Sudanese troops in coastal Red Sea state where tribal violence erupted . Credit:Sharjah Sudan declared a state of emergency and imposed a night curfew in some parts of the coastal Red Sea state on Monday, after tribal violence that killed at least five people, a statement and state media said. The statement by the state governor media office gave no details of the clashes and did not mention casualties. However, state news agency Suna quoted a local medical official as saying the clashes left at least five people killed and 13 wounded. The report said the clashes broke out at some areas in the city of Port Sudan. Red Sea state, in eastern Sudan, has a history of deadly clashes between the Beni Amer and Nuba, even after leaders from the two tribes signed a peace agreement to stem the violence in 2019. © Copyright 2021 Reuters

The Sri Lankan army has blocked all roads leading to Mullivaikkal after it announced the imposing of a lockdown on Mullaitivu earlier today, just hours before Tamil Genocide Day commemorations were due to take place in the district. Despite the relative lack of coronavirus cases in Mullaitivu, Sri Lanka’s war crimes accused army commander declared at least three regions in the district under lockdown over what it claims to be a spike in COVID-19. The announcement came just hours after Tamil lawyers had successfully beaten back efforts by the security forces to halt memorial events at a court in Mullaitivu, as the district judge T Satgunaraja allowed an appeal to hold remembrance events in accordance with COVID-19 guidelines. Earlier in the month, several Police stations in the Mullaitivu District had obtained a court order barring several Tamils, including two MPs from carrying out Mullivaikkal commemorations. “The Police did not provide any evidence either from the district health officer or the Public Health authorities to suggest the possibility of the spread of Covid-19 infection at the venue,” said the Tamil National People’s Front Nadaraja Kandeepan, who spoke to reporters outside of the court earlier today. “I lost my father-in-law during the war and have a right to mourn him and pay homage,’ added Jaffna lawyer Sugas Kanagaratnam. “What authority does the police have to say not to do so and stop me from doing it”. Shortly after the court ruling however, the Sri Lanka security forces continued to block Tamil access to Mullivaikkal, the final scene of a military offensive 12 years ago that saw tens of thousands of Tamils massacred. Within hours, the military-enforced lockdown was announced. The latest move from the military comes in the midst of a crackdown on attempted commemorations of the genocide, and just days after a memorial at Mullivaikkal was destroyed by the army. Tamils in Mullaitivu are still expected to mark the anniversary privately in homes across the district, alongside other events across the island and around the world. With arrets of Tamils rising in recent months however, many fear what the military may attempt tomorrow. © 2016 Tamil Guardian Ltd.

Ethiopia has again delayed its national election after some opposition parties said they wouldn’t take part and as conflict in the country’s Tigray region means no vote is being held there, further complicating Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed's efforts to centralise power. The head of the national elections board, Birtukan Mideksa, in a meeting with political parties’ representatives on Saturday said the June 5 vote in Africa’s second-most populous country would be postponed until a yet-unknown date, citing the need to finish printing ballots, training staffers and compiling voters’ information. Ethiopia last year delayed the vote - the first major electoral test for Abiy - citing the COVID-19 pandemic. That heightened tensions with the Tigray region’s leaders, who declared that the prime minister's mandate had ended and defiantly held a regional vote of their own that Ethiopia called illegal. Since then, the war in Tigray has killed thousands and led the United States to allege that "ethnic cleansing" against Tigrayans was being carried out in the western part of Tigray, a region of some 6 million people. The term "ethnic cleansing" refers to forcing a population from a region through expulsions and other violence, often including killings and rapes. The prime minister, who introduced sweeping political reforms after taking office in 2018 and won the Nobel Peace Prize the following year, has repeatedly vowed that this election would be free and fair. Abiy will keep his post if his Prosperity Party wins a majority of seats in the national assembly. The European Union recently said it would not observe the vote, saying Ethiopia failed to guarantee the independence of its mission and refused its requests to allow the importation of communications equipment. Ethiopia replied that external observers "are neither essential nor necessary to certify the credibility of an election". Meanwhile, sometimes deadly ethnic tensions in other parts of the country of some 110 million people have led some to question how the election would be carried out, and the opposition Oromo Federalist Congress earlier this year pulled out of the vote. Several of the party's leaders remain behind bars after a wave of violence last year sparked by the killing of a popular Omoro musician. Late last month, five US senators wrote to the US special envoy for the Horn of Africa, Jeffrey Feltman, expressing concerns about Ethiopia’s ability to hold fair elections while the Tigray conflict continues. In response, Ethiopia’s national election board said it was "striving" to ensure the poll will be free. "Shortfalls are inevitable given factors such as population size, development deficits at all levels, a nascent democratic culture, and an increasingly charged political and security environment," it said. "We are deeply concerned about increasing political and ethnic polarization throughout the country," the State Department said on Friday. Ethiopia’s election board has said some 36.2 million people have registered to vote. It was hoped that up to 50 million would do so. © The Associated Press and Euronews, 2021

News Alert The FW de Klerk Foundation agrees with President Ramaphosa’s recent statement that South Africa’s democratic transition presents an example for the resolution of intractable problems everywhere - including the current conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians. As he observes: “As Citizens of a country that was able to turn its back on race-hatred and bloodshed and build a society rooted in human rights for all, it is our collective hope that the people of Israel and Palestine will follow a similar path: that they will find each other, and that they will find peace.” South Africa’s transition to constitutional democracy is one of the most notable examples in recent - or perhaps any - history of how “intractable conflicts can only be solved through peaceful negotiations”. It was based on the idealistic premise that conflicting parties could put their trust in solemn agreements and constitutions for the long-term assurance of their fundamental rights - rather than having to descend again and again into the uncertainty, irrationality, and brutality of armed force. Our entirely home-grown process developed approaches and mechanisms that could assist other conflicted societies - particularly in its inclusivity; its apparent ability to reconcile bitterly opposed parties; its opening Declaration of Intent; the various working groups at CODESA and the involvement of technical experts in the constitution drafting process. Finally, in December 1993, we emerged with an interim constitution that opened the way to our first fully democratic election and laid the foundations for our present constitution - that includes a universally admired and justiciable Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, many of the rights and freedoms in the 1996 constitution have since then been eroded, diluted - or have simply evaporated - possibly as part of a 25-year gradualist programme. The cultural and language rights that minority parties insisted on in the 1996 constitution have not been honored; the crucial prohibition of unfair racial discrimination has been swept aside by legislation and by the courts; the history and culture of our minorities are being progressively excised from the national identity; and the courts imply that some minorities do not have a right to culture rooted in their histories and traditions. At the same time, the economic sphere in which minorities are permitted to operate is being progressively constricted to the declining percentage of the population that they represent - and they are now confronted by the very real threat that their land and property might be expropriated with little or no compensation. Their President tells them that they “are not the rightful owners of land” to which they hold title; that they are “the bearers of the original sin” of their ancestors and that they are not really part of “our” people. Their government no longer makes them feel welcome in the country of their birth - and the land of their ancestors. President Ramaphosa’s statement on Palestine is, alas, filled as much with invective arising from South Africa’s conflicted past - as it is with invective against the Israelis over their conflicted present. 