This is where you can follow the important socio-economic, geopolitical and security developments, going inside the Republic of Somaliland and Horn of Africa region
Wasiirka biyaha ee Masar Maxamed Cabdul Mutalib ayaa bishan dhammaatay ee Feebarwari wuxuu booqday wadanka Talyaaniga oo ay Masar aaminsantahay inuu yahay gacanta ugu weyn ee farsamo ahaan ku taageerta dhismaha biyo xidheenka Itoobiya.
Wasiir mutalib oo uu weheliyay wasiirka arrimaha dibadda ayaa kulamadoodaas ka dib waxay warbaahinta u sheegeen, “booqashadayadu way gaadhay guulihii ay u socotay.
Waxase aan la ogayn in dedaalka Masar ay wado ee diblomaasiyadeed uu dawladda Itoobiya ku qancin karo inay joojiso biyo xidheenkan oo ay itoobiya dhismihiisa wakhti iyo maal badan u hurayso.
A UN counter-terrorism expert has published the second report
of his year-long investigation into drone strikes, highlighting 30
strikes where civilians are reported to have been killed.
The report,
by British lawyer Ben Emmerson QC, identifies 30 attacks between 2006
and 2013 that show sufficient indications of civilian deaths to demand a
‘public explanation of the circumstances and the justification for the
use of deadly force’ under international law.
Emmerson analysed 37 strikes carried out by the US, UK and Israel
in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and Gaza, to arrive at a
‘sample’ of strikes that he believes those nations have a legal duty to
explain.
States
must ‘conduct a prompt, independent and impartial fact-finding inquiry
and to provide a detailed public explanation of the results’
- Ben Emmerson
Britain and the US conduct strikes as part of the armed conflict in
Afghanistan, and the US also conducts covert strikes in Pakistan, Yemen
and Somalia.
Although Israel has never officially acknowledged
using armed drones, Emmerson met with Israeli officials in the course
of preparing his report and lists seven attacks in Gaza among those
requiring investigation.
This report expands on an argument for the legal obligation for
states to investigate and account for credible claims of civilian
casualties, which Emmerson first laid out in his previous report,
presented to the UN General Assembly in October.
He writes: ‘in any case in which there have been, or appear to have
been, civilian casualties that were not anticipated when the attack was
planned, the State responsible is under an obligation to conduct a
prompt, independent and impartial fact-finding inquiry and to provide a
detailed public explanation of the results.’
A February 2010 attack in Afghanistan serves as a ‘benchmark’ of the
kind of disclosure that should follow claims of civilian casualties.
After a US drone attack on a convoy of trucks reportedly killed up to
23 civilians, the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), which
runs international operations in Afghanistan, partially declassified
the findings of its internal investigation. Emmerson writes that this
report strongly criticised the crew’s actions and revealed ‘a propensity
to “kinetic activity” [lethal action]‘.
This level of transparency is rare.
The most recent incident featured in Emmerson’s report is a December
2013 attack that hit a wedding procession near Rada’a in Yemen, killing
at least 12. Multiple sources have identified numerous civilian
casualties among the dead, including a Human Rights Watch investigation published last week.
Three unnamed US officials told Associated Press
after the publication of Human Rights Watch’s report that an internal
investigation had found only alleged militants were killed – but no
results of this investigation have yet been officially released.
Information is particularly scarce for activity in Somalia, Emmerson
notes. The only strike from the country in the report is the February
2012 strike that killed former British citizen Mohamed Sakr, whose case
the Bureau has reported on as part of its investigation into the British
government’s deprivation of citizenship.
Neither the US nor the UK routinely publish details of their drone
operations. The UK states that it has killed civilians in only one
incident in Afghanistan, a March 2011 strike that killed four civilians.
The US has repeatedly dismissed the Bureau’s estimate that at least
400 civilians have died in Pakistan drone strikes as ‘ludicrous’; the
CIA director John Brennan has said that claims of high civilian
casualties amount to ‘disinformation’.
Emmerson notes that operations that kill civilians are not
necessarily illegal under international law, but states have a duty of
transparency where there are credible allegations of non-combatants
being harmed.
The report does not take a position on the legality of drone strikes
away from the battlefield, but says there is an ‘urgent and imperative
need’ for international agreement on the legal arguments advanced in
favour of covert lethal action.
The US has argued that its strikes are legal on two grounds: they are
legitimate acts of self-defence against an imminent threat, and they
are part of an armed conflict against an enemy, al Qaeda, and its
‘associated forces’. Emmerson asks a series of questions – about the
thresholds for action in self-defence, the definition of ‘imminent’
threat, al Qaeda’s current state, and more – on which he says the
international community must reach consensus.
Last week the European Parliament voted 534 to 49 in favour of a motion calling on the EU to develop a ‘common position’ on drone strikes and other targeted killings.
To date, Europe has remained largely silent on the issue, but the
motion expressed ’grave concern’ over drone strikes ‘outside the
international legal framework’ and called on member states not to
‘facilitate such killings by other states’.
