Dear Friends and Colleagues, Proposals are currently being accepted towards participation in the summer 2017 conference entitled "Large-Scale Violence and Its Aftermaths", which is being co-organized by the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation (AIPR)! Call for Papers Large-Scale Violence and Its Aftermaths Kean University | June 25-29, 2017 Submission deadline: February 28, 2017 ***EXTENDED*** Large-Scale Violence and Its Aftermaths is a Summer Institute comprising a two-day conference focusing on the United States (June 25-26), followed by half-day working groups over three days on other societies around the world for comparison (June 27-29). It will explore tested and contested measures of dealing with the global legacies of large-scale, collective violence and atrocity crimes - including crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide - against vulnerable communities and fueled by terrorist acts, rogue states, authoritarian regimes, asymmetrical warfare, internal conflict, and institutionalized discrimination. The Institute's purpose is twofold: to clarify the anemic performance by state actors in managing atrocity and large-scale violence and restoring confidence in social stability and security; and to consider non-state, civil-society alternatives that, in the aggregate, could move progressively forward toward securing, if not transforming, successor societies. The conference and working groups will take place at Kean University, Union, NJ, nearest Newark; near New York City. These sessions are intended for scholars, non-governmental organization practitioners, government and think-tank policymakers, and teachers at all levels. Professional development and completion certificates, as well as Kean University course credits, will be made available upon request, after the conference and/or working groups. Attorneys may receive CLE credit in "professional practice" for particular qualifying sessions and working groups. Co-sponsors, co-conveners, and keynoters The conference-and-working groups Summer Institute is organized and hosted by the Master of Arts in Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Kean University and is co-organized with the Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation and the Cardozo Law School's Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic, with support from Kean University's Office of Academic Affairs and Jewish Studies Program.The Summer Institute is co-convened by the Alliance for Historical Dialogue and Accountability, Institute for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia University; American Ethical Union, a federation of Ethical Societies in the United States representing the Ethical Culture movement; the Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights at Rutgers University; the Strassler Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Clark University; and Kean University's Human Rights Institute. Keynoting the Institute are Pablo de Greiff, Colombian Human Rights activist and UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence (confirmed); Fania E. Davis, Co-Founder and Executive Director of Restorative Justice for Oakland Youth (confirmed); and others. Proposal submission guidelines We are seeking papers for conference panels and working groups to evaluate the U.S. record in addressing domestic and foreign policy injustices and, by comparison and for cross-pollination, practices abroad that provide a dozen or more paradigms for dealing with historical and contemporary injustices. What accounts for the relatively slow pace or reluctance in the United States to respond systematically and proportionately to its realities of large-scale violence and its legacies of structural inequalities? In light of advancements and setbacks in other parts of the world-including the Balkans, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia-what is the value of civil society experiments as proportionate counter-forces against injustices, such as transitional justice, truth commissions, exemplary criminal justice, restorative justice conferences, counter-monuments, and human rights interventions? What challenges do we face and what resolutions do we consider in marking a path forward? The conference and working groups will look at specific flash points of vulnerability to injustices, including, for example, violence against African American and Native American communities, forced sterilization practices, the expulsion of Mexican-Americans, and the internment of Japanese Americans in the U.S. (the conference), as well as, for comparison, the Balkan conflicts, South African apartheid, the the military dictatorships of Latin America, and genocide in Indonesia, Rwanda, Cambodia, and Bangladesh (the working groups). We welcome to the conversation a wide range of experience and scholarship as well as other instances of historical and contemporary injustices and case studies of other vulnerable communities. Potential conference themes include, but are not limited to: Global paradigms of post-conflict trajectories Transitional justice: concepts and case studies Social violence and its aftermath: the US record A US context for addressing injustice: paradigms for the here and now Peace, conflict resolution, and conflict transformation in central Africa The role of civil society in successor states Memory and justice after conflict and genocide The predatory politics of sustainable development What works, what doesn't, what's on the horizon? Special one-day workshop: "Reflections in the Aftermath of War and Genocide: Empathy, Coexistence, Imagination, Resilience," organized by the Reflections Organizing Committee, a consortium of scholars and practitioners affiliated with Cornell University, Kean University, Georgia State University, and Yale University. Potential working groups include, but are not limited to: Historical Dialogue and Opposing Views of the Past International Law and Legal Mechanisms for Addressing Past Violence Indigenous Rights and Responding to Legacies of Indigenous Abuses Security Sector Reform and Law Enforcement Reform Truth Commissions: From the Local to the Federal Levels Restorative Justice Economic and Symbolic Reparations The Role of Memory in Recognition and Prevention To meet our objectives toward sharing successes, failures, and best practices in responding to atrocity violence, we invite 250-word proposals by February 28, 2017 to abstracts@kean.edu. Decisions will be communicated to selected presenters by March 15. Presented papers will be scheduled for publication and will form the basis of policy recommendations. Please note: Attendance requires a registration fee for the conference and/or working groups. Registration discounts available for both conference and working groups and for students. Keynoters and co-sponsors in formation; please inquire if interested. Please address any questions to Brandon Moye, moyeb@kean.edu. Further information about the institute and registration forms can be found at http://grad.kean.edu/mahgs-conference. Respectfully, Tibi Galis Executive Director Auschwitz Institute for Peace and Reconciliation

TRANSITION FROM military rule to democracy remains far from assured in Burma, where the military continues to be a formidable force. Now it is carrying out a scorched-earth offensive against Rohingya Muslim militants in Rakhine state, a campaign that has forced 65,000 civilians to flee across the border to Bangladesh amid reports of mass rape, torture and the killing of innocents. Some 90 people have died. Therein lies a challenge for Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the democracy movement who now tenuously steers the country, and for Burma’s foreign partners. We have urged Aung San Suu Kyi to be more outspoken in support of the long-suffering Rohingya minority, especially now that she has made the crossing from dissident to political leader of her country, which is also known as Myanmar. We think she should bring to bear her considerable moral standing as a Nobel laureate and do what she can — including promote unhindered investigation and reporting from the region — to end the abuses. But the ferocious assault on the Rohingya is being waged by the military, and the generals must be held to account first and foremost. With a quarter of parliament seats reserved for the military, those generals still dominate the power structure of this Buddhist-majority country. The latest conflict began Oct. 9 when a newly formed group of Rohingya insurgents struck in the northern part of Rakhine state at three posts near the border with Bangladesh, killing nine police officers. The group, well-funded and organized, has been identified as Harakah al-Yaqin by the International Crisis Group, marking a turn to guerrilla tactics and violence by Rohingya militants. Since then, the Burmese military has responded harshly, including with widespread destruction of villages and atrocities against civilians. The government has denied allegations of abuse, but human rights investigators and journalists have been largely barred from the scene. This is a delicate moment when outside pressure might do some good. The Obama administration celebrated Burma’s progress toward democracy, lifting sanctions and making high-level visits to encourage it. We have no idea whether President Trump will care a whit for the plight of this battered people. He and his appointees have shown no enthusiasm for advancing human rights abroad, and Mr. Trump is fond of strongmen. But the United States has made a big down payment on Burma’s journey toward a democratic society; further effort is called for, if a way can be found to do it without undermining Aung San Suu Kyi’s shaky position. The conflict in Rakhine state should also bring a stronger response from the United Nations. The Rohingya civilian suffering is intense, even if it is not on the radar screen in the West. Though the scale of violence so far is smaller, think of it as the Aleppo of Asia — a nascent armed insurgency; a mass of helpless, innocent people; religious fault lines; and crushing blows from a powerful military. This is a powder keg that should concern all. ___________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 The Post's View