10 of its 26 paragraphs revert to the ANC’s passionately nurtured - and incessantly repeated - grievances arising from its struggle against white governments of the past. They call into question the degree to which we have actually “found each other” and are building “a society rooted in human rights for all”. The greatest contribution that South Africans can make to international peace would be to show the world that the solemn agreements on which our democratic transition was based are being faithfully honored in letter and spirit by all the parties involved. Unfortunately, when the Israelis look at South Africa’s experience, they are unlikely to be convinced that our unraveling national accord is the best model to follow. This is tragic - because, in the final analysis their problems can be solved only by credible agreements that assure justice for all - just as our own mounting crisis can be resolved only by reverting to the faithful implementation of our constitutional accord and by honoring the values on which it was founded. Comment: E-mail: info@fwdeklerk.org FW De Klerk Foundation © 2021

Former public servants have revealed on Twitter the extent of Turkey’s post-coup purge by sharing “then-and-now photographs” of them in their new jobs as day laborers and blue-collar workers. Former judge Mehmet Köroğlu posted a photograph of his watermelon stand with the caption, “Have you ever seen a judge selling watermelons?” His post was quickly joined by other former public servants who added their current work with the same caption, “Have you ever seen?” Ahmet Arıcı posted a photograph of a construction site where he worked as a day laborer and said, “Have you ever seen a fighter pilot working in construction?” Yakup Sevinçhan shared a photograph of his lemon stand asking people if they had ever seen a state auditor selling lemons. The posts aimed to draw attention to the aftermath of the purge that has left thousands of families facing economic difficulties and social marginalization. Many purge victims have had to work in uninsured jobs with very little job security. There have also been cases where former public servants have died due to occupational accidents in physically demanding jobs. Following a coup attempt on July 15, 2016, the Turkish government declared a state of emergency and carried out a massive purge of state institutions, summarily dismissing more than 150,000 public servants including academics, teachers, military personnel, diplomats and police officers with emergency decree-laws subject to neither judicial nor parliamentary scrutiny. A total of 4,156 judges and prosecutors as well as 20,571 members of the armed forces, were removed from their jobs for alleged membership in or relationships with “terrorist organizations” by emergency decree-laws. Former public servants were not only fired from their jobs; they were also banned from working again in the public sector and getting a passport. The government also made it difficult for them to work formally in the private sector. Notes were put on the social security database about dismissed public servants to deter potential employers. The Justice for Victims Platform and former Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) deputy Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu released a joint report in July 2020 which said that the two-year-long state of emergency declared after the coup in Turkey caused immense suffering among public servants who were dismissed from their jobs by the government as well as their families. “The decree-law victims not only were removed from their jobs but also barred from seeking employment in the private sector and denied access to social security benefits,” said Gergerlioğlu. The dismissed public servants lost 70 percent of their average monthly income, a circumstance that reduced them to dire financial straits, according to a survey conducted for the joint report. The survey indicates that 99.1 percent of the victims are college or university graduates or holders of master’s or doctoral degrees, which means an immense loss of human resources for Turkey’s public administration. According to the victims’ family members taking part in the survey, the biggest problem they have been facing is economic hardship (97.9 percent) followed by psychological problems (88.6 percent), loss of social prestige and social exclusion (83.7 percent), the disintegration of social circles (83.1 percent), unemployment/lack of employment (80.4 percent) and lack of social security (73.2 percent), respectively. Access the full article here. Stockholm Center for Freedom © 2021

Thai government instructed authorities to block refugees from Myanmar. (Bangkok, May 12, 2021)–The Government of Thailand should protect refugees from Myanmar from being forcibly returned and establish protection mechanisms in line with international human rights law, Fortify Rights said today. On March 19, Thai Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha instructed government agencies to prevent “illegal immigration” from Myanmar, according to government meeting minutes. In line with this order, a Thai provincial official confirmed to Fortify Rights that Thai authorities this week returned to Myanmar at least 2,000 refugees fleeing violence in Myanmar’s Karen State. “The Thai government should be preparing to protect refugees rather than prevent border crossings,” said Amy Smith, Executive Director at Fortify Rights. “Thailand has made positive commitments and taken steps to establish procedures to recognize and protect refugees during the past several years. Now is the time for Thailand to put those commitments into action to protect refugees fleeing the ongoing crisis in Myanmar.” According to meeting minutes of the Thai Center for COVID-19 Situation Administration (CCSA), dated March 19, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha instructed the Ministry of Interior, CCSA, and other concerned agencies to “monitor and prevent illegal immigration” along the Thailand-Myanmar border and instructed the Immigration Bureau to “enforce strict inspection of border crossings.” The government has also deployed Royal Thai Army troops and patrol boats to “monitor illegal entry along the western borders both by land and sea,” according to the meeting minutes. The Thai Government does not recognize refugees and considers undocumented or unauthorized entry or stay in Thailand as “illegal immigration.” A Thai government official speaking on the condition of anonymity told Fortify Rights that the Ministry of Defense is responsible for coordinating the government’s response to refugees from Myanmar. Among those responsible for this coordination is the Naresuan Force of the Royal Thai Army. The Naresuan Force is a special unit designated to protect the borders of Tak and Mae Hong Son provinces by “interception, retaliation and pushing back foreign forces deemed to violate Thai sovereignty.” The Naresuan Force held more than 2,100 refugees in makeshift shelters in Mae Sariang District of Mae Hong Son Province after they crossed into Thailand last week to flee attacks in Myanmar. Less than 100 remain in Thailand as of May 11, according to a Thai provincial official. Civil society actors in Karen State told Fortify Rights that Thai authorities also forced back to Myanmar most of the 5,000 refugees who crossed into Thailand in March and April. The official also confirmed that the army continues to restrict humanitarian organizations and U.N. agencies, including the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), from accessing groups of newly arriving refugees from Myanmar, citing security and COVID-19 health concerns. “Ensuring protections for refugees is first and foremost a humanitarian issue that demands an appropriate response from the Thai authorities to prevent the loss of life,” said Amy Smith. “Public health concerns due to the COVID-19 pandemic and national security can be addressed and managed through proper screening mechanisms. Rather than restrict and sideline U.N. and humanitarian organizations who are ready to assist, Thai authorities should draw on their technical expertise and resources to facilitate a coordinated response.” According