By Eyder Peralta Thousands gather to celebrate Liberation Day in Shyira, Rwanda. Twenty-three years ago, a rebel army led by Paul Kagame, now the president, marched into Kigali to end a genocide against the Tutsi minority.Eyder Peralta/NPRShyira is a picture-perfect Rwandan village, surrounded by luscious green mountains. No matter where you look, even at the tip of some of the highest mountains and along the precipice of the most dangerous slopes, there are houses. On July 4, while Americans celebrate their independence, Rwandans are celebrating Liberation Day — commemorating the day in 1994 when rebel troops marched into the capital Kigali and ended a genocide against the country's Tutsi minority.On Tuesday, even before the morning fog dissipated, Rwandans began arriving in Shyira on foot, by motorcycle, hitchhiking. Some of the men wore suits; the women wore their most beautiful kitenge.This year, President Paul Kagame — who'd led the troops into the capital 23 years ago — brought his whole entourage to this village northwest of Kigali, where the government has built a hospital and brick-and-mortar homes with bathrooms and showers for the poorest residents.So everyone came down from the hills and neighboring villages to witness the spectacle. And it was impressive: The government built a stage, and some of Rwanda's biggest stars — including the pop singer King James — performed their hits. Children danced, women sang and everyone waved paper Rwandan flags. In a lot of ways, it was like America's 4th of July celebrations — a day when people don't go to work and for a few hours, they celebrate their country. Rwandans came down from the hills and neighboring villages to celebrate Liberation Day in Shyira. Eyder Peralta/NPR But unlike in the United States, this is a holiday preceded by weeks of remembrances. At the Genocide Memorial in Kigali, more than 250,000 people are buried in a mass grave. In the weeks leading up to Liberation Day, loved ones of some of the nearly 1 million who were killed during the genocide stop by to lay flowers and offer prayers. Back in Shyira, Prudence Karambizi, 58, said he felt an obligation to come to the celebration. "After the genocide and the war, there was nothing in this country," he said. "The country was empty and people had been killed. Today we are happy." So Liberation Day is about celebrating progress, he said. While Rwanda is still a very poor country, it is peaceful — after a decade of community-led justice and reconciliation efforts, it is largely free from the ethnic divisions that led to the genocide more than two decades ago. And it has made strides in building its infrastructure and stamping out corruption. "But," Karambizi said, "this is also a day when you can't help but think about the Rwandans who lost their lives for nothing." In the United States, holidays like Independence Day feel historical. Those who died fighting the Revolutionary War are many generations in the past. In Rwanda, the history of this holiday is still within arm's reach, even for those too young to remember. Clemence Amulisa, 19, was born four years after the genocide. She was smiling and dancing in Shyira on Tuesday, but as soon as she was asked what Liberation Day meant to her, she grew somber. "For me, this is a very big day," she said. "If that rebel army had not marched on Kigali, maybe my parents would have been killed and that means I would not have been here." _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 NPR

By Dr. Eric Reeves Within the coming week the Trump administration will make a decision unlikely to break through the furor of bizarre presidential behavior, the health care debate, or any of the foreign policy issues that have dominated the past six months—from North Korea to ISIS and Syria to relations with Europe to dangerous frictions among the Gulf States. But the decision—whether to make permanent President Obama’s lifting of U.S. economic sanctions on the Khartoum regime in Sudan—will have immense implications for the people of that desperate country. And for the western Darfur region, a permanent lifting of sanctions will likely result in cataclysmic human destruction. Perhaps not immediately, although there will be significant and direct consequences for the 3 million non-Arab/African Darfuris displaced from their homes and lands (http://sudanreeves.org/2017/05/22/displacement-in-sudan-and-darfur-un-figures-continue-to-be-careless-or-inadequate/ ). But sooner or later many of these desperate people will join the more than half a million people who have already died, directly or indirectly, from violence unleashed over the past fourteen years during Khartoum’s genocidal counter-insurgency in the region (http://sudanreeves.org/2017/04/27/violent-mortality-in-the-darfur-genocide-a-matter-of-international-indifference-and-prevarication/ ). Who has said that that the violence was genocidal? For the moment, let’s focus on senior members of the Obama administration, beginning with Senator, candidate and President Obama himself. He campaigned declaring that Darfur was a “stain on our souls,” and that he would never “turn a blind eye” to such human slaughter (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEd583-fA8M/). His National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, wrote in these pages during the Bush administration that genocide was occurring in Darfur and that the U.S. should be prepared to undertake unilateral humanitarian intervention if necessary to stop it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64717-2004May28.html? utm_source=huffingtonpost.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=pubexchange_article/). Obama’s Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, also wrote frequently and powerfully about Darfur, and did not hesitate to use the “g-word” (https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/video/samantha-power-responding-genocide-darfur/). Did the genocide somehow stop? Did it burn out? There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case. Indeed, beginning in the 2012 – 2013 dry season, violence escalated dramatically, particularly in the region known as East Jebel Marra. This violence was perpetrated chiefly by Khartoum’s new Arab militia force, the heavily armed and well-organized “Rapid Support Forces” (RSF). An important report from Human Rights Watch (September 2015 | https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/09/09/men-no-mercy/rapid-support-forces-attacks-against-civilians-darfur-sudan ) gave us our best insight into the character of RSF violence—and the ambitions of the Khartoum regime. Vice President Hassabo Abdelrahman delivered a speech to the RSF in December 2014, according to a defecting militiaman, in which he declared: “Hassabo told us to clear the area east of Jebel Marra. To kill any male. He said we want to clear the area of insects… He said East Jebel Marra is the kingdom of the rebels. We don’t want anyone there to be alive.” The chilling echoes of the Rwanda genocide and Hutu characterizations of Tutsis as “cockroaches” has been remarked by no one in the Obama administration—or to date by the Trump administration. But in fact Hassabo’s comments had ample precedent in Darfur, perhaps most notoriously in a memo ten years earlier from the headquarters of brutal Janjaweed leader Musa Hilal: “Change the demography of Darfur…empty it of African tribes.” Khartoum’s human rights record continues to be abominable, as does its persecution of Sudan’s small Christian population. And yet current U.S. Charge d’Affaires Steven Koutsis recently gave an interview in which he declared emphatically that issues of human rights, political and religious persecution, and freedom of expression were irrelevant to the decision about sanctions: “None of these other issues were the point of sanctions, and none of these other issues, therefore, should be linked to the lifting of sanctions.” (Agence France-Presse, June 24, 2017 | http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-4635304/Sudan-positive-steps-meeting-sanctions-terms-US-envoy.html/) But Koutsis is dead wrong: the Preface to the Executive Order by President Clinton imposing economic sanctions in 1997 explicitly asserts that in addition to the Khartoum regime’s support for international terrorism, sanctions were being imposed because of “the prevalence of human rights violations, including slavery and the denial of religious freedom” (https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Documents/13067.pdf /). Unsurprisingly, Sudan remains one of only three countries remaining on the State Department’s annual list of “state sponsors of terrorism.” Perhaps the most egregious violation of international human rights law in the recent past occurred last year during Khartoum’s savage military campaign against the people of the Jebel Marra region in central Darfur. Amnesty International published an exhaustively researched report in September 2016, demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that Khartoum had used chemical weapons against civilians nowhere near the fighting (https://www.amnestyusa.org/reports/scorched-earth-poisoned-air-sudanese-government-forces-ravage-jebel-marra-darfur/). Most of