NATO ‘humanitarian’ warriors let refugees from Libya die

This video says about itself:

Civilian casualties have raised serious misgivings about NATO intervention in Libya, even among supporters of the ongoing aerial campaign. And while the international community is taking sides in the conflict, it is the Libyan people who suffer most.

By Patrick Martin:

Charges mount of NATO war crimes in Libya

6 August 2011

The Italian government has demanded an investigation into whether a NATO warship engaged in the war against Libya ignored the plight of a boatload of refugees, contributing to the deaths of as many as 100 people from hunger and thirst.

The vessel arrived at Lampedusa, an Italian island in the Mediterranean Sea between Sicily and Libya, with 270 survivors crammed onto a 65-foot-long boat. The boat had issued an SOS after its engine broke down, but an unidentified NATO warship ignored the appeal.

The survivors said the bodies of the dead had been thrown into the sea during the harrowing journey. They said they had first encountered a Cypriot tugboat, which gave them life rafts and notified Italian authorities.

Italy informed NATO, which had a warship 27 miles away, but the warship’s assistance was denied. The refugee boat was finally reached by Italian coastguard vessels and a helicopter when it was 90 miles south of Lampedusa.

The International Organization for Migration said the vessel had left the Libyan coast near Tripoli on Saturday, jammed with African migrants from Nigeria, Ghana, Ethiopia, Sudan, Chad and Morocco, and lacking water and food.

Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini requested a formal investigation of the incident and instructed his country’s ambassador to NATO to raise the issue of rescue of civilian refugees as part of the NATO mission in the war.

NATO officials denied they had received an appeal to save the refugee vessel. A spokeswoman said that Italian authorities had told NATO about the ship while saying they were responding to the distress call themselves. “NATO subsequently confirmed with Italian authorities that they had responded to the incident with three ships as well as with helicopter support,” the official said.

A right-wing Italian MP, Roberto Castelli, denounced NATO claims that its fleet did not know the refugee boat was in the maritime war zone. “The idea that NATO, with all its surveillance technology, was not aware of a boat of this size is a story that not even Little Red Riding Hood would believe,” he said.

The war was launched by the United States, France and Britain on the pretext of defending civilians from the regime of Muammar Gaddafi, but NATO warplanes have routinely bombed civilians, both in Gaddafi-held territory and even in the areas held by the NATO-backed “rebels.”

At the same time, in the Mediterranean, thousands of refugees fleeing the war zone are persecuted by the NATO powers, just as they were before the war.

In another atrocity case, the International News Safety Institute asked UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to investigate the NATO bombing of the headquarters of Libyan state television, in which three people were reported killed and 15 injured. The INSI asked the UN leader to determine whether the attack was a breach of a 2006 Security Council resolution that bans attacks on journalists.

NATO’s five-month bombing campaign in Libya, run under the guise of protecting civilians, is also killing victims fleeing the conflict, directly and indirectly: here.

The International Federation of Journalists has also condemned the July 30 bombing raid, which destroyed three satellite transmission dishes.

Bosnia, Kosovo, and Now Libya: The Human Costs of Washington’s Ongoing Collusion With Terrorists. Peter Dale Scott, Japan Focus: “Twice in the last two decades, significant cuts in U.S. and western military spending were foreseen: first after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and then in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. But both times military spending soon increased, and among the factors contributing to the increase were America’s interventions in new areas: the Balkans in the 1990s, and Libya today. Hidden from public view in both cases was the extent to which al-Qaeda was a covert U.S. ally in both interventions, rather than its foe”: here.

Can anyone explain why, at a time of national financial hardships and budgetry cutbacks, we can afford the hundreds of millions of pounds we’re spending on yet another imperial adventure in Libya? Here.

Reports circulated on June 15, 2011 that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would not rule out bombing ancient Roman ruins in Libya if it knew Muammar Gaddafi’s soldiers were hiding military equipment in them. For those who appreciate the importance of Libya’s Roman archeological sites, the most well preserved in all the Mediterranean, this is worrying news: here.

NATO Missiles Target Libyan Hospital, Kill 50 Children: here.NATO said to have killed 85 civilians: here.

Bombs continued to fall on Tripoli today as Nato continued its mission to oust Colonel Muammar Gadaffi despite its member states’ economic crises and confusion over the leadership of its National Transitional Council (NTC) allies: here.

Nic Beuret writes on the economic and political pressures behind border controls and the EU’s ‘Fortress Europe’ anti-migrant measures: here.

