Over the weekend, President Trump directed his administration to “develop a comprehensive plan to defeat ISIS.” That memorandum follows a clear focus on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria in the White House’s foreign policy statements, as well as comments by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson clarifying that the defeat of radical Islam and ISIS will be a primary mission objective of the State Department under his watch. In line with the positive whole-of-government approach adopted by the administration, it is imperative that thought be given to the fate of ISIS fighters who will inevitably be captured in the upcoming actions in Iraq and Syria and how the handling of them may either advance or negate efforts to defeat ISIS. Once detained, there is very good reason to provide for swift, yet fair, justice for ISIS fighters. In recent years, international criminal justice has often been packaged by the U.S. government as an equal among other pillars of transitional justice, such as truth seeking, reparations and legal reform. In post-conflict settings this makes sense; however, in the context of ongoing kinetic action, criminal justice should be de-linked from those transitional justice structures and supported as a non-kinetic operational priority of the mission to defeat ISIS. Of course, many ISIS fighters will die in combat, but a substantial number will not. If held in prolonged detention without trial or convicted in fast-tracked show trials charged only with material support to ISIS, these fighters will continue to find support in a vulnerable global community of at-risk youth. These young people remain susceptible to a narrative that ISIS is the protector of a holy caliphate, whose members are persecuted at home and abroad simply for being members of a devout religious group. By feeding this narrative, future actions could inadvertently promote the continued recruitment of individuals willing to travel to Syria and Iraq, as well as those answering ISIS’s calls for violence at home. Demonstrating the specific criminality of individuals in ISIS through fair and open trials, rather than simply trying them for material support to the group, provides a powerful counter message and contributes to their delegitimization. These individuals are criminals, common and habitual. They are murderers, rapists, slavers, thieves and drug dealers. While ISIS has been happy to demonstrate some of its criminality through public executions and physical abuse, its members are much less vocal about their role as serial rapists, human traffickers and drug traffickers — allegedly producing and selling Captagon, an amphetamine popular in the region. Fair trials for specific crimes will provide an additional tool to fight back against the group’s social media campaign with facts, proven in courts of law and open for the world to see — at least for those not yet so far down the path to radicalism that facts no longer matter. Bringing these individuals to justice wherever they may be found for drug trafficking and other lucrative criminality also contributes to another administration priority: the need to cut off funding for terrorist groups. And U.S. support for the collection and preservation of evidence of ISIS crimes and the chains of command within ISIS today will also serve a longer-term purpose: Many ISIS members will seek to avoid detention or death on the battlefield by leaving the organization. An increase in ISIS fighters leaving Syria and Iraq has already been noted in the last several months — those numbers will surely increase once an enhanced US engagement is underway. Over time, many of these former fighters will resurface elsewhere in Syria, Iraq and other countries, particularly in Europe. It is imperative that evidence is collected and preserved to criminal law standards today in order to ensure the fair and just prosecution of these individuals once they are identified, hopefully before they engage in further terrorist activities. This will be particularly important for mid-level commanders who are less likely to appear in ISIS propaganda videos but who are in positions of significant authority and hold responsibility for numerous crimes. Not only does securing evidence of criminal activity now allow for the proper prosecution of these individuals abroad, it also ensures support for attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions’s stated top priority at the Department of Justice: protecting the American people from terrorism. By supporting the collection of evidence on suspected ISIS fighters now before it is destroyed or discarded, the U.S. can ensure that material identifying ISIS fighters is preserved for future vetting purposes, thereby increasing the likelihood that a potential terrorist is stopped before entry into the U.S. or, in the event they make it to our borders, that sufficient material is available to effectively prosecute these individuals. Whether the administration chooses to try such individuals in U.S. federal court or in military tribunals, an issue reportedly being discussed by the administration, evidence collected for criminal justice purposes in Syria and Iraq can only strengthen these prosecutions, and indeed, where relevant, contribute to defense of an innocent individual. Irrespective of where these individuals are ultimately tried, the key to ensuring that justice is done and that those responsible are held accountable is the availability of reliable evidence. Given the long-term benefit of collecting evidence now, and the devastating impact of having murderers, rapists and drug traffickers go free if evidence is destroyed or simply allowed to disappear, it seems clear that the U.S. should consider providing support to those Iraqis and Syrians in the region who are already collecting and preserving such evidence. This type of support is currently being discussed in Congress and is detailed in Rep. Chris Smith’s Iraq and Syria Genocide Emergency Relief and Accountability Act (H.R. 390). In addition, the administration should consider supporting the fair prosecution of ISIS fighters in Iraq, thereby keeping justice local, where it is best served, while protecting U.S. interests by ensuring these individuals are not allowed entry into the United States. With limited support, Iraqi courts could try these fighters in an fair and efficient manner under Iraqi law for the specific crimes they have committed, utilizing material collected over the past years by regional lawyers in anticipation of this moment. Conversely, delaying justice will provide additional ammunition for ISIS’s rallying call of religious persecution — one that many around the world may still answer. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 The Hill

A refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, near the Burmese border. Over 200 Rohingya villagers who fled Myanmar to Bangladesh gave harrowing testimony to United Nations investigators about the treatment they received. Credit Allison Joyce/Getty Images GENEVA — Members of Myanmar’s army and police have slaughtered hundreds of men, women and children, gang-raped women and girls, and forced as many as 90,000 Rohingya Muslims from their homes, according to a United Nations report released on Friday. The report, the world body’s first official account of a four-month government crackdown on ethnic Rohingya in Myanmar, said the actions of members of the army and the police “very likely” amounted to crimes against humanity. “The gravity and scale of these allegations begs the robust reaction of the international community,” said Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, whose office released the 50-page report. Mr. al-Hussein demanded that the government halt the security forces’ counterinsurgency operations in Rakhine, a state on the western coast, which began in October, and he said he delivered that message to Myanmar’s leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, by telephone on Friday. “I impressed on her that she is an individual of high moral standing in the international community and she must use that and every means at her disposal to exert pressure on the military to end this operation,” he said in an interview. “I hope this is exactly what she will do now.” Myanmar’s government has repeatedly rejected accusations, from human rights groups and others, that the military has systematically abused members of the Rohingya ethnic group, a long-persecuted minority in the country, and resisted calls for an international investigation. In their telephone conversation, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi “seemed to be genuinely moved by what she had read,” Mr. al-Hussein said. “There was no defensiveness. There was no denial.” Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi said the government needed more information, he added, and, in an apparent shift from the government’s previous public position, she asked for help from the United Nations in learning more, Mr. al-Hussein said. On Friday, the presidential spokesman U Zaw Htay said the government was taking the allegations in the report seriously and announced that a previously established commission led by Vice President U Myint Swe would investigate. “Where there is clear evidence of abuses and violations, we will take all necessary action,” Mr. Htay said, according to Reuters. A group of women and children from one family at the refugee camp in Bangladesh in January, a week after they escaped an attack by the Burmese military. Credit Allison Joyce/Getty Images Mr. al-Hussein was skeptical of the commission, and he said an independent inquiry would be necessary. “In our view, this would not meet international standards, and there would need to be an international commission of inquiry,” he said. More than 200 Rohingya villagers who fled Myanmar to neighboring Bangladesh gave harrowing testimony to United Nations investigators about the treatment they received. The investigators’ report said that soldiers and police officers, helped by local villagers, carried out “a calculated campaign of terror” against the Rohingya in Rakhine after insurgents attacked military posts on the border with Bangladesh, killing nine guards. Witnesses, some with scars from gunshot wounds or beatings, told investigators how security forces swept through their villages, often attacking before dawn, shooting indiscriminately with rocket launchers and from helicopters. They killed people who tried to flee and burned them alive in their homes, villagers said, according to the United Nations report. A 14-year-old girl told investigators that soldiers had raped her, beaten her mother to death and killed her two younger sisters. “They were not shot dead but slaughtered with knives,” she said, according to the report. The report said that in some instances, members of the security forces beat, raped or killed people in front of their relatives, “with the intention of inflicting severe mental torture, humiliating and instilling fear.” “They beat and killed my husband with a knife,” a 25-year-old woman told investigators, describing how five soldiers then raped her and killed her 8-month-old son, who was crying. “To silence him, they killed him too with a knife,” she said, according to the report. “The devastating cruelty to which these Rohingya children have been subjected is unbearable,” Mr. al-Hussein said on Friday. “What national security goals could possibly be served by this?” he asked later. Myanmar’s neighbors have expressed alarm that the brutality of the crackdown is creating fertile ground for an organized Rohingya insurgency. Satellite images showed widespread burning of entire villages in Rakhine in an operation that bore the hallmarks of ethnic cleansing, the report said, contradicting assertions by the military that the villagers had burned their own homes. The report said the campaign by the security forces should be seen in the context of decades-old abuses and systematic discrimination by the government against Rohingya for their religion and ethnicity. Rohingya are denied citizenship in Myanmar, an overwhelmingly Buddhist country, and are widely referred to as Bengalis, a term suggesting that they are migrants from Bangladesh. “Every form of violation appears to have been perpetrated against a population that has for decades endured the deepest discrimination, and yet this seems to have been unprecedented” in its brutality, Mr. al-Hussein said. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 The New York Times Company

Aung San Suu Kyi's ruling NLD party has also been accused of disseminating 'fake news' and imagery in a bid to discredit real reporting on atrocities in the western Burmese state A Burmese government commission has said the Rohingya Muslim ethnic group is not facing genocide in the country's remote Rakhine State, rejecting any evidence to the contrary as "propaganda". The official report, published on Wednesday in the state-funded Global New Light of Myanmar newspaper, denied "external allegations" of human rights violations, and cautioned readers against falling for "fabricated news and rumours". The actions of state forces in the region have been described as ethnic cleansing by senior UN officials, while journalists and aid organisations have documented mass rape, murders, and beatings. Satellite imagery has shown entire villages destroyed by Burmese soldiers. But according to the commission it is impossible that a genocide is underway in the region, which is currently entirely closed to reporters and foreign aid workers, because a "Bengali population" continues to reside there. The report cites the existence of mosques and religious edifices as proof the Muslim population is not facing persecution on the grounds of their religion. Violence has erupted sporadically in Rakhine state since 2012, with state forces implicated in either instigating or actively perpetuating attacks on the up to one million Muslim Rohingya who lived there. Members of the minority ethnic group are denied Burmese citizenship and have been described by the government as illegal immigrants, despite having lived in the country for generations. Since 2012, many Rohingya people have been confined to inadequate IDP camps, where they have become ill and malnourished and struggled to access healthcare. Many have fled abroad by boat, with thousands believed to have drowned at sea. The most recent spate of fighting began on 9 October last year, when several Buddhist Burmese border guards were attacked and killed. Since the incident, dozens of Rohingya villages have been burned to the ground, women have been raped and civilians murdered by the army. At least 10,000 Rohingya have fled across the Bangladeshi border to escape the violence. But the commission — who were tasked by the president, operating under de facto head of state Aung San Suu Kyi, with “uncovering the truth about terrorist attacks in the region” — failed entirely to address allegations that Burmese security forces had killed civilians. It said there was “insufficient evidence of mass rape”, and argued that police beatings were ordinary in many countries, so did not matter. Allegations of arson, torture, and arbitrary arrest are still being investigated, the report said. Human Rights Watch described the report as "very worrisome". "This commission is looking more and more like the Myanmar government whitewash mechanism that we feared it would be," said Asia Division Deputy Director Phil Robertson. "This commission report is all about giving the Myanmar government some wiggle room, to try and dispute established facts about burning of Rohingya house and communities and the swelling mountain of evidence about Tatmadaw and police abuses against the Rohingya," he added. "No doubt that this is the unofficial role of this committee, to raise doubts and counter-points to assertions by the UN, the Kofi Annan Commission, and of course, rights groups like Human Rights Watch – and it’s sad that this is the tactics they are pursuing, rather than allowing a truly credible, internationally assisted investigation that would get both the facts and point to all the perpetrators of the rights abuses on all sides of this situation." Mr Robertson said that while no one should condone the attacks against government security officials, this is only part of the story of rights abuses happening in Rakhine state. "The problem is the commission is apparently treating it as the biggest part, and discounting or delaying the other half of the story, which is the disproportionate, rights abusing response by security forces against defenseless Rohingya villagers," he said. The commission also claimed in the report that they encountered no cases of malnutrition in the north of the impoverished state. In December, Amnesty International said tens of thousands of people are now at risk of starvation, after the blanket ban on aid. Even before 9 October, malnutrition levels were critically high in the region where 150,000 people were dependent on food aid for their survival," the organisation said. The commission report was also refuted by journalists, who questioned claims they have been allowed to "freely go and cover the news as they wish". In reality, the north of the state is entirely closed to members of the press. Ms Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, has been widely condemned for her failure to speak up in defence of the Rohingya, and actions which appear to discriminate against the group. Soon after the NLD government won power — in an election the Rohingya were not allowed to participate in, and in which the party fielded no Muslim candidates — Ms Suu Kyi wrote to foreign ambassadors in the country asking them to stop using the term Rohingya. In recent weeks, the government has been accused of sharing fake news images of atrocities in other countries, or even in some cases in Hollywood films, and claiming these are being passed off as images of crimes against the Rohingya, in a bid to discredit real reporting. The government claim the "fake news" stories are damaging the country's reputation abroad, which is confusing many Burmese citizens who do not know what to believe. The Global New Light, state television channel MRTV, and even a government department have simultaneously showcased the images – the origins of which are unclear – and condemned them. Posts warning citizens about fake news have been shared thousands of times on Facebook by Burmese citizens, provoking angry nationalistic sentiment. In a particularly absurd move Ms Suu Kyi's office on Tuesday even sought to use a still from a Rambo movie, alleging it had been shared by Muslims who claimed it showed human rights violations in Rakhine State. (C) 2017 The Independent