the victims were young children. The international community has been silent about Amnesty’s finding—indeed, in an action grotesque even by African Union standards, seven AU members elected Khartoum to the position of Vice-President of the executive body of the Organization for the Prohibition of chemical weapons, the very body with a mandate to investigate allegations of chemical weapons use (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/03/sudan-elevation-to-opcws-governing-body-a-slap-in-the-face-for-victims-of-chemical-attacks/). Certainly the Sudanese economy is a mess. But that isn’t a function of U.S. sanctions, which have been largely undermined by French banking giant BNP Paribas, convicted in 2015 of massive criminal violation of U.S. financial sanctions (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bnp-paribas-settlement-idUSKBN0F52HA20140701/). The Khartoum regime is a powerful, ruthless kleptocracy—maintaining a monopoly on Sudanese national wealth and power since it came to power as the National Islamic Front on June 30, 1989—28 years ago (http://sudanreeves.org/2015/12/09/7041/). It has failed to invest in infrastructure, agriculture, or health services. It failed to anticipate the consequences of the loss of oil revenue with the 2011 secession of South Sudan and now confronts staggering inflation, a plummeting currency, and an almost complete lack of foreign exchange currency (Forex) with which to import critical commodities, including wheat for bread, cooking fuel, and essential medicines. The Sudanese people—across the political spectrum—desperately want range change; they have been told by the U.S., however that this is not what we want: “We [the Obama administration] do not want to see the ouster of the [Khartoum] regime, nor regime change. We want to see the regime carrying out reform via constitutional democratic measures.” (Interview with Asharq al-Awsat, December 3, 2011 | http://english.aawsat.com/2011/12/article55244147/asharq-al-awsat-talks-to-us-special-envoy-to-sudan-princeton-lyman) The notion that this brutal, profoundly repressive, and serially genocidal regime is capable of “carrying out reform via constitutional democratic measures” is simply too preposterous to take seriously. Rather, it is the way in which the Obama administration, and so far the Trump administration, choose to put a fig-leaf over the real reason they want to keep the regime in power: supposedly valuable counter-terrorism intelligence, this from one of three countries that remains on the State Department’s annual listing of “state sponsors of terrorism.” But whatever the putative value of counter-terrorism intelligence expediently provided by the regime, is this really the time to be giving such brutal men an economic and financial lifeline? denying Sudanese people their political aspirations and ensuring that the regime feels it has a “green light” to continue its genocidal ways in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile? There was a time before the Obama administration when Americans broadly said “no!” That should be our answer now. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 The Huffington Post

By Fahim Reza Shovon A human chain was held by DU teachers, students, and staff in front of Memory Eternal on the Dhaka University campus on September 26Fahim Reza Shovon/Dhaka Tribune A human chain was held by Dhaka University (DU) teachers, students, and employees on Tuesday in front of Memory Eternal (DU), demanding an international probe committee for genocide of the Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar’s Rakhine state. The protestors also demanded the Myanmar government and its de facto leader State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi stop the ongoing atrocities against the Rohingya and take them back to their native residence. The hourlong human chain was held under the banner of “Dhaka University Family” and was presided by Prof Md Akhtaruzzaman, vice chancellor (VC) of Dhaka University. “Rohingya Muslims have lived in Myanmar for thousands of years. But, they have also been persecuted by their own government for a long while. We are calling on the world community to take a stand against this crime against humanity,” said Prof Akhtaruzzaman. Noakhali University of Science and Technology VC Prof Md Ahiduzzaman, DU Treasurer Prof Md Kamal Uddin, President of Dhaka University Teachers Association (DUTA) Professor Dr ASM Maksud Kamal, syndicate members, deans of the faculties, hall provosts, Freedom Fighters Institutional Unit Command members, Dhaka University Officers Association leaders, the president and general secretary of DU unit BCL, Third Class Employees Association leaders, Technical Employees Association and Fourth Class Employee Union leaders, among others, took part. The latest exodus began on August 25, 2017, when violence broke out in Rakhine. The vast majority of Rohingya refugees are women, children, and elderly people requiring additional aid and protection. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Dhaka Tribune

By Alex Richardson A group of Rohingya refugee people walk in the water after crossing the Bangladesh-Myanmar border in Teknaf, Bangladesh, September 1, 2017. REUTERS/Mohammad Ponir Hossain Around 120,000 displaced people - mostly Rohingya Muslims - in camps in Myanmar’s Rakhine state are not receiving food supplies or healthcare after the U.N. and aid groups suspended operations following government accusations of supporting insurgents. Nearly 400 people have died in fighting in the far north of the state after Rohingya militants attacked police posts and an army base a week ago, provoking a major army counteroffensive. The impact from the conflict has now spread, including to the state capital Sittwe further south, where some 90,000 Rohingya have lived in camps since an outbreak of communal violence rocked the city in 2012, killing nearly 200 people. A further 30,000 Rohingya are housed in camps elsewhere in the state, while a small number of ethnic Rakhine Buddhists displaced in the 2012 violence also live in separate camps. “As a result of the disruption of activities in central Rakhine state, many people are currently not receiving their normal food assistance and primary healthcare services have been severely disrupted,” said Pierre Peron, a spokesman for the United Nations’ Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). The U.N. and international aid groups had already evacuated all “non-critical” staff from the north of the state amid intensifying fighting and after the office of national leader Aung San Suu Kyi repeatedly published pictures of World Food Programme (WFP) energy biscuits allegedly found at an insurgent camp. Suu Kyi’s office also said it was investigating aid groups’ support for the insurgents in one incident. Now contractors working for the WFP, a U.N. agency, have refused to carry food to the camps in Sittwe and elsewhere. Staff with international aid groups who run clinics inside the large, densely populated camps have also been afraid to show up for work, leading to the closure of facilities, U.N. sources and aid workers told Reuters. Local staff were afraid of being intimidated by Rakhine Buddhist hardliners, and some worried about being attacked by Muslims, the sources said. Sanitation is also a major problem - contractors cleaning latrines in the camps have also refused to work and the latrines are overflowing in the monsoon rains, increasing the risk of cholera and other waterborne diseases, they said. COMMUNAL TENSIONS The treatment of Myanmar’s roughly 1.1 million Rohingya, who have long complained of persecution in Buddhist majority Myanmar, is the biggest challenge facing Suu Kyi. The top U.N. human rights official, Zeid Ra‘ad al-Hussein, has criticized Suu Kyi’s office for “irresponsible” suggestions that aid agencies may have assisted Rohingya militants calling themselves the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). “#WFP Aid & #ARSA terrorists : #Myanmar Govt asking #WFP, Aid for civilian or terrorists? #Rakhine #Myanmar,” said Suu Kyi’s spokesman, Zaw Htay, in a tweet on Thursday. Tin Maung Swe, secretary of the Rakhine state government, confirmed that workers have refused to work for the WFP. “Laborers who carry the WFP food bags don’t want to contract with them any more. People who have made contract with WFP refused to work for them,” he said. He added that residents were “disgusted” with the organization following the government’s accusations. Tin Maung Swe also said that the government was trying to find “a different way to support the organization”. Rakhine Buddhist leaders have long bemoaned the presence of international agencies, who they accuse of favoring the Rohingya. Aid offices in Sittwe were sacked during 2014 riots. The discovery at a suspected militant camp on July 30 of WFP-branded biscuits intended for malnourished children had further stoked tensions even before last week’s attacks. Accusations against the U.N. have been spread on social media by nationalist hardliners, stoking fears of another outbreak of communal violence in a state that has long been divided along religious and ethnic lines. International aid agencies operating in Myanmar issued a statement on Thursday condemning the insurgent attacks and subsequent violence, and urging “all stakeholders to cease the spread of misinformation”. TALKS SCHEDULED The OCHA’s Peron said the disruption was already being felt. “Humanitarian aid normally goes to these vulnerable people for a very good reason, because they depend on it,” he said. In addition to the closure of camp clinics, Rohingya who have been referred to the main hospital in Sittwe for more serious complaints were finding it hard to travel there, said the hospital’s chief doctor Kyaw Naing Win. “There have been some constraints for them to come to the hospital because of the tighter security control after recent clashes,” he said, but added the hospital did not discriminate against them. Kyaw Naing Win said he arranged for the state government to provide security for 17 Muslim patients who were discharged from the hospital on Thursday. Even before the recent violence Rohingya camp residents faced severe restrictions on their movements around Sittwe. Talks between government and relief agencies are scheduled for next week, aid group sources told Reuters. Possible solutions might include the government providing security escorts for food convoys, they added. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Reuters

