Search This Blog

Saturday, March 15, 2014

The Silent New York Trial Of An Al Qaeda Terrorist

A Day In Court: The Trial Of An Al Qaeda Terrorist Who New York Forgot About

An artist sketch shows Suleiman Abu Ghaith, a militant who appeared in videos as a spokesman for al Qaeda after the 9/11 attacks, appearing at the U.S. District Court in Manhattan March 8, 2013. Abu Ghaith, a son-in-law of Osama bin Laden and one of the highest-ranking al Qaeda figures to be brought to the United States to face a civilian trial, pleaded not guilty to a charge of conspiracy to kill Americans. The U.S. District Court in Manhattan is only blocks from the site of the World Trade Center. REUTERS/Jane Rosenberg           
By

NEW YORK -- Outside the U.S. District Courthouse, crowds of people stream past on an otherwise normal Wednesday lunch break in Manhattan. People chat about colleagues at work, what they’ll be doing the coming weekend, the crisis in Ukraine. A French tourist stops to photograph the impressive façade of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan building and moves on.

There’s no hint of the dramatic story unfolding beyond the building’s gilded entrance, which on this day is a portal into a dark and momentous history whose climax took place only a few blocks away. Asked if they’re aware of what’s going on inside, most people shake their heads. The same is true of the NYPD police officer who slouches nonchalantly against the passenger door of his car, who also answers that he doesn’t know. What is happening? he asks.

What is happening is the ongoing civil trial of the most senior adviser to Osama bin Laden since the Sept. 11 attacks. Reputedly at the late bin Laden’s request, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, 48, became the voice of al Qaeda in the months leading up to 9/11, though few would have recognized him until after American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines flight 175 few into the Twin Towers. After that fateful day, al Qaeda, in the eyes of the world, had arrived. Abu Ghaith’s mandate, according to prosecutors, was simple: to terrorize the West with words and recruit the next generation of al Qaeda fighters.

S still image of Abu Ghaith A man identified as Suleiman Abu Ghaith appears in this still image taken from an undated video address. The son-in-law of Osama bin Laden who served as al Qaeda's spokesman has been arrested and detained in Jordan in an operation led by Jordanian authorities and the FBI, U.S. government sources said on Thursday. The sources said Abu Ghaith, a militant who had appeared in videos representing al Qaeda after the Sept. 11, attacks on New York and Washington in 2001, had initially been picked up in Turkey.  REUTERS/Handout
Abu Ghaith can be seen in videos saying Americans were ultimately responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and urging Muslims to fight “Jews, Americans and their allies” in powerful sermons that were transmitted around the world. Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University, said in a Washington Post article on March 7 that Abu Ghaith was “the vortex of al Qaeda’s operations at arguably the most important time in the movement’s history.”

Few would have expected that Abu Ghaith would one day sit in a courtroom just a few blocks away from the World Trade Center. The attack is the most traumatic event in the city’s history, yet even at the site itself -- which has become a major New York tourist destination, with vendors hawking postcards of the Twin Towers, few people are aware that the voice of the most feared terrorist organization in the world, who, in the aftermath of 9/11, raged that the attacks on America “shall not stop,” is on trial in the very city where the attacks began.

The reasons have to do with the forward momentum of a dynamic city like New York, with Americans’ willingness to abdicate responsibility to their government for pursuing, capturing and punishing its attackers, and with time and emotional fatigue.

Still, the courthouse is only a few blocks from the scene of the crime.

Just over a year ago, Abu Ghaith was captured by CIA operatives while getting off a flight in Jordan on his way from Afghanistan to visit family in Kuwait. Jordanian officials handed him over to U.S. authorities, and within days he was in custody in a federal prison in New York.

In announcing the arrest last March, Attorney General Eric Holder asserted, “No amount of distance or time will weaken our resolve to bring America's enemies to justice. To violent extremists who threaten the American people and seek to undermine our way of life, this arrest sends an unmistakable message:

There is no corner of the world where you can escape from justice, because we will do everything in our power to hold you accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”

It was a year before Abu Ghaith went to trial.