NATO lets refugees from Libya die

This video is called Humanitarian concerns not on NATO’s agenda – ex-Belgian MP.

From weekly Socialist Worker in Britain:

Tue 7 Jun 2011 | updated: 12.45pm Thu 9 Jun 2011

Refugees from Libya left to die by Nato ships speak out – exclusive

Hundreds of refugees from Libya were left to drown by Nato ships, survivors told Socialist Worker.

They say that their sinking vessel appealed for help from passing Nato and Italian ships, but none would stop.

The United Nations (UN) says that more than 150 people died when a boat overloaded with 850 refugees fleeing Libya’s capital Tripoli sank in the Mediterranean last Friday.

The refugees were mostly mirgrants who had been working in Libya.

Nato claims it had to “intervene” in Libya to save civilian lives. But it has callously refused to help those forced to flee its bombing.

Some of those who lived through the ordeal spoke to Socialist Worker in a refugee camp in Tunisia at Ras Ajdir.

Samuel Michael, a Nigerian, explained, “We were in the middle of the war in Tripoli, so we tried to leave for Europe.

“But we were stranded on the boat at sea for six days. We ran out of food and water after just two.” The boat then capsized after running onto a sandbank.

Samuel said, “Italian and Nato boats saw us, but they ignored us.”

Eventually fishermen found the refugees—but their boats were too small to take passengers, so they alerted the Tunisian authorities.

The survivors say the authorities rescued just two or three refugees at a time—and then only because there was one Tunisian woman on board.

Several survivors accused the UN of lying, saying the disaster was far worse than UN reports have suggested.

Nigerian refugee Sunshine survived the wreck with her young son Mike. But she said, “I lost the father of my son on that boat.”

A Bangladeshi survivor added, “We paid money to get to Libya for work, but were kicked out. We got on the boat to Europe but it sank.”

Another said, “There was bombing all night in Tripoli. Very heavy bombing. We could not stay there.”

A group of Bangladeshis said many died in desperate attempts to escape the sinking ship—jumping to their death.

The conditions at the refugee camp are making their nightmare even worse.

Mothers and their children are often separated into different camps, not knowing if the other is even alive.

One man died after becoming so mad with hunger he ate his own shit.

And allegations of mistreatment by the Tunisian military were rife. Many feared talking to journalists while near the camp. Several complained of beatings.

Military

George Moussa was one of a group of Nigerians trying to find family and friends from the wrecked ship. He pleaded with a senior military official, “I want to see my people, my brother and my wife.”

“Your brother is in the camp or in the sea,” said the smug soldier. “He died, don’t mind. There is no problem, baby.”

George pulled up his shirt to show bruising. “Why did you beat us?” he demanded of the officer.

“Five days at sea, now they don’t feed us,” George told Socialist Worker. “We’ve been drinking salt water. They treat us wrong. We are humans.”

The camp only has salty water on offer to drink—unless refugees pay for bottled.

The group also said they had their passports taken. They were then left outside the camp without food or water.

Survivors include nationals from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Niger, Egypt and Morocco. Most have nowhere to go.

People are dying here while European states like Italy and France bicker about how to prevent migration into Europe.

The camp currently interviews only three people a week for refugee status.

The head of the camp, Colonel Chedi, says that 1,000 refugees are crossing the border every day, making 100,000 since the war began. But the European Union has only accepted 100.

Many refugees are starting to return to Libya out of sheer desperation.

Recently refugees protested at the camp’s UN base, calling for more assistance. Hundreds blocked the road—but they were met by thugs with hammers and handguns.

When refugees grabbed rocks to resist, the military moved in. Several bodies were later found in the desert with gunshot wounds.

NATO OFFICIAL: GADDAFI A LEGITIMATE TARGET: here.

Defense Sec. Robert Gates says U.S.’s military alliance with Europe faces a “dim, if not dismal” future: here. And here.

Nato’s performance in Libya has exposed the weakness of the Western military alliance, US Defence Secretary Robert Gates said today in a blunt farewell address in Brussels: here.

Gates’ address to a NATO conference was an ultimatum to the European powers to increase military spending and manpower: here.

The War in Libya: The African Union’s Mistake of Policy and Principle: here.

The Billion Dollar War? Libyan Campaign Breaks Pentagon Estimates Costing US Taxpayers $2 Million a Day: here.

Four out of five refugees end up in poor states according to a new United Nations report released today which demolishes myths “about supposed floods of refugees in industrialised countries”: here.

