” atrocities was written in a study paid for by the government of Qatar, which has long funneled cash, guns, and Jihadis to Syria in aid of the anti-government rebels.

Again, we don’t know if the story is true or not. But such an important investigation should be conducted by the UN or another more objective institution. The same biased dynamic occurred in relation to the infamous chemical weapons attack, where no real evidence was provided, though an unending string of “experts” were quoted in the Western media, testifying to the guilt of the Syrian Government. But when Pulitzer prizewinning journalist Seymour Hirsch reported that the Obama administration lied about the rebels not having the capacity to perform such an attack, the Western media simply ignored the legend of journalism. The wrench in the propaganda machine was simply dislodged.

How do these lies become such permanent fixtures in the Western media? An excellent article in the Guardian newspaper recently discussed in depth the principal sources the Western media has used to understand the Syrian conflict.

The article exposed the incredible bias of some of the most important Western media sources on Syria, which is why they were handpicked in the first place to be “expert” sources: they had political agendas that were aligned with the U.S. government’s foreign policy decisions. The other side of the conflict was completely ignored, except when it was targeted for ridicule. Thus, Americans and Europeans have a completely one-sided, if not fantasy-based perspective of what is happening in Syria. This has been systematic since the beginning of the conflict, as happened with the Yugoslav, Afghan, Iraq, and Libya wars.

The result of this media-led ignorance could result in yet more unnecessary deaths in a country that now has millions of refugees and over a 100,000 dead. Obama seems like he intends to exploit these peace talks with the intention of blaming the Syrian government for their failure. Having failed to defeat Assad on the battlefield in a proxy war, the Obama administration is trying to win the propaganda war. And once peace talks have failed, talk of war will resume, since “all other options have failed.”

Shamus Cooke is a social service worker, trade unionist, and writer for Workers Action (www.workerscompass.org). He can be reached at shamuscooke@gmail.com

Racism alive in India: Story of Kim Barrington Narisetti, an African-American professional

By Kim Barrington Narisetti

January 28, 2014

@ http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/

 

My 12-year-old daughter gets exasperated easily. Maybe it’s because she’s 12. She gets even more exasperated because she says I seem to have a saying for everything: Patience is a virtue. You can catch more bees with honey than with vinegar.

Never judge a book by its cover. When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. The last two seem to be the most relevant as they apply to racism and racist acts in India. It saddened me to hear about the recent attacks on Ugandan women in Delhi.

As a darkskinned African-American woman who lived in New Delhi for nearly four years, the stories quickly brought back memories of my daily experiences and the assumptions that were made about me and how I was treated. I constantly felt I was on display. I was stared at in restaurants, elevators and even in my car on the street.

Random people would come up to me when I was shopping at Khan Market (usually men) to let me know that they knew someone from Uganda, Nigeria, or the Congo. My response would be: That’s nice. I’m American. The most disturbing incident happened when my husband, Raju, and I were walking back home from a restaurant down the block from our house in New Friends Colony.

A young boy of about 8 was riding on the back of his bike with his father. As they passed us, he hurled a huge rock the size of a fist at me. It landed with a thud on my sunglasses and my head snapped back. If I weren’t wearing huge aviator sunglasses, I likely would have lost my eye. My chivalrous husband chased down the bike, pulled the boy off and gave him and his father a tongue lashing in Hindi and made him apologise.

The boy conceded that he threw the rock because he thought I was African. Therefore, his rock-throwing would certainly have been justified. Daily, I would have my cook pack up in foil any leftover breakfast, whether it were omelettes, idlis, crepes or just bread and butter. I would hand it out to the kids begging for food on the street on the way to my children’s school. When I rolled down the tinted window, the same kids who were begging for something to eat seconds earlier, would then proceed to laugh and point at me.

I easily could have gotten angry and refused to continue to do what I did or cower and have my driver do it instead, but I didn’t. That’s not the kind of person I am. They made assumptions about me and there was really nothing I could do about it. But the racist acts toward me also came at the hands of people who were obviously well educated, well-traveled and should know, well, better.

At the Oberoi Hotel in Rajasthan where we stayed when my family came to visit from Maryland, a boy started jumping up and down like a monkey and pointing in our direction as we were relaxing on the sofas in the lobby. His parents laughed. They stopped laughing when I went over to them and asked them what was so funny.

 

Surely they and their son had seen pictures of people who looked like me. Obama was my president; Will Smith was the biggest movie star in the world at the time (my apologies to Shah Rukh Khan); and “That’s so Raven” was one of the top kids’ shows on Disney in India.

Coming back to Delhi from the US after summer vacation, we were held up at customs by an official who turned my daughters’ OCI cards and my PIO card over and over and over again. The questions came fast and furious: How did we get it? How long have I been married? Where exactly in Hyderabad is my husband from. He stopped short of asking what could have compelled a Hyderabadi boy with a wheatish complexion to marry an African-American.

I drew the line when one of the men in the small crowd that had gathered proceeded to touch my youngest daughter’s hair and stroke the arm of my eldest. Did he think the colour would rub off ? Having visited India for 13 years as a tourist to meet my husband’s family and friends, before living in Delhi for the four years, I realise a lot of the behavior toward me and people who look like me stems from the infatuation that Indians have with light skin. Unless I told people I was American, the assumption was that I was African. But that is really neither here nor there.

Dark skin has a lot of negative connotations attached to it whether you’re Indian or of African descent, hence the bustling skin lightening market. I could only hope that attacks such as these don’t continue to happen. We recently celebrated Martin Luther King Jr’s birthday in America on January 20. He hoped that one day we would live in a nation where people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character.

 

(Kim Barrington Narisetti is publisher of Urban Crayon Press. She also held editing positions at The Wall Street Journal, TheStreet.com; Advertising Age and The Source magazine.)