The UK has refused to clarify whether it shares intelligence with the
US that could lead to drone strikes in Pakistan; in January the Court
of Appeal ruled that any attempt to force the government to disclose
such information could endanger international relations. In December,
Emmerson told a meeting
in parliament that such intelligence-sharing is ‘inevitable’ owing to
the closeness of the relationship between the US and UK. ‘It would be
absurd if it were not the case,’ he added.
Mr. Mohamed Abdelaziz President of the Republic, Secretary General of the Polisario Front
Abuja — President of the Republic, Secretary General of the Polisario
Front Mr. Mohamed Abdelaziz has urged the African leaders and
international community to redouble efforts to put an end to the
occupation of Western Sahara.
In his speech during an international summit on human security,
convened today in Nigeria in parallel with the country's centenary
celebrations, President Mohamed Abdelaziz called upon the African
leaders and international community as a whole to contribute to the
success of the efforts undertaken by the UN Secretary General's Personal
Envoy, Christopher Ross, to settle the Saharawi-Moroccan conflict on
the basis of the charter and resolutions of the United Nations and
African Union, especially those related to the respect for the
boundaries inherited from the colonial era.
The President of the Republic expressed, on behalf of the people and
government of the Saharawi Republic, heartfelt congratulations to the
brotherly people of Nigerian on the centenary of the amalgamation of
their country.
He, in the same respect, congratulated the Nigerian President
Goodluck Jonathan for his visionary decision to choose the theme "human
security, peace and development: Agenda for 21st Century Africa" to celebrate this international summit.
President Mohamed Abdelaziz hailed Nigeria's efforts to support
liberation movements around the world, and its contribution to
strengthen peace, stability and development in many African countries.
Waa warbixin an soo koobey oo ku saabsan saddexdii maalmood ee an Hargeisa joogey iyo waxyaabihii uugu muhiimsanaa ee an soo arkey. Waxa dhici karta in aragtida lagu kala duwanaado oo qofba ay si la noqoto. Waxase hubaal ah iney maskaxda qofka akhriyaya ay kaga shaqeysiin karto oo ay ku qasbi karto inu fikiro oo uu dhiniciisana wax ka qiimeeyo.
1. SAXAAFADA
Bahda saxaafaddu aad ayay u dedaalen oo ay iskugu dayeen iney umadda gaadhsiiyaan warar iyo madadaalaba. Hanoqoto warar an qaar dhaliilno, qaar jecleysano, qaar ka xanaaqno, qaar ku faanno. Wixii ay aqoon la’aan iyo farasama xumo u keento mooyee, saxaafaddu umadda wax badan ayay u soo kordhisey. Ka sakow saxaafadda dawliga ah, waxa xusid mudan in saxaafadda dalkeenu ay tahay mid iyadu is wadda iyada oo aan maalgelin ka helin cid kale.
Dadka ku nool dalka iyo malaayiinta kale ee qurbaha joogaaba waxa ay habeen iyo maalin akhriyayaan warar ay saxaafaddu lacag la’aanta uugu soo gudbiso. Kala duwanaanta saxaafadda ee ay qaar muxaafidka yihiin qaar mucaaridka yihiin, qaarna dhexdhexaad yihiin iyo qaar aan siyaasadba ka hadleyn ee wacyi-gelin ka hadlayaa, waa waxa saxaafadda xiisaha badan u yeeley.
Inkastoo ay saxaafadda “digital” ka ihi muqaal ahaan hore u martey, hadana joornaalada la daabaco ayaad moodaa inaaney 20 sanadood ee ina soo dhaafey wax badan iska bedelin muuqaal ahaan oo badankoodu waa afar warqadood oo khadka iyo sawiraduba aaney sidaa u fiicneyn.
Waxa loo baahanyahay in saxaafaddu ay kor u qaado xirfadooda taxliilka (analyses) oo loo baahanyahay in arimaha ay ka hadlayaan ay si ballaadhan u lafaguraan oo arin kasta oo ay werinayaan ay ka bixyaan sawiro dhinacyo badan wax laga eegey oo aaney ku eekaanuun fikir dhinac keilya uun wax laga eegey.
Waxa Iyana muhiim ah in warbaahinta abuurto barnaamijyo ay iskugu keeneyso dad aqoon u leh hadba arimaha markaa socda oo laga dodo, lana lafaguro, talooyinka ka soo baxana ay noqdaan wax cidda ay khuseyso, gaar ahaan dawladdu ay ka faa’iideysato.
2. ISGAADHSIINTA
Isgaadhsiinta tilifoonada iyo internetku meel fiican ayay gaadheen oo dad badan oo ay u badanyihiin dhalinyarada ayay u sahlanaatey iney ka faa’iideystaan isgaadhsiinta. Isgaadhsiinta dalku meelo badan oo caalamka sadexaad ah ayay ka fiicantahay kana jabantahay.
