Gov't pressure to shut down Turkish schools sparks outcry

SCHOOLCHILDREN ARE SEEN IN CLASS AT YAVUZ SULTAN SELIM ANATOLIAN SCHOOL, WHICH WAS CLOSED AFTER A DEMAND BY THE AK PARTY GOV’T. (PHOTO: TODAY'S ZAMAN)

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's government's attempts to shut down Turkish schools abroad that are affiliated with the Hizmet movement, which is inspired by the teachings of Islamic cleric Fethullah Gülen, have sparked an outcry among opposition figures and diplomats, who criticize the government for “abusing education because of personal hostility.”

After several reports that circulated in the media stated that Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu sent orders to Turkish embassies to take steps towards the closure of the Turkish schools, opposition figures and diplomats raised their voices against such an attempt, saying, “Shutting down schools is completely a political and ideological attempt.”

The faith-based Hizmet movement administers a wide network of schools and more than 2,000 educational establishments in more than 120 countries around the world. These schools provide education to thousands of students and are well known for their achievements in the International Science Olympiads.

The attempt to shut down the schools comes at a time when the Hizmet movement has been subjected to a smear campaign from the Turkish government, whose prime minister and many high-level officials are implicated in a sweeping corruption scandal that became public on Dec. 17, 2013.

Former Turkish Foreign Minister Yaşar Yakış has also criticized government's attempt, saying those schools have always been a "source of pride" for Turkey and that closing them would be a big mistake.

“The closure of these schools is totally an ideological matter. If the schools carry out something against the national education's curriculum, then what is needed could be done. However, closing schools is an indication of personal hostility. The government should act within a legal framework. Closing schools is equivalent to medieval thinking,” said Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) deputy Yusuf Halaçoğlu.

Main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) Deputy Chairman Faruk Loğoğlu has also reacted to Erdoğan's attempts to close the schools. “This is totally a political decision. From every aspect, this decision is based on animosity and is wrong,” said Loğoğlu.

Regarding Davutoğlu's instructions to Turkish embassies and representatives, Loğoğlu stated that the Foreign Ministry does not have the authority to order the closure of schools in other countries, and that deciding to close those schools would be in “violation of laws” as they are not public but private schools.

Last month, parents of students at Yavuz Selim School in Kanifing, Gambia, received a letter announcing its immediate closure. According to reports, the national education authorities of Gambia reportedly sent a one-sentence letter to the school's principal ordering the school's immediate closure, and the principal in turn sent a letter to all parents announcing the government's decision to close the school.

Following this, Gambian authorities reportedly ordered the immediate closure of the school. Yavuz Selim School was established in 2010 and served students of various nationalities. The school provided an international school curriculum and was described as "not for profit."

When asked about reports that the school in Gambia received compensation for its closure, Loğoğlu replied: “I would not be surprised [the Turkish government]. It would close it [the school] through money. Anything can be expected from this government."

Education should not be abused for personal hostility

Observers say the closure is a clear an example of Turkish pressure on governments to shut down Gülen schools abroad.

Türk Ocakları Chairman Nuri Gürgür also said that the closure of these schools would be a serious mistake and added that those schools effectively represent Turkey abroad. Entrepreneurs affiliated with the Hizmet movement consider the Olympiads to be the schools' most important activity, as they represent Turkey and the Turkish language.

“Closing the schools that keep Turkey's name alive in foreign countries would be a very bad decision. Considering that these schools provide quality education, closing those schools would mean nothing but only revenge. History would not forgive this,” said MHP Deputy Reşat Doğru.

Recent reports say that Erdoğan personally asked Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) Prime Minister Nechirvan Barzani to close Turkish schools in the autonomous region of Iraq during Barzani's visit to Turkey in mid-February, according to sources close to the KRG prime minister. Erdoğan also called on the administration of Pakistan's Punjab region to shut down its schools linked to the Gülen movement.

“It is unacceptable for the prime minister to carry his animosity to the area of education. 

Education should not be an instrument of personal hostility. It is not ethnical to pursue hate rhetoric by means of our children,” said CHP parliamentary group deputy chairman Engin Altay.

Closing schools is a dictatorial attempt

CHP's Mahmut Tanal also criticized the government's attempt to shut down the schools abroad, saying that such an attempt would drag society into darkness. “Shutting down schools is a method that dictators apply in order to prevent the public from being enlightened,” said Tanal.