Images of the 9/11 attacks with the Brooklyn bridge
The second tower of the World Trade Center bursts into flames after being hit by a hijacked airplane in New York September 11, 2001.  REUTERS/Sara K. Schwittek

The trial commenced on March 5 with little fanfare. Among the resulting news articles, many seemed unclear about the charges; often, in headlines, Abu Ghaith was (and in some cases still is) reported as being on trial for helping plan 9/11. Sometimes it sounds like he is the first terrorist to be tried publicly in connection with 9/11, which he isn’t; that was Zacarias Moussaoui, who was sentenced to life in prison in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia after being found guilty of conspiring to kill American citizens.

Five other 9/11 conspirators have bounced between the military and civilian court systems, though to date none of them have actually been tried. The only other 9/11 trial took place in Hamburg, Germany, in which Mounir El Motassadeq was sentenced to 15 years -- likely far less than he would have received had he been convicted in the U.S.

Abu Ghaith was essentially the al Qaeda spokesman for 9/11, and he is the closest thing New York has seen to a 9/11 terrorist on trial. The fact that his trial is so little known is perhaps by design, said a woman who identified herself as a documentary filmmaker but declined to give her name. “You know that if it’s quiet, it’s been managed well. The last thing they want is a media circus,” she said as she sat outside of the courtroom.

But it isn’t as if the trial is taking place in secret. And New Yorkers have obviously not forgotten 9/11.

When President Obama was elected in 2008, he said, in the face of intense pressure, that he would oversee the closure of the contoversial U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay. Six years later, not only is the prison still open, but few people seem to really care about it anymore. Given that blasé attitude toward what had fairly recently been a source of widespread outrage and the object of an Obama campaign promise, it is also possible that people just don’t care anymore about a man like Abu Ghaith.

Yet clearly, the U.S. government does. When the indictment against Abu Ghaith was unsealed on March 6, Preet Bharara, the current U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, said: “Today’s action is the latest example of our commitment to capturing and punishing enemies of the United States, no matter how long it takes.”

Abu Ghaith became Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law after he married bin Laden’s daughter Fatima, and worked for al Qaeda prior to 9/11, though not much is known about his life before that. He worked as a teacher in Kuwait after the government banned him from preaching at mosques for verbally attacking the government in the wake of the first Gulf War. A year after the 9/11 attacks, Kuwait withdrew his citizenship over his issuance of a fatwa against American citizens. Abu Ghaith reportedly lived under house arrest in Iran from 2003 to 2013, when he managed to escape using a fake Saudi passport. He is not accused of planning or executing the attacks on Sept. 11; the specific accusations against him are for making threats against the U.S. and its citizens, primarily in the aftermath of 9/11, and for being the head recruiter for Al-Qaeda’s ground troops.

At his trial, not surprisingly, 9/11 is a constant presence.

The front of the U.S district court house
United States Marshals stand guard as lawyer Stanley Cohen (2nd L) arrives outside the Manhattan Federal Courthouse for the Suleiman Abu Ghaith trial in the Manhattan Borough of New York March 5, 2014. Abu Ghaith, a son-in-law of Osama bin Laden, went on trial in New York on Monday, becoming one of the highest-profile defendants to face terrorism charges in the United States.  REUTERS/Carlo Allegri

On this particular day of the trial, as the 10 a.m. start time approached, international news crews – mostly from the Middle East – began appearing at the barriers in front of the courthouse. Otherwise, the queues delineated by the barricades were empty, and there were just a few onlookers.

After passing the pensive-looking U.S marshals out front, the media encountered more security inside. When asked, one marshal conceded that extra security had been assembled for this “very high-profile” case. As the trial resumed, reporters took notes on the opening statements, but soon the film crews waiting in the vestibule packed up their equipment and left, and most of the reporters inside weren’t far behind.

"Osama bin Laden asked the defendent to deliver al Qaeda to the world," said Michael Ferrara, the prosecution lawyer. "He threatened further attacks against America and asked Muslims around the world to pick up arms and fight America."

Ferrara said he would prove in the course of the trial that al Qaeda was a terrorist organization and that Abu Ghaith has helped them in their attacks. In one video, says Ferrara, Abu Ghaith is seen saying, "When al Qaeda threatens, it delivers."

The opening statements were revealing, in different ways. The prosecution sought to keep the focus on 9/11 and read aloud comments from the videos released by Abu Ghaith on behalf of al Qaeda. “The storms shall not stop, especially the airplanes storm,” read Ferrara, from a speech Abu Ghaith made in the wake of 9/11.