Tayada isgaadhsiinta gaar ahaan internetka ayaa weli hooseeya oo aan laheyn awoodii iyo dhakhsihii socodka. Dhibaatada uugu weyn waa isgaadhsiinta oo ku kooban magaalooyinka iyo dadka inta ladan balse mujtamaca intiisii badneyd gaar ahaan kuwa ka fog magaalooyinka waaweyn aaney illaa hadda si fiican u gaadhin. Waxa kaloo dhiman sidii isgaadhsiintu uuga qeybqaadan laheyd casriyeynta adeegyada sida tacliinta, cashuur ururinta iyo wacyigelinta dadweynaha. 3. TACLIINTA SARE EE SOMALILAND
Waxa sii kordheysa tirade jaamacadaha wadanka ka furmey oo dhalinyaraddii aan awoodda u helin iney dibedaha wax soo bartaan fursad u siisey iney helaan tacliin jaban. Jamacadaahaas qaarkood waxa ay bixiyaan tacliin heerkeedu sareeyo, qaarna weli wey soo korayaan oo waxbaa ka dhiman.
Tartanka jaamacadaha dhexdooda ayaa keeni doonta in tayada tacliinta ay bixiyaan kor u kacdo mustaqbalka, kuwa sidaa yeeli waayana dan ayay u xidhmi doonaan.
Qodobka u weyn ee ay shicibku ka rabaan siyaasadda Somaliland ee arimaha dibeddu waa in Jamhuuriyadda Somaliland noqoto dawlad gooni u taagan, heshana aqoonsi caalami ah si ay wax uula wadaagto umadaha hore u marey ee calamka.
Sannadkii ina dhaafey waxa ay dawladdu dardar gelisey wada hadalkii ay la laheyd Somaliya waxaana ka qeybqaadatey shirar dhowr ah.
Waxa Iyana xilkii arimaha dibedda loo magacaabey wasiir lagu tirin karo inu yahay shakhsi ka mida dadka fara ku tiriska ah ee aqoonta iyo waaya aragnimo badan u leh sida caalamku u wada shaqeeyo. Waxase hubaal ah in Somaliland ay dawladdu ku guuldareysatey inay xitaa sharax cad ka bixiso siyaasadda arimaha dibedda iyo waxa ay dooneyso iney ka soo baxaan shirarka ay la leedahay Somaliya.
Somaliland iyo Somaliya midna daacad kama aha shirarka ay wada geleyaan. Labada dhana midba midka kale uu ogyahay inaanu daacad ka aheyn, sidaasooy tahay hadana wey is madadaalinayaa oo shirar ayay wada gelayaan. Dawladdii Riyaale kumey wareejin dawlada maanta joogta wax siyaasad cad ah ama qorshe ah oo ku waajahan arimaha dibedda gaar ahaan aqoonsi raadis.
Ayaan darada jirtaa ah inaan dawladan lafteedu aaney la iman. Waxa Iyana lagu guuldareystey in Etoobiya iyo Jabuuti laga helo aqoonsi dawladnimo, labadaa dawladood oo aynu isku qabno danaha uugu waaweyn haddii ay tahay siyaasad, dhaqaale, ganacsi, nebedgelyo. Waxa an ka dhalin kari weyney labadaa dawladood iyo Somaliya, lagama keeni karo dawladaha kale ee aan daniba inaga dhexeyn. 5. AMAANKA QARANKA
Waxa aad loo dareemey in nabadgelyada dalku meel wanaagsan gaadhey. Waxa si nidaamsan looga hortagey lana fashiliyey isku dey badan oo oo lagu khalkhalinayey nabadgelyada oo meelo kale laga soo maleegey. Waxa suurogeliyey horumarka laga sameeyey nabadgelyada waa iyada oo kor loo qaadey sirdoonka.
Sida bileysku uuga hortago mudahraadyada ayaa weli aad u hooseysa oo oo inta badan ku kooban xabad dhalisa dhimasho iyo dhaawac.
Waxa si gaar xusid mudan in hey’adaha sirdoonku oo xoog badan saara iney war iyo xogo siyaado ah ka helaan arimaha nebedgelyada gaar ahaan argagixisada. Waxa aad loogu baahanyahay in bileyska lagu tababaro xirfado ay ku maamulaan mudahraadka iyaga oo aan adeegsan xabbad. 6. DHAQAALAHA DALKA
Dhaqaalihii qeybo badan ayaa kor u Kacey, waxaaney ka muuqaneysa meheradaha cusub ee furmey iyo dhismayaasha laga hirgelinayo magaalooyinka. Waxa kale oo laga garan karaa sida uu u kordhey kharashka dadka iyo reeraha oo aad u iibsanaya alaabo casri ah sida talafishanno, tilifoonno, feernijar cusub, baabuur, taasi oo ku tuseysa in dadka uu dhaqaalihiisii kor u kacay.