Grand Unity Party (BBP) leader Mustafa Destici described the attempt to shut down the school as a “shame." “It is inexplicable to see the Turkish government complaining about its schools abroad while many other foreign countries are trying to establish their own schools in abroad,” said Destici.

Davutoğlu defended the instructions given to the Turkish embassies and representatives abroad for the closure of Hizmet-affiliated schools there. Speaking to the reporters on the sidelines of his meetings in New York, where he went to gather support for Turkey's pursuit of non-permanent membership on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for the 2015-2016 term, Davutoğlu said that the reason behind the orders was that a number of civil society representatives sent letters to foreign officials in which they expressed their complaints about Turkey.

Davutoğlu, who did not give details regarding the content of the letters, said that for the sake of their duty, they should take measures. When asked whether Turkish schools sent those letters to foreign officials, Davutoğlu replied: “Not the schools [themselves], but well-known civil society organizations and representatives from those institutions sent the letters,” said Davutoğlu.

“I wouldn't say this if I hadn't been asked, but I mean the [Turkish] schools in the United States... Some civil society representatives complain about their own countries by sending letters to foreign officials. Some foreign officials conveyed those letters to me. We have the right to question whom these efforts serve,” said Davutoğlu.

Despite smear campaign, Somalia says it stands by Turkish schools

Contrary to reports circulated by pro-government Turkish newspapers claiming that an investigation has been launched by Somalia against Turkish schools in the country, Somali authorities claimed no such investigation had been launched and said they would continue to support Turkish schools.

Mohammed Omar, a member of the Somali parliamentary committee for foreign affairs, has stated that Somalia is happy with the work carried out by the Turkish schools in the country. “Four schools and a hospital have been established in Somalia. They provide services up to global standards. We Somalis will always be with the Nil institutions [affiliated with the Hizmet movement] and we will always support them,” Omar said.

Somalia has been struggling with civil war and drought for a long time, and Turkish schools have played a prominent role in rebuilding the education system in the country, despite the fact that the schools were opened only two years ago.

Nil institutions, which have been increasingly active in Somalia, have achieved 22 medals in international student Olympiads.

Source: TODAY'S ZAMAN

US Operates Global Drone War from German Base

TEHRAN (FNA)- A testimony by a former US Air Force drone pilot revealed that the US is using its Ramstein Air Base in Germany to wage highly controversial drone warfare in Africa, Yemen, and Pakistan.

“The entire drone war of the US military wouldn't be possible without Germany," Brandon Bryant, who resigned in 2011, told NDR television and Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper, RT reported.

Last year, German media revealed that the US uses its military bases in Germany to conduct targeted killings of suspected terrorists in Somalia. But Bryant now says that Ramstein Air Base in the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate is involved in strikes on Pakistan and Yemen. 

During his five years of service, Bryant flew more than 1,000 operations in Pakistan and Yemen. He said his unit was responsible for 1,262 targeted killings. Although Bryant was seated at his control pad in New Mexico, far from the actual drones, there is mounting evidence that the base in Germany plays a key role.

Data from the remote controlled drones is transmitted via satellite to Germany. It is then sent back to America via fiber optic cable. Live pictures are analyzed and classified by teams of US intelligence officers in Germany, suggesting Ramstein is the nerve center behind the operations.

Bryant said that Ramstein was always “the first port of call” during any strike.

Polls show that the majority of Germans have consistently disapproved of drone strikes, saying they are secretive, do not follow a legal process, and can prove ineffective if the wrong targets are eliminated.

Aware of these concerns, the United States, which has a military presence in the country guaranteed by post-WWII agreements, has denied that its German base, which houses over 600 personnel, is directly involved in the strikes.

"The US government has confirmed that such armed and remote aircrafts are not flown or controlled from US bases in Germany," government spokesman Steffen Seibert told reporters on Friday.

In total, up to 900 people may have been killed in Yemen since strikes began in 2002. More than 3,700 people have died in Pakistan since 2004. The figures were collated on the basis of reports by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, an independent online news source, as the CIA and the Pentagon do not reveal official figures.

In the wake of the revelation, foreign policy spokesperson for the Greens party, Omid Nouripour, urged Angela Merkel’s government to take action. "It is shameful that the German government simply closes its eyes to violations of international law on German territory," Nouripour told DPA news agency.

While the new revelations may put further strain on the relationship between Washington and Berlin, which is already tense due to Edward Snowden's leaks about NSA surveillance, they are unlikely to lead to specific measures from Germany.