NATO lets refugees from Libya die

This Euronews video says about itself:

10 March 2011

African refugees fleeing from Libya say they have been threatened with death, as Libyan rebels believe they are mercenaries working for Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

The UN refugee agency has expressed alarm at reports of armed Libyans attacking and, in some cases, even lynching sub-Saharan Africans.

Antonio Guterres, the agency’s commissioner, said authorities are “working together” and “need to be prepared” to welcome more people crossing into Tunisia.

NATO itself drops the mask of “humanitarian” pretexts for its waging of bloody war in Libya.

From daily The Guardian in Britain:

Nato units left 61 African migrants to die of hunger and thirst

Exclusive: Boat trying to reach Lampedusa was left to drift in Mediterranean for 16 days, despite alarm being raised

Jack Shenker in Lampedusa

Sunday 8 May 2011 21.30 BST

Dozens of African migrants were left to die in the Mediterranean after a number of European and Nato military units apparently ignored their cries for help, the Guardian has learned.

A boat carrying 72 passengers, including several women, young children and political refugees, ran into trouble in late March after leaving Tripoli for the Italian island of Lampedusa. Despite alarms being raised with the Italian coastguard and the boat making contact with a military helicopter and a Nato warship, no rescue effort was attempted.

All but 11 of those on board died from thirst and hunger after their vessel was left to drift in open waters for 16 days. “Every morning we would wake up and find more bodies, which we would leave for 24 hours and then throw overboard,” said Abu Kurke, one of only nine survivors. “By the final days, we didn’t know ourselves … everyone was either praying, or dying.”

International maritime law compels all vessels, including military units, to answer distress calls from nearby boats and to offer help where possible. Refugee rights campaigners have demanded an investigation into the deaths, while the UNHCR, the UN’s refugee agency, has called for stricter co-operation among commercial and military vessels in the Mediterranean in an effort to save human lives.

“The Mediterranean cannot become the wild west,” said spokeswoman Laura Boldrini. “Those who do not rescue people at sea cannot remain unpunished.”

Her words were echoed by Father Moses Zerai, an Eritrean priest in Rome who runs the refugee rights organisation Habeshia, and who was one of the last people to be in communication with the migrant boat before the battery in its satellite phone ran out.

“There was an abdication of responsibility which led to the deaths of over 60 people, including children,” he claimed. “That constitutes a crime, and that crime cannot go unpunished just because the victims were African migrants and not tourists on a cruise liner.”

This year’s political turmoil and military conflict in north Africa have fuelled a sharp rise in the number of people attempting to reach Europe by sea, with up to 30,000 migrants believed to have made the journey across the Mediterranean over the past four months. Large numbers have died en route; last month more than 800 migrants of different nationalities who left on boats from Libya never made it to European shores and are presumed dead.

Underlining the dangers, on Sunday more than 400 migrants were involved in a dramatic rescue when their boat hit rocks on Lampedusa.

The pope, meanwhile, in an address to more than 300,000 worshippers, called on Italians to welcome immigrants fleeing to their shores.

The Guardian‘s investigation into the case of the boat of 72 migrants which set sail from Tripoli on 25 March established that it carried 47 Ethiopians, seven Nigerians, seven Eritreans, six Ghanaians and five Sudanese migrants. Twenty were women and two were small children, one of whom was just one year old. The boat’s Ghanaian captain was aiming for the Italian island of Lampedusa, 180 miles north-west of the Libyan capital, but after 18 hours at sea the small vessel began running into trouble and losing fuel.

Using witness testimony from survivors and other individuals who were in contact with the passengers during its doomed voyage, the Guardian has pieced together what happened next. The account paints a harrowing picture of a group of desperate migrants condemned to death by a combination of bad luck, bureaucracy and the apparent indifference of European military forces who had the opportunity to attempt a rescue.

The migrants used the boat’s satellite phone to call Zerai in Rome, who in turn contacted the Italian coastguard. The boat’s location was narrowed down to about 60 miles off Tripoli, and coastguard officials assured Zerai that the alarm had been raised and all relevant authorities had been alerted to the situation.

Soon a military helicopter marked with the word “army” appeared above the boat. The pilots, who were wearing military uniforms, lowered bottles of water and packets of biscuits and gestured to passengers that they should hold their position until a rescue boat came to help. The helicopter flew off, but no rescue boat arrived.

No country has yet admitted sending the helicopter that made contact with the migrants. A spokesman for the Italian coastguard said: “We advised Malta that the vessel was heading towards their search and rescue zone, and we issued an alert telling vessels to look out for the boat, obliging them to attempt a rescue.” The Maltese authorities denied they had had any involvement with the boat.