Following the announcement of the recent Executive Order in the United States regarding immigration, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres released a statement on Tuesday denouncing any policies founded in discrimination based on religion, ethnicity or nationality as both “ineffective” and “against the fundamental principles and values on which our societies are based.” Mr. Guterres also noted that discriminatory migration policies breed fear, anger and the very violence they claim to prevent. Above all, Mr. Guterres expressed his particular concern regarding decisions around the world that have jeopardized the integrity of the international refugee protection regime, preventing refugees from receiving the protections they are in desperate need of and are entitled to under international law. Secretary-General Guterres, who previously served as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, has stressed the importance of the pursuit of peace and has repeatedly underscored the primacy of prevention and diplomacy in international peace and security, stating during his first official address as the UN chief that, “peace must be our goal and our guide.” Speaking with media at UN Headquarters on Wednesday Mr. Guterres specifically addressed the actions of the US prohibiting migration and refugees from specific countries and expressed belief that the measure should be reversed. Recalling the written statement he had made the day prior, Secretary-General Guterres emphasized that the measures put in place by the US administration are not the way to protect the US, or any country, from the threat of terrorism. He went on to firmly state that “these measures should be removed sooner rather than later.” The Secretary-General’s calls have been also echoed by other officials and experts within the UN. On Wednesday, five independent human rights experts released a joint statement through the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The UN Special Rapporteurs on migrant rights, racism, human rights and counter-terrorism, torture and freedom of religion jointly expressed their expert opinion that the US policy is discriminatory, a “significant setback for those who are obviously in need of international protection,” and risks violating international humanitarian and human rights law. The current UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi, also made an impassioned plea for solidarity and compassion for refugees fleeing devastation in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere. Mr. Grandi said “The world has to go back to solidarity, has to think again of these people – not with fear, not with suspicion, but with open arms, with an open mind, with an open heart.” Earlier this week the Mr. Grandi also expressed his deep concern over the uncertainty now faced by thousands of refugees in the process of resettlement in the United States due to the ban. The High Commissioner noted that in the first week of the Executive Order alone, 800 of some of the most vulnerable refugees were turned away from the US after already being cleared to restart their lives in the country. In total, the UNHCR (Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees) estimates that 20,000 refugees could have been resettled over the 120 days prohibited by the Executive Order. Recalling the history of the US as a leader in the protection of refugees, the High Commissioner voiced clearly his hopes that the “US will continue its strong leadership role and its long history of protecting those who are fleeing conflict and persecution.” ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 RtoP Weekly

According to the annual report of the French Ministry of the Interior published on 1st February, the number of racist, anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish incidents largely decreased last year while the number of anti-Christian incidents dramatically increased over the same period. After a record number in 2015 (2034 incidents), racist, anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim incidents clearly decreased in 2016 with 1125 incidents (-44.7%). These statistics are reflective of incidents (acts of violence, arsons, degradations…) and threats (insults, hate speech…) about which complaints were filed. Anti-Muslim incidents At the same time, the Collectif contre l’Islamophobie en France (CCIF) and the Observatoire National contre l’Islamophobie (ONCI) have published their own report, which confirms the trend measured by the Ministry of the Interior, but also notes that this has not impacted the level of tolerance towards Muslims. According to the CCIF, anti-Muslim incidents diminished by 35.9% in 2016 in comparison with 2015 and by 24.1% against 2014. Under the heading “discrimination” (419 cases), the CCIF also includes acts of vandalism (25), assaults (39) and hate speech (98). Most recorded discrimination incidents are committed in public services (64%). These internal statistics are related to the number of cases directly referred to the CCIF. The ONCI recorded 186 cases of anti-Muslim incidents in 2016 against 429 in 2015, a decrease of 57.6%: 64 “acts” (against 124) and 118 “threats” (against 305). These statistics are related to incidents leading to the filing of a complaint. The general decrease in anti-Muslim incidents is said to be due to several factors: bigger social empathy and solidarity towards Muslims, policies against Islamophobia as well as securing mosques and prayer places by law enforcement forces (initiatives supported by 341,000 EUR in 2016 and 756,000 EUR in 2015). The strategy of ISIS terrorist attacks aiming at dividing France’s civil society and fueling anti-Muslim sentiments has obviously failed. Anti-Jewish incidents According to French interior ministry figures, there were 57.6 percent fewer anti-Semitic incidents in 2016 compared with the previous year. The French government sees this drop as “the fruit of government initiatives”, in particular a €100 million campaign to “fight racism, anti-Semitism and all forms of discrimination linked or originating from religion”. According to the January 22 report compiled by the Israeli ministry for diaspora affairs, the number of anti-Semitic attacks in France dropped, by 63.6 percent, between 2015 and 2016. Much of the credit for this drop is due to the French government, which in 2015 launched an anti-racism initiative involving hundreds of posted police officers and soldiers patrolling near Jewish schools and synagogues, said the Israeli ministry. Anti-Christian incidents According to the Ministry of the Interior, 949 anti-Christian incidents – 399 acts of vandalism and 191 cases of theft of worship items – were recorded on the French territory in 2016 but this does not include the hacking of Catholic websites which were said to number 112 by the French Observatory of Christianophobia. Some comparative statistics: Anti-Christian incidents: 17,4% increase between 2015 and 2016. Incidents targeting Christian sites (places of worship and tombstones: 245% increase between 2008 and 2016. Incidents concerning Christian places of worship in 2016: 90% of incidents concerning all places of worship (Christian, Jewish and Muslim). The Ministry of the Interior notes that there was a satanist motivation behind 14 incidents and in 25 cases there was an anarchist connotation. In France, there are about 45,000 church buildings, 2500 mosques and 500 synagogues. According to the Ministry of the Interior, 2400 Christian places of worship, 1090 Muslim buildings and 817 Jewish sites (synagogues, schools and community centers) are protected by law enforcement forces. In the last two years, an interministerial fund for the prevention of delinquency has granted 12.5 million EUR to provide the most sensitive religious sites with security and video-protection material. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 Human Rights Without Frontiers