By Edith M. Lederer U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley urged South Sudan’s leaders on Tuesday to seize “the last chance” to salvage the 2015 peace agreement and end the worsening violence that has forced 4 million people to flee their homes and left 7.6 million in desperate need of aid. Haley told the U.N. Security Council that “the people of South Sudan are suffering and the promise of their hard-fought independence is slipping away.” She said opposing parties in the world’s newest nation must commit themselves to the revitalization process put forward by the eight-nation East African regional group known as IGAD “to resuscitate the peace agreement — and to do so quickly for time is running short.” There were high hopes that South Sudan would have peace and stability after its independence from neighboring Sudan in 2011. But the country plunged into ethnic violence in December 2013 when forces loyal to President Salva Kiir, a Dinka, started battling those loyal to Riek Machar, his former vice president who is a Nuer. The conflict has killed tens of thousands of people. The August 2015 peace agreement has not stopped the fighting and clashes in July 2016 between supporters of Kiir and Machar set off further violence. Haley’s appeal to South Sudan’s feuding leaders to support the High Level Revitalization Forum that IGAD is trying to convene to bring them together was echoed by nearly all council members and U.N. special envoy for South Sudan David Shearer. Shearer painted a grim picture of the impoverished, war-torn nation as it approaches the end of the rainy season. “The government appears emboldened by its recent military gains,” he said. “Across the country, the opposition remains deeply fractured and has suffered significant military setbacks in recent months.” At the same time, Shearer said, South Sudan is “beset by social, economic and humanitarian challenges” and an economic crisis is fueling public frustration with many civil servants unpaid for over four months and salaries to security forces delayed. In addition, he said, deep distrust of military forces, “exacerbated by human rights abuses,” is fueling the flight of many people to neighboring countries. Shearer said the splintering of opposition forces has had “negative consequences” for the delivery of humanitarian aid. As an example, he said the World Food Program’s regular convoys to Yambio — normally two days travel from the capital Juba — now require “13 separate permissions from armed groups along its route.” The United Nations has a 12,000-strong peacekeeping mission in South Sudan and the Security Council last year approved an additional 4,000 peacekeepers from the region to help protect civilians after a series of reported gang-rapes and other assaults when fighting erupted in Juba in July 2016. Shearer told the council that deploying regional troops to Juba Airport, including at the mission’s Tomping base, “remains a vexed issue.” He said that he and the force commander are discussing “unresolved issues” with the government and will reach out to IGAD and the African Union to meet with the government in Juba as soon as possible. South Sudan’s First Vice President Tabo Deng Gai painted a much rosier picture in his speech to the General Assembly’s annual ministerial meeting on Saturday, saying the government is confident that peace will soon return to the country “and wars shall be stories of the past.” This was in sharp contrast not only to the assessments of Shearer and Haley but to those of many council members. In late April, Haley urged the council to impose an arms embargo and additional sanctions on South Sudan to pressure the parties to end the civil war — but Russia and China remain opposed. Haley told the council Tuesday that the U.S. recently imposed its own sanctions on a number of South Sudanese officials “who thwarted peace.” “Our hope is that South Sudan’s leaders will seize this opportunity” offered by IGAD, she said. “If not, we must resolve now both individually and collectively to do more to end this conflict.” Haley said President Donald Trump has asked her to visit central and east Africa in October and she will be in Juba soon. Russia’s deputy U.N. ambassador Petr Iliichev reiterated Moscow’s opposition to targeted sanctions against individuals and an arms embargo, saying they “will not facilitate in alleviating the crisis. On the contrary, this will further compound the situation.” “Our hope is that preparations currently under way for the IGAD forum on revitalization of the peace agreement will lead to success,” he said. Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 The Washington Post

By Ester Htusan and Robin McDowell In this Sept. 14, 2017, file photo, Rohingya Muslim man Naseer Ud Din holds his infant son Abdul Masood, who drowned when the boat they were traveling in capsized just before reaching the shore, as his wife Hanida Begum cries upon reaching the Bay of Bengal shore in Shah Porir Dwip, Bangladesh. Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist nation of 60 million, was basking in international praise just a few years ago as it transitioned to democracy after a half-century of dictatorship. Since then, a campaign of killings, rape and arson attacks by security forces and Buddhist-aligned mobs have sent more than 850,000 of the country's 1.3 million Rohingya fleeing. (AP Photo/Dar Yasin, File) After facing international outrage and charges of ethnic cleansing, Myanmar made a pledge: Rohingya Muslims who fled the country by the hundreds of thousands would start their journey home within weeks. With so many obstacles, however, and no real sign of good will, few believe that will happen. The returns are supposed to be voluntary. But many members of the religious minority, now living in sprawling refugee camps in neighboring Bangladesh, are afraid to go back. They don't trust the nationalist-led government and feel widely hated by the general population. Meanwhile, the military — which violently ousted them — says the refugees shouldn't expect to return in large numbers. Myanmar, a predominantly Buddhist nation of 60 million, was basking in international praise just a few years ago as it transitioned to democracy after a half-century of dictatorship. Since then, a campaign of killings, rape and arson attacks by security forces and Buddhist-aligned mobs have sent more than 850,000 of the country's 1.3 million Rohingya fleeing. Their home for generations, the northern tip of Rakhine state, is now virtually empty, prompting the United Nations, the United States and others to label it ethnic cleansing. In an apparent effort to quiet criticism, Myanmar reached an agreement with Bangladesh last month saying refugees would start returning home before Jan. 23. There is "no way" that will happen, says Chris Lewa, a leading expert on the Rohingya and the policies that have made them one of the world's most persecuted minorities. The government, she notes, has done almost nothing to prepare. While Myanmar said the Rohingya would be allowed to settle in their original homes, few of which remain standing, some officials have talked about putting them in "camps" in northern Rakhine. Already, two barracks have been constructed next to a police post in the Rakhine state village of Taungpyo Letwe to receive returnees, the Ministry of Information says. The government has stockpiled material and started breaking ground for 41 modular houses. The idea, the ministry said, is that returnees can stay there temporarily. That scares Arif Ullah, a 34-year-old Rohingya living at the Balukali camp in Bangladesh. He worries it could lead to something more permanent like apartheid-style camps erected after violence broke out in Sittwe, the state capital, in 2012. Five years later, those camps remain home to 120,000 people. International aid agencies are effectively banned and the Rohingya have little access to food, education or basic medical care. Mothers regularly die in childbirth. Babies and children have clear signs of malnutrition. "We miss our home," said Arif Ullah, married and a father of two. "But we are human beings." "If the Myanmar government is really willing to take us back and give us our rights, they could have built houses on the land where our houses were burned down," he says. "But clearly they don't want to do that. And we are not going back to just live in the camps." Anagha Neelakantan, Asia Director of the International Crisis Group, meanwhile, warned of potential security risks. She also does not believe large numbers of Rohingya will be returning from Bangladesh any time soon. And the presence of so many traumatized, hopeless refugees in Bangladesh, she said, could be a recipe for further instability and possible cross-border attacks by Rohingya militants, known as ARSA. Attacks by ARSA inside Rakhine state — first in October 2016 and then again in August — triggered the army's heavy-handed, indiscriminate response. Well-trained and funded in part by the Middle East, the militants' agenda appears to be to localized. They want the Rohingya to enjoy the same rights as others in Myanmar. But if the situation does not improve, there are fears the militants could be exploited by transnational jihadists with their own aims. Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, says the decision as to who returns and when should not be left to governments. It should be for residents inside Myanmar to decide. "It is impossible to accept the number of persons proposed by Bangladesh," he said last month in a statement. "Emphasis must be placed on wish of local Rakhine ethnic people who are real Myanmar citizens. Only when local Rakhine ethnic people accept it, will all the people satisfy it." Though many Rohingya have been living in Myanmar for generations, they are seen by most people in the country as "foreign invaders" from Bangladesh. They have been denied citizenship, effectively rendering them stateless. In addition to saying the Muslim minority should be allowed to return freely, safely and in dignity, Myanmar's agreement with Bangladesh says Rohingya will need to provide evidence of their residency — something many say they do not have. While the agreement says that the U.N. High Commission for Refugees will play a role in the repatriations, Adrian Edwards, a spokesman in Geneva, said they have so far been excluded from initial discussions between Myanmar and Bangladesh. Bangladesh wants them to be involved, sources say. Myanmar does not. "After the widespread atrocities, safe and voluntary return of Rohingya will require international monitors on the ground in Burma (Myanmar)," says Bill Frelick, refugee rights director at Human Rights Watch. This, he says, means a central role for the UNHCR. But how that can happen and when is just one of the many obstacles to a Rohingya return to Myanmar that many fear, many simply don't want — and that, in the context of the months of violence that 2017 brought to so many people, is for the moment a political talking point and very little else. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/analysis-sign-rohingya-allowed-return-home-51972795 (c) 2017 ABC

By Erin Cunningham On a celebrity gossip show here, the hosts recently projected the Instagram profiles of Turkish actors and pop stars on the screen and berated those who had not yet posted support for Turkey’s military offensive in ­Syria. “There are those celebrities who even post when they go to the bathroom,” one host quipped. “They could just post a little thing saying, ‘I prayed and would pray again for the soldiers.’ ” Disdainfully, the hosts flashed through more accounts, calling out those they faulted for ignoring the operation, which seeks to oust Kurdish fighters officially portrayed as terrorists. Since the offensive began last month in the Afrin enclave just over the border, Turkish media and public opinion have rallied around the government, stirring nationalist sentiment and giving a boost to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is up for reelection by next year. On newsstands, headlines have blared support, and imams in mosques throughout the country have prayed for a military victory. Authorities have detained hundreds of people — including doctors and writers — for criticizing the assault. Even opposition leaders have fallen in line. Erdogan has deftly framed the Afrin battle as an extension of Turkey’s war with Kurdish insurgents at home, tapping into years of public anger with the militant Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, which is linked to the Kurdish fighters in northern Syria. In waging what has been dubbed “Operation Olive Branch,” he is also exploiting a surge of anti-Americanism among Turks, arising in part from U.S. military support for the Syrian Kurds. The Syrian Kurdish militia, called the YPG, or People’s Protection Units, has been a crucial American ally in the campaign to oust the Islamic State from Syria. Since the operation began, public opinion polls have shown a large majority of Turks supporting the offensive. One poll, conducted by Turkey’s MAK research company and cited widely by pro-government media, said 82 percent of respondents believed that the operation will succeed. Ninety percent said the United States is “behind” the PKK and YPG. That broad distrust of the United States comes at a time when, Turkish commentators say, relations between the two longtime allies have sunk to their lowest point since Turkey joined NATO in 1952. [New American strategy for Syria could be doomed as allies of U.S. fight each other] During recent interviews in Istanbul, in working-class and upscale neighborhoods alike, Turks repeatedly questioned why the United States had joined forces with the YPG, which they see as inextricably linked to the PKK and thus to bomb attacks inside Turkey. “I am not a government supporter,” said Yadagar Karakul, a 30-year-old event coordinator. But in Afrin, he said, the government “is protecting Turkey’s territory against terrorists on the border.” “Nowhere in the world can you form an agreement with a terrorist organization,” he said, referring to the YPG. At a teahouse in the conservative Tophane neighborhood in Istanbul, Ihsan Gumus, 39, defended the operation. “Syria has become a problem for the entire world,” said Gumus, who is unemployed. “And if there is a terror organization on the border like the government says, then I support it.” The Turkish offensive, including air and ground operations, aims to establish a buffer zone inside northern Syria enforced by Turkish-backed forces. The YPG was initially formed to protect Kurdish populations amid the chaos of the Syrian civil war. Erdogan has said that after neutralizing Afrin, Turkey plans to extend its Syrian campaign eastward and oust the YPG fighters from the Kurdish-controlled city of Manbij. That could bring Turkish forces into direct conflict with the United States, which has an undisclosed number of troops in that city. [In call, Trump issues stern warning to Turkey over Syria operation] In a phone call with Erdogan on Jan. 24, President Trump urged Turkey to “de-escalate, limit its military actions, and avoid civilian casualties,” according to a White House account. Gen. ­Joseph Votel, commander of the U.S. Central Command, told CNN recently that withdrawing from Manbij was “not something we’re looking into.” Writing in the conservative daily newspaper Karar, which is sometimes critical of the president and his ruling party, columnist Mustafa Karaalioglu said the military campaign requires Turkish solidarity. “With 11 days of the operation behind us,” he wrote, “almost the entire country shares the same feeling” about the offensive. Another columnist, Ibrahim Karagul, writing in the pro- government Yeni Safak newspaper, minced few words in criticizing the United States. “The U.S. is now the . . . greatest and most open threat for Turkey. It is an enemy country. The U.S. is the one that released the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and Daesh on us,” Karagul wrote, using an Arabic term for the Islamic State. Our “ties with the U.S. have no meaning left.” The enthusiasm for the offensive highlights how Turkish public opinion has evolved in recent years, from opposition to intervention in Syria’s war to support for what could be an open-ended operation. At home, Turks also once backed government peace talks with the PKK — which has waged a decades-long struggle for Kurdish autonomy — resulting in a cease-fire from 2013 to 2015. Since then, however, Turkey has been roiled by myriad crises, hardening attitudes toward both Syria and the Kurds, who number about 15 million inside Turkey. There are an additional 2 million Kurds in Syria, where they now administer key stretches of territory. [Turkey’s Erdogan wages a dangerous war on many fronts] Analysts say Erdogan is taking advantage of recent domestic instability, including renewed fighting with the PKK inside Turkey and a string of deadly attacks by the Islamic State, in hopes of turning public fears into votes next year. Soner Cagaptay, director of the Turkish Research Program at the Washington Institute and author of “The New Sultan: Erdogan and the Crisis of Modern Turkey,” called the military campaign a “masterstroke” by the president. “He’s mobilizing his base,” Cagaptay said. “The media has already decided that he has a victory.” And if Erdogan decides to call early elections, he said, “Afrin could help catapult him to a clear sweep at the polls.” But Erdogan could falter if the government overplays its hand. “If Turkey gets bogged down in Afrin, everything goes out the window,” Cagaptay said. In mountainous Afrin, where the well-trained YPG has deep roots, Turkish forces could face stiff resistance. According to official figures, 13 Turkish soldiers have already been killed in the campaign. And the stakes could be even higher if Turkish forces move on Manbij. “I don’t think Turkey should take this risk,” 60-year-old Arif Tulle, a hardware store owner in Istanbul, said of the possibility of clashing with U.S. forces. “The U.S. and Turkey have been NATO allies for years,” he said. Still, “there are threats on our border. And I want to live in peace.” (c) 2018 The Washington Post