As a member of a persecuted minority in Iraq, 24-year-old Shaker Mahie has seen his people massacred, raped and scattered across a new continent. Now, the Yazidi — whose faith is older than Christianity — are at the center of a new European dilemma. Portugal has offered to take in several hundred of the 2,500 Yazidi refugees living in Greece, arguing that their mistreated community merits special protection. Athens has rejected the offer, worried that other countries might start cherry-picking asylum applications based on religion or ethnicity. Does that make the Yazidis victims of discrimination or nondiscrimination? It's a question that could be keeping some of them in limbo. Ana Gomes, a European Parliament member from Portugal who has been an outspoken advocate of the resettlement proposal, says Greek concerns are misplaced. Yazidis, she noted, were targeted for slaughter by Islamic State militants at home and face ongoing harassment from fellow Iraqis stranded in migrant camps. "These people have been victims of negative discrimination in resettlement to other European countries when they should be having positive discrimination in recognition of the barbarity they have suffered," Gomes told the Associated Press after returning from a visit to refugee camps in Greece. The dispute comes as the European Union wrestles with how to protect the most vulnerable refugees while making sure that member nations are sharing the cost of taking in newcomers. Delays and political obstruction have impeded an emergency relocation program meant to ease the disproportionate load carried by Italy and Greece. Over centuries, Yazidis have been the victims of purges by rulers who regarded their religious symbols and practices as devil worship. Islamic State militants used the same explanation when they targeted the insular community for conversion and elimination. Iraq's remote Sijar region, the Yazidi minority's heartland, is where thousands of civilians were massacred and thousands more fled in 2014. The United Nations has described the attacks as genocide. In a small hotel room near the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Mahie watches his son and daughter play on the floor with a toy dump truck, and struggles to find words to recount the horrors witnessed by his young family. He remembers IS fighters entering his village two years ago. "They (took) girls and women and killed the men," he said. He and his family fled into the mountains of Sijar before crossing into Turkey and paying smugglers to get them to Greece. The Yazidis' recent plight has been highlighted by the revelations of women being captured by IS fighters for sexual slavery. Two Yazidi women, Nadia Murad and Lamiya Aji Bashar, received an annual award for human rights last month from the European Parliament. But old prejudices also have followed the Yazidi to Europe, where they have reported being attacked by other refugees at camps and are often housed separately. "We take the issue of Yazidis very seriously because they have suffered such violence and persecution. We are doing everything we can to ensure their protection," Greek Migration Minister Yannis Mouzalas told The Associated Press. Greece says more than 60,000 refugees and migrants who arrived there hoping to make it further into Europe are stranded in the country, after EU and Balkan countries closed their borders last year. Athens is struggling to shelter them over the winter and pressing other European Union countries to honor relocation commitments. Portugal so far has taken in about half of the 1,618 asylum-seekers it pledged to accept under the EU's embattled relocation scheme. Nevertheless, it's Yazidi-specific invitation is unacceptable, Mouzalas said. "No government can discriminate on a racial basis," he said. "And those making a lot of noise around this issue are not helping the Yazidis." Yazidi refugees themselves are split on the offer from Portugal. Some worry about further dispersing the members of a minority group thought to number only several hundred thousand worldwide. "I don't want to go to Portugal," Mahie said. "My mother and my brother are in Germany and my father is in Iraq. It's difficult for one family someone to (be) in this country and someone to (be) in another country." To others, the idea of a safe haven is appealing. Like Mahie, Riad Salo sought refuge from IS in the mountains of Sinjar; his father-in-law died there. The younger of Salo's two daughters, Xzidxan, was born in a tent at a refugee camp near Mount Olympus in northern Greece. Salo said he feared continued persecution from other Iraqis even if another EU country agrees to relocate his family. "I don't want to go to a country where there are many (other refugees)," he said. "I want to go to Portugal because it's very safe." ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Fox News

WASHINGTON — President Trump signed an order on Wednesday to start building a border wall with Mexico and was planning to indefinitely block Syrian refugees from entering the United States and to institute a temporary halt on all refugees from the rest of the world. The refugee policies are part of an executive order he is expected to issue as soon as Thursday, according to an eight-page document, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times. The order would require tougher vetting of foreigners fleeing persecution and place a monthlong ban on allowing any person into the United States from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia or Yemen. Refugee admissions would be halted for 120 days while a review of screening procedures is completed. When it resumes, the program would be far smaller, with the total number of refugees resettled in the United States this year more than halved, to 50,000 from 110,000. Trump Drafts Executive Order on Refugees An early draft of an executive order that President Donald J. Trump is expected to issue as early as Thursday outlines his plans to indefinitely block Syrian refugees from entering the United States and institute a temporary halt on all refugees from the rest of the world. OPEN DOCUMENT White House officials declined to comment on the forthcoming plan, which emerged as Mr. Trump announced the construction of his long-promised Mexican border wall and aggressive new measures intended to crack down on undocumented immigrants inside the United States. Through a pair of executive orders he signed at the headquarters of the Department of Homeland Security, Mr. Trump was laying out a new vision for fortifying the nation’s borders and sharply increasing efforts to round up and remove some of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States — including by enlisting state and local officials to track and apprehend them. “Federal agencies are going to unapologetically enforce the law — no ifs, ands or buts,” said Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary. “The American people get the final say who can and cannot enter our nation.” The plans were a stark break with former President Barack Obama’s approach and what was once a bipartisan consensus to devise a path to citizenship for some of the nation’s undocumented immigrants. Mr. Trump, whose campaign rallies featured chants of “build the wall,” has instead described many undocumented immigrants as criminals who must be found and forcibly removed from the United States. Trump's Order Would Cut the Number Of Refugees Admitted to the U.S. in Half The order would also indefinitely block all refugees from Syria. OPEN GRAPHIC “They’re setting out to unleash this deportation force on steroids, and local police will be able to run wild, so we’re tremendously concerned about the impact that could have on immigrants and families across the country,” said Joanne Lin, senior legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. “After today’s announcement, the fear quotient is going to go up exponentially.” Until the refugee orders are signed, it is possible the language could change. The order on refugees is also in line with a Muslim ban that Mr. Trump proposed during the campaign, though it does not single out any particular religion in its text. It orders the secretary of state and the secretary of homeland security to prioritize those who are persecuted members of religious minorities, effectively ensuring that Christians living in predominantly Muslim countries would be at the top of the list. “In order to protect Americans,” the order states, “we must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward our country and its founding principles.” It says that for the time being, admitting anyone from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia or Yemen is “detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