Among the myriad Executive Orders that President Trump has inherited from the Obama administration is one essentially lifting sanctions on the regime in Khartoum, Sudan. During his last week in office Obama declared there had been sufficient “positive action over the past six months” by the very regime the former president had repeatedly accused of genocide—both before and after taking office. Obama used his UN ambassador, Samantha Power, to make the case in detail: during her last press conference, Power declared, falsely, that a “sea change” in improved humanitarian access throughout Sudan justified the administration’s decision. She cited one unrepresentative example, even as every humanitarian and human rights organization that has spoken about Power’s claim denies its validity. Human Rights Watch declared Obama’s decision simply “inexplicable.” Samantha Power, former UN Ambassador under the Obama administration So it falls to the conspicuously dysfunctional Trump administration to decide whether during the upcoming six-month “testing period” Khartoum deserves to see a finalizing of this lifting of sanctions. It can choose to ignore realities on the ground, as the Obama administration did in its assessment of the past six months; or it can take a hard look at what is widely reported from those on the ground and in the Sudanese diaspora. Humanitarian embargoes, imposed by Khartoum, continue to affect many hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in the long-marginalized regions of Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile. The “sea change” Ambassador Power spoke of is certainly not visible in South Kordofan, where an experienced and highly informed humanitarian wrote to me, declaring: “there's been absolutely no change in humanitarian access. Not a single grain of sorghum nor one tablet of medicine has entered Nuba Mountains from any of the usual humanitarian agencies.” (email received from the Nuba Mountains, January 14, 2017) The new administration can look at compelling evidence that an epidemic of rape continues to be part of Khartoum’s genocidal counter-insurgency campaign in Darfur, now in its fifteenth year. It can look at the continuous shelling and bombing of clearly civilian targets in the three regions. It can look at overwhelming evidence that chemical weapons were used in Jebel Marra, Darfur last year—evidence assembled assiduously by Amnesty International. Victims of chemical weapons assault in Jebel Marra (2016); photograph from report by Amnesty International It can look at the rapidly escalating and increasingly violent repression by the regime in suppressing civil discontent—discontent that follows from an economy imploding not because of U.S. sanctions but because of massive corruption and self-enrichment that have always defined what is essentially a kleptocracy. “Shoot to kill” orders have been both given and threatened in the face of rising unrest. In light of Trumps immoral and badly confused Executive Order on refugees coming to the U.S. from Sudan and six other countries—affecting countless real or potential Sudanese refugees—there is precious little reason for optimism. Moreover, the Trump administration, burdened by its policy myopia, is unlikely to understand that the effectiveness of U.S. sanctions—particularly financial sanctions—has been undermined by massive money-laundering on the part of French banking giant BNP Paribas, which pled guilty to criminal violations of U.S. financial laws in 2015, primarily because of activities that directly benefited the Khartoum regime. A civil suit filed on Federal District Court (Southern District of New York, Case 1:16-cv-03228-AJN) lays out in highly revealing detail the way in which BNPP served (in the words of the former U.S. Deputy Attorney General) “as a de facto central bank for the Government of Sudan.” Despite the declaration today (Sudan Tribune, February 3, 2017) by President al-Bashir that the Obama administration lifted sanctions on Sudan because of their “futility,” the truth is that their efficacy has not been tested: BNP Paribas saw to that during their long tenure as “central bank” for al-Bashir and his genocidal regime. Those in the world of Washington-based pundits who proclaim their agreement with al-Bashir only reveal their ignorance of the potency of the U.S. financial sanctions that BNP Paribas so effectively undermined. The regime in Khartoum has not changed in the 27 years since it seized power in a military coup as the “National Islamic Front.” It continues to wage genocidal counter-insurgencies against the marginalized regions of the country in order to maintain a monopoly on national wealth and power. And the regime has assessed with uncanny skill the willingness—or lack thereof—by the international community to confront the regime over these multiple genocidal assaults—in what is now South Sudan, in the Nuba Mountains during the 1990s, in Darfur beginning in 2003, and now South Kordofan and Blue Nile. If it believes that refusing to acknowledge a cholera epidemic in these regions serves its purposes, it will deny—until facts become so overwhelming as to compel acknowledge of this vast threat to hundreds of thousands of civilians, especially in the eastern regions of Sudan. Darfuris have long since given up trying to keep records of the dead during 14 years of genocidal counter-insurgency against non-Arab/African civilians in Darfur. Extant data and reports make clear the number now exceeds 500,000. The Trump administration looks at once badly confused—and dismayingly indifferent to all but major geopolitical events—and here Sudan clearly does not qualify except as a resource for counter-terrorism intelligence, “red meat” for the wolves in the intelligence community that increasingly dominates U.S. foreign policy. Moreover, the odds-on favorite to become Trump’s Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Peter Pham, has put himself decisively on record—even before Obama’s Executive Order—as strongly favoring the lifting of sanctions against Khartoum. Peter Pham, the leading candidate for the position of Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs in the Trump administration. His credentials are questioned by many. Congress, which once took Sudan seriously on a bipartisan basis, is presently nowhere to be found in responding to the Executive Order. It was not always so: in July 2004 every member of Congress—in both houses and from both parties—declared that Khartoum was committing “genocide” in Darfur. But the present wait-and-see Congressional attitude only makes more likely a de facto lifting of sanctions (without another Executive Order they will disappear on July 13)—or encourages the Trump administration to believe it can not only lift sanctions but proceed apace with the rapprochement the U.S. intelligence community strongly favors—a supremely callous trade-off in which U.S. favors are given to Khartoum in return for counter-terrorism intelligence—in many cases about the very terrorists previously supported by the regime, which hosted Osama bin Laden during the formative years of al-Qaeda (1992 – 1996). Osama bin Laden, circa 1992; his time in Sudan (1992 - 1996) were formative years for the terrorist organization al-Qaeda Just this week Sudanese intelligence General Hanafi Abdallah boasted of Khartoum’s important to American counter-terrorism intelligence: "There is communication between the two bodies and regular meetings. The CIA office in Khartoum is the largest office in the Middle East. Because the United States is aware of the Sudan strategic importance in the region, it has established one of the largest diplomatic missions in the region, even they had to expand their buildings," said Hanafi in an interview with the Khartoum based Al-Sudani newspaper published on Tuesday. (Sudan Tribune, January 31, 2017) Although the regime lies shamelessly, there is on this occasion little reason to doubt the truth of this statement, which has not been denied by the U.S. State Department. For a long time the Khartoum regime held hostage the opening of CIA operations in the new building and embassy in Khartoum, knowing how desperate the agency was to gain access to what was designed to be the premier listening post in North Africa. The date of the Obama administration’s gaining operational permission from Khartoum was never publicized, but clearly—whenever the final terms of the quid pro quo were settled upon—things are humming for the CIA in Khartoum now, and this more than any other factor governs any future decision by the Trump administration concerning reinstating sanctions and Sudan policy generally. And it will be a decision only nominally made by the State Department. Massive new U.S. embassy in Khartoum--and key CIA listening post for North Africa It is hard to be optimistic, with Washington-based pundits lauding Obama’s Executive Order, and an incomprehensibly thoughtless Trump administration that gives no sign of heeding Sudan’s agony as it pushes for “America First.” This may well be Sudan’s darkest hour. -- Eric Reeves, Senior Fellow at Harvard University’s François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights ereeves@smith.edu www.sudanreeves.org Twitter@SudanReeves