After several hours of waiting, it became apparent to those on board that help was not on the way. The vessel had only 20 litres of fuel left, but the captain told passengers that Lampedusa was close enough for him to make it there unaided. It was a fatal mistake. By 27 March, the boat had lost its way, run out of fuel and was drifting with the currents.

“We’d finished the oil, we’d finished the food and water, we’d finished everything,” said Kurke, a 24-year-old migrant who was fleeing ethnic conflict in his homeland, the Oromia region of Ethiopia. “We were drifting in the sea, and the weather was very dangerous.” At some point on 29 or 30 March the boat was carried near to a Nato aircraft carrier – so close that it would have been impossible to be missed. According to survivors, two jets took off from the ship and flew low over the boat while the migrants stood on deck holding the two starving babies aloft. But from that point on, no help was forthcoming. Unable to manoeuvre any closer to the aircraft carrier, the migrants’ boat drifted away. Shorn of supplies, fuel or means of contacting the outside world, they began succumbing one by one to thirst and starvation.

The Guardian has made extensive inquiries to ascertain the identity of the Nato aircraft carrier, and has concluded that it is likely to have been the French ship Charles de Gaulle, which was operating in the Mediterranean on those dates.

French naval authorities initially denied the carrier was in the region at that time. After being shown news reports which indicated this was untrue, a spokesperson declined to comment.

A spokesman for Nato, which is co-ordinating military action in Libya, said it had not logged any distress signals from the boat and had no records of the incident. “Nato units are fully aware of their responsibilities with regard to the international maritime law regarding safety of life at sea,” said an official. “Nato ships will answer all distress calls at sea and always provide help when necessary. Saving lives is a priority for any Nato ships.”

For most of the migrants, the failure of the Nato ship to mount any rescue attempt proved fatal. Over the next 10 days, almost everyone on board died. “We saved one bottle of water from the helicopter for the two babies, and kept feeding them even after their parents had passed,” said Kurke, who survived by drinking his own urine and eating two tubes of toothpaste. “But after two days, the babies passed too, because they were so small.”

On 10 April, the boat washed up on a beach near the Libyan town of Zlitan near Misrata. Of the 72 migrants who had embarked at Tripoli, only 11 were still alive, and one of those died almost immediately on reaching land. Another survivor died shortly afterwards in prison, after Gaddafi’s forces arrested the migrants and detained them for four days.

Despite the trauma of their last attempt, the migrants – who are hiding out in the house of an Ethiopian in the Libyan capital – are willing to tackle the Mediterranean again if it means reaching Europe and gaining asylum.

“These are people living an unimaginable existence, fleeing political, religious and ethnic persecution,” said Zerai. “We must have justice for them, for those that died alongside them, and for the families who have lost their loved ones.”

Additional reporting by John Hooper and Tom Kington in Rome, and Kim Willsher in Paris

• This article was amended on 9 May 2011. The picture caption used the wrong figure for the death toll. This has been corrected.

See also here. And here.

U.N. Warning After Libya Shipwreck: here.

Libya Fighting in Mountains Leaves Refugees Stranded: here.

Sallum — Over the years, George* has read about the violence and destruction ravaging his native Iraq from the safety of Libya, where he moved ages ago to pursue a career as an electrical engineer. He never imagined that all-out war would come to this peaceful part of North Africa: here.

USA: Kucinich: Frozen Assets are for the Libyan People, Must not be ‘Lost’ Like Money ‘Lost’ in Iraq & Afghanistan: here.

UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon renewed demands for “an immediate, verifiable ceasefire” in Libya today after Tripoli suggested it is ready to call a halt to hostilities: here.

Death squads reportedly assassinating Libyan regime figures in Benghazi: here. And here.

Britain: David Cameron bolsters ties with Libyan rebels: here. And here.

‘Europe Worsening Hunger Worldwide’: here.

Victory for Afghan refugee girl!

The Dutch Rightist government wanted to send back 14-year-old Afghan refugee girl Sahar Hbrahim Gel to dangerous Afghanistan. She would have to leave her school, the Piter Jelles Gymnasium in Leeuwarden (called after a famous Dutch socialist pioneer of about 100 years ago, Pieter Jelles Troelstra.)

After a long struggle against this government plan by Sahar’s classmates, school, and other pro-refugee people, today the government has given in. Sahar can stay in the Netherlands.

Congratulations to her and her family!

Geert Wilders and his xenophobic PVV party will hate this decision.