Burmese ethnic minorities walk out after mass at a Catholic church at Htaykho Village in Kayah State, Burma. © 2015 Reuters/Soe Zeya Tun (YANGON, January 24, 2017) — Burmese authorities should immediately release or appropriately charge two ethnic Kachin Baptist leaders arbitrarily detained by the military since December 24, 2016, Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights said today. The military in northern Shan State should urgently transfer Langjaw Gam Seng, 35, and Dumdaw Nawng Lat, 65, to police custody so that they are no longer at risk of abuse by military personnel. The two went missing after being called to a military base, apparently linked to their assisting journalists investigating an unlawful military airstrike. On January 19, the military published a statement on Facebook acknowledging their arrest and detention, and alleging that the two had been providing various forms of support to the Kachin Independence Army (KIA). In the month since their arrest, the military had not filed charges, turned them over to civilian authorities, or provided them access to lawyers or family members, as required by Burmese and international law. “The arrest of the two Kachin Baptist leaders appears to be retaliation for their help in exposing wartime abuses,” said Matthew Smith, chief executive officer of Fortify Rights. “The military came clean about their detention only after local and international outcry, but they’re are still at grave risk.” The military in its statement alleges that Langjaw Gam Seng, a youth leader with the Kachin Baptist Convention (KBC), and his cousin Dumdaw Nawng Lat, an assistant KBC pastor, acted as the “financial supporter, informer, recruiter, rumor monger” for the Kachin Independence Army. According to the statement, Dumdaw Nawng Lat “gave information about movements of Tatmadaw [Burmese Army] columns and financial support to the insurgents and spread slanderous news and propaganda by having links with outside media in order to mislead the local and international communities.” Langjaw Gam Seng allegedly “gave information about the Tatmadaw to KIA insurgents, recruited new members, and transported fuel for smooth transport of insurgents during the battles.” The military statement added the two had been “placed under investigation” under article 376 of the 2008 Constitution, which allows detention without judicial review for more than 24 hours as a precautionary measure for national security or the “prevalence of law and order, peace and tranquility in accord with the law in the interest of the public.” The military also said that the “arrestees will be handed over to the relevant police station systematically, in order to take action against them under the law.” Thus far, no such action has been taken. “The government needs to act now to ensure that these men are urgently transferred out of the darkness of military detention where they’re highly vulnerable to abuse,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Government leaders are responsible for the safety and security of these two men and should ensure lawyers and family have immediate access.” In December 2016, the two men had guided journalists who were reporting on Burmese airstrikes that allegedly severely damaged a Catholic church in Northern Shan State. Photographs of damage to the church were published on the internet in early December. Prior to the military statement, the men were feared to have been forcibly disappeared, Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights said. Local government authorities failed to respond to repeated inquiries on the whereabouts of the two men. Presidential spokesperson Zaw Htay denied that the military had detained them. On January 20, Yanghee Lee, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Burma, raised concerns about the dangers facing individuals who speak out on rights issues. She said that the message from the government was clear: “Do not express yourself. Do not speak your mind if your opinion or position does not fit or support the narrative and agenda of those who have no qualms in how you live or die.” Fighting between the Burmese military and the Kachin Independence Army in northern Burma has displaced more than 23,000 people during the past several weeks. On January 11, Chinese state security forces reportedly forced back to Burma approximately 4,000 Kachin civilians fleeing Burmese military airstrikes and heavy artillery attacks. “The Burmese military’s handling of this case shows how far the army needs to go to bring the government in line with international human rights standards,” Robertson said. “The dangers to civilians and those who are helping to expose abuses in conflict areas seem as great as ever – strong action is needed to bring changes fast.” ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Human Rights Watch

Rohingya boys and girls as young as 11 and 12 spoke of atrocities they had witnessed that forced them to flee Myanmar’s Rakhine state in recent weeks, with some telling BenarNews they saw Burmese security personnel burn their siblings alive. A correspondent for BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated online news service, interviewed at least 19 children during visits to refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar, a district in southeastern Bangladesh where some 65,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled from Rakhine state since early October, according to U.N. estimates. “The military whisked away my brother and killed him, set fire to our house, and tortured the women,” said Tasmin Khatun, 11, using a term that refers to the rape of women. “We hid in the nearby jungle. I still shudder in fear when I think about it. I cannot sleep at night,” the Rohingya girl told BenarNews at the Kutupalong camp for unregistered refugees in Ukhiya sub-district. Myanmar security forces have been accused of committing atrocities against the Rohingya population, such as targeted killings, rapes and the burning of homes, while mounting a crackdown after the killings of nine Burmese border guards by suspected militants in October. Myanmar’s government has defended itself from widespread international criticism, denying that its forces committed such abuses against members of the stateless Rohingya Muslim minority. Last week, BenarNews reported that 17 of 54 Rohingya women interviewed at refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar said members of the Myanmar security forces had raped them. Thrown into flames Rohingya youngster Abdul Malek, at the Leda refugee camp in Teknaf sub-district, said he witnessed Myanmar security personnel throw his brother into the family’s burning home. “Military threw my twin into the fire. … They have been killing everybody by setting fires,” Abdul told BenarNews. He and the rest of his family members were able to escape by jumping into a river as security forces shot at them, Abdul alleged. Zohur Ali, 12, a refugee at the Kutupalong camp, recounted a similar incident, saying that security personnel snatched his two small siblings from his mother’s lap and threw them into the flames of their home that had been set alight. Zohur’s mother Rahima Khatun, 35, told BenarNews: “Zohur cries even while sleeping. I do not know when he will recover from this.” Nazim Uddin, 12, whose mother died during childbirth several months ago, said he saw his father beaten and arrested by Myanmar security personnel “some days ago,” before he, four siblings and an uncle fled across the border. Two of his siblings, 2-year-old Md Yeasin and 4-year-old Umme Salma, whom he cradled, remain traumatized, Nazim told BenarNews. Count under way An official with the Dhaka office of the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) said it is working to verify the estimate that 65,000 Rohingya have arrived in southeastern Bangladesh since October. This number does not include at least 300,000 Rohingya refugees who live in camps in Cox’s Bazar but who fled violence in Rakhine state years ago. “To determine the number of the newly arrived Rohingya, we have been conducting a survey. So far, we have registered 12,000 new arrivals including 5,000 children,” the UNHCR official told BenarNews on condition of anonymity. Ali Hossain, the deputy commissioner of Cox’s Bazar district, told BenarNews the government had yet to count the number of Rohingya “who entered Bangladesh afresh.” The government, however, has been immunizing children age 5 and younger at the camps and giving them doses of Vitamin A, he said. Md Alam, a leader of Block B at the Leda camps, said officials were finding it difficult to feed all the children in the camp. “Where is the time to look after the mental trouble?” he told BenarNews. “These children are mentally devastated as they came across a horrible reality; counseling is a must for their mental recovery. But where is the opportunity? Many of them are not getting food for survival,” C.R. Abrar, an expert on refugee issues and professor at the University of Dhaka, told BenarNews. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________(c) 2017 BenarNews | RFA