Any scaling down of international support in Iraq after the military defeat of ISIS would have “grave consequences” for the country and the world, the UN’s head of mission in Iraq told the Security Council on Thursday. “Any abrupt scaling-down of engagement or support would mean repeating mistakes of the past – mistakes that have had grave consequences for stability and security, well beyond the borders of Iraq, even globally,” Jan Kubis warned, detailing that Iraq will need “continuous, substantial and sustainable support and assistance from the international community, including its regional partners.” The lack of a plan for governance of the key city of Mosul has been a source of concern for Kurdish leaders. “We wanted to have a plan even before the military action, and my president has said so in all meetings with the Iraqi or American delegations. But it did not happen,” Fuad Hussein, chief of staff to the Kurdish president, said in an interview with Rudaw English. “The Iraqi government did not want to, and the Americans were occupied with their elections.” “So now we have no idea how to deal with the future. There is no plan.” In his briefing to the Security Council, Kubis summarized what has been achieved in Iraq so far and the steps that will need to be taken in order to rebuild the country and relations between Iraqi citizens. The first step to national reconciliation, he said, was the protection of civilians, avoiding sectarian tensions, and preventing revenge attacks in Mosul. Rudaw reported on a revenge killing that had occurred in eastern Mosul in January, after an Iraqi Counter Terrorism Service soldier boasted of killing an ISIS fighter, after he had surrendered. Kubis stressed the need for reconciliation in order to build “a new and truly unified Iraq in which all its people will feel as equal citizens, under fair treatment and the protection of the State.” Steps to achieving reconciliation include “peaceful reintegration and interaction among all groups of the population in Ninawa governorate, including ethnic and religious minorities,” that comes about through effective governance, he added. The UN mission in Iraq (UNAMI) is supporting grassroots initiatives towards “stabilization and community-based reconciliation efforts.” ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 Rudaw

The soft-spoken rights lawyer had devised a plan to replace Myanmar’s Constitution with one that would strip the military of its extraordinary political powers. The lawyer, U Ko Ni, a top adviser to the governing National League for Democracy, had recently been working on a new draft, a colleague said, and he hoped to promote his project at a conference this month. But when he returned to the Yangon airport on Sunday from a trip to Indonesia, cradling his young grandson in his arms as he waited for a taxi, a man drew a pistol and shot him in the head. The killing appears to have been a rare political assassination in Myanmar, fueling rumors, distrust and worry about the country’s future. “This bullet was not only for Ko Ni,” the colleague, U Thein Than Oo, a human rights lawyer in Mandalay, Myanmar, said by telephone. “It was for the N.L.D. and the people who want to amend and replace the 2008 Constitution and support the peace process.” The Myanmar police have said that the assailant, detained shortly after the shooting, was a professional hit man, and they have arrested three other suspects in the attack, including the man they say hired the killer. The police have not announced a motive for the killing. It is not clear whether Mr. Ko Ni could have succeeded in changing the Constitution, although colleagues said he had been pressing the case. While unverified rumors swirled on Myanmar’s social media this week that the military was behind the killing, the police said there was no evidence to support the claims. The assistant secretary of the military-controlled Home Affairs Ministry, U Maung Maung Myint, issued a statement on Wednesday denying rumors that the home affairs minister, Lt. Gen. Kyaw Swe, had orchestrated the killing. But even as a few details began to leak out, there were still more questions than answers. Those guessing at motives noted that Mr. Ko Ni, 65, was one of the country’s most prominent Muslims in a majority Buddhist country torn by religious strife. But he was hardly a firebrand. While he did not hesitate to advocate the legal rights of Muslims and other minorities whenever he felt they were threatened, he did not promote Islamic law and he backed a decision by the National League for Democracy not to field Muslim candidates in the 2015 election, telling a reporter at the time that it was not worth it given the polarized political climate. Instead, he expressed an inclusive vision that was shaped in part by his background as the son of an ethnic Burmese and Buddhist mother and a Muslim father from India. “He was a man who could appreciate different traditions precisely because his own tradition in his country did not always receive the respect that it deserved,” said Melissa Crouch, an expert on Myanmar’s Constitution at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. The main suspect, U Kyi Lin, had been jailed from 2003 to 2014 for smuggling ancient Buddha statues, according to police statements and leaked police documents. That would hardly be the profile of a radical Buddhist. Mr. Kyi Lin was pardoned in 2014 in a prisoner amnesty by the government of former President Thein Sein, who was an army general. Some lawyers wondered how the gunman had acquired a 9-millimeter pistol, which is manufactured by the Myanmar Army, in a country where civilian firearm sales have been prohibited for decades. There was also speculation about how the attacker could have carried out the killing in daylight in a public place that is among the country’s most secure and that regularly hosts national and foreign dignitaries. All of which lead Mr. Ko Ni’s friends and colleagues back to his efforts to challenge the military and its powerful supporters. A canny constitutional lawyer, Mr. Ko Ni had outmaneuvered the military before. Before the military dictatorship that ruled Myanmar for nearly 50 years allowed democratic elections, it left in place a Constitution that barred anyone with a spouse or child with foreign citizenship from becoming president. That clause was aimed at one person: Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the popular Nobel laureate and leader of the National League for Democracy, whose husband, now dead, was British and whose sons are also British citizens. Mr. Ko Ni is widely credited with helping devise the strategy that allowed her to take power after her party won a landslide election in 2015. Parliament created a new position, state counselor, that would be above the president and appointed her to the job. Richard Horsey, a political analyst and former United Nations official in Yangon, called the move a legal “fudge” that may have survived because Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi’s party controlled the courts. But he said that Mr. Ko Ni was among the most knowledgeable legal minds in the National League for Democracy orbit. “There aren’t many people like that, so in that sense, he played a very important role,” Mr. Horsey said. But the party has long had another target: eliminating the special powers for the military enshrined in the Constitution, including a crucial veto. The veto is actually two parts: a quota that allocates a quarter of the seats in Parliament to the military, and the requirement of a 75 percent majority to pass a constitutional amendment. Mr. Ko Ni had proposed introducing a bill on a referendum about drafting a new constitution. The bill could be passed with a simple majority, which the National League for Democracy could easily muster. “If the military still focuses on protecting its interests, it will be impossible to change any part of the Constitution within Parliament,” he said last year, according to The Myanmar Times. “That’s why writing a new one is the best way to pursue a democratic Constitution.” Party officials, however, have not publicly endorsed this solution, and U Win Htein, a party leader contacted this week, said the party still favored amending, rather than replacing, the Constitution. But Mr. Ko Ni was still promoting the idea, and one colleague, Mr. Thein Than Oo, said that “one of his last works” had been drafting a new Constitution. The consequences of the killing for the country will depend on what motive is ultimately established, as well as the transparency of the police investigation. But the killing has already demonstrated that the rule of law in Myanmar remains fragile, and it could further erode the National League for Democracy’s ability to govern, said Elliot Brennan, a Myanmar specialist and a research fellow at the Institute for Security and Development Policy in Stockholm. Initial expectations that the party could bring major changes to Myanmar were “far too high, and we’ve been waiting for the expectations, the red balloon, to pop,” he said. “The assassination might not be the final pinprick, but we’re getting very close.” That the party leadership has said little about the killing has raised questions about its ability to handle the situation. Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, who has faced international criticism for recent military operations in far-western Rakhine State against the Rohingya, a persecuted Muslim minority, has also been rebuked. The office of Myanmar’s president, U Htin Kyaw, said in a statement on Monday that the attack had been carried out to undermine the country’s stability. U Zaw Htay, a spokesman for Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, later said that the statement by the president’s office had been made on her behalf. But Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi did not attend Mr. Ko Ni’s funeral, and his daughter, Dr. Yin Nwe Khaine, said on Wednesday that, to the best of her knowledge, Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi had not sent condolences. She said she knew that her father’s work carried risks, but that he never talked about them at home. “He always said that lawyers are forever worrying, and he never wanted to pass those worries on to his family,” she said by telephone, fighting back tears. But he did train her to be strong in difficult times, she added, and this was one of them. “My father is my hero,” she said. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Asia Pacific

Germany’s cabinet has approved a measure aimed at tracking individuals who might pose a terrorism threat. The monitoring device can be used even if an individual hasn’t been convicted. Authorities will be able to force suspected Islamist extremists believed to pose a threat to the public to wear electronic ankle bracelets, the German cabinet agreed on Wednesday. Previously, only convicted individuals could be required to wear the device used to monitor location and movements. With the cabinet proposal, “Gefährder,” or people who pose a security threat, who have not been convicted can be forced to wear the device by order of the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA). The change to the law was approved by the cabinet as part of a package of amendments to BKA law. Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere and Justice Minister Heiko Maas had previously agreed to change the law in the wake of the December 19 terror attack on a Berlin Christmas market, which killed 12 people and wounded nearly 50 others. The attacker, Anis Amri, was considered a potential threat to public safety and under surveillance until a few months before the attack when he fell off the radar. He was ordered to be deported to his native Tunisia, but the deportation was postponed because Tunisia delayed providing his papers. Despite the deportation order, he was able to move around Germany. The incident prompted sharp criticism of measures aimed at preventing terrorism. In response, the German government has put forward a host of measures to overcome apparent security gaps. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 Deutsche Welle

Archbishop Bashar Warda of the Chaldean Archeparchy of Erbil, Iraq. (Credit: Daniel Ibanez/CNA.) Archbishop Bashar Warda of Erbil tells Crux that as long as special preferences under Trump's new refugee order are for all victims of ISIS and not just Christians alone, it will help, and that Christians "celebrated when Trump won" in hopes it would mark an end to U.S. neglect. [Editor’s note: Archbishop Bashar Warda is the Chaldean Catholic archbishop of Erbil in Iraq, and has long been an outspoken voice on behalf of Middle East Christianity. He recently spoke to Crux from Erbil about the Trump administration’s controversial executive order on refugees, including the idea of giving special preference to Christians and other minorities who have been victims of ISIS genocide.] CRUX: When the executive order was rolled out, your own upcoming trip to the United States was cancelled. What happened? Warda: The main purpose for coming was for a Congressional hearing that was postponed. I hope to come soon and to testify on behalf of Christians in Iraq. Do you agree that security concerns warrant the new U.S. refugee policy? I don’t know what the president knows about security risks as they relate to the “countries of concern” and refugees from them. I do know two things. First, it is terrible to live with terrorism. My country lives with terrorism daily. And if the United States wants to have a strong vetting process, I can understand and appreciate that. Some people are quick to forget that Europe has tried to slow down the refugee flow too. The EU has done its best to keep the refugees in Turkey, and has paid Turkey to keep them there. Obviously, in the era of terrorism, people are concerned about who is entering their country and that is understandable. Second, the Catholic Church is fundamentally on the side of immigrants, regardless of their faith or origin. This is a core part of who we are. So these are complex times in a brutal world. The real question is what is the obligation of the world community, not just the U.S., to all the innocent victims of this brutality. As the Church, especially here in Iraq, we are shepherds to the innocents, all of them - those who are migrating and those who are not. I fear that all the media discussion on this travel issue will place the focus completely on those who are in the migration process, and forget those who are still attempting to live and survive in their legitimate homeland. One other thing: Christians and other minorities have been largely ignored by the American government before now, so even if this step had a bumpy start and required clarification, we in Iraq appreciate that an American administration understands that we are here and wants to help the minorities here who have suffered so much. Do you think this order will make it harder for Christians from Iraq? Someone quoted me out of context on this in another article, so let me clarify it. Obviously in certain individual cases in the short term, this could change the plans of those who were in the process of immigrating or traveling, but I understand several of our families with new immigrant visas have now been approved for travel just this week. As long as this is understood as something available to all the minority communities of Iraq, and not just to the Christians, I do not think this will make it harder for us Christians here in Iraq. Obviously in the long run, it will make it easier for those from our community who wish to move to the West. And while I hope most of our people will stay, I must respect the decision they make for themselves, especially after what they have endured. What do you make of the protests against President Trump’s refugee order? Everyone, including the administration, seems to agree that this should have been implemented with more clarity. There was much confusion about what the order meant and many people were very upset. From my perspective in Iraq, I wonder why all of these protesters were not protesting in the streets when ISIS came to kill Christians and Yazidis and other minority groups. They were not protesting when the tens of thousands of displaced Christians my archdiocese has cared for since 2014 received no financial assistance from the U.S. government or the U.N. There were no protests when Syrian Christians were only let in at a rate that was 20 times less than the percentage of their population in Syria. I do not understand why some Americans are now upset that the many minority communities that faced a horrible genocide will finally get a degree of priority in some manner. I would also say this, all those who cry out that this is a “Muslim Ban” - especially now that it has been clarified that it is not - should understand clearly that when they do this, they are hurting we Christians specifically and putting us at greater risk. The executive order has clearly affected Christians and Yazidis and others as well as Muslims. Here in Iraq we Christians cannot afford to throw out words carelessly as the media in the West