Waxa muuqda ifafaalayaal muujinaya in mujtamucu u kala baxayo dabaqado oo ay jiraan qeybo dhaqaalahoodii kor u sii kacayo iyo qeybo bulshada ka tirsan oo faqriqii ku sii badanayo. Waxa muhiim ah in dawladdu ahmiyad gaar ah siiso sidii loo kabi lahaa maceeshadda dadka dhaqaalohoodu hooseeyo si ay u korsan karaan caruurta uuguna noolaan karaan sharaf. 7. AAFADA QABYAALADA
Qabyaaladdii lala xishoon jirey ayaa daahii laga qaadey. Dawaladda iyo mucaaridkuba si isku mid ah ayay u adeegsanayaan, iyadoo qolaba qolada kale farta ku fiiqeyso. Inkasta oo laga gudbey dhacdooyinkii gacan kahadalka ahaa ee arimaha qabiilku keeni jirey, hadana qabiilkan la soo toosiyey waxa uu wax u dhimay kalsoonidii dhalinyarada iyo dadka jecel inaan noqono mujtamac hore u marey.
Dadka in badan ayaa iminka rumeysan in waxkasta oo la qabanayaa aanu suuro gal noqoneyn haddaan la soo marin ciriqa qabiilka. Qabiilkiina waxaabu noqdey nidaam la tartamaya kii dawaldda oo malin kasta laga hadalhayo warbaahintii qaranka. Waxa jira tallaabooyin fiican oo ay dawladdu qaadey, gaar ahaan madaxweynuhu oo laga dardarb gelinayo bulshada.
Waxa madaxweynuhu la kulmey qeybo badan oo bulshada ka mida, ha noqoto xubno matalaya qurba jooga, qaar ka mida ururada dhalinyarada iyo weliba xubno metelaya dadka laga tirade bedenyahay, isaga oo ku booriyey iney ka qeyb qaataan dib u dhiska dalka. Waa arin aad loogu riyaaqey dhiirigelin bandanna keentey.
Waxa haboon in dawladdu miiska soo saarto habkii lagu yareyn lahaa saameynta qabiilku ku yeeshey nidaamkii dawladeed. 8. SIYAASADA IYO HAWEENKA
Maamulka maanta jiraa bilowgii wuxu muujiyey inu door muuqda siinayo haweenka, ha noqoto mansab siyaasadeed iyo ballanqaadyo is daba jog ah. Balse arimahaasi waxa ay iskugu biyo shubteen sidii caadada aheyd ee siyaasadda iyo hoggaamintu ay ku koobneyd oo rag uun ah.
Taa marka lagu daro tii dhaqanka oo ah salaadiin iyo odayaal dhaqameed oo buuxiyey doorkii hoggaaminta bulshada, haweenkii ma hystaan fursad badan oo ay ku muuqdaan kagana qeyb qaataan hoggaaminta umadda.
In kasta oo ay jiraan dumar badan oo aqoon iyo waaya aragnimaba leh, hadana mansabyada sida agaasimayaasha guud, maareeyayaasha guud, badhasaabada oo intuba ay tahay mansabyo ay magacowdo dawladdu waxa lagu koobey rag. Marka ad madaxda qaarkood wareysato, laguma siinayo sharaxaad waafi ah.
Waxa muhiim ah in dawladdu gaar ahaan Madaxweynuhu si gaar ah arimaha dumarka u eego oo uu ka qeyb geliyo hoggaminta dalka. 9. AAFADA TAHRIIBKA
Waxa weli sii socda tahriibkii oo ay dhalinyaro badani naftooda ku biimeynayaan badaha waaweyn iyo saxaraha carabta. Waxa aad kor uugu Kacey wacyigii umadda iyo dawladda ee ahaa in wax laga qabto tahriiibka iyo guud ahaanba dhibaatooyinka heysta dhalinyarada ee ay ka mid tahay shaqo la’aantu.
Waxa dalka ka abuuran ururo dhalinyaro oo firfircoon oo ku hawlan dhiirigelinta dhalinyarada. Ururadaa wax aka mida SONYO iyo HAVOYOCO oo ah laba urur oo wax qabadkooda la dareemey.
Arimaha ay dawladdu illaa hada soo bandhigtey waxa ka mida shirar la qabtey oo lagaga arinsanayo tahriibka iyo shaqo la’aanta iyo gudiyo la saareey.
Waxqabadkaasi illaa hadda aad ayuu uuga hooseeya mushkiladda xajmigeeda. Mushkiladda maanta dhalinyarada heysataa maaha wax shir iyo siminaar iyo warbaahinta oo laga hadlo lagu maareyn karo.
Waxa loo baahanyahay in arrinta laga dhigo “Mudnaan Qaran” oo loo xilsaaro cid aqoon iyo araqti wanaagsan ka heysata wax ka qabashada arintaas, lana siiyo awood siyaasadeed iyo dhaqaale laguna hawlgeliyo iney muddo kooban ku keenaan barnaamij lagu maareynayo dhibaatooyinka horyaal dhalinyarada. 10. SAAMI WANAAGSAN OO DHALINYARADA XUKUUMADU SIISAY
Dhalinyartii da’da dhexe ee shaqeynayey oo qaarkood xilsare ka hayaan dawladda ayaan arkey oo in badani ay dhigtaan jaamacaddo iyaga oo qaar wadaan tacliintii shahaadadda knowaad, in badanina waxa ay wadaan tacliintii shahaadadda labada (Masters Degree).