Religious leaders and faith-based organizations have a responsibility to contribute to peaceful societies and the international community must support these grassroots peacemakers in their daily activities, the United Nations official mandated to fight genocide today told an international meeting on religion. Addressing the third annual symposium on ‘The Role of Religion and Faith-Based Organizations in International Affairs,’ now under way at UN Headquarters in New York, Adama Dieng, the UN Special Adviser for Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, said that religious leaders “have a responsibility to contribute to the building of peaceful, inclusive and cohesive societies that are resilient to conflict, violent extremism and atrocity crimes.” The Office of Mr. Dieng is one of the sponsors of the symposium, along with the UN Inter-agency Task Force for Engagement with Faith-based Organizations and the Committee of Religious NGOs at the UN. This year’s thematic focus is on just, inclusive and sustainable peace. Mr. Dieng, who is currently in Doha participating in a meeting on the responsibility to protect, delivered his address via a video message. He said the primary responsibility for creating sustained peace lies with States, who must promote the values of diversity and manage diversity constructively – however, “collaboration” with religious leaders remains vital. “They can reach out to and influence large numbers of people,” Mr. Dieng. He added that religious leaders “provide support during emergencies, respond to the needs of marginalized communities, as well as address grievances as soon as they emerge and advocate for the rights of their communities.” Last year, the UN Security Council passed resolution 2282 (2016) , which calls for a comprehensive approach to transitional justice and accountability to consolidate peace, reduce poverty and prevent countries from relapsing into conflict. In his video message, Mr. Dieng discussed his recent work with religious leaders on the Fez Plan of Action on the role of religious leaders and actors in preventing incitement to violence that could lead to atrocity crimes. The Plan was named after the Moroccan city where the first steps on a strategy on the role of religious leaders were taken in 2015. According to Mr. Dieng, the Plan will be launched in New York during the first quarter of this year, followed by meetings on its implementation. “Implementing the Fez Plan of Action will be a good starting point in enhancing religious actors’ engagement in the prevention of atrocity crimes, as well as enhancing collaboration among religious leaders, Member States and civil society to prevent incitement to violence,” he said. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 UN News Centre

Bulgarian border police stand near a barbed wire fence on the Bulgarian-Turkish border on July 17, 2014. © 2014 Reuters Bulgarian law enforcement officials summarily return asylum seekers and migrants to Turkey, often after stealing their belongings and subjecting them to violence. In research in six countries between October and December 2015, Human Rights Watch interviewed 45 asylum seekers and migrants from Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq who described 59 incidents of summary returns from Bulgaria to Turkey between March and November. Twenty-six people said they had been beaten by police or bitten by police dogs. All but one said they were stripped of their possessions, in some cases at gunpoint by people they described as Bulgarian law enforcement officials, then pushed back across the border to Turkey. “Bulgaria needs to end the abuse and unlawful treatment of people seeking protection in Europe,” said Lydia Gall, Balkans and Eastern Europe researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The Bulgarian government should immediately put a stop to summary returns, investigate allegations of abuse and pushbacks, and hold those responsible to account.” Fourteen asylum seekers and migrants who had been held in detention in Bulgaria described beatings by guards, lack of adequate food, and unsanitary conditions. Three also described being robbed and, in one case, beaten by Bulgarian law enforcement officials when the person tried to cross from Bulgaria into Serbia. Human Rights Watch wrote to the Bulgarian Interior Ministry on December 15, raising concerns identified during its research. The Interior Ministry has not yet responded. Some asylum seekers and migrants described being apprehended by people wearing uniforms and insignia consistent with those worn by Bulgarian law enforcement officials. Others were unable to describe insignia and uniforms because they were apprehended at night, but they said that those responsible for the abuse were wearing uniforms and were often accompanied by dogs. They said that officials stripped them of money and other belongings and took them in police cars to the Turkish border, forcing them to cross back into Turkey. In some cases they were also subjected to violence. Human Rights Watch documented similar abuses at the Bulgaria-Turkey border and in detention centers in April and September 2014. The Belgrade Center for Human Rights documented similar abuses in November 2015. The new Human Rights Watch findings suggest that the Bulgarian government has failed to take the necessary action to stop summary expulsions and violence and abuse at its borders and its detention centers. The migrants said that the pushbacks to Turkey in 46 of the 59 cases involved abusive and violent behavior, including beatings with fists and batons, kicks, and dog bites. In all but one case, asylum seekers and migrants told Human Rights Watch that Bulgarian law enforcement officials thoroughly searched them and took their money, mobile phones, food, drinks, and other items. Asylum seekers and migrants trying to leave Bulgaria near the Serbian border also described being robbed and, in one case, beaten by people they described as Bulgarian law enforcement officials. They gave detailed accounts of being apprehended by people they understood to be law enforcement officials close to the Serbian border, then being stripped of their money, mobile phones, and other items. In April 2014, the European Commission opened infringement proceedings against Bulgaria in connection with the allegations of summary returns. The procedure stalled after the Bulgarian authorities flatly denied any wrongdoing despite evidence from Human Rights Watch and other groups. In September 2015, the commission initiated new infringement proceedings against Bulgaria for failure to implement the Qualification Directive, which sets out the minimum standards for the qualification of international protection as well as protection from refoulement, which under international law requires not returning anyone to a country where they would be at risk of being subjected to torture or other cruel or inhuman treatment. The summary return of asylum seekers before their protection claims are considered violates Bulgaria’s obligations under domestic and international law, including the 1951 Refugee Convention, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights, which guarantees the right to asylum. While Bulgaria is entitled to secure its border, under universal standards embodied in the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, law enforcement officials, including border agents, may use force only when nonviolent means have been unsuccessful. Any use of force must be proportionate and minimize damage and injury. Taking asylum seekers and migrants’ possessions through the threat or