(It would be even better if the Dutch government would not forcibly return Iraqi refugees to dangerous Iraq, like they are doing right now.

A few days ago, an Iranian refugee, who feared forcible return to Iran, killed himself by setting himself on fire in Amsterdam. Public indignation in the Netherlands against harsh anti-refugee policies because of that may have forced the government to take a step backwards in their anti-refugee zeal).

Britain: Black workers called today for a united front across Europe in light of a “rising tide” of racism: here.

Stop deporting refugees to dangerous Afghanistan

This video is called Afghan refugees return home to a bleak future – 19 Nov 2008.

From This is Exeter in Britain:

Friends fight to stop Exeter schoolboy being deported to Afghanistan

By exclusive eleanor gregson

FRIENDS of an Exeter schoolboy facing deportation to war-torn Afghanistan have launched a desperate plea to keep him in the UK.

Hakim Hussani, a pupil at St Peter’s Church of England Aided School, in Exeter, could be removed from the UK and sent back to his homeland if his application for asylum is refused.

The youngster, who is due to sit his exams in a couple of months, fled Afghanistan after his parents were killed.

He is understood to have been living in Exeter for around two years and has previously failed to gain asylum.

Immigration officers will deport him from the country once he is 18 if his latest bid for permanent residency fails.

Hakim’s situation is currently being assessed and he is believed to have just seven months before he turns 18.

The teenager is thought to have some family members back in Afghanistan but now has little contact with them.

He told the Echo he sees Exeter as home and has made friends with other Afghans living in the city, and regularly plays football with them.

“I am hoping to take my exams in May and June and I am trying to be able to stay in this country because I would like to live here permanently,” he said.

“I have lots of friends here and I am very happy here. I can’t go back to my country because of the fighting – that would be a big problem for me.”

He added: “I am really pleased with all the support I am getting, with letters and on Facebook, from students and teachers at St Peter’s and my teacher at Exeter College.”

Almost 400 people have joined a Facebook campaign to show their support for Hakim’s case.

Mark Perry, headteacher at St Peter’s, said Hakim was integrating into the community.

“It’s very heartwarming to see pupils trying to secure Hakim’s future,” he said.

“He is going through a process, having come over here temporarily, to see if he can make that permanent.

“I understand that Hakim did apply for asylum previously, but it was refused and there was no appeal. It appears he is speaking with a solicitor to see if he can make another application.”

He added: “Hakim was very traumatised when he came to this country and didn’t speak a word of English.

“My immediate concern was that he wasn’t going to be here long enough to take his exams, but I now understand that fear to be unfounded.”

Exeter’s Refugee Support Group said it would offer help and advice to Hakim. Manager Annette Hughes said: “We do have these situations pop up, particularly with young people.

“We are aware of this case and would help with any campaigning that needs to be done.”

It appears that Afghan warlords and religious fundamentalists are not the only ones who don’t want Malalai Joya in the public eye. The outspoken women’s rights activist and fierce critic of the war in Afghanistan has been denied a travel visa on the eve of a three-week U.S. speaking tour: here.

UPDATE: Success! Malalai Joya Granted Visa: here.

Many women in central Daikundi province are dying unnecessarily because there are no female doctors in any of the districts: here.

Refugee in Securicor mercenaries’ hands dies

This is a music video by British punk band Crass, of their song Securicor (another name for G4S corporation). Lyrics are here.

Britain: Police confirmed today that they are investigating the death of an Angolan man at Heathrow Airport during an attempted deportation by G4S security guards: here. And here.

Death of Angolan deportee: how accountable are private security firms? Here. And here.

An asylum-seeker who died during an attempted deportation had complained of breathing problems and asked for help seconds before he collapsed under three G4S private security guards, a witness claimed on Friday: here.

Medical Justice campaigners called on Tuesday for the suspension of all forced deportations until the truth about the death of Angolan refugee Jimmy Mubenga is discovered: here.

The Burden of Record-Breaking Deportations: here.

Britain’s draconian asylum system is forcing failed applicants to choose between destitution here or persecution back home, a leading charity warned today: here.

Human rights and child protection groups told Austria on Friday to stop detaining children and halt the deportation of well-integrated foreign families who have been denied asylum: here.

Britain: Black people are 27 times more likely to face stop and search by the police than whites: here.