can do. I would ask those in the media who use every issue to stir up division to think about this. For the media these things become an issue of ratings, but for us the danger is real. Most Americans have no concept of what it was like to live as a Yazidi or Christian or other minority as ISIS invaded. Our people had the option to flee, to convert, or to be killed, and many were killed in the most brutal ways imaginable. But there were none of these protests then of ISIS’s religious test. Our people lost everything because of their faith - they were targeted for their faith, just like the Yazidis and others too. Now these protesters are saying that religion should not matter at all, even though someone was persecuted for their faith, even though persecution based on religion is one of the grounds for refugee status in the UN treaty on refugees. From here I have to say, it is really unbelievable. It is exactly this reasoning, that religion should not be a factor at all in American policy, that has resulted in Christians and other minority communities being overlooked by U.S. and UN aid programs. We are too small to matter, our communities are disappearing from constant persecution, and for years the American government didn’t care. Now when someone tries to help us, we have protesters telling us that there can be no religious basis for refugee status - even though the UN treaty and American law say that religious persecution is a major reason for granting the status, and even though ISIS targeted people primarily on the basis of religion. I am not saying that any group should have a blanket preference when it comes to being admitted as a refugee in the United States. Such a policy would not be right, and would clearly be against our Catholic faith and teaching. And that is not the policy as I understand it. But it is very hard for me to understand why comfortable people in the West think those who are struggling to survive against genocide, and whose communities are at extreme risk of disappearing completely, should not get some special consideration. We are an ancient people on the verge of extinction because of our commitment to our faith. Will anybody protest for us? Do you think your people will take advantage of this priority status? Clearly, I don’t want our Christian people to leave Iraq, because I hope our community will stay and thrive in its homeland, and contribute to the pluralism of a land Christians have called home for almost 2000 years. I think that a real Christian presence is critical to any future peace and reconciliation efforts here. But that does not mean that I do not appreciate the effort and gesture the American government is making by giving priority to the most vulnerable people here. Remember, we have many thousands of Iraqi Christians, victims of ISIS, now trapped in other countries in the Middle East trying to get out to safety who do not even exist for the UN because they are afraid to enter the official refugee camps. This is a real problem. Of those who are still here, I truly hope most of our people won’t seek asylum outside of Iraq, but I cannot stop them if they believe this is the only way they can have a life. The hardship and hopelessness, especially among the displaced people, is incredible. These people have lost everything on earth because of their faith in Jesus Christ. It is that simple. They have kept their faith, but everything else has been taken from them. Everything. What would you like to see changed in this executive order? There needs to be a proper understanding and perception of what this means. Obviously there has been confusion about this and that isn’t good for anyone, including the administration. As other Christian leaders have noted, it is not good if people think there is priority only for the Christians. That could make us a target, but clearly we now know this is not the actual case with this policy. This priority status was announced for all religious minorities in my country. That would include Yazidis and Mandaeans as well as Christians. It would have included Jews also, but Iraq already expelled almost all of its Jewish community decades ago. In Syria, Shiite Muslims are a minority, and they were targeted by ISIS. So this isn’t only about the Christians. But there have been many injustices to the Christians and other minorities before now, especially with those from Syria having been largely excluded from entry to the United States since 2011. I am happy an American president finally realizes there are Christians - and other religious minority groups - here who need help. This is an important step forward, and it means a good deal to the displaced people here. We have felt like we were forgotten by the United States until now. What do your people need most from the American government? The Christians of Iraq desperately need American government humanitarian aid now, and we need it to be delivered in a manner to ensure it actually reaches us and does not get absorbed and redirected in the existing aid structures. My archdiocese hosts the largest community of displaced Christians in my country, and since 2014, we have received no money from the United States government and no money from the UN. We have hosted and cared for all of these displaced people on our own, with funds we raised privately on our own, nearly all of it from private Christian charitable groups. We are talking about housing, food, medicine, and schools. We have done all of this, and are continuing to do so. I should say also that we are not just taking care of Christian IDPs. We have taken in many Yazidi families in our programs, and our medical clinics serve large numbers of Muslim IDP patients. As of today, we will run out of money for many of these programs in three months. For medicines, we have only two months’ reserve left, and we are serving many thousands of IDPs - Christians, Muslims and Yazidis. Our small staff is busy night and day working to find these funds, but we have been doing this for almost three years and many of our private donors are reaching their limits. While the U.S. has donated generously to the overall humanitarian aid effort in Iraq, almost none of this aid reached the Christians. We are told by some that they cannot give us money because we are a Church. I have two things to say about this. First, we have been advised by members of U.S. Congress that U.S. law does not prohibit Church organizations from receiving humanitarian funds, it only prohibits the use of proselytizing with those funds. As I just stated, we serve Yazidis and Muslims already and treat them with dignity and respect for who they are. And as Catholics, we are always respecting of all faiths. Second, I think we have also delivered aid to the IDPs in a way that is far more efficient and effective than these other “official” aid organizations. Our staff are members of the Church, missionaries and volunteers, doing this work because we believe we are called to it. But under the previous administration, the Americans, and the UN, were applying a rigid formula that blocked the Church from receiving aid to help take care of our IDPs, while also denying aid to our IDPs directly because, in the view of the UN, we the Church were already taking care of them. Imagine the frustration we have felt about this! And there was no outrage about this. Iraqi Christians celebrated when Trump won, because they hoped the American government would finally care about them after years of neglect by your government. Why is it that Americans only use a religious test to prevent minority groups who are genocide survivors from getting aid, or to prevent them from getting any kind of priority assistance based on the needs of their communities? Here, we do not understand this. Beyond this, because they are still displaced and will be for many more months, perhaps years, our people need aid to survive. Because their homes and villages were often destroyed by ISIS, they desperately need U.S. financial assistance to rebuild. Because the security situation is so complicated, they need meaningful security guarantees. And they need the U.S. government to insist that religious minorities get the same rights as citizens that every other citizen in Iraq gets, because right now, we do not get those same rights. What is your impression of President Trump so far? I am not a politician and I do not offer political endorsements, but on the issues that affect my people directly, I can say that I am pleased that an American president is focused on the plight of small religious communities - including the Christians - in Iraq. In many ways, this gives us a renewed hope for the future that we are not alone and abandoned by the West and by the United States, which was the common belief here up until now. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Crux Catholic Media Inc.