Berlin cannot freely inspect, much less close down, US bases without pulling out of key military cooperation agreements.

Source: english.farsnews.com

Africa. The failures of the UN

by: Roberta Walls

Italy will participate in the European Union mission in the Central African Republic, battered by a severe humanitarian crisis. This was announced by the premier Italian Matteo Renzi, at the end of the EU-Africa summit, which took place Tuesday and Wednesday in Brussels. Renzi announced the sending of "some engineers" to give "a hand in terms of development and cooperation." In addition, will also be sent "a few dozen" soldiers of Engineers. 

On Tuesday, the European Council has given the green light to the military mission in the African country "to help create a safe environment in this country", in line with the UN resolution . The military operation EUFOR RCA renamed operate in Bangui and in the airport of the capital with the aim of protecting the population and provide humanitarian aid. 

Spite of the presence of French soldiers Sangaris the operation and mission of the African Misca peace, not violence stop. Indeed, we have multiplied. The vicissitudes of recent days have indeed raised the tension and angered people. 

Eye of the Storm did the Chadian soldiers, who are part of the AU peacekeeping mission, accused of shooting "without receiving any provocation" on the inhabitants of Bangui last weekend, killing at least 30 people and wounding 300 others. The news was confirmed Friday by the UN. "As soon as the convoy of the National Army of Chad reached the market area PK12, opened fire on the population. As people fled in panic in all directions, the soldiers continued to fire indiscriminately, "said the UN representative in Geneva for Human Rights, Rupert Colville, explaining to the media the first results of the investigation on the United Nations' accident. 

The incident sparked the reaction of the rebels Sélèka responsible for the coup posted about a year ago (March 24, 2013, ed), militias and self-defense Anti-Balaka, who for months you do the war. 

According to local sources, the Chadian soldiers arrived in Bangui to pick up some fellow citizens and Muslims, eager to leave the capital, but did not inform the command of Misca and French. 

Soldiers sent to N'Djamena have serious previous dependent and are not well regarded by the local population. Among the various accusations that he had helped the rebels Séléka to score the coup against former President Bozizé. 
Overall the African population is tired and discouraged against foreign troops that have been proven to abuse their powers and not be able to restore order. 

People are convinced that behind the inefficiency of African soldiers of Misca and those of the French Sangaris there is a strategy, that of the UN to intervene. France has assured that within ten days the Security Council will vote on the resolution to send a peacekeeping mission but also sanctions against 11 Central African personality. Among them are former President Bozizé and his son Jean-Francis, accused of "direct support to Anti-Balaka." 

The arrival of UN peacekeepers in the country does not arouse enthusiasm. And it's no wonder. From the genocide of Rwanda to the Democratic Republic of Congo, the massacre of Sierra Leone, to move to the Biafran and that of Somalia, the history of UN peacekeeping missions are dotted with setbacks and failures. 
It is customary to give the blame the blue helmets that do not do what they could do. Or be faster, more courageous, more efficient and more disciplined. They can not defeat evil. Do not look like superhero comics, cartoons or movies, which we are accustomed. 

Who are the peacekeepers? Pakistanis, Indians and Bangladeshis. The vast majority of UN troops employed in peacekeeping missions come from the poorest Member States of the United Nations. Why? The reason is simple: for poor countries participation in peace operations is a great deal because the soldiers at home cost when they become peacekeepers get an entry of a thousand dollars a month per soldier. 

Whilst the soldiers from rich countries receive compensation directly from the UN, those of poor governments, usually, if you pocket them. Often, it happens that the peacekeepers have to wait long to get equipment and reimbursements. It happens that the blue helmets from poor countries should ensure themselves to remedy the equipment they need. As happened in 1998 in Kuwait, where British soldiers sminarono the ground using special detectors British, while the soldiers of Bangladesh that dector not owned them, they did the same job putting sticks in the ground. 

Recent years have multiplied slogans against UN troops. The most common are the "blue helmets have failed" and "failed to protect the population." In Rwanda, in 1994, the peacekeepers were "property" to look Hutus who massacred with machetes 800 thousand Tutsis and moderate Hutus in less than a hundred days. He cried foul. Yet today in the Democratic Republic of Congo is happening the same thing under the eyes of UN peacekeepers in the Minusco, women and girls are raped and raped with sticks and guns, old and young are killed or mutilated with machetes by rebel groups who flock the country. 