Taasi waxa dad badan u sahashaey iney iyaga oo shaqeeya oo weliba reero leh ay wax bartaan. Waxa kale oo ay keeneysaa in tayadii maamul iyo hoggaaminba ay kor u kacdo. 11. DIB U DHISKA XAFIISYADA DAWLADA IYO FURSADO SHAQO OO AY KENEEN
Waxa ay dawladdu maalgelin weyn ku waddaa dib u dhiska wasaaradihii iyo hey'adihii dawladda. Waxa jira wasaaraddo tiro badan oo loo dhisey xafiisyo casri ah qaarna iminka gacanta lagu hayo.
Ka sakow dhismayaasha, waxa ay arintani shaqoyin u abuurtey dad aad u badan oo dhakhli ka soo galo. Adeegyada ka jira dalka waxa ay ku eegyihiin oo faa'iido ku qaba dadka inta ladan ee gaar ahaan magaalooyinka ku nool. Hadey tahay waddooyinka, ama isgaadhsiin, leydh, biyo, jaamacaddo, shaqooyin la abuurey, biyo la cabbo, intuba waxa ay ku koobanyihiin dad iyo deegaamo kooban.
Reer miyigii, reer guuraagii, dadkii faqiirka ahaa manaafacaad badan dawladnimada kuma qabaan iney niyeystaan uun mooyaane. Dawladdu waa iney sameysaa barnaamij si gaar ah wax uugu taraya dadka jilicsan, gaar ahaan reer miyiga. 12. MASHAAKIL IJTIMAACI AH
Waxa jira rag aad u tiro badan oo da'da dhexe iyo odayaal u badan oo qaarkood yihiin xildhibaano, qaar waa madax hore oo aan iminka xil heynin, qaar waa xil doon, salaadiin, cuqaal, qaarna waa taageerayaasha dawladda oo la yaqaan balse aan xil muuqda heyn oo intaa wareegaya xafiisyada dawladda iyaga oo doonaya iney madaxda la kulmaan oo dano ka fushadaan.
Aad ayay uugu adagtahay madaxda dawladda iney hirgeliyaan shaqadii loo direy waayo wakhtigiiba waxa ka qaadey dadkaa wareegaya oo marka qolo baxdaba qaar cusubi ay xafiisyadii soo gelayaan.
Madaxdii dawladda wey ku adagtahay in ay wax shaqo ah qabtaan. Dadkaa iyo odayaashaa wareegaya waa carqaladda uugu weyn ee hortaagan waxqabadkii madaxda dawladda.
Waxa ad arkeysaa madax intey xafiisyadoodii foodda soo geliyaan markaba iskaga tegaya iyaga ka dhuumanaya xertaa wareegeysa.
Madax an la kulmey waxa iiga soo baxay sawirka ah in wakhtigooda 20% ay qabtaan shaqadii loo igmadey inta kalena ay ku mashquulsanyihiin la hadalka dadkaa wareegaya.
Waxa dawladda qassab ku ah iney qaaddo olole lagula dagaalamayo “Xerta” Xafiisyada dawladda wareegta maalintii ee caqabadda ku noqotey habsami u socodkii hawlihii dawladda. 13. DHISMAHA WADOOYINKA DALKA: WAXQABAD MUUQDA
Dhisamaha waddooyinka ayaa ah wax qabad muuqda. Inkasta oonan magaalada Hargeisa dhaafin, hadana inta yare en arkey ayaa ii muujisey in dedaal badani socdo. Waxa la qabtey aad ayuu uuga hooseeyaa baahida jirta, balse waxa xusid mudan in hawlaha waddooyinka lagu dhiiradey oo weliba lagu wado dhaqaale aan mucaawimo ku jirin. Waxa xusid mudan in caruurta iskuulada oo iska ururiyey nuusasaacohoodii ay wadada Ceerigaabo uugu deeqeen $120,000 halka lacagtii ay qurba joogu soo ururiyeen ay noqotey $100,000. Taasi waxa ay ku tuseysaa in haddii umaddu dedaasho ay ururin karto lacag intii la doonaba.
Armed men patrolled the street outside Simferopol’s airport in the Crimea region of Ukraine on Friday.Credit
Sergey Ponomarev for The New York Times
KIEV,
Ukraine — Ukraine’s fragile new government accused Russia of trying to
provoke a military conflict by invading the Crimea region on Friday,
while in Washington President Obama issued a stern warning to the
Kremlin about respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty, in an effort to preclude
a full-scale military escalation.
American
officials did not directly confirm a series of public statements by
senior Ukrainian officials, including the acting president, Oleksandr V.
Turchynov, that Russian troops were being deployed to Crimea, where
Russia has a major naval base, in violation of the two countries’
agreements there.
Mr. Obama, however, cited “reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine,” and he said, “Any violation of Ukrainian sovereignty would be deeply destabilizing.”