The government contends that Abu Ghaith went to training camps all over Afghanistan and recruited bombers, that he instilled hatred and encouraged violence against America and its citizens. They say he was the voice of al Qaeda.

A few moments after the opening remarks by the assistant U.S. attorney, the judge cleared his throat, reminded one juror to stay awake and then summoned the defense lawyer, Stanley Cohen, to make his opening statement. Cohen stood up and made his way over to the jury. He introduced himself and said: “Ladies and gentlemen, you’ve just been to the movies.”

The defense for Abu Ghaith was simple. Cohen reminded the jury that this was not about 9/11, not about the USS Cole or any embassy bombings that have taken place. “After 13 years, this is about words and associations,” Cohen said. The basic facts that were established, he said, was that Abu Ghaith had killed no one and that the prosecution had set out to substitute “evidence for fear.”

Cohen then set about dismantling the prosecution’s two main witnesses, saying they were the only real terrorists who will be heard in the courtroom and that their words against Abu Ghaith were being heard only because they cut a deal to avoid a long sentence.

But then Cohen, who has a long bushy beard and a greying mane of hair that’s pulled into a ponytail, began describing his own cinematically themed story for the jury.

He started out by describing the story of Captain Thomas Preston, a regimental officer at the Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770. After the massacre, Preston was accused of murder along with eight of his troops. Such was the dislike of the British at that time that no lawyer would take the case. Preston requested the assistance of John Adams, who would later go on to become the second president of the United States.

It was clear what Cohen’s point was. He was trying to ensure a fair trial for Abu Ghaith and was pleading with the jury, through his story about Preston, that they should separate the trial from the events of 9/11 and the hatred they may feel for al Qaeda, in the same way Adams had asked the jury in 1770 to forget that the soldiers were British.

All John Adams had to do was prove that it was not Preston who shouted “fire” on the day of the massacre. Cohen said that throughout his time in Boston, Preston was accused of saying many nasty things against the patriots, but, ultimately, as was eventually proven in court, he was not the man who shouted “fire” on the day. As Cohen put it in the Manhattan court, Abu Ghaith, despite his nasty words about America and its citizens, was not the man who shouted “fire” during 9/11 or any other terrorist-related event. The acquittal of Preston and six of his fellow soldiers, much to the disbelief of those living in Boston at that time, was one of Adams’ proudest moments and a victory that prompted his famous quote that  Cohen repeated in court: "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

The cinematic touches seemed dated, as if the scenes were outtakes from a circa 2005 blockbuster drama. Abu Ghaith sat upright with a determined look on his face, and despite having spent a year in a New York prison, he appeared to be in a confident mood, something his lawyer confirmed to IBTimes outside of the court during a brief interview.

“He’s a strong man with a strong belief system,” Cohen said, standing on the courthouse steps. Notably, there was no one else around to argue otherwise.

The trial is expected to finish by the end of March.

TAIWAN: Joining search for plane shows int'l assimilation: scholars



Taipei, (CNA) The Republic of China's move to send Navy and Coast Guard Administration vessels to help with the international search for a missing Malaysia Airline plane has highlighted the nation's contribution to non-conventional security issues and its role in assimilating into international cooperation, scholar have said.

In a show of the spirit of humanitarian rescue, Taiwan has dispatched a Lafayette-class vessel, the Chengkung-class Navy frigate and two Coast Guard Administration (CGA) vessels to join the international search.

Tiehlin Yen, deputy executive director of the Center for Security Studies in Taiwan under National Chengchi University's Institute of International Relations, said he is happy to see that the government has taken the positive action.

Viewed from the perspective of changes in the international situation, it's best for Taiwan's diplomacy to participate in "non-conventional issues" such as climate change, natural disasters and rescue operations, he said.

By doing so, Taiwan will have the opportunity to improve its international image, he said.

Yen said that the search operation cannot be accomplished by one single nation alone, and Taiwan's participation and the process of multinational coordination, mission assignment and cooperation with other nations, have demonstrated Taiwan' s assimilation into international cooperation.

Huang Kuei-po, secretary general of the Association of Foreign Relations, said the government's dispatch of Navy and CGA ships is in line with the spirit of East China Peace Initiative put forth by President Ma Ying-jeou, which advocates that relevant parties set aside disputes and jointly tap resources.