But it is the fault of peacekeepers or UN? Or better yet the soldiers or the five permanent members of the Security Council? Are the United States, France, the United Kingdom, China and Russia, which have the first and last word on the subject, who decide whether or not to send missions and identifying the scope, cost, time of so-called operations peace. 

Praxis is always the same. The UN produces resolutions that summarize all these conditions, then press the mandates and makes them have blue helmets who learn at that precise moment where they will go and what they can and can not do. In the mandates always appears the phrase: "Do not shoot unless in self-defense and never on the authorities of the host country." Even when thousands of people are massacred under their noses. The blue helmets are pawns of the five members of the UN, which protect their geopolitical and economic interests around the world.They do nothing but obey and carry out the UN mandate. Despite this, they are not saints, indeed most times you are guilty of crimes against humanity, as UN peacekeepers in Congo have raped dozens of women, or even children in Haiti. 

Entire world over. As in Italy, the south and the lower-middle classes to join in the international arena, are poor countries that provide troops, people who are illiterate and poor, for the UN missions. 

During 2001, the former Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, faced with the difficulty of finding troops to be sent to Sierra Leone and the absence of Western countries in the UNAMSIL mission, raised "a very serious question that all of us not only the Security Council must consider: the Council can continue to adopt resolutions by requiring a deployment of our forces while its own members and in particular the most important countries with larger armies and do nothing? ". Kofi Annan was referring in particular to the United States, the largest military power in the world, which did not provide even one more soldier. A decision was taken by the U.S. after the adventure or rather misadventure in Somalia. 

In 1993 President Bill Clinton in his first speech before the General Assembly of the UN declared enough was enough, it was assumed that "commitments that were then beyond his own abilities. " He was referring precisely to the UN peacekeeping mission in Somalia, requested by the United States. 

Those words then Secretary of the United Nations Boustros Boutros-Ghali said: "It is the UN that says yes or no to something. It is the United States. It is the United States to say yes to the mission in Somalia. The task of the Organization is simply to raise troops and money needed. " 

The truth is that national interests always prevail on the objectives of the UN. And so it was for Somalia and Operation Continue Hope, which was sunk by the Member States. The U.S. who had started the mission and had taken the lead, were the first to open a hole and jump ship, accusing those who remained on board to have failed and not being able to say "no." 

History of Somalia includes all the dynamics that revolve around the UN resolutions. 

It all started in 1992 when the humanitarian agencies declared that there was a famine that was threatening to kill half of the Somali population at a rate of "three thousand people a day." Because of the civil war food aid could no longer reach the affected areas of famine. Despite the presence of five Pakistani peacekeepers, the bandits attacked humanitarian convoys. The United States decided to intervene. 

On 27 November 1992, President Bush told the nation: "I am deeply concerned about the fate of the Somali people" and announced sending 20-30 thousand men in Somalia in order to protect humanitarian aid. At the same time, "he asked," to the Security Council to pass a resolution to send a peacekeeping force in the Horn of Africa. Request that was accepted without much hesitation. 

As told by journalist Linda Polman, in his book "UN. Weaknesses and contradictions of an institution indispensable for peace ", twelve members of the Security Council voted in favor of the resolution. One abstained. Two voted against it. One of these was the Yemen, who paid dearly for his decision. According to the New York Times, as we read in the book, a U.S. diplomat would have said very abruptly to the representative of Yemen that this would be the most expensive vote that Yemen had ever expressed. The threat came at the facts: the U.S. reduced aid to this country of 60 million dollars. 

Threats instead worked with Colombia, "Our Achilles heel is the drug. The United States believes that we do not act strongly enough against traffickers. If we had voted against the resolution or abstained would have been if we had passed a very delicate border. We had a lot of fear that the United States could make us again what we did two years ago. On that occasion, a judge had accidentally discharged a Colombian drug dealer. It was the signal for the retaliation. Since then, the U.S. Customs checked the Colombian flower box to box. The operation called for three to four days, after which the flowers had withered completely, "he told a Colombian diplomat. 

If the background of the adoption of resolution are disturbing, even more so those that relate to the arrival of the invading forces in North America Somalia. 

Polman In the book, it is said that two days before the scheduled date of their landing in Mogadishu, came a messenger sent by the Bush administration. "Listen," said the leaders of the Somali clans specially gathered "under American leadership the world is going to prevent this country to commit suicide. We come in peace, but you know perfectly well what they are able to make the U.S. army. You have seen from you during Desert Storm. Now those same U.S. forces will arrive here in two days. If you do not cooperete polverizzeremo. " The invasion of the Marines was broadcast live on television in prime time. The U.S. soldiers landed on the beach in Mogadishu were greeted by photographers and journalists around the world. But there was not a Somali. It says a lot about what people thought about the mission. 