By Edith M. Lederer The United Nations Security Council meets on peacebuilding and sustaining peace, Wednesday, April 25, 2018, at United Nations headquarters. (Mary Altaffer/Associated Press) UNITED NATIONS — The Security Council is heading to Asia for a firsthand look at the plight of 700,000 Rohingya Muslims who fled a military crackdown in Myanmar and the several hundred thousand who remain in the country’s northern Rakhine State. Britain’s U.N. ambassador, Karen Pierce, said the most important thing is that the body charged with maintaining international peace and security “can see for itself the situation on the ground in a very desperate case of alleged human rights violations and abuses and crimes against humanity.” The government of Buddhist-majority Myanmar doesn’t recognize the Rohingya as an ethnic group, insisting they are Bengali migrants from Bangladesh living illegally in the country. It has denied them citizenship, leaving them stateless. The recent spasm of violence began when Rohingya insurgents staged a series of attacks Aug. 25 on about 30 security outposts and other targets. Myanmar security forces responded with a scorched-earth offensive against Rohingya villages that the U.N. and human rights groups have called a campaign of ethnic cleansing. The Security Council members planned to leave New York late Thursday. The ambassadors have scheduled a Saturday arrival at Cox’s Bazaar in southern Bangladesh, where the Rohingya who fled are now living in camps. They also will visit the Bangladesh capital, Dacca, and Myanmar’s capital, Naypyitaw, for talks with government officials before traveling to Rakhine on Tuesday. The United Nations has a major effort under way to help the refugees in Bangladesh, and Pierce said the council will be able to see it in operation and “take a view on the extent to which that impacts on regional security and stability.” She said the council will also be able “to draw attention to what it considers are the most flagrant human rights abuses and violations, and what needs to be done next to help Myanmar develop as a modern political and economic entity, and to help create the conditions where the refugees can go home in safety and security and dignity.” Lord Nazir Ahmed, the United Kingdom’s minister of state for the Commonwealth and the United Nations, told reporters earlier this week that Myanmar’s agreement to the council visit and a previous visit by the U.N. special envoy for sexual violence in conflict “demonstrates the glimmer of hope in what has been a very dark chapter in human history in that part of the region.” He stressed the importance of direct engagement, which “sends a very strong signal to those in Myanmar, both the civilian but more importantly military authorities who have been responsible largely for what we’ve seen, which has been ethnic cleansing and nothing short of that.” Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. (c) 2018 The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/un-council-heads-to-bangladesh-and-myanmar-to-see-rohingya/2018/04/26/68b85d9e-499b-11e8-8082-105a446d19b8_story.html?utm_term=.7e94623a9e7a

By Dewa Mavhinga A woman waves a South African flag as she attends Freedom Day celebrations in Kwa-Thema Township, near Johannesburg. (File photo: April 27, 2019) © AP Photo/Denis Farrell When I met a Zimbabwean truck driver, Tinei Takawira, in Durban last year, he was recovering from life-threatening injuries. He told me that on 25 March 2019, a man who was part of a protesting group of locals knifed him in the stomach, in broad daylight as the police looked on. The police did not apprehend the attackers or help him get medical care. The group was protesting foreign truck drivers working in South Africa. He told me he was shocked at the police inaction. Takawira said that the police took information from him about the stabbing three months later, but had not provided a reference number for his case or any updates. Takawira is still waiting for justice. Over the last year, while researching xenophobic violence in South Africa for Human Rights Watch, I repeatedly heard similar stories. There appears to be a vicious cycle: it starts with impoverished citizens, angry at their sub-par economic and living conditions and the authorities’ failure to resolve the perennial problems of  chronically high unemployment, high crime rates, and poor public services. Then the aggrieved citizens receive tacit encouragement from public officials to deflect the blame to foreign nationals considered as competitors for the limited available opportunities. Finally they take the law into their own hands. They plan and carry out mob attacks against the foreign nationals, and rarely suffer any consequences. The victims of xenophobic violence have often found that   law enforcement officials responded to attacks with indifference and showed little interest in pursuing the cases. In the same vein, government and law enforcement officials have often denied that such attacks were xenophobic in nature, insisting instead that they were routine criminal acts. This lack of acknowledgment of the true nature of the problem has encouraged impunity, and people operating in mobs have been allowed to act as if they were above the law. Lack of accountability emboldens bad behavior and makes it only a matter of time before there is another wave of xenophobic violence. Virtually no one has been brought to justice for past outbreaks of xenophobic violence , including the 2008 attacks that resulted in the deaths of more than 60 people across the country. The same is true for the April 2015 violence in Durban that led to the displacement of thousands of foreign nationals, or the violence against foreign truck drivers and others last year that resulted in the deaths of at least 200 people. Local groups that could incite violence are openly mobilizing and whipping up xenophobic sentiments. One such group organizing under the slogan “Put South Africans First” marched to the Nigerian Embassy in Pretoria last month, demanding that foreign nationals be sent ‘home.’ In addition to the xenophobic violence, many foreign nationals in South Africa, particularly asylum seekers and refugees, face difficulties in acquiring and renewing documentation to maintain legal status to remain in South Africa. This in turn makes it harder for them to access education, health care, and other basic services. This also creates key barriers to accessing justice, which means that the path toward accountability for xenophobia, and therefore for ending it, remains uncertain. In March 2019, the South African government introduced its National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (NAP). Among other actions the NAP identifies steps to be taken to combat xenophobia, including creating systems to ensure that  foreigners receive services they are entitled to, facilitating their integration, and embracing a humane and dignified approach to managing migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers. But the NAP has not managed to stop the waves of xenophobic violence. At Human Rights Watch we highlighted, in our latest report on South Africa, some of the large scale and more individual experiences of xenophobia, discrimination, and barriers experienced by non-nationals in the year after  the NAP was introduced, as well as the, at best, anemic response by the government. A lot still needs to be done to end xenophobic violence and discrimination against foreign nationals, including holding those responsible for violent attacks to account in fair, credible trials and sanctioning public officials who propagate inciteful rhetoric against foreign nationals. Carrying out the NAP should include steps to improve accountability for abusers motivated by xenophobia and ensure justice for its victims. Potential measures include creating a dedicated portal or contact for non-South African nationals to report xenophobic incidents and standardizing how officials record and respond to instances of xenophobia across provinces, stations, and community policing structures. When incidents motivated by xenophobia or that disproportionately