use of force may amount to robbery under domestic criminal law. The Bulgarian authorities should investigate allegations of excessive use of force and robbery by its law enforcement officials. “The failure by Brussels to hold Bulgaria to account for serious rights violations has left the pushbacks and violence against migrants and asylum seekers unchecked,” Gall said. “The European Commission should seriously pursue these blatant violations of EU standards and press Bulgarian authorities to bring to them to a halt.” Accounts of Violent Pushbacks to Turkey Between October and December 2015, Human Rights Watch interviewed 45 asylum seekers and migrants, including eight unaccompanied children, in Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia, Slovenia, and Turkey. They described 59 incidents of summary expulsions from Bulgaria to Turkey. To protect the identity of those interviewed, pseudonyms are used. In all but one case, witnesses and victims said people they described as Bulgarian law enforcement officials stripped them of their money, mobile phones, water, energy drinks, and food before taking them in police cars or trucks to the Turkish border and forcing them to cross. Interviewees described being bitten by police dogs or seeing others bitten; being beaten with truncheons and wooden branches; and in one case, beaten in the head with a gun butt. Some said that Bulgarian law enforcement officials fired into the air after spotting groups of asylum seekers and migrants. Sinisha, 22, from Afghanistan, described a November 2015 incident: We saw the police car and started running. We heard a kid screaming behind, turned around, and saw the dog biting him. We stopped and saw how the dog dragged him about 15 meters, viciously biting him, he wouldn’t let go. Then, about eight police officers came and one started beating the kid while the dog continued biting him…Then the police told the dog to stop biting but grabbed my friend and had the dog bite his arm. Then another police hit me on the head with the butt of his gun. It bled badly. I asked the police for a napkin to wipe the blood from my face but instead he kicked me on the leg…They took two mobiles, my money and new shoes…They brought us by police cars to the border and took wooden sticks and started hitting all of us and made us cross the border to Turkey. Hamdast, 16, from Afghanistan, described how, after crossing into Bulgaria in early November from Turkey, he and 47 others were caught by Bulgarian law enforcement officials: They made us stand in a line. They made us take off our trousers down to our knees and searched us to see if we had money. There were five police officers. They took 200 euros from me. They also took food and my phone. I had new boots, the policeman liked them and took them as well. My bag, which had been full, was given back to me empty…One officer hit me on the face with a tree branch because I talked…Then police trucks came and took all of us to the Turkish border and the police kicked each of us while making us cross into Turkey. Abdullah, 16, also from Afghanistan, said that in early November, people he believed to be Bulgarian law enforcement officials chased his group of about 40 Afghan men, shot at them, and then beat them: When Bulgarian police saw us, we tried to run away. They chased us with dogs and shot at us. There were five police. When they caught us, they started beating us. They kicked me and the others wherever they could reach, [they kicked] my arm and my head. They did this for about an hour and threatened us with the dogs. They took my money and mobile. Nazem, 18, from Afghanistan, said he had been pushed back to Turkey five times in November. He recounted a similar incident in mid-November: We crossed the border. We saw a police dog behind us and hit it with a scarf so it ran away. A few minutes later, we saw a policeman behind us and he shot in the air. We sat down. The policeman recognized me and said, ‘You are here for the third time.’ Then he [had his] dog to bite me and he [the dog] bit my right arm. Then he [law enforcement official] pointed a gun to my head and said that if I come again he would kill me…They took US$500 from me and two mobiles and made us cross the border into Turkey. Nasratullah, 23, from Afghanistan, said that people he believed to be Bulgarian law enforcement officials pushed him back to Turkey three times between late October and mid-November: When police caught us, they beat all 22 of us. They searched us and took money and mobiles from everyone…First they searched us and found the money and started beating us. They had electric sticks. They beat me with the stick on my arm and on my back. I don’t know for how long [they beat me] because when they beat me I lost consciousness. After they took everything from us they left us with only clothes, put us in cars and took us to the Turkish border and made us cross. Five days later, Nasratullah crossed into Bulgaria a second time with a group of 50 men: A police dog bit my friend in the leg. He bled and we took a scarf and tied it around his leg…When we tried to help my friend, they started beating us. They [five policemen] all had electric sticks that they beat us with. Then police cars came, they put us inside them and brought us to the Turkish border and made us cross. In some cases, asylum seekers and migrants said that people they believed to be Bulgarian law enforcement officials had handed them over to Turkish police. Rahman, 20, from Afghanistan, who said he had been pushed back to Turkey three times, described a mid-November incident involving about 50 people: They [Bulgarian law enforcement officials] took all they could from us and beat me… There were four police and two dogs. First they shot in the air and then they let the dogs after us…They beat me with fists in the face. Then they put us in a [police] car, took us to the border and gave us to the Turkish police.” Abuse, Poor Conditions in Bulgarian Detention Centers Fourteen asylum seekers and migrants, including three unaccompanied children under 18, described poor conditions in at least two detention centers in Bulgaria: Busmantsi and Elhovo. Four said they had experienced or witnessed abusive behavior, including beatings, by Bulgarian officials in detention centers. Sina, 16, described his mistreatment during his 15-day detention in early November in Busmantsi: The guards would yell, ‘Why do you come to our country?’…[after] five or six days, they [guards] kicked me one time…I didn’t know how long I would stay at the camp…no one knew…the food was scarce, there was never enough to eat. 17-year-old Sehr, from Afghanistan, also described ill-treatment during his 30-day detention in Busmantsi in late October: They [guards] beat me seven times there [in Busmantsi]. They [guards] hit me with wooden sticks and there was no reason for the beating. They hit me on my legs and on my back. They beat all Afghans there… 20-year-old Gulzar, from Afghanistan, gave a similar account of beatings that occurred in mid-November in a detention center he could not name but where he was held for 15 days. He said that guards beat him and took his money. Asylum seekers and migrants described dirty conditions and inadequate amounts of food in the detention centers. A 25-year-old man from Syria said that he was held for two days in very dirty conditions at Elhovo detention center and given bad food. Nasratullah, the 23-year-old Afghan who had described being pushed back to Turkey, described dirty conditions and insufficient food in a detention center he could not name: I was there for eight days [in early November]. It was a closed camp. It was dirty, the beds were broken, and they didn’t give us enough food to eat. I never got full… Asylum seekers and migrants in all but two cases told Human Rights Watch that food rations in detention centers were insufficient. Abuse at the Bulgaria-Serbia Border Human Rights Watch interviewed three asylum seekers and migrants who described 11 incidents in which Bulgarian law enforcement officials apprehended them close to the Serbian border, stripped them of belongings, and brought them to police stations for 24 hours, often without water or food. In two cases, arrests involved physical abuse. Didar, 21, from Afghanistan told Human Rights Watch: [In late November] my friend was beaten by Bulgarian police as we tried to cross into Serbia. They [police] asked us to show our money and mobiles and told us to take them out of our pockets. I took out my money and phone and gave to them but my friend hid his. When police found his money, they started beating him. Two police beat him, one with fists and the other one with a stick. He beat him on the face with the stick, he didn’t plan to but my friend turned his head and the stick hit his nose…he is in hospital in Sofia because of it. The Human Rights Watch researcher saw photos of the wounds that appear consistent with his account of being beaten with a police baton. An 18-year-old Afghan man said he had been arrested seven times between mid-October and mid-November by Bulgarian police while trying to enter Serbia and described abuse and robbery during each arrest: Every time Bulgarian police caught us they beat us, mistreated us and took our money…They kicked us, they used a wooden stick, they swore at us and used bad language. They talked badly about our mothers and fathers. They kicked us and hit us wherever they could. Every time they arrested us they did this…One time when they caught us they brought us somewhere. They made us stay for 24 hours without food or water. They treated us very badly. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) 2017 Human Rights Watch