But Huang also said that the humanitarian rescue mission should be simple with nothing to do with sovereignty.

Amid criticism that Taiwan's rescue has come too late, Premier Jiang Yi-huah also said that although "we have been a little late, we have not been absent from the rescue operation."

Taiwan's Navy frigate and two CGA vessels arrived Friday evening in an area of the South China Sea where the Boeing 777-200 possibly went missing.

In addition, its Air Force has been sending a transport plane every day to its assigned sea area starting March 10. It takes the plane three hours to reach the area, where it searches for two hours, and spends 3.5 hours on its return trip, so it's on duty between eight to 10 hours daily.

Taiwan's participation in the search has won international recognition and Taiwan has been assigned search areas. In view of logistic needs, Taiwan's vessels have also obtained consent from Malaysia to dock in its port.

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 disappeared from radar screens in the early hours of March 8 after taking off from Kuala Lumpur en route to Beijing.

Air traffic controllers lost contact with the aircraft, which was carrying 227 passengers -- including Taiwanese national Chuang Hsiu-ling -- and a 12-member crew.

No debris from the plane has been discovered so far, leaving investigators perplexed, without any clues to determine what might have happened to the plane.

(By Tang Pei-chun and Lilian Wu)
enditem/cs

Earlier stories on the missing MH370 flight:
Second Taiwanese warship to join search for missing Malaysian jet
Vessels on search mission could dock in Malaysia: official
Chinese martial arts choreographer aboard missing Malaysian jet
Taiwan's military continues search for missing Malaysian plane
Taiwan Coast Guard vessels to help look for missing plane (update)
Taiwan warned of attacks; official sees no link to missing plane
Brother of Taiwanese woman on missing flight holding out hope
Taiwanese woman among passengers of missing Malaysian flight

US offers $3m reward for Somali terror suspects on al-Shabaab Members: Ikrima, Jafar, and Yasin Kilwe



Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC 
The U.S. Department of State's Rewards for Justice program is offering rewards for information on three members of the Somalia-based terrorist organization Harakat Shabaab al-Mujahidin, al-Shabaab. The Department has authorized rewards of up to $3 million each for information leading to the arrest or conviction of Abdikadir Mohamed Abdikadir, Jafar, and Yasin Kilwe.

Since 2006, al-Shabaab has killed thousands of civilians, aid workers, and peacekeepers in Somalia, Uganda, and Kenya. Al-Shabaab claimed responsibility for the July 11, 2010, suicide bombings in Kampala, Uganda, which killed more than 70 people, including one American citizen. Al-Shabaab also claimed responsibility for the September 21-24, 2013, terrorist attack against the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi that left more than 60 people dead and nearly 200 wounded.

Al-Shabaab’s terrorist activities pose a threat to the stability of East Africa and to the national security interests of the United States. The U.S. Secretary of State named al-Shabaab a Foreign Terrorist Organization on March 18, 2008. In February 2012, al-Shabaab and the al-Qaida terrorist network jointly announced they had formed an alliance.

Abdikadir, better known as Ikrima, was born in 1979 in Kenya to Somali parents. Ikrima reportedly has medium-length hair and has worn a thick moustache. He is missing three fingers on his left hand. He has coordinated the recruitment of Kenyan youth into al-Shabaab and commanded a force of al-Shabaab’s Kenyan fighters in Somalia.

Jafar, also known as Amar, is an al-Shabaab facilitator and has served as Ikrima’s deputy, and is reportedly missing one eye.

Yasin Kilwe is al-Shabaab’s emir for Puntland in northern Somalia. Kilwe was officially appointed al-Shabaab’s leader in the region by Al-Shabaab emir Ahmed Abdi aw-Godane. Kilwe pledged his allegiance to al-Shabaab and al-Qaida in February 2012.

More information about these individuals is located on the Rewards for Justice website at www.rewardsforjustice.net. We encourage anyone with information on these individuals to contact the Rewards for Justice office via the website, e-mail (RFJ@state.gov), phone (1-800-877-3927), or mail (Rewards for Justice, Washington, D.C., 20520-0303, USA). All information will be kept strictly confidential.

The Rewards for Justice program is administered by the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Since its inception in 1984, the program has paid in excess of $125 million to more than 80 people who provided actionable information that put terrorists behind bars or prevented acts of international terrorism worldwide.