affect non-nationals occur, the South African government should openly speak out against xenophobia, seek accountability, and promote inclusivity and cohesion. The fact that crimes against non-nationals may be, and are often, motivated by xenophobia should be recognized as an important element in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. The authorities should ensure that when suspects are identified in crimes, including property damage and public violence, against non-nationals, there are effective investigations and that the suspects are appropriately charged and prosecuted. To stem the trend toward lack of accountability for these crimes, the authorities should organize interactive and recurring training on racism, xenophobia, and implicit biases for law enforcement and judicial officers. This should be part of broader efforts to improve training and professionalization throughout the criminal justice system. Without a comprehensive anti-xenophobia strategy that includes efforts to bring to justice those responsible for inciting and carrying out violent xenophobic attacks, the horrific waves of xenophobic violence are likely to continue unabated. Effective policing to protect targeted communities and efforts to ensure justice and accountability for xenophobic violence are essential for deterring future violence and showing that the consequences for such actions are real. © 2020 Human Rights Watch

A legal scholar weighs in on the decision taken by Ethiopian prime minister Ahmed Abiy to send troops into the northern Ethiopian region of Tigray, to quell what the government sees as an insurgency. Published by The Conversation on December 9, 2020. Republished by The Africa Report on December 15, 2020. By Eugène Bakama Bope The fighting in Tigray has left thousands dead, according to the International Crisis Group (EDUARDO SOTERAS/AFP) In Ethiopia, the national army claims to have taken “complete control” of Mekelle, the capital of the dissident region of Tigray. But since the fighting started in November, there have been concerns for civilians in the region who may have been injured or displaced due to the conflict. What is known is that providers of humanitarian aid haven’t been able to reach civilians. There are also reports that hundreds of civilians have been killed. However, because parts of the region have been cut off from mobile phone and internet network, it’s hard to ascertain the exact situation on the ground. As an expert on human rights and international criminal law , I wanted to provide insights into the legality of the government’s actions and whether the armed intervention violates international law. As well as governing relationships between countries, international law applies to the conduct of hostilities within a country. At the core of international humanitarian law are the Geneva Conventions. These were a series of meetings that produced rules for times of armed conflict. They seek to protect people who are not taking part in hostilities. The agreements originated in 1864 and were significantly updated in 1949 after World War II. Ethiopia has ratified several of the UN’s key international human rights conventions, the Geneva Conventions and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights . I argue that there are several instances in which Ethiopia could have already violated these conventions. For instance in the denial of humanitarian aid and if civilians were attacked. Serious violations of these laws can be considered war crimes and can be prosecuted in national or international courts, such as the tribunals established to investigate violations of the law in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and the International Criminal Court. Victims of humanitarian blockade could also sue the government in Ethiopian courts. Military intervention Under international law, the Ethiopian federal government has the right to suppress rebellion, riot or mutiny by parts of the population against the established government. But it must respect the rules of international humanitarian laws. For instance, it must ensure the protection of all civilians. The conflict was triggered when forces loyal to the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) – the region’s ruling party – attacked a federal military base, killing federal soldiers. This act constitutes an insurgency and the government has legal grounds to suppress it. The Tigrayan government also refused federal government orders to postpone the organisation of regional elections because of COVID-19. This constitutes a rebellion, which again gives the government legal grounds for military action. But the Ethiopian government must respect the rules of international humanitarian law, including the Geneva conventions. They cover legitimate violence, proportionality, respect for human rights and the prohibition of the use of torture. These laws also include the protection of civilians. It appears – though the government denies it – that civilians have been bombed. If this is true, this is in violation of international humanitarian law: it’s not lawful to attack civilians in a conflict. It’s difficult to verify the extent to which civilians have been affected, because of a media blackout. But some rare reports show that many people have been injured. The government is also legally bound to protect its people from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This is known as the “principle of the responsibility to protect”. States must ensure that their armed forces respect this. It is not enough for the Ethiopian army to tell people living in Mekelle to “save themselves from any artillery attack”. Not protecting them is a violation of international law. Humanitarian assistance In addition to this, any denial by the Ethiopian government of humanitarian assistance to people in Tigray is a violation of international humanitarian law. Under various conventions , it’s the responsibility of the warring parties that control the territory to ensure that the needs of the civilian population are met. This includes their access to humanitarian assistance, such as food, water, clothing and medicines. In Tigray, nearly one month after the conflict had started humanitarian organisations were still not able to access civilian populations trapped in Tigray. This was because the Ethiopian government refused to grant access to humanitarian organisations. Minorities and displacement There’s one more area of concern regarding international human rights law: the question of displacement due to the conflict. Tens of thousands of people have already been displaced by the violence. The African Union’s “Kampala Convention” , to which Ethiopia is party, obliges the state to allow the relevant agencies to provide protection and assistance to internally displaced persons. If the situation gets much worse, the African Union can intervene militarily and hold the government to count. The Ethiopian government has emphasised its commitment to restoring order in the Tigray region. But some of its actions violate international humanitarian law. The government must respect international law. And the UN and other institutions must remind Ethiopia of its obligations. Eugène Bakama Bope , Professor, Université de Lubumbashi Copyright © 2010–2020, The Conversation Trust (UK) Limited

By Diaa Hadid and Fazelminallah Qazizai In a mosque on the outskirts of Afghanistan's capital, Kabul, a preacher crowed to assembled men and boys: The Taliban, with their primitive guns, brought foreign forces to their knees, he said, and the Afghan government is next. "America with her rich and modern weaponry knelt down to us mujahedeen. So how will you defy us?" shouted the preacher on a sunny Friday in late October. He only permitted NPR to use his family name, Mazloum, and requested the mosque's name and its precise location remain anonymous, so it would not be targeted by Afghan government forces. "The world is realizing the power of Islam and the mujahedeen, but not a few stupid puppets here," Mazloum said, referring to the country's Western-backed government. "Soon, Allah will grant us the Islamic government that our nation deserves." The Taliban once lurked on the outer fringes of Kampany, a busy Kabul district with unruly traffic and roads that peter out into the countryside. But in recent weeks, they have been openly preaching in the district. It is one of the ways the Taliban have been emboldened since signing a deal with the United States that will lead to American and allied foreign forces withdrawing from Afghanistan by spring 2021. Already, U.S. forces have downsized from 12,000 to 4,500 since the deal was signed in February. President Trump ordered the forces cut back to 2,500 troops by next month , largely cementing the withdrawal before Joe Biden assumes the presidency on Jan. 20. The drawdown is being accompanied by peace talks between the Taliban and Afghanistan's government. On Monday, the architect of those talks, U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, said the two sides would take a 20-day hiatus . Even if they are to succeed, they may take months, likely years, to negotiate. But few are optimistic, because as foreign forces withdraw, the Taliban have waged violent attacks on Afghan government forces across the country, despite pleas to stop. Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, became the latest senior U.S. official to call for "an immediate reduction of violence" following a meeting with Taliban leaders on an unannounced trip to Qatar on Thursday. Yet the Taliban's violence continues, and there are signs that the government is losing control over Kabul. Streets empty after dark The city's jammed streets empty out after dark, residents fearing militants and criminal gangs. Dozens of rockets slammed into the city in two incidents in November and December, killing more than 10 people. Shadowy assailants target security officials, judicial workers and journalists, with no militant claiming responsibility for the attacks. On Tuesday, the deputy governor of Kabul was killed by a magnetic bomb attached to his vehicle. ISIS fighters, who were dormant for months, did claim responsibility for two deadly attacks in recent months: On Nov. 2, they stormed the Kabul University campus, killing 35 people, mostly students. A week earlier, on Oct. 25, one of their suicide bombers detonated himself outside a tuition center, killing 24 people . Taliban inside the gates The preacher publicly vowing to restore the Taliban's harsh version of Islamist rule over Afghanistan was yet another show of defiance around the capital. Mazloum wore the white garb of a Taliban cleric as he addressed a crowd who gathered in late October to celebrate a dozen young men who had memorized the entire Muslim holy book, the Quran . Among the crowd were preachers from neighboring mosques. Young loyalists distributed Taliban glossies, including Trench , which highlights — and exaggerates — the exploits of the insurgents. Others directed traffic around the mosque. "The Taliban are not only at the gates of Kabul, but inside the city gates," said Andrew Watkins, senior Afghanistan researcher at the International Crisis Group. He said it was "as ominous as it sounds and as terrifying as it indeed is, in many scenarios for a security environment, for the protection of minority communities, and so for many other reasons, it's certainly alarming news," he said. Across a tributary of the fetid Kabul river from Kampany, other Afghans watching the rise of the Taliban say they are arming themselves. The sprawling neighborhood of Dasht-e-Barchi is predominantly made up of Hazaras, a Shiite Muslim minority, who are targeted by Sunni militants. In recent years, ISIS fighters have battered the area; but during a pitched phase of the Afghan civil war in the 1990s, before the U.S. invasion, it was the Taliban who targeted them. They say they aren't waiting to be targeted again. "When our houses are not safe, when our educational academies are not safe and our mosque are not safe, we have to make plans," said Mustafa Nikzad, an activist for Hazara rights. "We have active groups in the area, and if we are attacked, they are willing to defend us." Nikzad said several militias had formed in Dasht-e-Barchi, with more than a thousand gunmen between them, their members purchasing weapons on the black market. He said one of the largest militias was "Fedayeen Baba Mazari" and one of its leaders, Jayhoun, had his men patrol religious Shiite gatherings, which are often targeted by Sunni militants. "Recruitment sped up" Murtaza, a 29-year-old clerk who practices martial arts, said several strongmen were trying to recruit young men through gyms dotting the area. He asked to use only his first name because he did not want intelligence officials to identify him. Murtaza said the groups began forming after militants beheaded a 9-year-old Hazara girl in 2015. "But this year, recruitment sped up. They're equipping themselves with weapons more quickly. It feels like this process will accelerate," he said. Afghanistan's government also funds some local gunmen in Dasht-e-Barchi, largely to guard mosques, although there are complaints it is not enough. "Naturally, we are disappointed," Mohammad Daud, 42, a guard assigned to protect the Imam Zaman mosque on a side street of Kabul, said of the government's response. He said the community asked the government two years ago to help them defend about 100 Shiite mosques in the area but only received weapons and paid fighters for 16. "The mosques still don't have security guards, there are still threats and the people are still coming to the mosque to pray. They are 100% at risk." The mosque where Daud is stationed has blast walls, a watchtower and a guard to search worshippers. It was targeted by an ISIS suicide bomber in 2017, killing 39 men , their names etched in the court yard. The mosque still receives ISIS threats, as recently as late November, Daud said. Afghanistan's government, meanwhile, says it is trying to keep the country safe. "Our forces will be here to face the threat that the Taliban and other terrorist groups are posing," said Javid Faisal, a political adviser to the Afghan National Security Council. He added that the government is arming local communities under the army's command structure, as part of its efforts to strengthen security. To stay or go None of this seems to reassure many Afghans, and young idealistic graduates who once believed they would help build their country are eyeing the exits, like Shakira Yazdani. She's 22 and studies law at Kabul University. She is a graduate of business administration and was hoping to become a commercial arbitrator in Kabul. "I have never been interested in living abroad," said the young woman. "But if the situation in Afghanistan gets worse — we wouldn't have any solution or any other choice, but finding a way to go outside Afghanistan to live in a peaceful environment." Yazdani said she began thinking seriously about leaving, at least for a few years, after the ISIS attack on Kabul University. She was on campus and had to flee. Some of her friends were killed. "This country has invested in me and I have to pay it back," she said. "But the increase of violence in Afghanistan really put me in a doubtful situation, whether I can live here or not." Another law student at the American University of Afghanistan, Ali Yaqubi, 24, echoed Yazdani's hesitations. He had planned to run his own business and enter politics — to help his community in Dasht-e-Barchi. He also has a degree in public policy, works as a consultant and volunteers in a charity that helps street children. Now though, he said, "if I have the opportunity, legally to go to other countries, I would definitely go. At least to have security and to be alive." Yaqubi spoke to NPR in a cafe near his office in central Kabul. "You can't guarantee a minute, even here," he said. A few days ago, "there was a rocket attack next to this café." But for now, he's in Kabul. Every morning, his mother gives him money to give to poor people on the street — so they'll pray for his safety. That follows a Muslim belief that God hears the prayers of the oppressed. Yaqubi said he doesn't really believe it will do anything, but at least it makes his mother feel like he is safe. Diaa Hadid and Fazelminallah Qazizai reported in Kabul, Afghanistan; Khwaga Ghani contributed to this report in Kabul. © NPR 2020

The finding by the Trump administration is the strongest denunciation by any government of China’s actions and follows a Biden campaign statement with the same declaration. By Edward Wong and Chris Buckley A facility in 2019 that is believed to be a re-education camp in Xinjiang. Credit...Greg Baker/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images WASHINGTON — The State Department declared on Tuesday that the Chinese government is committing genocide and crimes against humanity through its wide-scale repression of Uighurs and other mostly Muslim ethnic minorities in its northwestern region of Xinjiang, including in its use of internment camps and forced sterilization, American officials said. The move is expected to be the Trump administration’s final action on China, made on its last full day, and is the culmination of a yearslong debate over how to punish what many consider Beijing’s worst human rights abuses in decades. Relations between the countries have deteriorated over the past four years , and the new finding adds to a long list of tension points . Foreign policy officials and experts across the political spectrum in the United States say China will be the greatest challenge for any administration for years or decades to come. ”I believe this genocide is ongoing, and that we are witnessing the systematic attempt to destroy Uighurs by the Chinese party-state,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a statement, adding that Chinese officials were “engaged in the forced assimilation and eventual erasure of a vulnerable ethnic and religious minority group.” The determination of atrocities is a rare action on the part of the State Department, and could lead the United States to impose more sanctions against China under the new administration of President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr., who said last year through a spokesman that the policies by Beijing amounted to “genocide.” Other nations or international institutions could follow suit