to the Thai government’s meeting minutes, the prime minister called for “effort” to be made to “prepare an area to host the influx of migrants into Thailand, quarantine facilities and field hospitals.” However, the Thai authorities have yet to announce the construction of facilities for refugees or that refugees will be provided access to quarantine or medical facilities. On May 6, Thai officials, including Mae Hong Son Governor Sithichai Jindaluang, the Commander of the Special Unit 7thInfantry Regiment, Colonel Sujin Subsin, and Permanent Secretary of Mae Hong Son Province Chanathip Semyam met with UNHCR-Thailand to discuss potential refugee influxes into Thailand and responses. At the time of writing, Thai authorities have yet to approve UNHCR operations to assist new refugees from Myanmar. UNHCR’s Key Legal Considerations on Access to Territory for Persons in Need of International Protection in the Context of the COVID-19 Response provides that “[d]enial of access to territory without safeguards to protect against refoulement cannot be justified on the grounds of any health risk.” Myanmar military attacks on civilian areas and clashes between the Myanmar military and ethnic armed groups have displaced more than 55,000 people in Kachin, Karen, and Shan states in Myanmar since February 1 , according to the latest figures from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) Myanmar. A majority of the displaced, approximately 40,000, were forcibly displaced following renewed clashes between the Myanmar military and the Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA), as well as airstrikes, “indiscriminate attacks,” and “shelling of civilian areas” by the Myanmar military, according to OCHA Myanmar. Since taking power in a military coup d’état on February 1, the Myanmar junta has continued to kill, arbitrarily arrest, and commit other crimes against political leaders, human rights defenders, peaceful protesters, and others in Myanmar. In a document seen by Fortify Rights and provided by the Myanmar junta to members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations ahead of a controversial summit to discuss Myanmar last month, the junta claimed that it detained 9,848 persons, released 4,511, and charged 5,070 between February 1 and April 15. Forcing refugees back to Myanmar violates the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits the “rejection at the frontier, interception and indirect refoulement” of individuals at risk of persecution. While Thailand has not ratified the 1951 U.N. Refugee Convention nor its 1967 Protocol, the principle of non-refoulement is part of customary international law and is therefore binding on all states. Under this principle, all countries are obligated to protect people from being returned to where they face danger or persecution, including through informal returns. The Thai government has repeatedly expressed a commitment to protect refugees, including by adopting the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration and endorsing the Global Compact on Refugees during the U.N. General Assembly in December 2018. The Thai government also affirmed a commitment to “humanitarianism and to take care of various groups of irregular migrants” during the U.N. Human Rights Committee review of Thailand’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in March 2017. On December 24, 2019, the Thai Cabinet endorsed regulations to establish a national screening mechanism to identify and potentially protect refugees. However, the mechanism has yet to be implemented and has come under criticism from human rights groups for failing to meet international standards. Thailand currently hosts more than 100,000 refugees, most of whom are protracted refugees from Myanmar living in temporary shelters along the Thailand-Myanmar border, as well as refugees from various countries living in Bangkok and surrounding provinces. All refugees in Thailand lack formal legal status and are at risk of arbitrary detention and being forcibly returned to countries where they may face persecution. “Thailand still views refugees primarily through a national security lens, but the only real threat to regional peace and security is the Myanmar junta,” said Amy Smith. “If Thailand wants to protect its own security, it should protect the people of Myanmar and work with the international community to deprive the junta of its weapons and financial resources.” Access the full article here. Fortify Rights © 2021

Israel Charny Looks Back on the Momentous Conference That Almost Wasn’t The Armenian Mirror-Spectator APRIL 20, 2021 by Alin K. Gregorian JERUSALEM — Prof. Israel Charny, a longtime champion of recognition of the Armenian Genocide, is looking back at the uphill battle he has waged in his country for the recognition of that genocide, the cost to him personally and professionally, and why he keeps on doing what he does. In a recent interview from his home, Charny, 90, spoke with enthusiasm about his new book, titled Israel’s Failed Response to the Armenian Genocide: Denial, State Deception, Truth Versus Politicization of History and his reasons for writing it. The book details the efforts by the Israeli government to thwart the first International Conference on the Holocaust and Genocide, organized by Charny, in 1982. The conference was notable for including for the first-time scholars presenting papers on the Armenian Genocide in a conference on the Holocaust. In the end, the conference went on, but not without a bruising fight from Yad Vashem, the Holocaust Remembrance Center, and Elie Wiesel, noted Holocaust survivor and human rights advocate, acting at the behest of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs led by Shimon Peres. The book presents the chain of events through cables to and from the Foreign Ministry, which tried to disrupt the conference. Charny recalled that the impetus for the book came from one of his graduate students who had been participating in his monthly seminars and had successfully dug up once-classified government communications regarding the event. The student, he said with a smile, “made a youthful discovery. I never even thought of looking for it. She dug up the cables in the archives of the Israel Foreign Ministry from that period of the conference which had been locked up as secret. It’s fun to look at them and see ‘secret,’ ‘top secret,’ ‘classified.’” She sent him the “hundreds of pages” and he “lay in bed a few nights reading these cables and oohing and ahing and discovering all sorts of angles I had not known from their point of view, the inside of their efforts to close the conference and then I hit on the smoking gun. The smoking gun was a cable from the chief consul of Israel in Turkey to the Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem about two days before the conference was scheduled to open. He [the consul] wrote, ‘Nice going on all of your tactics to close the conference down. Maybe it will even bust out completely still. But there is one thing I don’t understand. I am the chief consul here in Turkey and you’ve been claiming all along that Turkey has threatened to close off the escape route of Jews escaping Syria and Iran through Turkey, which would mean their death if the route was closed down but I don’t know anything about it. I haven’t picked up a single signal here in Turkey for any such threat,’ he said.” Seeing the exchange of all the cables between the officials in Turkey and Israel, as well as with Yad Vashem, Wiesel and others, lit a fire in Charny. “They had really gone all the way, including making up the threats to justify their behavior. And then I couldn’t do anything but pick up a pencil and start writing,” he said. But what would cause that? Again and again, he spoke about the duality of the issues which cause him great pain: his love for the state of Israel and his paramount wish for its safety and existence, while recognizing the immoral stance it had chosen to take regarding the Armenian Genocide. That same duality — or ambivalence — applies to his interaction with Wiesel, of whom he remained very fond, despite seeing a side of him which deeply disappointed him. As for the former’s actions, he explained, “I have to answer rationally about rotten, irrational behavior. Israel’s horrible policy for years has been to court favor with Turkey and maintain a relationship with her. We understand the practical reasons for it but I and many people strenuously object to the immorality of it when it comes to issues like the simple basic truth of recognizing the Armenian Genocide.” But, he realized, that was not the only reason. “Turns out there is a further inside reason. When you study the correspondence of the period,” for many Jews and Israelis, the official position of Yad Vashem