Within hours, the U.S. military occupied the port and the airport and set off the first convoy of food aid. CNN sent in world vision pictures "moving" of the Marines surrounded by children in the party and fed. Despite their arrival, "television", the U.S. high command did not intervene in the power struggle pitting Somali clans. "If you let us stay and food aid convoys, we'll let you stay," the Americans proposed to the heads of the clan, who immediately accepted the agreement. Rejecting the rest: they could keep their weapons, provided they do not point them against the marines. The pact was less when the peacekeepers arrived in Somalia. As soon as the peacekeepers arrived in Somalia felt order from the United States, which held the military command of the operation under the auspices of the United Nations, to begin to look for weapons. The Somalis who refused to leave were seen disarm bomb the houses from the North American drones. Hundreds were killed. Were the most violent and bloody bombing, grew more anger and violence of the Somalis against foreign soldiers in general: over sixty peacekeepers fell under the blows of the Somalis. 

And then one day the same fate befell 18 marines and the House White announced that it would withdraw its troops. The straw that broke the camel's back was the shooting by a crew from CNN, who happened to be staying in place, the body of one of the 18 soldiers dragged by a rope around the city as a trophy. It was then that the United States President Bill Clinton declared that the mission in Somalia was a failure of the UN, because the UN would have to say no to Somalia. Too bad that the whole operation was conceived by the United States under the U.S. command from start to finish. The provocation, the former UN General Secretary Boutros-Ghali pointed out that "there is the United Nations to say yes or no to something" and described its task as "going around the world's capitals to beg. To be clear: I have no power and are not independent. The Member States of the United Nations are free to contribute to paying for peacekeeping missions or not. Member States are free to make troops available or not. In order to do my job I depend on your willingness. " 

United States left Somalia and took away their trucks, their water purifiers and other equipment essential to ensure the conduct of the mission. At the heart of the United States, from the beginning, there was the Somali population, but their economic interests. 

Source: rinascita.eu

Kenya: About 1,000 Somalis arrested in Kenyan police crackdown in Eastleigh

Nairobi - About 1,000 ethnic Somalis were arrested in two days Kenyan Police operation in Nairobi’s Eastleigh suburb and were taken to Kasarani Stadium outside Nairobi, RBC Radio reports.

Those arrested included men, pregnant women, young children of Somali origin, according to Somali Embassy officials in Nairobi.

The local media reported that the door-to-door operation which started on Saturday morning continued even Sunday morning as the media quoted security officials saying that the operation will not last until Kenya becomes secure enough from explosions.

The operation which came under the order of President Uhuru Kenyatta us likely to take one month, and aimed to clean up illegal Somali immigrants in Nairobi.

Kenyan government officials say those arrested will either be taken back to refugee camps in Kenya or be deported back to their home country with the guidance of the Somali Embassy in Nairobi.

Somalia’s Ambassador to Kenya Mohamed Ali Nur said the embassy is working to help return of Somali citizens who do not have valid documents to stay and live in Kenya.

Kenya has been experiencing a wave of explosions and other attacks, mostly in Nairobi which mostly claimed by Al Shabab militant group in Somalia.

Kenya sent  its troops into Somalia in late 2011 to pursue what is said as an Al Shabab’s threat in Kenya, but the Al Qaeda linked group vowed that Kenya will get its fair share from its intervention in Somalia.

Crimea isn't the only region looking to secede from its host country this year. Why?

In some cases, such as that of Somaliland (in Somalia) or Kurdistan (in Iraq), they succeed in creating a separate, protective state that has, however, no international recognition as an independent state. In many others, they fail and are plunged into a cycle of violent civil conflict.

by Aleksandar Pavković

The specter of secession is haunting Europe. Since 2000 there have been three successful separations from existing states — by Montenegro, Kosovo and Crimea — and at the moment, several other regions are attempting to secede and create independent states. In March, Crimea first seceded from Ukraine and then voted, in a referendum, to rejoin the Russian Federation. At the same time, in an informal online referendum, voters of the Veneto region in northern Italy overwhelmingly favored independence and the restoration of the old Venetian republic. In September, the citizens of Scotland will vote in an independence referendum, and the government of the Spanish region of Catalonia plans to hold a referendum of the same kind two months later — despite a ruling by the Constitutional Court of Spain that such a referendum would be illegal (a similar referendum in the Basque region in 2008 was thwarted by the Spanish government). 