After four years of negotiations between the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – People’s Army (FARC-EP) and the Colombian government in Havana, the peace deal entered into force on December 1, 2016. The conflict parties were forced to renegotiate after the people of Colombia rejected the first version of the agreement in a referendum. After multiple failed peace negotiations in the past, this is a historic moment for Colombia and the expectations are high. The ambitious agreement includes various measures to implement the points negotiated in Havana. The rights of the victims, the illegal cultivation of drugs, the agricultural development policy, the political participation of the FARC, and resolving the armed conflict, which includes a permanent ceasefire, are the important topics. Some of the initial challenges to be faced in the context of Colombia will be examined below. Measures to compensate the victims of the conflict had already been taken before the negotiations were concluded. Since 2012, over six million victims have received reparation measures and around 194,900 hectares of land have been restituted in accordance with the Victims and Land Restitution Law. However, the government also implements an investment policy that has put these marginalized sections of the population at a disadvantage due to large agro-industrial projects and intensive raw-material extraction. This further reinforces the inequality between the rich and poor in Colombia, which is already one of the highest in the world. Furthermore, the peace process is polarizing the Colombian public opinion. Unlike in the 1990s, armed conflict with the FARC has not been part of everyday reality for people living in the cities over the past years – but it has been for some rural communities. There is no longer significant public support for the FARC’s motives after thousands of committed abductions and the financing of their activities by drug trafficking. However, support from the wider community is needed to successfully integrate the former fighters into political and civil life. Far-reaching efforts to provide information by authorities, schools, civil and international actors about the advantages of the peace process will therefore continue to be necessary and – in light of the results of the vote – perhaps even more so. Even with a smooth integration of the FARC into civil life, caution is advised in regards to the expectations of an improved security situation. In addition to the remaining smaller guerrilla movement, the National Liberation Army (ELN) with which peace negotiations are scheduled to start on February 6, numerous armed groups are active across the whole country, resulting mainly from the demobilization of paramilitary organizations. These are working in the lucrative coca production and are largely responsible for the high crime rate. Estimations suggest that the FARC only had around 7,000 fighters remaining. Last but not least, it had already declared a one-sided ceasefire months before concluding the negotiations in Havana. The first weeks and months of the demobilization process, which is already underway, will show how many of the FARC combatants will demobilize for good and start a civil life and how many will join another armed group. The paramilitary demobilization process in the 2000s revealed that the appeal of the latter is significant if fairly unattractive integration measures are offered. The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) gave a warning about the danger for the peace process in December 2016 as the zones intended for demilitarizing the FARC did not yet have the necessary infrastructure such as clean drinking water, sanitation, and health care. These circumstances increase the fear that the fighters will not disarm. Earlier processes have also shown that the demobilized fighters will be in danger of being threatened or killed. The Patriotic Union was founded as the political arm of the guerrillas after the government and the FARC had concluded a ceasefire agreement in 1984. After initial successes in municipal elections, the following years saw around 3,000 party members murdered predominantly by paramilitary fighters, partly in coordination with state actors. This memory is still very present for today’s FARC members. In fact, the Office of the OHCHR and NGOs have criticized the fact that the violence toward human rights defenders and social leaders, including from civil society organizations related to the FARC, dramatically increased in the second half of 2016. This can be traced back to the fact that the other armed groups are gaining new areas of influence because of the FARC’s withdrawal. Although the Colombian state has an elaborate system of protective measures for persons who have to fear for their lives due to their past or present political activities, its effectiveness is very limited. The state’s historical absence in rural areas, complicated bureaucratic operations between the authorities, and corruption make it almost impossible to implement preventative protective measures in an effective and timely manner. Against this backdrop, it is difficult to predict whether or not the ambitious plans to demilitarize and reintegrate the FARC will be successful. Nevertheless, the FARC is said to have been attuning its combatants to this process for quite a while now. The authorities, which can fall back on experiences from earlier processes, already began their preparations many months before the signing of the agreement. The peace agreement in Colombia is just one step in a long and difficult process. The next few years will show whether this implementation can actually contribute to the transformation of the causes of conflict. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 Swiss Peace

A Pakistani court acquitted 112 suspects in the 2013 torching of hundreds of Christian homes in the eastern city of Lahore over a rumour that one of the residents there had blasphemed, a lawyer said on Sunday. In March 2013, more than 125 homes in Lahore’s Josep Colony were burned by a mob of more than 3,000 Muslims responding to rumours that a local Christian man, Sawan Masih, had made derogatory remarks about the Prophet Mohammad. No one was killed in the incident but there was widespread damage to the property of the mostly destitute Christians living in the neighbourhood. Two churches and dozens of Bibles were also desecrated in the attack. Defence lawyer Ghulam Murtaza Chaudhry said an anti-terrorism court in Lahore had acquitted 112 people accused of torching and ransacking hundreds of houses. “They were acquitted by the court because of lack of evidences against them,” Murtaza told Reuters. “The state witnesses could not identify the accused and their statements were also contradictory.” All 112 suspects were already out on bail. A road sweeper in his late twenties, Sawan Masih told police after his arrest on blasphemy charges that the real reason for the blasphemy allegation was a property dispute between him and a friend who spread the rumour. In Pakistan, conviction under the blasphemy laws can carry a mandatory death sentence. Masih was sentenced to death in 2014, a decision he has appealed. Critics of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws say they have long been used by individuals and religious groups to settle disputes. This month, the Pakistani Senate’s human rights panel said it would debate how to prevent the country’s blasphemy laws being applied unfairly, the first time in decades that any parliamentary body had considered a formal proposal to stop the abuse of the blasphemy laws. Many conservatives in Pakistan consider even criticising the laws as blasphemy, and in 2011 a Pakistani governor, Salman Taseer, was assassinated by his bodyguard after calling for reform of the laws. His killer Mumtaz Qadri was hailed as a hero by religious hard-liners. Tens of thousands of supporters attended his funeral after he was executed last year and a shrine was built over his grave soon after his burial. Hundreds of Pakistanis are on death row for blasphemy convictions. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 Reuters