Croatian police are forcing asylum seekers back to Serbia from inside Croatia, in some cases using violence, without giving them an opportunity to lodge claims for protection, Human Rights Watch said today. Migrants wait in line to receive free food during a snowfall outside a derelict customs warehouse in Belgrade, Serbia January 9, 2017.© 2017 Marko Djurica/Reuters Human Rights Watch interviewed 10 people from Afghanistan, including two unaccompanied children, who described being forced back to Serbia since November 2016 after being apprehended in Croatian territory. They said they were denied the right to lodge asylum claims even though they said they wanted to seek asylum. Nine said the officers kicked and punched them, and all said that the officers took personal items, including money or mobile phones. “Accounts of Croatia’s shocking and abusive treatment of asylum seekers at its border are unworthy of an EU state,” said Lydia Gall, Balkans and Eastern Europe researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Authorities in Zagreb need to make sure that all officials are doing their duty to protect asylum seekers and not violently forcing them back to Serbia.” In four cases, asylum seekers described the uniforms and insignia worn by the men who forcibly returned them that match those worn by Croatian police. In three other cases, asylum seekers told Human Rights Watch that law enforcement officials introduced themselves as Croatian police and wore matching uniforms. In one case, an asylum seeker described the uniforms as “very dark, like black,” and in another, the asylum seeker described police vehicles. One asylum seeker was unable to give a detailed description of uniforms or insignia. Croatian authorities should investigate allegations that officials have engaged in abuses against asylum seekers and hold those responsible to account, Human Rights Watch said. Human Rights Watch wrote to Croatia’s Interior Ministry, on December 20, informing officials of the findings and requesting comment but has yet to receive a response. Hussein (not his real name), 24, from Afghanistan, told Human Rights Watch that he made it to a reception facility in Zagreb with two friends in early January. He said that staff there told him to go to a specific police station to register his asylum claim. At the police station after they allegedly let them register a claim the police put the three into a police car saying that they would transfer them to a refugee camp. Instead, the police took them to a site close to the Serbian border, beat them, laughed at them, took their phones and forced them back to Serbia. Ahmed, 18, from Afghanistan, (not his real name) said that he and 27 other men who crossed into Croatia on November 21 were beaten by what he described as Croatian police wearing dark color uniforms riding in police cars. “My little brother and I were beaten,” he said. “They hit me on the back and on my legs with batons… There was no reason for it… If you talked they [officials] would beat more. I was scared so I didn’t speak. Others were beaten more than me because they didn’t immediately sit down when they were told to.” Ahmed said that Croatian officials searched them and took their mobile phones. “After that,” he said, “they pushed us back to Serbia and said, ‘Don’t come back.” Another 18-year old from Afghanistan, travelling in a group of 29, including a family with three small children, said that on November 20 more than a dozen officials wearing dark blue uniforms apprehended the group far inside Croatian territory, split the group into separate cars, drove them to a site near the Serbian border, then beat all single men. “It was good that I had a lot of clothes as it served as padding,” he said. “They [officials] beat me with a baton on my head and legs. Five of them beat me…They also beat us as they made us run back into Serbia.” Croatia, along with Macedonia, Serbia, Slovenia and Austria, introduced new border restrictions in March 2016 in an attempt to close the Western Balkan route for asylum seekers and other migrants trying to enter the European Union irregularly. As a result of the border closures, thousands of asylum seekers and other migrants have been stuck in Serbia and elsewhere on the Western Balkan route, exposed to the weather, and dependent on smugglers who in some cases abuse or exploit them. Despite the restrictions, asylum seekers continue to attempt the journey through the Western Balkans. The increase in reported incidents affecting people trying to transit through Croatia may be connected to restrictions on asylum seekers imposed by Hungary at its border with Serbia. Pushbacks from Croatia to Serbia have been documented in the past. Moving Europe, a joint initiative of nongovernmental groups, in January 2016 documented violent pushbacks from Croatia to Serbia. The summary return of asylum seekers without consideration of their protection needs is contrary to EU asylum law, the EU charter of fundamental rights, and the international Refugee Convention. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees’ current guidance is that Serbia should not be considered a safe third country for asylum seekers. This means that Serbia is not a country to which EU states, including Croatia, should return asylum seekers because of its failure to protect their rights in line with the Refugee Convention and to provide effective remedies as required by the European Convention on Human Rights. Human Rights Watch has previously documented serious abuse of asylum seekers and other migrants and shortcomings in the asylum system, including lack of protection for unaccompanied children. Of 574 asylum applications submitted in 2016 in Serbia, a majority by Afghans, Iraqis and Syrians, only 19 people received refugee status, and 23 subsidiary protection. On December 10, 2015, the European Commission initiated infringement proceedings against Croatiaover its failure to implement EU legislation requiring the government to fingerprint asylum seekers and send the data to the central Eurodac system within 72 hours. The commission has not raised public concerns about summary returns of asylum seekers and other migrants from Croatia to Serbia, however. The European Commission should press Croatian authorities to halt summary returns of asylum seekers to Serbia and to investigate violent and other summary returns, Human Rights Watch said. “Croatia’s actions are putting asylum seekers and migrants at risk and flouting its legal obligations,” Gall said. “The European Commission should press Zagreb to comply with its obligations under EU and refugee law, investigate alleged abuses and provide meaningful access to asylum and fair procedures for those on its territory and at its borders.” ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ (c) Human Rights Watch

The moral hypocrisy, the mendacity, and the sheer foolishness of the Obama administration’s claim that there has been a “sea change” of improvement in Khartoum’s facilitating of humanitarian access in Sudan is staggering. This isn’t some shading of the truth; this isn’t slightly disingenuous; it is a bald lie. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, claims there has been a "sea change" of improved humanitarian access in Sudan A humanitarian with extensive experience on the ground in the Nuba Mountains of South Kordofan made this clear in a communication to me today, noting: “there's been absolutely no change in humanitarian access [in the Nuba Mountains—suffering under Khartoum’s humanitarian embargo for over five and a half years]. Not a single grain of sorghum nor one tablet of medicine has entered Nuba from any of the usual humanitarian agencies.” (email received January 17, 2017) The same is true for hundreds of thousands of people in Blue Nile, also under humanitarian embargo for over five years. What has been the effect of these humanitarian embargoes—still in place because the international community refuses to put sufficient pressure on the Khartoum regime to compel their lifting? One example of many: the South Kordofan/Blue Nile Coordinating Unit | Flash update #13 – 2nd March 2016: Emergency in Kau-Nyaro-Warni area (Southeastern Jebel, South Kordofan State): An estimated 65,000 people are in urgent need of assistance. Starving child in the Nuba Mountains of South Kordofan---denied all humanitarian access by the Khartoum regime The "Special Bulletin: Food security situation in Warni and Kau-Nyaro" released by the Food Security and Monitoring Unit (FSMU), reports levels “of food insecurity unprecedented” in their regular monitoring of the Two Areas. As many as sixty four percent (64%) of households in the area are severely food insecure; and a further thirty six percent (36%) are moderately food insecure (total 97%). This degree of food insecurity is not without its manifestations. Two hundred and forty two (242) people are reported to have died between July and December 2015, in the 8 villages assessed, 145 of which were attributed to lack of food. Almost 10 percent of those who died from lack of food were under the age of five. The households assessed had no food available to eat for an average of 16 days (out of the last 30 days). For an average of 10 days in 30 they went a whole day and night without any food. All households reported having no remaining food stock from the current harvest and are consuming wild foods, including wild roots and green leaves, as their main food source. High levels of insecurity around the area have prevented people from accessing land to harvest during the last agricultural season. This, along with low levels of rainfall and insufficient seeds, has contributed to the poor harvest. Insecurity has further deteriorated with the beginning of the new season of fighting. Fear of attacks by government-supported militias was assessed as the most prevalent factor preventing people from moving out of the area, and the main limiting factor when searching for wild foods. As quoted in the report, people “preferred to stay put and die, rather than undertake moving." Nothing has changed in the months since this assessment; conditions only worsen because Khartoum’s embargo continues to block food aid. Moreover, in Sudan generally UNICEF estimates that there are 2 million children under five in Sudan who are either severely or acutely malnourished ( http://sudanreeves.org/2014/09/05/an-internal-unicef-malnutrition-report-on-sudan-and-darfur-5-september-2014/ ). This staggering figure is a direct result of the gross mismanagement of the Sudanese economy by the National Islamic Front/National Congress Party regime. And in Darfur, the fact that humanitarians now have access to Golo town (in the Jebel Marra region of Central Darfur)—while important—doesn’t begin to make up for the denial of humanitarian assistance in countless areas of Darfur, including the Sortony camp for persons displaced from Jebel Marra during the massive 2016 offensive: Radio Dabanga reported the same obstruction by Khartoum-backed militias in May of 2016: Militiamen's road block causes water shortage in Sortony, North Darfur | May 23, 2016 | https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/militiamen-s-road-block-causes-water-shortage-in-sortony-north-darfur …and then again in October of 2016: North Darfur militiamen halt water for Sortony | October 24, 2016 | SORTONY, North Darfur | https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/north-darfur-militiamen-halt-water-for-sortony So severe were the shortages caused by Khartoum’s militia blockades that the UN was forced, at great expense, to airlift many displaced persons to camps near el-Fasher, capital of North Darfur. The Jebel Marra assault entailed some of the most brutal and comprehensively destructive tactics used by Khartoum during the the entire genocidal counter-insurgency, including the use of chemical weapons; and it was directed overwhelmingly against civilians. More than 200,000 people were displaced by Khartoum's regular and militia forces during the Jebel Marra offensive of 2016; thousands were killed, hundreds of them by chemical weapons See: “Scorched Earth, Poisoned Air: Sudanese Government Forces Ravage Jebel Marra,Darfur,” September 29, 2016 | Amnesty International | http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/scorched-earth-poisoned-air-sudanese-government-forces-ravage-jebel-marra-darfur See also: “Men with No Mercy: Rapid Support Forces Attacks Against Civilians in Darfur," Human Rights Watch | September 9, 2015 | https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/09/09/men-no-mercy/rapid-support-forces-attacks-against-civilians-darfur-sudan The Obama administration would have us believe that we should use a “look back” period of six months in assessing the various benchmarks that justified the move toward lifting sanctions on a regime led by Omar al-Bashir, a man indicted by the International Criminal Court for genocide and massive crimes against humanity in Darfur. But the case of Sortony just three months ago is certainly not unique; and more broadly, years of Khartoum’s relentless assault on humanitarian relief have taken a terrible toll. More than 30 humanitarian organizations have been expelled by the regime—thirteen in March 2009 alone; these organizations continue to face harassment, bureaucratic obstructionism, and physical assaults; and after fourteen years of violence and one of the most expensive humanitarian operations in history, donor fatigue has set in with profound consequences—consequences that figure nowhere in Ambassador Power’s mendacious claims about humanitarian access. An example I reported this past November is all too telling: Massive Funding Shortages Leave a Vast Population at Acute Health Risk in Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile Eric Reeves | November 19, 2016 | http://wp.me/p45rOG-1Yn For Khartoum, these shortages—in part engineered by the regime—are welcome news from the three marginalized areas in which they are engaged in genocidal counter-insurgency efforts. The news comes even as reports indicate that UN actions have forced some more than 27,500 Nuba to return to South Kordofan from South Sudan, including some 15,000 from Yida refugee camp in Unity State, South Sudan. OCHA Sudan Bulletin #46 (November 7 - 13, 2016) | http://reliefweb.int/report/sudan/sudan-humanitarian-bulletin-issue-46-7-13-november-2016 11 clinics have closed and 49 are at risk of closure in Darfur, South Kordofan and Blue Nile due to funding shortages. About 769,000 people (IDPs and host communities) are affected by these funding shortages. The following is the Radio Dabanga dispatch on this disturbing OCHA report | https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/relief-news/article/sudan-ocha-bulletin-46-funding-shortages-cause-closure-of-health-units-in-sudan OCHA Sudan Bulletin #46: Funding shortages cause closure of health units in Sudan | November 19, 2016 | KHARTOUM The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Sudan reports in its latest weekly bulletin that a lack of funding is forcing humanitarian organisations to either hand over or close down their health facilities in some parts of Sudan. In Um Keddada in North Darfur, about 140 suspected cases of diphtheria have been recorded. From January to September, 173,973 children suffering from acute malnutrition have been treated across Sudan. About 27,500 Sudanese refugees have returned from Yida camp in South Sudan to Sudan’s South Kordofan. The latest Sudan Health Sector Quarterly bulletin reports that the Sudanese Ministry of Health and the World Health Organization (WHO) assessed 60 health facilities in North, South, and West Darfur, Blue Nile and South Kordofan states. They found that 11 clinics have already closed and 49 are at risk of closure. The bulletin said that 769,000 people, including displaced and their host communities, in these states may face significant difficulties in accessing primary health care services as a result of funding shortages. About $7 million is needed to keep these facilities running for one year. According to the report, consequences of funding shortages include people not being able to access health services or buy medicine; no access to immunisation services; less assistance in the control of communicable diseases and outbreaks; and lack of referrals of complicated cases to other facilities. As Obama Exits the Presidency There are many reasons to be outraged at the decision by the Obama administration in its closing days to commit to a lifting of sanctions imposed on a genocidal regime—and strengthened during the Bush administration precisely because of genocide in Darfur. But most outrageous is the justification on the basis of “improved” humanitarian access—a “sea change” of improvement according to the Obama administration’s ambassador to the UN. I will be returning in subsequent analyses to the destructive consequences of this lifting of sanctions: encouraging Europe to pursue its even more aggressive policies of rapprochement with the Khartoum regime; undermining the International Criminal Court by rewarding a regime