is, “there really has never been anything that really qualifies as genocide to the extent of the Holocaust and any attempt to refer to other genocides in a major kind of way is an insult that degrades, belittles, reduces, the significance of the Holocaust. This irrational position is what I think lies at the heart of the matter in addition to the realpolitik position,” he added. From Psychology to Genocide Unlike many scholars involved in genocide studies, Charny is a clinical psychologist and not a historian. That academic background brings a different interpretation to history. Charny received his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Rochester in 1957. He established and directed the first group psychological practice in the Philadelphia area (1958–1973), where he was also the first Professor of Psychology at the newly founded Reconstructionist Rabbinical College in Philadelphia. He, along with Helen Fein, Robert Melson and Roger Smith, founded the International Association of Genocide Scholars in 1994, an affiliate of the Institute for the Study of Genocide. He has written several books on genocide, including the Encyclopedia of Genocide, Genocide: A Critical Bibliographic Review, and Fascism and Democracy in the Human Mind, each of which were elected “Outstanding Academic Book of the Year” by the American Library Association. He is a clinical psychologist and practicing psychotherapist, was Professor of Psychology and Family Therapy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where he was the founder of first director of the Program for Advanced Studies in Integrative Psychotherapy. In addition, he was the founding and first president of the Israel Association of Family Therapy and later a president of the International Family Therapy Association. He turned to genocide studies after a particularly awful dream soon after attaining his board certification. “I passed and was very happy about that. I went to sleep and had a dream. I woke up from the dream and I had seen the Nazis killing Jewish children in my dream and I woke up thinking how can human beings do things like that? That was the day I realized I would be studying those questions the rest of my life.” When asked what would drive various governments and populations around the world, in societies with no religious or ethnic commonality, to single out a minority for extermination with clinical precision, he replied, “I believe we human beings are universally sick with the need for too much power over others. I think the need for power in itself is a perfectly normal and healthy things. When that power extends to becoming superior to others and exploiting others, it leads to much of the ugliness in this world, including genocide. What is happening in the denials of the Armenian Genocide by Israel and Israel’s general failure to be a real leader in empathy and caring about all peoples who suffered genocide is that Israel is acting out the very kind of striving for power that led to the disaster that befell us. It’s a tough answer, isn’t it?” He further added, “I have come to believe that every one of us human beings is endowed from birth with two sets of instinctive machinery. One is to care about life, our own and others, and one is to destroy, including our own lives. Look at how many bad things people do to themselves. I believe that every group, that includes nations, has to do what every human being has to do, namely, to work out a philosophy and methodology of combining these two instincts where the instinct for living is given the winning position and the instinct for destroying is translated to the ability to use power constructively when necessary.” As examples, he cited surgeons, who need to be aggressive enough to slice through a living body, but clearly for the purpose of healing, or engineers building dams who blow up rocks and structures, for the noble purpose of making better the lives of citizens. “Societies that commit genocide are one after the other, examples of collectives that have failed the challenge in the task to become decent societies, where caring for life is stronger than the urge to destroy. America is going through a variation of it struggle these days. January 6 is a very clear example of the rottenness that awaits us,” he noted. Elie Wiesel Dilemma Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel holds a special place in the hearts of many Holocaust survivors. The Romanian-born Wiesel, who died in 2016, survived horrors beyond imagining in Auschwitz and Buchenwald. Therefore seeing Wiesel as a disruptor of a conference dedicated to the Holocaust and other genocides, is jarring. The actions of Wiesel truly hurt Charny. He repeated frequently during the interview, however, his heartfelt respect for what Wiesel had experienced and how that must have shaped him as a child. “When I think of Elie Wiesel, for me and many people it is a classic photograph of this little boy in one of those rotten, wooden beds in the concentration camps and I think of this man who survived that, something I don’t think I could have survived for one hour. I understand his drive, in subsequent years, to do everything possible to support the development of the state of Israel as the new and absolutely necessary refuge for the Jewish people,” Charny said. “That, then, combined with the personal aspect of Wiesel, which is a real weakness of character, like we all have, was boy, did he like being favored by the leaders of Israel! There was an egotistical little boy inside him that was delighted that the prime minister and foreign minister feted him. When they gave him a direct order to close the conference down in the name of the state of Israel, which he loved and honored and cared about, he had no choice, even though you and I believe that with greater maturity, he should … not have done something that was so horrible, in terms of its impact on another people,” Charny said. Instead of judging Wiesel, he chose to try to understand him. “It’s a real human story and I do believe that his basic legacy as the most prominent Holocaust survivor who periodically issued really caring statements about other people will last. A lot of Holocaust survivors couldn’t see [the suffering of other people] in this world and I understand them,” Charny noted. In one communication with Charny, Wiesel had written, “Don’t you dare use the word genocide in the plural, because that would mean there were more genocides than the Holocaust,” Charny recalled. Charny’s father was from Russia and had arrived in New York in the 1920s. “During World War II, I remember the day my father received the information that his entire family in Russia had been taken out to Babi Yar [Ukraine] and had been murdered there by the Nazis. I will never forget, the overwhelming experience from my strong daddy on learning that,” Charny said. Holocaust v. Genocide The government of Israel still has not recognized the Armenian Genocide, nor has it recognized others that have tragically happened in the 20th and 21st century, including those of the Yazidis. “In my judgment the majority of the people of Israel are very caring people. I believe the majority of the people in Israel very much recognize the Armenian Genocide and at the same time a very strong majority of people in Israel believe that there was never anything that could compare with the Holocaust. Not all of them make the mistake of … not recognizing the genocide.” He then spoke about a much more recent genocide, that of the Yazidi people in Iraq. “It is a minority that has been seriously genocidally persecuted by ISIS,” he said. “A member of the Knesset introduced a resolution for Israel to recognize the genocide of the Yazidis and express our empathy and her proposal was voted down. There’s another example of the inability as yet of the decisive mass of the Israelis and the political system to extend itself beyond the ancient ‘We suffered the most, nobody’s suffering can compare with ours.’” He also suggested that for some survivors of a genocide, it is hard to believe others suffered as they did. “I will always remember vividly a survivor of the Armenian Genocide who came over to me after I had spoken and he said to me with the full felling of a human being who had suffered terribly, ‘Professor, isn’t it true that what happened to us never happened to anyone else and was the worst event in the world?’ You know what I did? I put my arm on his arm and I said the Armenian genocide was terrible. I didn’t argue. I would never argue with a survivor. Their experience is totally understandable.” Charny still works, offering both family and individual therapy. When asked if delving into the very darkest aspects of humanity is not overwhelming, he said he is able to rise above it through his family. “I live my life going to the gym every morning, loving my wife very much, loving my children very much, having fun, making jokes, when I am not studying the rottenness of us human being,” he noted. He said he was delighted with the response to the book so far. “Pre-publication response is just growing very strongly. There have been hundreds of orders for the book before it was published based on the information about it,” he said. About three years ago, a committee in the Knesset voted to recognize the Armenian Genocide. “I had the pleasure of being one of the witnesses. There were only two objections to the recognition during the witness part of the process. One was from a very weak representative of Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the other was from a Jewish Azeri person with strong commercial ties to Azerbaijan but our position prevailed overwhelmingly in that committee. The vote was for recognition.” Again, the government intervened and the bill never reached the full Knesset. “If it had reached the deliberation stage, it would have passed. The majority would have passed,” Charny said. Will Israel ever change course regarding the recognizing of the Armenian Genocide? “Would Israel ever get liberated enough to overcome the government policy about Turkey and Azerbaijan and you know what I wish and what I am working for and what this book stands for but I can’t give you a final prediction in the world of corruption of policies.” Charny stressed his sadness about the Karabakh war of 2020. “I am in grief along with the Armenian people at the loss in Nagorno Karabakh. I’ve seen what 5000 deaths feel collectively after a war. The sadness, the pain, goes on for years and years and years. Five thousand in a small population. My god!” And, he added, “I feel a deep, deep shame and anger in Israel’s participation in that war, as the major supplier of arms to Azerbaijan. We have succeeded in creating some demonstrations about Israel’s arms policies, some degree of demonstrations regarding the policy with Azerbaijan. It is almost like talking about selling arms to Nazi Germany during the Holocaust. Many, many of us are upset.” Israel’s Failed Response to the Armenian Genocide: Denial, State Deception, Truth versus Politicization of History is currently available on Academic Studies Press. Copyright 2021 The Armenian Mirror-Spectator View the webinar on Israel Charny's book at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqwy5plTfOk&t=1s

For Immediate Release Washington, D.C. – The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) today condemned the Iranian government’s alarming escalation of persecution targeting Baha’is in Iran. In the past month, Iran’s government has raided Baha’i homes across the country and jailed more than 20 community members, including a woman recovering from chemotherapy. Iranian authorities also prevented Baha’is from burying deceased community members in a designated section of Khaveran cemetery until receiving international pressure, and eventually relented. “Iran’s latest persecution of the Baha’i community demonstrates the government’s unwillingness to uphold international laws pertaining to freedom of religion or belief,” said USCIRF Chair Anurima Bhargava. “We urge the Biden administration to raise this spate of raids and arrests in ongoing bilateral discussions.” Iran’s government has systematically persecuted the Baha’i community for decades. Baha’is are restricted from pursuing education in Iran and security forces regularly close down Baha’i businesses, raid Baha’i homes, and conduct mass arrests of Baha’is. In December 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.Res. 823, a bipartisan bill that cited USCIRF’s reporting and condemned religious freedom violations against Baha’is in Iran. “The United States must continue to hold Iran accountable for these incessant and outrageous attacks,” said USCIRF Commissioner Gary Bauer. “Targeted sanctions on high level officials responsible for egregious religious freedom violations send a strong message that those acting against Baha’is in Iran will not escape accountability.” In its 2021 Annual Report, USCIRF recommended Iran for designation as a “country of particular concern,” or CPC, under the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) for engaging in or tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom. In August 2020, USCIRF released a factsheet on Iranian officials sanctioned for religious freedom violations. In December 2020, the State Department redesignated Iran as a CPC. ### The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) is an independent, bipartisan federal government entity established by the U.S. Congress to monitor, analyze, and report on religious freedom abroad. USCIRF makes foreign policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State, and Congress intended to deter religious persecution and promote freedom of religion and belief. To interview a Commissioner, please contact USCIRF at media@USCIRF.gov. USCIRF © 2021

Image Source Link to Film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut8_FdLB9iI&feature=youtu.be&ab_channel=U%26IGlobal "#Genocide, the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group. During World War Two, the world saw one of the most horrific genocidal acts, the #Holocaust. The catastrophe murdered over 6 million European Jews, and millions of other people deemed ‘undesirable’ by the Nazi state. Never again were the words uttered after this atrocity. Every year, we remember on Holocaust Memorial Day. But it did happen again. This year, for Holocaust Memorial Day, we aim to tell the stories of the many #atrocities that have taken place within living memory since The Holocaust. Speaking with; Harry Spiro, Holocaust Survivor, Naila Kira, survivor of the 1994 Genocide in #Rwanda against the Tutsi, Mujo Delic and Nedzad Avdic, both survivors from the horrors of #Srebrenica, John U. Swarray, survivor of the crimes against humanity in #SierraLeone, and Doobey (Debay) Mahamud, survivor of the Genocide in #Darfur. Several organisations helped to make this #documentary#film possible. Please see their websites and donate to their work. 1) Holocaust- Holocaust Educational Trust - https://www.het.org.uk/ 2) Rwanda- Ishami Foundation - https://ishamifoundation.org/ Survivors Fund (SURF) and IBUKA for providing footage. 3) Bosnia- Remembering Srebrenica - https://www.srebrenica.org.uk/ 4) Darfur- Waging Peace - https://wagingpeace.info/ 5) Sierra Leone- Forum For People With Disability Sierra Leone - https://www.facebook.com/forumforpeop If you found the contents of this film upsetting or distressing, please reach out to a mental health organisation for professional support: Mind- https://www.mind.org.uk/ DISCLAIMER. All video footage has been used under fair use and is not monetised. No infringement intended. All picture & footage sources are listed below: Darfur 1)Waging Peace. Darfur Drawings. 2021. Available at: https://bit.ly/2Ybe52g 2) Witting, Kailey. The Best Documentary Ever- Genocide in Darfur. YouTube. 2 November, 2017. https://bit.ly/3a3NzgR Bosnia 3) Dobbs, Michael. Srebrenica Excutions – Trnovo. YouTube. 17 February 2012. https://bit.ly/3pgiQmO 4) The Global Link. #SrebrenicaGenocide July 1995 - Heartbreaking video of Ramo Osmanovic forced by Serb soldiers to c. YouTube. 12 July 2020. https://bit.ly/2YcAzjc 5) BBC Newsnight. The Butcher of Bosnia – BBC Newsnight. YouTube. 16 November 2017. https://bit.ly/3qLFF2f Rwanda 1) Survivorsfund. The Rwanda Genocide- A Film by IBUKA (part 1). Youtube. 7 June 2011. https://bit.ly/3qMVTrN 2) Survivorsfund. The Rwanda Genocide- A Film by IBUKA (part 2). Youtube. 7 June 2011. https://bit.ly/2MoKNKY Holocaust 1) United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The Path to Nazi Genocide. YouTube. 13 Jan 2014. https://bit.ly/2Mi3dgb 2) War Archives. Holocaust Buchenwald Concentration Camp Uncovered (1945) | British Pathé. YouTube. 14 March 2012. https://bit.ly/3pkUvg0 3) United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Death Marches: Photographs. Available at: https://bit.ly/39YfVJb 4) Imperial War Museum. Badge, star of David. Buchnwald concentration camp. Death March Art. Ghetto, Treblinka and Survivors Pictures. 2021. Available at: https://bit.ly/39cJW8O 5) AP Archives. Concentration Camps. YouTube. 28 July 2015. https://bit.ly/3oeBdaG Sierra Leone 1) Kimhalia Lewis. Sierra Leone Civil War 1991 - 2002 War For Profit Documentary. YouTube. 12 May 2015. https://bit.ly/3piYJEI 2) Ifreeyourmind. Africas Civil Wars Sierra Leone Documentary. YouTube. 12 December 2013. https://bit.ly/3iKKGp8 3) Journeyman Pictures. The Rebels Fighting For Sierra Leone (1998). YouTube. 21 September 2018. https://bit.ly/3iKKGp8 4) Brand Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone Tourism: Nature. YouTube. 8 June 2012. https://bit.ly/3c3mUmR Nuremberg 1) British Pathe. The Nuremberg Trials (1945). YouTube. 13 April 2014. https://bit.ly/368hmUk War in Libya 1) Libyan War Video. More Battle Footage From Libyan Civil War. YouTube. 25 June 2011. https://bit.ly/3cdtsQ1 Mediterranean Crossing 1) Doctors Without Borders/ MSF-USA. The Refugee Journey Across the Mediterranean. YouTube. 14 October 2015. https://bit.ly/2NxlaIl Quotes Sources 1) Dostoyevsky, F. (2009). The Karamazov Brothers. Translated By Constance Garnett. Wandsworth, Hertfodshire. 2) Levi, P. (1947). If This Is A Man. Translated By Stuart Woolf. Abacus, Great Britain. 3) Rucyahana, J. (2007). The Bishop Of Rwanda: Finding Forgiveness Amidst A Pile Of Bones. Thomas Nelson, USA. 4) Santayana, G. (2011). The Life Of Reason. Introduction and Reason In Common Sense. The MIT Press, Massachusetts. 5) Wiesel, E. (1993). Speech at Dedication Ceremonies for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum [Online]. USHMM. Available at: https://www.ushmm.org/information/abo.... A huge thank you to Harley Baptiste for editing this film. An equally huge thank you to Roxy Orloff who wrote up each one of these incredible stories." A film by U&I Global