The pointed warning came after a day in which military analysts
struggled to understand a series of unusual events in Crimea, including a
mobilization of armored personnel carriers with Russian markings on the
roads of the region’s capital, Simferopol, and a deployment of
well-armed, masked gunmen at Crimea’s two main airports.
Credit Gabriella Demczuk/The New York Times.Obama Warns Russia on Ukraine
President Obama said any intervention militarily in Ukraine would be “deeply destabilizing.”
“The
Russian Federation began an unvarnished aggression against our
country,” Mr. Turchynov said in televised remarks on Friday evening.
“Under the guise of military exercises, they entered troops into the autonomous Republic of Crimea.”
He said that Russian forces had captured the regional Parliament and the headquarters of the regional government,
and that they had seized other targets, including vital communications
hubs, as well as blocked unspecified Ukrainian military assets.
American
officials said they believed that unusual helicopter movements over
Crimea were evidence that a military intervention was underway, but
cautioned that they did not know the scale of the operation or the
Russians’ motives.
Russia
on Friday denied that it had encroached on Ukrainian territory or would
do so. After an emergency meeting on Ukraine at the United Nations
Security Council, the Russian ambassador, Vitaly I. Churkin, said that any troop movements were in line with arrangements that allow it to station soldiers in the area.
“We have an agreement with Ukraine on the presence of the Russian Black Sea fleet and we operate under this agreement,” Mr. Churkin said.
Still, the developments in Crimea sent Ukraine’s interim government, which was appointed
recently, deep into crisis mode as it confronted the prospect of an
armed effort to split off Crimea, an autonomous region with close
historic ties to Russia, from the Ukrainian mainland.
Analysts
said the reported moves in the area had parallels to steps Russia took
before a war with Georgia in 2008 over the largely ethnic Russian
regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. There was little to indicate if
President Vladimir V. Putin intended to escalate the challenge to
Ukraine beyond nonviolent provocation of the mostly pro-Russian
population in the region.
Mr.
Turchynov, the acting president, also made comparisons to Georgia.
“They are provoking us into military conflict,” he said. “They began
annexation of territory.”
An unidentified armed man patrolled in front of the airport in Simferopol, Ukraine, on Friday.Credit
Ivan Sekretarev/Associated Press
In
his address, Mr. Turchynov added, “I personally appeal to President
Putin, demanding that he immediately stop the provocation and withdraw
troops.”
The
crisis in Crimea is the latest a series of rapidly unfurling events
that began when scores of people were killed in Kiev last week during a
severe escalation of civic unrest that had been underway since late
November.
Protests
started after Russia pressured Viktor F. Yanukovych, then the
president, to back away from political and free-trade agreements with
the European Union that he had long promised to sign, setting off an
East-West confrontation reminiscent of the Cold War.
After
the recent killings, Mr. Yanukovych reached a tentative truce with
opposition leaders in talks brokered by the foreign ministers of France,
Germany and Poland, but within 24 hours he fled Kiev, Ukraine’s
capital, and an overwhelming majority of lawmakers voted to strip him of
power, saying he had abandoned his position.
On
Friday, a week later, Mr. Yanukovych resurfaced for a news conference
in Rostov-on-Don, Russia, in which he said he was still the legitimate
president and urged Russia not to intervene militarily in Crimea.
Mr.
Obama’s warning suggested a deepening uncertainty among American
officials about Mr. Putin’s intentions in the region despite a series of
high-level contacts in recent days, including a telephone call between
the two presidents one week ago. Mr. Yanukovych was an ally of Russia,
and his toppling has left the Kremlin grappling for a response.
While
American officials said that intelligence indicated that a Russian
operation was underway, Mr. Obama stopped short of calling it an
invasion. Part of the confusion, one official said, was that Russia
routinely moves troops between military bases in Crimea.
Another
American official said that intelligence reports from the region were
“all over the place,” but that the administration believed that Russia
had moved some of its forces into Ukraine, while some of the movement,
officials said, seemed to be an increase in protective measures around
Russian military installations.
Though
he threatened an unspecified cost to Russia, Mr. Obama has limited
options to respond to an intervention. Officials said he could cancel
his participation in a Group of 8 meeting in Sochi, Russia, in June. The
administration could also break off talks on a potential trade
agreement. Russia sent a delegation to Washington this week to explore
closer trade and commercial ties.
Crimea,
a multiethnic region that was granted a large degree of autonomy after
Ukraine gained independence from the Soviet Union, has long been a
source of tension with Russia and is home to some of Russia’s most
important military installations, including the headquarters of its
Black Sea naval fleet.
As other nations reacted with consternation to the developments in Crimea, the Kremlin was largely silent.
Russian
state television reported that Russian troops had arrived to secure the
airport at Belbek, which is close to the Russian naval base, but
officials did not confirm that information. The identity of gunmen who
appeared at the Simferopol airport and at roadblocks on major roadways
also remained unclear.
While
movement of Russian military vehicles, equipment and personnel is
common in the Crimea, Friday’s activity was extremely unusual, local
residents said. It involved a number of strange components, including
the deployment of heavily armed soldiers, wearing uniforms with no
identifying marks, at the region’s two main airports.