Why now?

Why are these referendums all taking place in 2014? In fact, the Scottish and Catalan votes were planned several years ago, at a time when dissatisfaction with the “host states” among the citizens of these regions was the highest. Spain and Italy were experiencing a series of banking and fiscal crises and increasing unemployment; the Conservative government in the U.K., which had no electoral support at all in Scotland, was introducing unpopular austerity measures. It was only when repeated attempts to get the Veneto regional assembly to hold an independence referendum stalled that the Veneto secessionists proceeded on their own with the online referendum — and made it coincide with the Crimean one.  

The point of these referendums is to mobilize the dissatisfaction of those who strongly self-identify as Scots, Catalan or Venetian and who regard their current “host state” as foreign, burdensome, incompetent or corrupt. By leaving this state, literally, and creating another, better state, the secessionists hope to improve their lot in life. In contrast to these movements, the Crimean referendum was conceived and conducted within a few weeks: It was a response to the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian president, a popular figure in Crimea, and was used to channel the consequent fears among the majority Russian speakers into a vote to rejoin Russia as a safe haven from the new, (allegedly) hostile, anti-Russian Ukrainian government. The referendum was rushed, with the Russian military lurking in the background, before the new Ukrainian government was able to dispel voters’ fears or establish control over the autonomous republic. Within weeks after the region rejoined Russia, the pay of public employees and pensions in Crimea almost doubled; the reunification thus brought more benefits to some Crimeans than a mere secession from Ukraine would have. 

No easy way out

Seceding from a country isn’t always as fast and (relatively) painless as Crimea made it seem. But there are other cases of secession that suggest these pains can be eased somewhat. First, the best strategy for any secessionists is to attempt to convince their host state that the secession of their territory won’t cause much harm. The potential secession of Scotland does not appear to be harmful to the U.K., so the U.K. government is prepared to recognize its independence. The secession of Montenegro in 2006, which the EU supported and supervised, did not appear to harm Serbia either; the Serbian government agreed to the secession of this federal unit.

If this tactic fails, a secessionist movement should try to find a powerful sponsor – a superpower, such as the U.S., or a neighbor more powerful than its host state (and not easily intimidated by a superpower), such as Russia. The Albanian secessionists in Kosovo gained U.S. sponsorship in 1998, when they led a large armed uprising against Serbia. And in 2008, when Kosovo, then a province of Serbia under U.N./NATO administration, formally seceded from Serbia in spite of Serbia’s vehement opposition, the U.S., Kosovo’s principal sponsor, along with most EU member states immediately recognized its independence. It is notable that Spain, Slovakia, Romania, Greece and Cyprus refused to recognize, on principle, a state, such as Kosovo, that unilaterally seceded against the opposition of its “host state”; not coincidentally, all these EU member states oppose separatist movements within their own borders.

This doesn’t lend much hope to the Catalan, Basque and Venetian secessionists — their host states oppose their aspirations, and they are not likely to gain powerful sponsors. Secessionists all over the globe face similar obstacles: Those in Tibet and Xinjiang (in China), the Caucasus (in Russia), Congo, Kurdistan (in Iraq) or Azawad (in Mali) — to mention, randomly, only a small selection of cases — have little chance of carving out an independent, internationally recognized state, however strong their movements may be. Quebec at least has the law on its side: If its secessionists ever succeed in winning over the majority of their province’s population, they may legally secede from Canada, thanks to a 1998 Canadian Supreme Court opinion. 

For secessionists, the state they currently live in is effectively foreign. 

The differences between secessionists in Europe and Quebec, on the one hand, and those elsewhere are quite obvious. Outside Europe and Quebec, the secessionists often face either a failing or a highly repressive state. Faced with the pervasive threat of violence, they aim to create a state structure that will protect the lives of its inhabitants. In some cases, such as that of Somaliland (in Somalia) or Kurdistan (in Iraq), they succeed in creating a separate, protective state that has, however, no international recognition as an independent state. In many others, they fail and are plunged into a cycle of violent civil conflict.

Secessionists in Europe and Quebec, by contrast, aren’t facing threats of violence; thus their aim is not protection but provision of perceived benefits. They claim that an independent state would advantage their constituents in all aspects of their lives much more than the current host state could; this includes a better standard of living. For them, independence serves to provide a variety of enhanced benefits to a group of people inhabiting a region within an existing state.