that comprises individuals charged, or destined to be charged, with massive crimes against humanity (and in the case of President al-Bashir, with multiple counts of genocide); President al-Bashir, indicted by the ICC on multiple counts of genocide and massive crimes against humanity undermining any international efforts to secure real humanitarian access in South Kordofan and Blue Nile: having already celebrated Khartoum’s “sea change” of improvement on this score, the Obama administration has hopelessly compromised meaningful negotiations; undermining any sense on the part of the regime that it need end its present, increasingly repressive domestic policies: mass arrests of political activists; unprecedented newspaper confiscations; President al-Bashir’s recent threat to issue again “shoot to kill” orders of the sort used in December 2013—the list is extremely long; undermining the political pressure deriving from a collapsing economy, a collapse that is galvanizing Sudanese civil society. Obama has, until the end, remained committed to a catastrophic policy view animated by the words of his former special envoy for Sudan, Princeton Lyman: “We [the Obama administration] do not want to see the ouster of the [Khartoum] regime, nor regime change. We want to see the regime carrying out reform via constitutional democratic measures.” (Interview with Asharq al-Awsat, December 3, 2011, http://english.aawsat.com/2011/12/article55244147/asharq-al-awsat-talks-to-us-special-envoy-to-sudan-princeton-lyman ) Obama is leaving office disgracing his 2008 campaign commitments to Darfur and the other victims of “slaughter” in Sudan. Those who continue to be “slaughtered,” or die because humanitarian access remains so severely attenuated, have no such easy exit. They must remain under the repressive, violent rule of the men Obama yesterday so richly rewarded. Candidate Obama traded heavily on Darfur during his 2008 presidential campaign, calling it a "stain on our souls"; President Obama reneged entirely on his promise "not to avert his eyes from human slaughter" -- Eric Reeves, Senior Fellow at Harvard University’s François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights

Numbers speak volume: in 1978, 280,000 (in 4 months); in 1991-92, 260,000; in 2012 (130,000 IDP + 100,000 boat people) The framing has changed since the army's concerns about the cross-border migration of a people whose presence in the region predates drawing of post-WWII boundaries between then East Pakistan and the Union of Burma in the 1950's and 1960's. By 1978, the military adopted a radical strategy of draining Southern and Middle part of the old Arakan region - renamed Rakhine - of Rohingyas. But the threat of the military regime of the newly independent Bangladesh (since 1971) to arm 280,000 Rohingya refugees on Bangladeshi soil forced the Burmese military's hand: over 230,000 were taken back via UNHCR assisted repatriation program. By 1991, the military stepped up its anti-Rohingya project and founded an inter-agency tool for persecution - Na Sa Ka (or border affairs unit) with the then Chief of Military Intelligence Gen. Khin Nyunt as its head. And a new exodus of over 260,000 ensued as the result of the new persecution. By 2012, the persecution was outsourced to the local Rakhine nationalists, who were increasingly vocal about their demands for fair-revenue sharing and greater political autonomy from the Burmese-controlled central government. Rakhines dropped their demands and gave into their powerful racist instincts to beat up the weak, rather than confront the powerful colonizer - the Burmese military. (The Burmese feudal court destroyed multi-ethnic coastal Arakan kingdom of Buddhist Rakhine kings on 1 January 1785). The Myanmar Gov, with the help of media and external players such as the ICG cleverly framed the state-directed persecution as "communal or sectarian conflict", primarily, thus absolving the state of its primary role in it. By 2016, the government allowed a small desperate gang of Rohingya youth to attack its border posts - nothing happened in the Rohingya communities, without the knowledge of the intelligence as the Rohingyas' physical movements are severely restricted and closely monitored - and pounced on the entire Rohingya region in N. Arakan, framing the lured attackers as "Muslim insurgents" "Jihadists" "terrorists", etc. Myanmar Generals sacrifices routinely thousands of Burmese rank and file soldiers in East and Nothern Burma's battles with Kachin, Shan, Kokant, etc. Loss of 9 soldiers in 3 separate if coordinated attacks by sword-wielding Rohingya "militants" is not even an issue worthy of War Office discussion. This evolutionary pattern of persecution - with the sole intent of destroying the Rohingyas - its identity, its history, its material foundations, its cultural foundations, its literal existence - is what i consider unequivocally a full-fledged GENOCIDE. Hitler only had less than 15 years to pursue his inhuman projects: but the Burmese military has all the time in its hands. For the world sits on its hand - since the first exodus of Rohingyas - numbering nearly 280,000 fled (by ex-General Khin Nyunt's own admissions) in 4 months in 1978 (12 Feb 1978 till June, with the month of May as a lull). ​ ======================================== 65,000 Rohingya flee from Myanmar to Bangladesh following crackdown: UN ========================================= The Rohingya Are Ready to Talk About the Atrocities in Burma But they need the help of the international community, not only Muslim countries, if they are to be heard. By PUTTANEE KANGKUN Jan. 9, 2017 12:34 p.m. ET Wall Street Journal ======================================== ‘There Are No Homes Left’: Rohingya Tell of Rape, Fire and Death in Myanmar By ELLEN BARRY JAN. 10, 2017 New York Times

Rohingya women near a refugee camp in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, in November.CreditMohammad Ponir Hossain/Reuters Last month, President Obama lifted sanctions against Myanmar, citing “substantial progress in improving human rights” following the historic election victory of the Nobel laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party in November 2015. Tragically, that praise is proving premature. Hopes that Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi would bring an end to the brutal repression of the Rohingya, a Muslim minority, lie dashed by a military campaign against the Rohingya in Rakhine State that began after an attack on a police station on Oct. 9. Since then, some 34,000 people have fled over the border to Bangladesh amid allegations of murder and rape by military forces, and satellite images of burned villages. At least 86 people have been killed. Yet, a commission appointed by Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi concluded last week that “there were no cases of genocide and religious persecution in the region.” Human rights groups rightly accuse the commission of a whitewash. In an effort to muzzle reporting, Myanmar’s government has barred independent journalists from the region, and dismissed reports of abuses as “fake news” and “fake rape.” After a disturbing video of police brutally beating Rohingya villagers in November surfaced in late December, the government said “legal action was being taken.” But, as Assistant Secretary of State Tom Malinowski observed, the video suggests such abuses are “normal and allowed.” Meanwhile, the International Crisis Group reports a new militant Rohingya organization with ties to individuals in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan was behind an Oct. 9 attack. The group warns that failure by Myanmar to address longstanding grievances by the Rohingya and the indiscriminate military crackdown in Rakhine State risk “generating a spiral of violence.” This is the last thing Myanmar needs. As the United Nations’ human rights chief, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein, said last month, Myanmar’s approach to the crisis is “shortsighted, counterproductive and even callous.” On Monday, the United Nations human rights envoy for Myanmar, Yanghee Lee, arrived in the country on a 12-day visit. She will present a report to the United Nations Human Rights Commission in March. Given the failure of Myanmar’s own commission to conduct a credible investigation, Ms. Lee should call for an independent investigation conducted under the auspices of the United Nations. Last April, the European Union renewed remaining sanctions on Myanmar on “arms and goods that might be used for internal repression” for one year. The union should renew those sanctions if the government of Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi fails to end abuses against the Rohingya. That failure would also warrant new sanctions from the United States. A version of this editorial appears in print on January 11, 2017, on Page A10 of the New York edition with the headline: Myanmar’s Shameful Denial.