Before
dawn, at Simferopol’s international airport, the soldiers initially
posted themselves outside an administrative building, and through much
of the day they did not interfere with departing or arriving flights.
By
evening, however, the usual flight in from Kiev was canceled, and it
was unclear whether any flights would go through Crimean airspace over
the weekend. Similarly mysterious gunmen also appeared at the second
airport, which is used for civil and military flights.
Journalists
spotted a convoy of nine Russian armored personnel carriers on a road
between the port city of Sevastopol, the site of Russia’s main naval
base, and Simferopol, a city of about 250,000 people. There were also
unconfirmed reports that several planes carrying thousands of Russian
soldiers had arrived in Crimea on Friday night.
Even
more unusual, a Ukrainian telecommunications company, Ukrtelecom, said
unknown people had seized control of several communications hubs,
disrupting telephone and Internet service between Crimea and the rest of
Ukraine. In a statement, the company pleaded with law enforcement
agencies to take control of the situation.
While
Western governments at first seemed hesitant to draw conclusions,
officials in the new provisional government in Kiev said early Friday
morning that they suspected Russian interference.
Mr.
Turchynov, who is also the speaker of Parliament, immediately convened a
meeting of the newly formed National Security and Defense Council to
discuss the events in the south.
--------
David M. Herszenhorn
reported from Kiev, Mark Landler from Washington, and Alison Smale from
Simferopol, Ukraine. Reporting was contributed by Patrick Reevell and
Noah Sneider from Simferopol, Oksana Lyachnyska from Kiev, Somini
Sengupta from the United Nations, and Michael D. Shear, Michael R.
Gordon, Thom Shanker and Mark Mazzetti from Washington.
Watch
out. Kobe Bryant may be violating your human rights.
Farida
Shaheed, the U.N. special rapporteur on cultural rights, recently announced
that she's launching a new study aimed at addressing
"whether advertising and marketing practices affect cultural diversity and the
right of people to choose their way of life." The announcement bears a photo of a
larger-than-life U.S. basketball advertisement (featuring star player Kobe
Bryant) looming over a Chinese playground.
This is
all in a day's work for the United Nations' cultural rights office. Just last
month, when Shaheed visited Vietnam, she took a break from discussing concerns
about the freedom of expression to highlight another urgent
crisis: the sensitive issue of the Cong drum. In case you haven't heard, the
Cong drum is a unique cultural artifact used by certain indigenous tribes in
Vietnam's remote highlands. Now, Shaheed notes, the Cong drum faces a new threat: it is "being played on demand
for tourists in some places, thus clearly losing its original cultural
significance." She urges the government to protect drum performances against
"folklorization" -- apparently a major violation of the indigenous groups'
"cultural rights."
It's
worth noting that Vietnam is a communist dictatorship that completely ignores
the freedom of religion, routinely imprisons monks and artists for their views,
and has been criticized
by countless human rights
organizations for its widespread use of torture and routine abuse of
detainees. (In the photo above, policemen prevent a photojournalist from
taking pictures outside a courthouse in Ho Chi Minh City.)
"Vietnam
is fast turning into one of Southeast Asia's largest prisons for human rights
defenders and other activists," Robert Abbott, Amnesty International's Vietnam
researcher, noted.
But these violations are equal,
in Shaheed's eyes, to the ghastly use of cultural artifacts in the
tourism
industry. The other, more serious violations merit just a one-paragraph
rebuke in her report; apparently, they don't fall within the ill-defined
spectrum of "cultural
rights." Now, Vietnam can ignore most of what Shaheed had to say, and brush off her criticisms as a side effect
of tourism.
Over the
years, critics have ridiculed the U.N. Human Rights Council's willingness to
heed the perverse opinions of the world's worst dictators, who figure
prominently among its members. (These members even tried to ban the word "authoritarian"
from council proceedings.) But the farce of "cultural rights" is merely a
symptom of a much deeper malaise that some call "human rights
inflation." Increasingly, groups have called everything they feel
entitled to -- from spare bedrooms to foreign aid -- a "right." One special
interest group is even clamoring to grant "access to the Internet" official "rights" status, as if
freedom of expression weren't enough. Meanwhile, various parties have asserted
their "rights" to employment counseling, paid vacation leave, free education through college, and a global financial tax to combat the economic crisis.
Today,
we have a surplus of human rights -- and they're all claimed to be equally
important and indivisible.
Human rights are going nowhere. They've lost their
value.
When the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was signed in 1948, it restricted
the world of human rights to just 30 provisions. Its drafters felt compelled to
keep the list short and punchy. Out of those, 18 were considered rights,
provisions that impose immediate obligations on states at the level of the
individual; the 12 social, economic, and cultural provisions were considered
aspirational. The latter were controversial from the start, and this is one of
the reasons that the UDHR is not binding and contains no enforcement mechanism.