STATEMENT REGARDING PROFESSOR WILLIAM SCHABAS’ ROLE IN THE DEFENSE OF MYANMAR AGAINST THE CHARGE OF GENOCIDE We, the undersigned, who are present or past presidents of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), all hold Professor William Schabas in very high regard as a scholar and person. We are indebted to him for his service as IAGS president from 2009 to 2011. He has done pioneering work interpreting the international law related to genocide. He has also played important active roles in legal cases, truth commissions, and other practical efforts to support human rights. We particularly respect his long-time work toward an international convention on crimes against humanity. It is precisely our esteem for Prof. Schabas as a scholar that causes us such great concern regarding his decision to join Myanmar’s defense team as it attempts to evade responsibility for what a United Nations investigation has demonstrated to be a genocidal campaign against the Rohingya minority. It seems from his writings and statements, that Prof. Schabas’ embrace of “crimes against humanity” in place of “genocide” is a pragmatic preference based on the fact that prosecutions of crimes against humanity do not require proof of “intent.” However, it is difficult to see how that preference could justify his decision to join the Myanmar defense team to make such a legal point. The effect of any defense of Myanmar is to further Myanmar’s impunity for killing, sexualized violence, displacement, and destruction of the Rohingya people. A professional ethical position would not endanger human lives to further a legal agenda. This is all the more of concern because Prof. Schabas, as a prominent scholar, has a multitude of avenues for advancing his views and having them taken seriously. He could write further scholarly works on the issue. He could advocate for the convention he seeks, Lemkin-style, with lawmakers across the world. Indeed, he could even have presented his views to the International Court of Justice in relation to the Myanmar/Rohingya case as an outside expert without taking a specific side in the case. Given his stature and past roles in international legal processes, his views would surely be taken seriously. But Prof. Schabas has chosen to join the efforts of the Myanmar government to deny its systematic violence. He has, in fact, allowed his own good name to provide legitimacy to a denialist agenda that even refuses to use the name, “Rohingya,” refusing to acknowledge the Rohingya as a protected ethnic group. We call on Prof. Schabas to sever his ties to the Myanmar government and to pursue his goals regarding international law in a manner that does not contribute to further crimes against humanity, including genocide, against the Rohingya people. Signed: Israel Charny, Co-Founder of IAGS and President, 2005-07 Greg Stanton, IAGS President, 2007-09 Daniel Feierstein, IAGS President, 2013-15 Andrew Woolford, IAGS President, 2015-17 Henry Theriault, IAGS President, 2017-Present

Les auditions sur le Xinjiang, annulées par une cyberattaque le 4 mai, reprennent aujourd’hui. Le Parlement belge va s’interroger sur un éventuel génocide des Ouïghours. Cela nous concerne-t-il vraiment ? Oui, car la Belgique a ratifié la Convention sur le génocide, qui oblige les Etats parties à prendre des mesures pour prévenir un génocide. UN DOSSIER DE VÉRONIQUE KIESEL Publié par Le Soir Mardi 18 mai 2021. Manifestation dénonçant un génocide contre les Ouïghours, le 19 février dernier à Washington. (Reuters) Le Parlement belge va reprendre ce mardi les auditions de témoins et d’experts relatives à la répression de la minorité ouïghoure au Xinjiang, annulées le 4 mai dernier en raison d’une cyberattaque qui avait paralysé ses travaux. Les députés devront ensuite adopter – ou pas – les différentes résolutions proposées, dont celle qui leur demande « de reconnaître le crime de génocide perpétré par le gouvernement de la République populaire de Chine contre les Ouïghours ». Mais pourquoi diable nos élus se mêlent-ils de ce dossier difficile qui fâche Pékin au plus haut point ? Quel poids peuvent-ils avoir sur des événements se déroulant à plus de 6.000 kilomètres ? Bref, que peut faire le Parlement d’un si petit pays face à l’immensité de la puissance chinoise ? Tout simplement jouer son rôle. La Belgique est en effet, aux côtés de la Chine, un des 152 Etats qui ont ratifié la Convention pour la prévention et la répression du génocide. Comme les autres Etats parties, la Belgique s’est donc engagée à « prévenir et punir » ce « crime du droit des gens ». Et à prendre « conformément à leurs constitutions respectives, les mesures législatives nécessaires pour assurer l’application des dispositions de la présente Convention ». La Chine affirme qu’aucun génocide n’est en cours au Xinjiang, et qu’y règnent au contraire paix et sécurité, couronnées par un développement économique record. Mais elle empêche toute visite indépendante non téléguidée sur le terrain, et tente de faire taire les témoins de la politique qu’elle y développe. Les rescapés des camps qui livrent leurs témoignages douloureux sont accusés de manipulations et de mensonges. Une campagne bien orchestrée vise à décrédibiliser les experts occidentaux qui décodent les documents officiels chinois détaillant la politique en cours au Xinjiang. Et Pékin a même imposé des sanctions contre des chercheurs actifs sur la Chine et des parlementaires démocratiquement élus de plusieurs pays européens, comme s’ils étaient des criminels. Les auditions qui auront lieu donneront au contraire la parole à des Ouïghours et à des experts universitaires. On ignore toujours la source de la cyberattaque du 4 mai, et si le fait qu’elle a eu lieu juste avant ces auditions n’était qu’une coïncidence. Mais en les reprogrammant, le Parlement belge prouve calmement qu’il entend remplir sa mission, sans se laisser intimider par une éventuelle menace. La relative inaction des élus fédéraux face à la pandémie de covid-19 a suscité bien des critiques. Mais en garantissant le droit de s’exprimer sur un thème aussi délicat, ils rappellent tout l’intérêt et la force de leur rôle, de leur mission : se renseigner, écouter, débattre, voter des textes. En toute liberté. 1. Qu’est-ce qui caractérise un génocide ? La Convention pour la prévention et la répression du crime de génocide, a été élaborée au lendemain de la Seconde Guerre mondiale et de l’Holocauste nazi, dans l’esprit du « plus jamais ça ». Elle a été adoptée en 1948, un jour avant la Déclaration des droits de l’homme, comme un des textes fondateurs de l’ONU, pour interdire qu’un Etat élimine une partie de la population qui est sous sa juridiction. Selon l’article II de cette Convention (qui a été notamment ratifiée par la Chine), « le génocide s’entend de l’un quelconque des actes ci-après, commis dans l’intention de détruire, en tout ou en partie, un groupe national, ethnique, racial ou religieux, comme tel : a) Meurtre de membres du groupe ; b) Atteinte grave à l’intégrité physique ou mentale de membres du groupe ; c) Soumission intentionnelle du groupe à des conditions d’existence devant entraîner sa destruction physique totale ou partielle ; d) Mesures visant à entraver les naissances au sein du groupe ; e) Transfert forcé d’enfants du groupe à un autre groupe. Et l’article III affirme que « seront punis les actes suivants : a) Le génocide ; b) L’entente en vue de commettre le génocide ; c) L’incitation directe et publique à commettre le génocide ; d) La tentative de génocide ; e) La complicité dans le génocide ». 