Related articles

• G4S mercenaries get British taxpayers’ millions (dearkitty1.wordpress.com)
• Israeli minister seeks approval to deport all Sudanese, Eritrean refugees (sudantribune.com)
• Rohingya boat people to be repatriated to Myanmar (miamiherald.com)
• Erie to welcome more than 600 refugees in 2013 (goerie.com)
• Thailand to Deport Rohingya Muslim Asylum Seekers (voanews.com)
• Thailand: Don’t Deport Rohingya ‘Boat People’ (hrw.org)

British anti-refugee policy is illegal

This video is called Deported Iraqi refugees sent back to UK – 16 Oct 09.

Britain: Deportation fast-track system for asylum seekers is illegal, court rules. Medical Justice, a group that helps detainees, wins case against government over removal of people with little or no notice: here.

Systemic failings in the appeals and detention system for asylum in Britain are letting down thousands of refugees, charities have stated in response to a new government report on the sector: here.

From British daily News Line:

Thursday, 14 April 2011

‘Detaining children is not a necessary evil’

THE announcement by the Coalition Government back in May 2010 that it would be ending the detention of children for immigration purposes was widely welcomed.

Finally the wealth of accumulated evidence on the gap between policy and practice in decisions to detain, and on the negative impacts of detention on children’s mental and physical well-being was being taken into account. Or so it seemed.

The introduction of ‘a radical new process’ by the Home Office for removing families with children who have no right to remain in the UK raises significant concerns about whether the Government has delivered on its commitment to end the detention of children.

Britain deports Afghan refugee children to death

This video says about itself:

16 April 2010 — Award-winning Afghan journalist Najibullah Quraishi investigates a sexual exploitation ring. The film exposes the lack of support from those in authority and explores possible responses to the plight of children in this conflict zone.

From the New Statesman in Britain:

Deporting lone children to Afghanistan is inhumane

Posted by Samira Shackle – 08 June 2010 09:45

Will a “reintegration centre” in Kabul guarantee the safety of unaccompanied children?

The Guardian reports today that the government is to set up a “reintegration centre” that will allow them to deport unaccompanied minors to Afghanistan.

Each month, the £4m centre in Kabul will accommodate 12 boys who are under 18, as well as providing “reintegration assistance” for 120 adults. According to the Guardian report, these plans are “part of a wider European move” to start removing children to Afghanistan.

This is a radical — and unwelcome — change in government policy. I have had close experience of the horrendous reality faced by those seeking asylum in the UK, through voluntary work and writing about the issue, and the treatment of unaccompanied children is frequently more humane than that faced by adults. Of course, there are instances when the Home Office refuses to believe their account of who they are or — crucially — their age, but child protection laws guarantee that they will not be left destitute and homeless.

While the default position for most adults — whether they are torture victims, or rape survivors — is disbelief, and a barely disguised wish to get rid of them (whether it is through deportation, detention, or enforced destitution), children who are in the UK without their parents are generally allowed to remain if their safety upon return cannot be guaranteed. According to Home Office figures, there are currently 4,200 of these unaccompanied children, many of them living in care homes.

We know that Afghanistan is unsafe and war-torn, because it is a war that we are fighting. It is very difficult to see how it is in a child’s best interests to be returned there. The plans give no indication of how long the children will be kept in the centre (with 12 new boys arriving every month, it will surely reach capacity at some point), what the conditions and pastoral care will be like, and what steps will be taken to locate their families.

Sadly, the move probably has two main motivations. The first is the automatic position of disbelief, outlined above. This characterised the Labour government’s attitude to asylum seekers, and looks set to continue to do so. Deporting children aged 16 or 17 removes the risk that they could be lying about their age.

The second is cost-cutting. A policy paper circulated in Brussels by the British government in February said that formal safeguards like guardianship are “immensely expensive to put in place”. Perhaps this is so, but isn’t it right that all possible precautions should be taken when dealing with children?

As Donna Covey of the Refugee Council points out: “There has been little said about how these children would be kept safe … if they have no family to whom they can be returned safely, should they be returned at all?”

Upon coming to power, the coalition government pledged to end the detention of children in UK immigration centres. That promise begins to look meaningless as it finalises plans to forcibly remove traumatised children with no adult protection to one of the world’s most dangerous places.

Thousands of children come to the UK to claim asylum every year – on their own. The government wants to send Afghan children home. Find out where the children come from: here.

Human-rights groups fought back on Tuesday against government plans to send back asylum-seekers young and old to the blood-soaked battle zones of Iraq and Afghanistan: here.

Anger as UK deports Iraqi refugees: UN refugee agency condemns removal of failed asylum seekers to Baghdad: here.