Many supporters of secession find it oppressive to live in a state whose rulers speak a language or dialect they consider foreign. State or cultural symbols (flags, anthems, coats of arms, popular songs) are to them also foreign: For them, the state they currently live in is effectively foreign. But these people are in the minority. As the opinion polls in Scotland, Quebec, Veneto and Catalonia suggest, identity secessionists do not form clear majorities in these regions, so would-be voters need to be convinced that independence would benefit them.

That’s not easy: In Quebec’s past two referendums, in 1981 and 1995, the veteran secessionist Parti Québécois failed to achieve even simple majorities to support independence. Pre-referendum opinion polls in Scotland, Catalonia and Veneto, while showing that the majority of voters in these regions are highly dissatisfied with the host state or central government, do not unequivocally show that the same majority would vote for independence.

Questionable benefits

Who would benefit most from the secession of Scotland, Catalonia, Veneto or Quebec? The answer is simple: The beneficiaries would first and foremost be the leaders of secessionist parties whose aim is to take over the governments of the newly independent states. If they were rulers of independent and sovereign states, their policies and actions — including the use of coercion and force — as well as their remuneration would not be subject to any higher or “foreign” sovereign authority or oversight. In addition, as the new state takes over the functions of the old — including those of diplomacy — there would be lots of new job opportunities in the expanding state bureaucracy. Local small and medium businesses would profit, too, as their competitors from outside the region withdraw across new state borders.

It’s less clear how other citizens of the new states would fare. As many nonlocal or even local companies pull out of the region (as they did prior to the Quebec referendum in 1995), employment is likely to become a pressing issue. Perhaps an economic downturn may be avoided if the seceded state remains in a regional economic organization (such as the EU) of which its former host state is a member. But this, too, remains uncertain: The EU, for example, has no policies about, or obligation toward, states seceding from an EU member.

For most people in these regions of Europe — unlike those in Crimea — seceding now would bring uncertainty and anxiety about the future that secessionist leaders would not be able to allay. For this reason alone it is highly uncertain whether the planned referendums will produce majorities in favor of independence — and, even if they do, whether these regions will become independent states, or be recognized as such, anytime soon. 

Aleksandar Pavković is an associate professor of politics and international relations at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia. He is the author of “Creating New States” (2007) and an editor of “The Ashgate Research Companion to Secession” (2011) and of “Separatism and Secessionism in Europe and Asia” (2013). 

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera America's editorial policy.

Judge sentences man in tutoring scam

Somali man guilty of falsifying invoices and stealing students’ identities in Ohio.

     

     By Kathy Lynn Gray 

A Somali man who ran a scam tutoring company for needy Franklin County students was sentenced to 13 months in prison Thursday on federal charges of falsifying invoices and stealing students’ identities.

Ashkir Ali, 46, of Balsam Lake Drive on the East Side, pleaded guilty in November to the charges. He faced as many as seven years in prison.

“I’m not coming back here,” Ali told U.S. District Judge Edmund A. Sargus Jr. “I’ve learned my lesson.”

Sargus ordered Ali to pay $115,916 in restitution and to serve 13 months in a federal prison and five months in a half-way house. He said a mandatory two-year prison sentence for identity theft was reduced because of Ali’s “substantial assistance” in investigating tutoring fraud.

Ali was indicted more than a year ago after a two-year investigation of his company, WAISS Network Technologies, by the Ohio auditor’s office.

The probe revealed that WAISS made $100,000 from Columbus and $20,000 from South-Western city schools as part of the federal “supplemental educational services” tutoring program, mandated by the No Child Left Behind law.

The program, which had little oversight from the state and schools, was shut down after the 2011-12 school year.

The indictment against Ali said his company charged Columbus schools $55 to $65 an hour for tutoring between September 2007 and January 2012.

Jim Longerbone, who investigated the case when he worked for the auditor’s office, said in November that Ali billed Columbus for students he never tutored or tutored infrequently. None of the South-Western students Ali claimed he tutored received tutoring, Longerbone said.

Ali also forged the signatures of tutors and students’ parents on forms he submitted to the schools.

The case is just one of several the state auditor’s office investigated.

Mike Spiert, the auditor’s chief investigator, said today that a large-scale investigation into tutoring in schools continues. He would not provide details.

“The important thing here is that the children in the program are the victims, because they needed tutoring and didn’t get it,” he said.