2. Ce qui se passe au Xinjiang répond-il à ces critères ? Si Amnesty International (AI) dénonce les violations des droits des Ouïghours, elle ne parle pas d’un génocide. « Pour conserver sa neutralité politique, AI n’affirme ni n’infirme jamais l’existence d’un génocide : nous préférons apporter des éléments factuels », décode Philippe Givron, d’AI Belgique francophone. Human Rights Watch, autre acteur majeur, a, en sortant un nouveau rapport sur le Xinjiang, précisé ne pas avoir jusqu’ici « documenté l’existence d’intentions génocidaires. Toutefois, rien n’exclut un tel constat ». Le 8 mars dernier, une cinquantaine d’experts – juristes, sinologues, experts des Ouïghours ou des génocides – ont de leur côté publié The Uyghur Genocide : An Examination of China’s Breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. « Nous avons répondu à la question posée par le “New Lines Institute” (un centre de recherche indépendant basé à Washington actif sur les questions de politique étrangère) : y a-t-il un génocide en cours ? », détaille le professeur John Packer, directeur du Centre de recherche et d’enseignement sur les droits de la personne à l’université d’Ottawa, qui a encadré ce travail. « Et avons tous conclu qu’il y a suffisamment de preuves publiques pour affirmer qu’il y a bien un génocide en cours. » « Le premier informateur est l’Etat chinois lui-même », confirme Vanessa Frangville, professeure en études chinoises à l’ULB. « Textes et photos partagés sur des blogs, sites ou réseaux sociaux d’instances officielles, articles de presse, communiqués et documents internes émis par des organes étatiques, appels d’offres et annonces d’emplois publics, images satellites qui révèlent une multiplication des structures de type carcéral, etc. » Un exemple : en août 2017, Maisumujiang Maimuer, responsable chinois des Affaires religieuses, avait, à propos des Ouïghours, publié cet appel sur Weibo : « Il faut briser leur lignage, casser leurs racines, leurs connexions, leurs origines. Complètement arracher les racines de ces gens aux deux visages, les déterrer et jurer de les combattre jusqu’à la fin. » 3. Y a-t-il eu « meurtre » et « atteinte grave à l’intégrité physique ou mentale » des Ouïghours ? « Il y a déjà eu de nombreux morts au Xinjiang : d’éminents dirigeants ouïghours ont été condamnés à mort ou, surtout dans le cas des aînés, à de très longues peines d’emprisonnement », précise le professeur Packer. « Mais il faut avoir à l’esprit que tous les génocides sont différents : il n’y a pas nécessairement de massacres de masse. En ce qui concerne les Rohingyas, on parle d’un “génocide à combustion lente”, qui dure depuis des décennies, avec des mesures qui touchent une génération après l’autre, de façon planifiée. Et mettre une personne dans une situation telle qu’elle ne pourra pas y survivre, c’est aussi un meurtre. Enfermer des jeunes hommes dans une prison où les conditions de vie – alimentation, hygiène – sont déplorables, sans accès aux soins de santé, c’est créer les conditions pour qu’ils meurent. » De très nombreux Ouïghours ont, selon le rapport The Uyghur Genocide, « subi des lésions corporelles et mentales graves à cause de la torture systématique et des traitements cruels, y compris le viol, les agressions sexuelles, l’exploitation et l’humiliation publique, aux mains des responsables de camps, et des cadres hans (l’ethnie dominante en Chine, NDLR) affectés aux foyers ouïghours dans le cadre de programmes imposés par le gouvernement. Les camps d’internement contiennent des “salles d’interrogatoire”, où les détenus sont soumis à des méthodes de torture incessantes et brutales : coups de tube de métal, chocs électriques, coups de fouet. L’internement de masse et les programmes gouvernementaux connexes sont conçus pour endoctriner et “laver” le cerveau, ce qui pousse les Ouïghours à se suicider ou à tenter de le faire, en raison des formes extrêmes de torture physique et psychologique quotidienne dans les camps, y compris des simulations d’exécution, des séances d’“autocritique” en public et l’isolement cellulaire ». 4. Les Ouïghours ont-ils été soumis « à des conditions devant entraîner leur destruction physique » ? Les naissances ont-elles été entravées ? Toujours selon le rapport, « les autorités ciblent systématiquement les Ouïghours en âge de procréer, les chefs de famille et les leaders communautaires pour les détenir dans des conditions invivables, imposent des mesures de prévention des naissances aux Ouïghoures, séparent les enfants ouïghours de leurs parents, et transfèrent les Ouïghours de façon massive dans des installations de travail forcé d’une manière qui correspond à l’internement de masse. En somme, la Chine inflige délibérément des conditions collectives calculées pour mettre fin à la survie des Ouïghours en tant que groupe ». « Dans les camps », explique John Packer, « les femmes sont soumises à des insertions forcées de dispositifs intra-utérins, à des avortements, obligées de prendre des traitements qui interrompent leurs cycles menstruels. Et les hommes jeunes sont ciblés pour l’internement, privant la population ouïghoure de la possibilité de se reproduire. Les taux de croissance de la population dans les régions à concentration ouïghoure sont de plus en plus proches de zéro. » 5. Y a-t-il eu des transferts forcés d’enfants à un autre groupe ? « En 2017, en vertu de la nouvelle politique du gouvernement, la Chine a commencé à construire un vaste réseau d’énormes pensionnats et orphelinats hautement sécurisés et dirigés par l’Etat afin d’y confiner les enfants ouïghours, y compris les nourrissons, à temps plein (…) qui, souvent, perdent leurs deux parents à cause de l’internement ou du travail forcé. Ils y sont élevés dans des environnements chinois selon les méthodes d’éducation des enfants de la population han », conclut le rapport. 6. Quelles sont les justifications avancées par le gouvernement chinois, qui nie tout génocide ? Le pouvoir chinois affirme qu’il agit dans le cadre d’une campagne antiterroriste. Face à la volonté de Pékin de gommer les particularités religieuses et culturelles des Ouïghours pour en faire des Chinois comme les autres, face aux discriminations croissantes, des activistes ouïghours ont en effet commencé, au début des années 90, à mener des actions violentes qui ont fait au total plusieurs centaines de victimes. « Un cycle qui a vu l’Etat s’opposer à des actes de violence locaux a commencé en 1990 avec l’incident Baren, durant lequel un groupe de Ouïghours du Sud a résisté à l’imposition de restrictions religieuses dans la préfecture de Kashgar », explique Joanne Smith Finley, maître de conférences en études chinoises à la Newcastle University. « En réaction, l’Etat chinois a déployé une force disproportionnée, tuant près de 1.600 Ouïghours avec des troupes antiémeutes, des tanks et des avions de chasse. Cet événement a, des années plus tard, été qualifié d’attaque terroriste lorsque la Chine a décidé d’adopter les discours américains post-2001 centré sur la Guerre globale contre la terreur. » D’autres événements ont suivi : attentats à la bombe, raids des forces chinoises, répression de manifestations… « En 2014, huit Ouïghours se sont attaqués à des civils han dans la gare de Kunming, localité du centre de la Chine : un acte qui peut légitimement être qualifié de terroriste », poursuit Joanne Smith Finley « Il a conduit le président Xi Jinping à annoncer publiquement une “Guerre populaire contre la terreur”. A chaque étape, les autorités chinoises paraissent avoir très fortement surréagi à la perception d’une menace ouïghoure. Jusqu’à arriver au point où, en 2014, tout ce groupe soit considéré comme dangereux. » « Un gouvernement a évidemment le droit de lutter contre le terrorisme », précise John Packer. « Mais s’agit-il de mesures discriminatoires ? Ciblent-elles précisément les personnes suspectées de terrorisme ? Si ces mesures sont prises contre la population en général, est-ce vraiment dans le but de lutter contre le terrorisme ? » La lutte contre le terrorisme ne permet pas tout : les défenseurs des droits humains avaient ainsi multiplié les rapports pour dénoncer les abus de la « guerre contre la terreur » menée par l’administration de George W.Bush après les attentats du 11 septembre 2001, et notamment les tortures sur la base de Bagram en Afghanistan ou l’enfermement sans inculpation de suspects à Guantánamo. Et ces organisations de défense des droits humains auraient aussi protesté si, après les attentats de Paris et de Bruxelles, toute la population de culture musulmane de ces deux pays avait été enfermée pour être « rééduquée »… Le gouvernement chinois explique aussi qu’il a créé des « centres de formation » pour lutter contre le chômage. « Pékin prétend offrir une “formation professionnelle” et une “déradicalisation”, mais cette rhétorique ne peut occulter la sinistre réalité de crimes contre l’humanité. Les autorités chinoises persécutent les musulmans turciques de manière systématique, qu’il s’agisse de leur vie, de leur religion, ou de leur culture », estime Sophie Richardson, directrice Chine à Human Rights Watch. 