Follow us on Twitter at https://twitter.com/Rewards4Justice.

Iraq considers allowing girls as young as EIGHT to marry as part of new laws that also force wives to submit to sex at their husband's whim


A file image of a young Iraqi girl. A proposed law would radically lower the legal age of marriage from 18

A new law being considered in Iraq could lead to girls as young as eight getting married and wives having to submit to sex at their husband's every request.

The controversial proposals have provoked outrage from activists both within Iraq and around the globe, who see it as a huge step backwards for women's rights.

The measure, aimed at creating different laws for Iraq's majority Shiite population, could further fray the country's divisions amid some of the worst sectarian bloodshed since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

Iraqi human rights activist Hana Adwar said: 'That law represents a crime against humanity and childhood. Married underage girls are subjected to physical and psychological suffering.'

Under current law, the legal age for marriage in Iraq is 18, or 15 with a guardian's approval.

However, with the proposed measure, known as the Jaafari Personal Status Law, there is no stipulated minimum age for marriage but there are rules regarding divorce for girls as young as eight.

The age of the girls is measured according to the lunar Islamic calender, which is 10 to 11 days shorter than the Gregorian calender each year. If this difference is taken into account, the law talks about men divorcing children as young as eight years and eight months.

Critics of the bill believe its authors slipped the age into the divorce section as a backhanded way to allow marriages of girls that young. Government statistics show that nearly 25 percent of marriages in Iraq, in 2011, involved someone under the age of 18, up from 21 percent in 2001 and 15 percent in 1997.
 

Planning Ministry spokesman Abdul-Zahra Hendawi said the practice of underage marriage is particularly prevalent in rural areas and some provinces where illiteracy is high.

The bill also makes the father the only parent with the right to accept or refuse the marriage proposal. 

The measure is thought to be a priority for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is expected to seek a third term of office in the upcoming elections
The measure is thought to be a priority for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is expected to seek a third term of office in the upcoming elections
Also, under the proposed measure, a husband can have sex with his wife even without her consent. The bill prevents women from leaving the house without their husband's permission, would restrict women's rights to parental custody after divorce and makes it easier for men to take multiple wives.
The law is based on the principles of a Shiite school of religious law founded by Jaafar al-Sadiq, the sixth Shiite imam.
Late last year, Iraq's Justice Ministry introduced the draft measure to the Cabinet, which approved it last month despite strong opposition by human rights campaigners. 

Parliament must still ratify the bill before it becomes law and this is unlikely to happen before the elections scheduled for April 30.

However, Cabinet support suggests it remains a priority for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who is widely tipped to seek a third term in office.

Baghdad-based analyst Hadi Jalo suggested electioneering could be the motivation behind the proposal. 

He said: "Some influential Shiite politicians have the impression that they should do their best to make any achievement that would end the injustice that had been done against the Shiites in the past." 

The formerly repressed Shiite majority came to power after the 2003 invasion that ousted Saddam Hussein's Sunni-led regime.

Since then, Shiite religious and political leaders have encouraged followers to pour in millions into streets for religious rituals, a show of their strength. 

Iraqi Justice Minister Hassan al-Shimmari, a Shiite, has brushed off the criticism of the bill. His office introduced a companion bill that calls for the establishment of special Shiite courts that would be tied to the sect's religious leadership.

Electioneering could be the motivation behind the proposal, as politicians try and appeal to Iraq's Shiite majority
Electioneering could be the motivation behind the proposal, as politicians try and appeal to Iraq's Shiite majority

Al-Shimmari insists that the bill is designed to end injustices faced by Iraqi women in past decades, and that it could help prevent illicit child marriage outside established legal systems. 

"By introducing this draft law, we want to limit or prevent such practices," al-Shimmari said. 

But Sunni lawmaker Likaa Wardi believes it violates women's and children's rights and creates divisions in society. 
She said: 'The Jaffari law will pave the way to the establishments of courts for Shiites only, and this will force others sects to form their own courts. This move will widen the rift among the Iraqi people.' 

New York-based Human Rights Watch also strongly criticized the law this week. 

Joe Stork, the organisation's Middle East director, said: 'Passage of the Jaafari law would be a disastrous and discriminatory step backward for Iraq's women and girls. This personal status law would only entrench Iraq's divisions while the government claims to support equal rights for all.'