Ali came to the United States in 1997 as a political refugee and is a permanent U.S. resident, Sargus said. He could be deported to Somalia after his prison term because he has been convicted of an aggravated felony, according to his plea agreement.

———

By Kathy Lynn Gray - The Columbus Dispatch, Ohio (MCT)

URGENT SHOCKING NEWS: No Khat Ban in UK after the House of Lords Rejected Legislation

Khat will not be banned in UK contrary to the expectations raised after the House of Commons passed the legislation banning khat on Monday the 31st of March 2014.

The reason is because the House of Lords have since then rejected the legislation.
Sources informed us today that " Although the House of Commons Legislative Committee voted to approve the classification of khat on Monday, the House of Lords have since rejected the necessary changes to the Misuse of Drugs 1971.”


The motion against Khat ban at the  House of Lords  reads as follows :


"Baroness Smith of Basildon to move that this House regrets that Her Majesty's Government's plans for the introduction of the draft Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2014 do not include provisions for a 12-month review of the impact of the reclassification of khat in view of the highly unusual community focus of its use, for putting a detailed policing strategy in place before a ban takes effect, or for a health strategy to prevent a transfer of addiction to other substances; and do not commit the Department for International Development to do more work with the government of Kenya to alleviate the effect of the reclassification on the Kenyan economy."

The House of Lords are more powerful than the house of Commons in British Democracy. When the Commons passed the proposed legislation banning khat , the proposal was then sent to the Lords for approval. Unfortunately they rejected the legislation.


This is how the difference between the House Commons and the House of Lords is defined in the Politics website: "The House of Lords is the second chamber of Parliament and is also called the Upper House. Because it is not elected, it does not have the same powers as the Commons, but it retains the right to revise and scrutinise the Government's actions and legislation.


Its independent minds and extensive expertise form a crucial check on the power of the executive in Parliament but it is much more likely to wield this power by asking Ministers to think again than to veto whole pieces of legislation." Politics.co.uk

The whole campaign has now gone back to square one and will require fresh campaign and lobbying to move it again to Westminster. This is a major blow to the campaigners and activists who wanted Khat to be banned in UK.


Khat has destroyed the lives of many Somalis in Britain . In addition to mental and dental healthproblems, it is the major cause of family break-downs among the Somali communities. Visit No 15 Mafresh at Southall next to the train station. It is open 24 hours a day , seven days a week. Addicts sleep there in shifts. Some even use cars parked in-front of the Mafresh as their sleeping places. Other cities and towns in UK have the same style Mafreshes as No 15. It will now be business as usual at all the local Mafreshes.

WAR DEGDEG AH: Madaxwaynaha Maamul Goboledka Puntland ayaa Shaqadii Ka Cayriyay Wiil uu dhalay Madaxwayne Faroole

Maxamed Cabdiraxman Faroole Madaxii Cidanka Ilaalada Xeebaha Puntland

Bosaso - Wararka ka imanaya magaalo Garowe ayaa xaqiijiyay in maanta Madaxwaynaha Maamulgobleedka Puntland uu xilkii ka qaaday Maxamed Cabdiraxman Faroole oo ahaa madaxii Ciidanka Police Ilaalada Xeebaha Puntland, ciidankan oo uu maalgaliyo wadanka Iimaaraadka Carabtu waxa tan iyo markii la aasaasay 2010  madax ka ahaa wiilka uu dhalay madaxwaynihii hore ee Puntland.

Sidoo kale madaxwayne Abdiwali Gaas ayaa xilkan u magacaabay Abdinasir Bihi Sofe, oo ka soo jeeda Gobolka Mudug isla markaasina ay isku ardaa hoose yihiin Madaxwayne Gaas. 

Warku waxa uu intaasi ku daray in xilkaqaadista wiilka Madaxwaynihiii hore ee Puntland dhalay ay timid kadib markii maalmihii u danbeeyay uu maran xaga mushaharka ahi ka dhex oognaa ciidanka ilaalada xeebaha puntland. 

Dadka u dhuundaloola siyaasada Puntland ayaa ku macneeyay xilka qaadida wiilka madaxwaynihii hore ee Puntland iyo ninka uu Madaxwayne Gaas ku bedelay ayaa ka dhigan bilowga olole uu Madaxwayne Gaas kaga nadiifinayo awooda maamulka Puntland dhamaan taageerayaashii iyo saraakiishii ku dhadhawayd Madaxwaynihii hore ee Puntland Mudane Cabdiraxman Faroole awooda