In 1976, to address these issues, the rights were correctly divided up into
separate binding treaties that impose obligations on the state through oversight
bodies: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and
the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
This was
a political compromise borne out of the ideological fight between the United
States and the totalitarian USSR, which advocated for social, economic, and
cultural rights at the expense of civil and political ones. To this day, the United
States has not ratified the ICESCR.
The
consequences of this ill-fated compromise have gotten quite out of hand. By
2013, there were 676 provisions that ranged from individual rights, to
collective rights, and even to environmental rights. Some of these don't even
impose immediate obligations on the state - instead they're established through
"progressive realization," whereby the state, to the limit of its resources and
capabilities, promises to fulfill them at some point in the future.
This
bizarre proliferation of rights is caused by the fact that human rights are a
valuable tool in the hands of every pressure group that stands to benefit from
the expansion of rights -- and that includes illiberal states.
The
right to food, for example, was made justiciable at the international level
just last year with the adoption of the optional protocol to the ICESCR. The
move received overwhelming support from, among others, Iran, which reiterated during the working group
that "the protocol provided an
opportunity to reiterate the equal status of all human rights." Meanwhile, the
sane and liberal voice of the United Kingdom was all but drowned out: "The
United Kingdom remained skeptical about the practical benefits of the protocol,
considering that economic, social, and cultural rights did not lend themselves
to adjudication in the same way as civil and political rights."
Some may
argue that states do not typically want to proliferate rights because this
imposes more obligations. Yet, it is precisely because of this proliferation
that states can cherry-pick the rights whose obligations they promise to fulfill
sometime in the future -- and thus, show off a "good" human rights record, even
as they fail to uphold even the most basic civil and political rights. Desirable
outcomes like housing or health care -- better understood as political goals --
were cloaked in rights language to make them seem more legitimate. From there,
the right to a spare bedroom is but a stone's throw away.
Well-intentioned
rights groups have broadened rights legislation to embrace women's rights and
minority rights for indigenous peoples, LGBT individuals, the elderly, and the
disabled. Women's groups and human rights groups in Saudi Arabia have, for
example, rallied the troops to consecrate the "right to drive." Of course,
these groups should be respected and their efforts celebrated -- but there is no need to draw
up new treaties or craft new rights. Traditional human rights instruments are
enough. The UDHR clearly states that no one should experience discrimination
because of their "race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other
opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, or other status."
You
don't have special rights because you're a lesbian, elderly, disabled woman
living in Saudi Arabia; you have rights because you're human.
The
darker side of rights proliferation is that it allows dictators to level the
playing field. The Human Rights Council is notorious for accommodating the desires of
autocratic regimes eager to whitewash their reputations. In 2007, after
refusing visits by U.N. special representatives for more than 18 years, Cuba welcomed Jean Ziegler, the Council's special rapporteur on the right to food. Ziegler praised the government for
upholding the right to food as a "fundamental human right," and proceeded to
blame the U.S. embargo for any food shortages. The policies of the 55-year-old
communist dictatorship -- which disallows private property, private business,
and the freedoms of movement and expression -- were apparently irrelevant to
the food problem. Ziegler viewed the right to food in isolation, ignoring even
relevant, non-food-related rights violations, and ultimately helped the Cuban
regime get away with murder. Cuba could celebrate its success in upholding one
right while tactfully glossing over all its many failures. Chronic rights
abusers have an interest in diluting rights to the point where the whole concept
loses its meaning.
"Sadly,
this is par for the course these days," says Jacob Mchangama, co-founder and
executive director of the Freedom Rights Project, a group that seeks to restore
liberty back to human rights. Recently, his group held a conference at the Danish Parliament on what
has gone wrong with international human rights and how to fix it.
The
conference addressed, among other things, the worrying trend of rights proliferation. The speakers challenged the
human rights community's dogmatic consensus on the indivisibility of rights and the doctrine of proportionality. Emilie Hafner-Burton presented
research that demonstrates that there are few examples of
human rights improving an illiberal state even after its leaders sign a human
rights treaty. In most authoritarian states, signing the Convention Against
Torture has had little if any impact on incidents of torture, and has
allowed these regimes to stay in power longer.
"When
everything can be defined as a human right, the premium on violating such
rights is cheap," Mchangama told me in Copenhagen. "By presenting themselves as
the champions of these third-generation rights, illiberal states seek to both
remove the moral high ground from civil and political rights and to achieve
political legitimacy. Rights proliferation is being abused by dictatorships to
praise each other, and is diminishing the moral clarity that human rights once
enjoyed."
We may
be witnessing the slow bursting of the human rights bubble. Had I invested in
the value of rights as a concept in 1966 when the ICCPR was adopted, the value of my shareholding would have
peaked around 1993. This was the year that the Vienna Declaration and Program
of Action of 1993 declared all rights to be equally justiciable and
indivisible, rendering the distinction between civil and political rights and
economic, social, and cultural "rights" meaningless.
At least I can always seek
comfort in playing my Cong drum -- that is, as long as there aren't any
tourists lurking nearby, right, Ms. Shaheed?
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