Source: dailymail.co.uk

Somaliland: Media Freedom Groups Call for an End to Closure of Somaliland Newspaper




PRESS RELEASE

Somaliland must re-open the offices of an independent newspaper in Hargeisa, says the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ).

According to an IFJ affiliate, the National Union of Somali Journalists (NUSOJ), Hubaal newspaper in Hargeisa, Somaliland, has been closed since 13 December, 2013, following a raid by the police rapid reinforcement unit (RRU). Police continue to occupy the newspaper's headquarters.

"We are deeply disturbed by the actions of Somaliland authorities to shut down Hubaal newspaper and forcefully occupy its offices," said Gabriel Baglo, IFJ Africa Director. "Authorities in Hargeisa should halt their on-going crackdown on Hubaal and allow it to operate without fear of reprisal".

Somaliland police have accused Hubaal newspaper of dividing the police leadership and misleading security officials, while also claiming that they obtained a court order to close the paper down, although the NUSOJ says they failed to produce this order during the raid.

"The continued closure of Hubaal and presence of police in their offices is nothing but censorship and an attempt to intimidate other media from being critical," said NUSOJ Secretary General Omar Faruk Osman. "Somaliland should withdraw all its forces immediately. Hubaal newspaper and its journalists are exercising their journalistic duty and the authorities must not target them because of their media work."

Harassment of Hubaal newspaper and its journalists has increased since April 2013 as the newspaper has been covering critical issues. On 11 June 2013, a Somaliland regional court in Hargeisa banned the publishing and distribution of the paper.

On 3 July, Hubaal editor Hassan Hussein Keefkeef was sentenced to two years in jail, while the paper's manager Mohamed Ahmed Jama Aloley received a one-year sentence. Both men were also ordered to pay a 2,000,000-shilling ($350) fine each, Marodi Jeh Regional Court Judge Osman Ibrahim Dahir told the media.

The two journalists were found guilty of reporting "false news", "slandering top Somaliland officials", and "falsely accusing employees of the Ethiopian consulate of smuggling alcohol into Hargeisa". The President of Somaliland later pardoned both journalists and the newspaper was allowed to resume its operations.

On 24 April 2013, two gunmen attacked the headquarters of the newspaper, injuring managing director Mohamed Ahmed Jama. The two gunmen are believed to be Somaliland police, and one of the policemen was caught by the Hubaal staffers and was later released by Somaliland authorities.

"Clearly this is systematic campaign to censor and intimidate an independent newspaper in Somaliland. Hubaal is a victim of its reporting about what is really happening in Somaliland," added Baglo.

The IFJ urges Somaliland to ensure that independent media outlets are not harassed, and to allow Somaliland journalists to practice their profession without fear of retaliation.