in formally criticizing China over its treatment of its minority Muslims and taking punitive measures. The determination also prompts certain reviews within the State Department. The finding is the harshest denunciation yet by any government against China’s policies in Xinjiang. Genocide is, according to international convention , “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” Mr. Pompeo, State Department lawyers and other officials had debated for months over the determination, but the matter had gained urgency in the Trump administration’s final days. As was common with most China policy, the issue of Xinjiang had long pitted administration officials against one another: Mr. Pompeo and other national security aides advocated tough measures against Beijing, while President Trump and top economic advisers brushed aside the concerns. The Chinese government has rejected previous accusations of genocide and other human rights violations in Xinjiang. At a news conference in Beijing last week, officials condemned American politicians and groups for making such accusations. “This utterly untethered fabrication of ‘genocide’ regarding Xinjiang is the conspiracy of the century,” Xu Guixiang, a deputy director of propaganda for Xinjiang told the news conference. “People of all ethnic groups independently choose safe, effective and appropriate birth control measures. There has been no such a problem of ‘mandatory sterilization’ in the region.” To deflect criticism from U.S. officials, Chinese officials have also taken to underlining some of the Trump administration’s vast governance failures, including a death toll of more than 400,000 from the coronavirus pandemic and the deadly assault on the Capitol by a mob incited by Mr. Trump. Before the new condemnation from Washington, the strongest statement by a government entity declaring that China’s actions in Xinjiang amounted to genocide came from a Canadian parliamentary subcommittee. Last October , the subcommittee concluded that the Chinese Communist Party was culpable of the crime. Mr. Pompeo and senior State Department officials made the decision just days before Mr. Biden takes office. The finding could complicate his administration’s dealings with Beijing, but it also offers a source of leverage. Mr. Biden’s nominee for secretary of state, Antony J. Blinken , plans to mention the “growing rivalry with China, Russia and other authoritarian states” at a Senate confirmation hearing on Tuesday afternoon, according to a copy of his opening statement. In the days before the decision, State Department officials had argued over whether China’s actions in Xinjiang met the standard for genocide or whether they fell under crimes against humanity, which has a lower standard, said American officials familiar with the debate. Mr. Pompeo decided to use both. One U.S. official said the best rationale for the genocide label on China was the use of forced sterilizations, birth control and family separations to destroy Uighur identity. Several State Department officials said the decision was rooted in trying to meet policy goals; they said they hoped the move would spur other nations to take a harder public line against China on this and other issues. Some officials opposed to the action pointed out that the department never made a determination on whether the Myanmar government had committed genocide against the ethnic Rohingya Muslims, despite strong evidence of the crime. In 2017, the department said Myanmar had committed “ethnic cleansing.” Mr. Biden, a critic of China’s human rights record during his decades in office, has used forceful language to describe its repressive policies. In August, he released a statement calling China’s actions “genocide” and pressed the president to do the same. Mr. Trump, he insisted, “must also apologize for condoning this horrifying treatment of Uighurs.” Mr. Biden was referring to an account by John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, who disclosed in his memoir that the president told Xi Jinping, the leader of China, at a summit in 2019 to keep building internment camps in Xinjiang, “which Trump thought was exactly the right thing to do.” Mr. Bolton wrote that Mr. Trump had made similar remarks on a trip to China in 2017. Mr. Bolton and other aides said Mr. Trump repeatedly ignored their recommendations to impose sanctions over Xinjiang to avoid jeopardizing trade negotiations with China. Mr. Trump has expressed little concern for human rights, and for most of his term publicly referred to Mr. Xi as a friend. For years, Democratic and Republican members of Congress have urged the administration to take a more aggressive stand. An annual report released on Thursday by the Congressional-Executive Commission on China said there was evidence that “crimes against humanity — and possibly genocide — are occurring” in Xinjiang. It stressed that budget legislation passed in December requires that the U.S. government determine within 90 days whether China had committed atrocities in the region. Some lawmakers made a last-minute push for the Trump administration to issue a determination against China. In October 2019, the Trump administration blacklisted police departments in Xinjiang and several Chinese companies . It has since issued other sanctions , including against senior Communist Party officials. On Wednesday, it announced a ban on imports of products made with cotton and tomatoes from the area. The State Department’s determination further underscores how Xinjiang has become a central human rights issue for the United States and its allies. China has for decades exercised heavy-handed control over Xinjiang’s ethnic minorities, who make up more than half of the region’s population of 25 million. For the largest groups, their Islamic religion and Turkic language and culture set them apart from China’s Han majority. Tensions sharply worsened from 2009, when Uighurs taking part in ethnic riots killed about 200 Han in Urumqi, the regional capital, after earlier tensions and violence . Chinese security forces began a sweeping crackdown. Attacks and more crackdowns occurred across Uighur towns in the years afterward, as well as in some cities outside Xinjiang . Since 2017, Xinjiang leaders pressed by Mr. Xi have begun or stepped up policies intended to transform the Uighurs, Kazakhs and other ethnic minorities into loyal, largely secular supporters of the Communist Party. The State Department determination said the Chinese government had committed “crimes against humanity” since “at least March 2017.” Security forces have sent hundreds of thousands of Uighurs and Kazakhs — possibly a million or more by some estimates — to indoctrination camps intended to instill loyalty to the party and break down adherence to Islam. The Chinese government has defended the camps as benign vocational training schools and disputed the estimates of inmate numbers, without ever giving its own. Former inmates and their families who have left China have described harsh living conditions, crude indoctrination and abusive guards. The swelling camps drew growing international condemnation, including from human rights experts who advise the United Nations as well as the United States and other nations. Journalists and scholars began writing articles on the camps and a sophisticated high-tech surveillance system in Xinjiang in 2017, well before foreign governments started discussing the issue. The indoctrination camps, however, have formed only part of the Chinese Communist Party’s broader campaign to drastically transform Uighurs, Kazakhs and other ethnic minorities. Other measures include labor transfers, schooling and cultural policies, and population controls. Under Mr. Xi, Xinjiang has expanded and intensified longstanding programs to shift Uighurs and Kazakhs from rural areas to jobs in factories, cities and commercial farming . The Chinese government has said that these work transfers are entirely voluntary and bring prosperity to impoverished peoples. But some programs have set targets for the numbers of people relocated for work and restricted recruits from choosing or leaving their jobs — hallmarks of forced labor. Schools have largely discarded classes in Uighur, pressing students to learn in Chinese. Uighur academics who have sought to preserve and promote their culture have been arrested, and Uighur-language publishing has been heavily curtailed. Officials have forced children into boarding schools , separated from their parents. Programs in Xinjiang have also sought to stem the growth of the Uighur population by forcing women to undergo permanent sterilization or have birth-control devices inserted, Adrian Zenz, a researcher in the United States who has focused on Xinjiang, said in a report last year. Chinese researchers have challenged the numbers and conclusions in Mr. Zenz’s report while not disputing that the government wants to bring down the population growth of Uighurs. The Chinese embassy in Washington said on Twitter this month that Uighur women had been “emancipated” and were “no longer baby-making machines.” Twitter later removed the comment and told a reporter the post had violated rules against “dehumanization.” © 2021 The New York Times Company