Whats led to Darfur asylum seeker’s prisoner suicide? Here.

The UN Refugee Agency has said that it would investigate claims by Iraqi asylum-seekers that they were mistreated by British officials before being deported to Iraq: here.

Voluntary refugee returns ‘plunge’: Few of world’s refugees opt to go home in 2009 due to ongoing conflicts: here.

War costs pass $1 trillion mark: here.

USA: Kucinich: ‘We may be funding our own killers in Afghanistan’: here.

Obama’s quagmire in Afghanistan: U.S. military position continues to deteriorate: here.

Report: Pakistani ISI backs Taliban: UK institution report says intelligence agency funds and trains Afghan fighters: here.

Refugees from Iraq, Afghan wars in Germany

This video says about itself:

Watch documentary maker Nick Broomfield’s short film, made for Amnesty International, about destitute refused asylum seekers in the UK.

From Deutsche Welle radio in Germany:

23.12.2009

Asylum seeker numbers on the rise in Germany

The number of people seeking asylum in Germany is expected to rise by 10 percent in 2010, says the Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF), after the government said Wednesday that more than 25,000 applied this year.

German media has reported that the country is set to see an increase in the number of asylum seekers in 2010, according to the Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF). The office said the number of asylum applications could rise by around 10 percent.

The office said most of the asylum seekers would arrive from Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran, according to public broadcaster ZDF.

BAMF said that unstable security situations and economic strains in Afghanistan and Iraq were the main reasons for people fleeing those countries, while in Iran, government repression was a leading cause for people seeking a new life.

With 2009 coming to a close, Germany has recorded accepting more than 2,000 Iraqi refugees, whom it has housed at its Friedland border transit camp in the state of Lower Saxony.

Applications increase

Iraqis made up the vast majority of people seeking asylum in Germany in 2009, with the Interior Ministry logging more than 6,200 applications for asylum status from January to November. In second place were asylum seekers from Afghanistan with around 3,000 applications.

The ministry said a total of 25,429 people applied for asylum in Germany in the first 11 months of this year. That figure represents a 15 percent increase compared to the number of applications for all of 2008.

One year ago European Union Interior Ministers pledged to take in up to 10,000 refugees from Iraq, with Germany saying it would accept as many as 2,500.

Most of those accepted are persecuted minorities, particularly Christians.

Iraqi Christians most definitely suffer from cruel violent persecution since George W. Bush invaded their country in 2003. So do Christians in Afghanistan (where there are far less than in Iraq).

However, occupation, war and dire poverty mean that basically the overwhelming majority of Iraqis and Afghans are “persecuted“, not just Christians or other minorities. Xenophobic prejudices, including in government policies, in Germany and other NATO countries mean that refugees are often not getting the asylum which they should get. Sometimes, Western governments deport Iraqi and Afghan refugees as these countries are supposedly “safe” (why are their soldiers waging war there then?). Quite often, the worst xenophobes are also the most enthusiastic supporters of bloody wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.

So, most refugees are from the two main countries where the USA and its allies wage war ever since 2001.

As for Iran, the third country in refugee numbers to Germany: while the Iranian government may repress people which it considers “not Islamic enough”, Iranian refugees may now face xenophobia in the West: whether they are “conservative” Muslims, “liberal” Muslims or not Muslims at all, they are, in xenophobic Rightist ideologies, part of the Great “Eurabia” Conspiracy (also never mind that Persians are not Arabs …).

A US-based human rights group has called on the Afghan regime to investigate the death of a suspect who died while being held in prison by the intelligence service: here.

Britain: Anti-war campaigners have called on the government to “open its eyes” and bring troops back home from Afghanistan after a probe was launched into the second suspected friendly-fire death of a British soldier in as many days: here.

The Great Afghan Gem Heist: How the War Led to the Pillaging of Afghanistan’s Precious Stones: here.

Iranian activists have called on the international labour movement to press Tehran to end its crackdown on opposition campaigners after eight people were killed in anti-government protests and hundreds detained in the aftermath: here.

Rupert Murdoch’s anti-refugee witchhunt

This video is called OUTFOXED: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism — Trailer.

Rupert Murdoch is an immigrant (from Australia) when he is in the USA to tend to Faux Fox News, the War Street Wall Street Journal, and other parts of his far Right media empire.

Rupert Murdoch, arguably, (using arguments somewhat similar to xenophobes’ for whom especially non white people are “immigrants” even if their ancestors have lived for hundreds of years in a so-called “white” country) is an immigrant in his native Australia, as he descends from people who immigrated to that continent … fair enough … while its Aboriginal people were robbed of their land and massacred … not so fair.