- International Federation of Journalists

Friday, March 14, 2014

12 of the hardest places to visit on Earth




Stunning lakes of Afghanistan. Picture: Carl Montgomery Source: Flickr
FROM impassable terrains to unstable political situations to strict visa regulations, there are some places on Earth that are nearly impossible to get into.
Fortunately, these adventurous photographers dared to venture into these territories. Even if you can’t be there yourself, you can still enjoy.
From Bhutan to Syria to Angola — read on and take a closer peek.
Pakistan
Travel to Pakistan is usually discouraged due to the threat of terrorist attack, kidnappings and its generally unpredictable security situation.
Travel guide Lonely Planet says: “No matter the attractions, tourism in Pakistan has always been something of a hard sell. A glance at the map shows the country living in a pretty difficult region: always-unruly Afghanistan to one side, Iran to another, and a border with India running through the 60-year-old fault line of Kashmir. But since the events of 9/11, Western pundits have increasingly been wondering if Pakistan isn’t just living in a tough neighbourhood, it is the tough neighbourhood.”
Despite these troubles, it’s “on the brink of being tourism’s next big thing”.
Rani Kort Fort, Pakistan.
Rani Kort Fort, Pakistan. Source: ThinkStock
The dramatic mountains of Pakistan. Picture: ZillayAli
The dramatic mountains of Pakistan. Picture: ZillayAli. Source: Flickr
Bhutan
You must have a tourist visa to enter Bhutan which can only be applied for through a Bhutanese tour operator or one of their international partners.
Tiger’s Nest Monastery, Bhutan. Picture: Goran Hoglund
Tiger’s Nest Monastery, Bhutan. Picture: Goran Hoglund. Source: Flickr
Angola
A high degree of caution is issued against travellers intending to visit Angola because of the risk of civil unrest and criminal violence. All visitors require a visa and if you’re travelling independently, you’ll require a letter of invitation from a person or organisation in Angola.
Lonely Planet advises to always ask permission before taking photos in public areas, always carry a photocopy of your passport and don’t wander off the road in rural areas – the threat of unexploded landmines is still a huge problem.
Spectacular Ruacana Falls, Angola.
Spectacular Ruacana Falls, Angola. Source: ThinkStock
Syria
Travellers are advised not to travel to Syria due to its extremely dangerous security situation including military conflict, kidnappings and terrorist attacks.
Airports in Damascus and Aleppo may be closed quickly, with little or no notice, and may be subject to checkpoints, due to nearby battles between Syrian and opposition armed forces.
But it’s home to a lot of amazing historical sites including cities of Damascus, Aleppo and Bosra. Most travellers must have a visa.
Turkish bath and minaret, Aleppo, Syria.
Turkish bath and minaret in citadel of Aleppo, Syria Source: ThinkStock
Turkmenistan
Independent travel is not allowed in Turkmenistan. All visitors must acquire a tourist visa and have a hired guide at all times.
Door To Hell, Turkmenistan. Picture: Rapidtravelchai.
Door To Hell, Turkmenistan. Picture: Rapidtravelchai. Source: Flickr
The hardest places to visit on earth
Aerial shot of Turkmenistan. Source: ThinkStock
Russia
Everybody needs a visa to visit Russia and to obtain one you must first receive an invitation (usually through your hotel). Tourists are advised to exercise caution when travelling in Russia because of the risk of terrorist threats and criminal activity.
St. Basil Cathedral, Red Square, Moscow.
St. Basil Cathedral, Red Square, Moscow. Source: ThinkStock
Libya
DFAT warns Australians thinking of travelling to Libya that there is a high threat of terrorist attack, and tourist visas are generally not available unless you’re part of an organised group tour.
Sahara Desert, Libya. Picture: DStanley
Sahara Desert, Libya. Picture: DStanley. Source: Flickr
Uzbekistan
Uzbek visa rules change frequently, and land borders between Uzbekistan and neighbouring states are often closed at short notice, according to DFAT.
Beautiful architecture of Uzbekistan. Picture: DanielDuce
Beautiful architecture of Uzbekistan. Picture: DanielDuce. Source: ThinkStock
Afghanistan
DFAT warns against travel to Afghanistan due to the high risk of terror attack and dangerous security situation. It’s a hostile area, but is full of treasures, according toLonely Planet.
The travel site says: “By any stretch of the imagination, Afghanistan isn’t the simplest country to travel in. For the visitor, it’s a world away from backpacking in Thailand or island-hopping in Greece. It’s a country recovering from nearly three decades of war, with a host of continuing problems. You’ll need to invest time getting the latest safety information, and news from other travellers or colleagues working in the country.”
Scenic shots from Afghanistan.
Scenic shots from Afghanistan. Source: ThinkStock
Somalia
With landmines and illegal roadblocks common, it’s no wonder that DFAT advises Australians not to travel to Somalia. Also, while the number of attacks has recently declined, the threat of piracy in waters off the Somali coast remains.
A Somali Wild Ass and foal, Somalia.
Somali Wild Ass mother with foal. Source: ThinkStock
Saudi Arabia
According to the Lonely Planet, Saudi Arabia is; “the world’s last great forbidden kingdom, and an emblem of everything most inexplicable to the West: the Middle East, Islam, oil and terrorism. For centuries the country was considered closed to outsiders, penetrable only to the bravest and the boldest ... who risked life and limb to get there. Today it continues to exist only in the realms of the imagination for most people.”
Diriyah, an old city of Saudi Arabia.
Diriyah, an old city of Saudi Arabia. Source: Flickr
Equatorial Guinea
The government makes it extremely difficult to get a visa making travellers of any kind rare in this country. You will need both a travel and photography permit and according to Lonely Planet women travellers should be prepared to attract a lot of attention.
The Presidential Palace, Equatorial Guinea. Picture: Bluepostlab
Presidential Palace, Equatorial Guinea. Picture: BluepostLab. Source: Flickr