7. Est-ce l’ONU qui a le pouvoir de déterminer s’il y a un génocide ? « De nombreux pays affirment que c’est à l’ONU de se prononcer : c’est une fausse excuse. Ce n’est pas à l’ONU, qui n’est pas une puissance souveraine mais un organisme interétatique, de décider si un génocide est en cours. Ni à son secrétaire général, qui est au service des Etats et dépend d’eux pour le renouvellement de son mandat », s’insurge John Packer. « L’ONU n’a pas ce pouvoir, d’autant que le pays mis en cause, la Chine, est un des membres les plus puissants du Conseil de sécurité, et qu’elle dispose d’un droit de veto. » Et la Cour internationale de justice ? En novembre 2018, la Gambie, soutenue par les 57 Etats membres de l’Organisation de la coopération islamique (OCI), avait certes intenté une action en justice devant la plus haute cour de l’ONU, qui statue normalement sur les différends entre Etats, accusant officiellement le Myanmar de génocide contre les musulmans rohingyas. Une action de ce type contre la Chine est-elle envisageable ? Non, car la République populaire de Chine a imposé une réserve lorsqu’elle a ratifié la Convention sur le génocide, indiquant qu’elle « ne se considère par liée par l’article IX » de ladite Convention. Cet article indique que « les différends entre les Parties relatifs à l’interprétation, l’application ou l’exécution de la présente Convention, y compris ceux relatifs à la responsabilité d’un Etat en matière de génocide (…) seront soumis à la Cour internationale de justice, à la requête d’une partie au différend ». La Cour pénale internationale alors ? La Chine n’étant pas partie au Statut de Rome qui a créé la CPI, aucune action n’est envisageable de ce côté-là. « Vu le poids diplomatique de la Chine », reprend John Packer, « il n’y a par ailleurs pratiquement aucune chance que soit un jour créé un tribunal international pour juger les crimes commis contre les Ouïghours. Il y a théoriquement des possibilités d’agir via la compétence universelle, mais il faudrait d’abord arrêter un haut responsable chinois, et cela, ce n’est pas gagné… » Car la question de puissance est essentielle : si les Etats membres de l’Organisation de la coopération islamique ont, à propos des Rohingyas, haussé le ton face à la Birmanie, on ne les a pas entendus sur la politique menée par la Chine contre les Ouïghours, eux aussi musulmans… Jusqu’ici, seul le gouvernement américain a d’ailleurs osé dénoncer un génocide des Ouïghours : Mike Pompeo, secrétaire d’Etat de Donald Trump, l’a fait au dernier jour de son mandat. Et son successeur, Antony Blinken, a lui aussi affirmé fin janvier qu’un génocide était commis. 8. Quelle est la responsabilité des Etats parties à la Convention ? Ils doivent d’abord ne pas commettre de génocide, mais ont aussi l’obligation de prendre des mesures concrètes pour prévenir un génocide, et pour punir ceux qui en commettent un, sous peine d’en devenir complices. « La Cour internationale de justice a, en janvier 2020 à propos de la Birmanie, indiqué que l’obligation de prévenir un génocide commence dès qu’un Etat constate qu’il y a un risque de génocide », décode John Packer. « Cette étape est, selon nous, largement dépassée. Certains analystes estiment qu’il faut encore attendre : attendre quoi ? Qu’il y ait des massacres de masse ? Pour alors prendre conscience du fait qu’il y a un risque de génocide ? C’est insensé et contraire à la Convention. » 9. Mais comment agir face à la Chine ? « Puisque la Convention les y oblige, les Etats parties devraient agir ensemble, avec des “moyens susceptibles d’avoir un effet dissuasif” sur la Chine, pour l’inciter, sans recours à la force contraire à la Charte des Nations unies, à changer sa conduite », précise John Packer. « Ces Etats ne peuvent plus continuer le “business as usual” : ils devraient donc éviter des relations commerciales liées à cette situation spécifique (en n’achetant par exemple plus de coton du Xinjiang ou des textiles risquant d’être produits par le travail forcé des Ouïghours). Ou en suspendant d’autres types de relations, comme une participation aux Jeux olympiques d’hiver qui auront lieu en Chine en 2022. Dans le droit international relatif à la responsabilité de l’Etat, un Etat peut prendre des “contre-mesures” qui doivent être proportionnelles, conformes à la Charte des Nations unies et, de préférence, ciblées pour être efficaces. Il est même permis de prendre des contre-mesures qui constitueraient autrement une violation (comme la suspension d’un accord commercial) si ces mesures répondent à l’objectif et aux critères spécifiques susmentionnés. » « Les Etats, les entités multilatérales, le secteur privé et la société civile doivent agir de toute urgence avant qu’il ne soit trop tard », ajoute Omer Kanat, directeur exécutif du Uyghur Human Rights Project. « Des Etats doivent approuver des législations qui conditionnent le commerce au respect des droits des travailleurs. Les entreprises doivent arrêter de faire du profit grâce à des chaînes d’approvisionnement basées sur le travail forcé des Ouïghours. Les universités doivent réfléchir à deux fois avant de conclure des contrats de coopération alors que des centaines d’intellectuels ont disparu ou sont morts en détention. » © Rossel & Cie - 2021

More than 300 Banyamulenge have resettled in Maine after fleeing the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Published by Portland Press Herald on May 14, 2021. Vincent Sematungo chants while marching along Park Avenue in Portland on Friday. (Gregory Rec/Staff Photographer) About 100 people took to the streets of Portland Friday in a protest march calling attention to the plight of the Banyamulenge people, a minority tribe in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. More than 300 Banyamulenge have resettled in Maine to escape “a silent genocide little noticed by the outside world,” according to a statement from the Mahoro Peace Association that helped organize the peaceful protest. “They live in sorrow and dread because of the ongoing genocide against their relatives back home,” the association said. Chanting “Take Action” and carrying signs saying “Stop Killing Us,” the protesters left Monument Square around 11:30 a.m. and marched down Elm Street, Park Avenue, Forest Avenue, Congress Street and back to the square. They also delivered letters seeking help to the offices of Sen. Susan Collins and Rep. Chellie Pingree. Militia groups and others in the central African country have targeted the Banyamulenge as part of a long-running territorial dispute, according to Genocide Watch, an international group that has warned about the potential for genocide amid the escalating conflict. The organizers of the protest Friday said the groups have wiped out villages, attacked women and children and stolen livestock, which has led to starvation and death. “The Banyamulenge are being killed because of who they are, not because of anything they have done,” the association said. “We have a moral obligation as citizens of the world to stand with this minority group and say never again to genocide. The situation is dire, and the time to act is now.” The protesters hoped to raise awareness and enlist support from Collins and Pingree in demanding immediate action from the Congolese government and the international community to stop the violence and uprooting of the Banyamulenge people. Collins, a Republican, plans to meet with protest leaders next week, as she did last year, spokesman Christopher Knight said. Back then, she sent a letter to State Department leaders urging them to “advocate for the protection of the Banyamulenge ethnic minority in the DRC and make every possible effort to end their persecution and prevent a genocide,” Knight said. “Senator Collins will continue to support efforts to halt the ongoing violence in the region, bring the perpetrators to justice, and provide humanitarian assistance for the Banyamulenge and other groups in the region.” Pingree, a Democrat, posted photos and videos of Friday’s protest on her social media sites, “so that no one can say that they didn’t know about this genocide,” spokeswoman Victoria Bonney said. She also shared a link to an April 9 statement by the international diplomatic community condemning “the violence and murders committed by armed groups in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, particularly the recent wave of atrocities by the Allied Democratic Forces in North Kivu and Ituri.” © 2021 | All Rights Reserved | Press Herald