Rupert Murdoch is an immigrant in Britain. That unfortunately does not stop his media empire there from whipping up hysteria against immigrants. Including refugees, who fled to Britain from torture and war.

From British weekly Socialist Worker:

‘The Sun used me to push its own agenda’

Zimbabwean former asylum seeker Urginia Mauluka is shocked after being used in an anti-immigrant Sun article. She spoke to Matthew Cookson

The Sun newspaper is not known for its sympathetic portrayal of asylum seekers—so Urginia Mauluka was a little surprised to get a call saying that it wanted to interview her about her experiences.

Urginia, who fled from her native Zimbabwe in 2002 and became a British citizen earlier this year, nevertheless agreed.

The Zimbabwean state and pro-government independence war veterans had targeted Urginia because of her role as an independent photographer documenting the violence of the regime and its supporters.

She said, “I thought my story could be documented in such a way to inform people and other asylum seekers about the reality of life for us. I thought the Sun would be responsible.”

But when she saw the printed version of the article, the mistakes it contained and the way it was presented left her “shocked” and “angry”.

The Sun printed Urginia’s story as part of a double page spread on immigration on Friday of last week, launching a new anti-immigrant campaign.

“I feel like somebody has used me for their own agenda,” Urginia told Socialist Worker.

“I had been attacked several times before June 2002 as I was a photographer who went onto the farms as well as the war veterans’ demonstrations. My life was exposed because of my job.

“I had also been arrested, detained and beaten by the police and war veterans a number of times. The pain was so intense I couldn’t cry. These occasions come back to me at times.

“My uncle decided to bring me over to Britain and I had a plane ticket in my camera bag when I was attacked by the police in June 2002—not May 2002 as claimed in the Sun.

“The Sun said that my uncle ‘moved to Britain five years ago to escape the torture’ but he had been settled here around 12 years before I arrived. And how could he invite me in 2002 if he didn’t move here until 2004?

“He has been very upset by the article.

Angry

“I am very angry that the headline over the article is ‘I’m Staying’ and the final sentence is ‘I will never go back.’ I did not say this.

“I miss home every day. Like every Zimbabwean who has been forced to move from home, I eat, breathe and live Zimbabwe. All we want to do is go home to rebuild our country, but only when it is safe for us.

“I have always said I want to return, but only when Robert Mugabe is gone as Zimbabwe’s leader.

“After that treatment from my country, now I’m getting this from the Sun.

“The article is irresponsible and full of mistakes. The Sun has printed a letter in response by me, but they edited and cut it.”

Urginia is concerned at the way her experiences were used by the newspaper, which she feels doesn’t understand what many migrants and asylum seekers have gone through.

She said, “I didn’t realise that I was going to be part of an anti-immigrant feature. My story was next to a box on eastern European criminals.

“Asylum seekers want to work, but they aren’t allowed to. It’s hard enough to survive when you flee, leaving your family behind.

“And then you get into this immigration system going through more horrible things.

“I had to live off my uncle when I moved here, even though I was a grown woman and could have worked. I did voluntary work with the Refugee Council to feel like someone again.

“This experience shows that refugees and migrants need to be careful when they are interviewed.”

Britain: The government has been urged to rethink its cruel policy of locking up child asylum-seekers after the Home Office admitted that almost 1,000 children have been detained in the last five years: here.

Former Fox News Host Calls Fox A ‘Right-Wing Partial-News-But-Mostly-Opinion Network’: here.

SANTIAGO, Dec 3 (IPS) – Chile is a classic example of the concentration of media ownership in too few hands, says Chilean journalist María Olivia Mönckeberg in her latest book “Los magnates de la prensa” (The Press Magnates). If the state does not exercise stricter regulation, democracy itself may be undermined, she warns: here.

This week, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia — the largest shareholder of News Corp outside the Murdoch family — endorsed Rupert Murdoch’s son James to succeed the elder Murdoch when he retires: here.

Murdoch’s UK tabloid ordered to turn over evidence in phone hacking case: here.

Adelaide is Australia’s festival city. Its arts festival is currently in swing. Polite debate, aesthetics and high-octane wine are putting the world to rights. With one exception. Adelaide is where Rupert Murdoch began his empire: here.

Britain: Former deputy prime minister John Prescott, whose spaniel-like loyalty to Tony Blair set new levels of sycophancy, has discovered how awful Rupert Murdoch’s media empire is: here.