vrijdag 5 augustus 2022

Ukraine ‘endangers civilians’ with army bases in residential areas, says Amnesty

 



Ukraine ‘endangers civilians’ with army bases in residential areas, says Amnesty

Ukraine government and international law experts argue report ignores wartime realities

Ukrainian solider walking through destroyed school
Rudnyts’ke school was the headquarters of the Russian military before the Ukrainan army retook control of the area in March. Photograph: Andrea Filigheddu/Zuma Press Wire/REX/Shutterstock

Amnesty International has said the Ukrainian army is endangering the life of civilians by basing themselves in residential areas, in a report rejected by Ukrainian government representatives as placing blame on it for Russia’s invasion.

The human rights group’s researchers found that Ukrainian forces were using some schools and hospitals as bases, firing near houses and sometimes living in residential flats. The report concluded that this meant in some instances Russian forces would respond to an attack or target residential areas – putting civilians at risk and damaging civilian infrastructure.

It also criticised the Ukrainian army for not evacuating civilians who could be caught up in the crossfire.

“We have documented a pattern of Ukrainian forces putting civilians at risk and violating the laws of war when they operate in populated areas,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s secretary general.

However, the head of Amnesty Ukraine’s office, Oksana Pokalchuk, wrote on Facebook that her operation disagreed with the report. She said they were cut out of the pre-publication process when they complained that the report was based on incomplete evidence compiled by foreign colleagues.

“Our team’s arguments about the inadmissibility and incompleteness of such material were not taken into account,” wrote Pokalchuk. “The representatives of the Ukrainian office did everything they could to prevent this material from being published.”

Ukraine’s deputy defence minister, Hanna Maliar, accused Amnesty of “distorting the real picture” and of failing to understand the situation on the ground. She said Ukrainian soldiers were deployed in cities and populated areas to defend them from Russian attack.

“There is no chronology of events [in the report]. The Russian Federation is committing the crime here. Ukraine is protecting its land. Moscow ignores all the rules of war. And unlike Ukraine, it doesn’t let in international organisations like Amnesty,” said Maliar.

Speaking at a briefing in Kyiv, Maliar stressed that the Ukrainian armed forces laid on buses to evacuate civilians from the frontline. Some refused to go, despite repeated pleas and offers of transport to safer regions. Ukraine gave access to outside agencies including the international criminal court and carried out its own investigations into abuses committed by its troops, she said.

Oleksii Reznikov, Ukraine’s minister of defence, said “any attempt to question the right of Ukrainians to resist genocide, to protect their families and homes … is a perversion” and presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak tweeted that “the only thing that poses a threat to Ukraine is a Russian army of executioners and rapists coming to Ukraine to commit genocide”.

Amnesty researchers investigated Russian strikes in Ukraine’s Kharkiv, Donbas and Mykolaiv regions between April and July. They found 19 villages and towns from where the Ukrainian forces had either launched strikes or were basing themselves. In these three regions, Amnesty found five locations where hospitals were “de facto” used as bases and out of 29 schools visited by Amnesty, they concluded 22 had been used as bases.

Schools were closed on the first day of the invasion and pupils have been learning remotely, where possible.

The report noted that most of the civilian infrastructure repurposed by the Ukrainian army was located kilometres from the frontlines and argued that alternative locations were available.

Maliar argued at the briefing that Ukrainian anti-aircraft systems needed to be based in towns to protect civilian infrastructure and if Ukrainian forces were only based outside urban settlements “Russian armed forces would simply sweep in unopposed”.

Ukrainian social media users also responded with examples of when Russian forces have hit buildings being used by civilians, as well as the scores of crimes committed against Ukrainian civilians under Russian occupation.

Guardian reporters have seen at least seven instances in three regions of Ukraine where schools and nurseries in residential areas were used as bases by the Ukrainian army. Five of the schools and nurseries the Guardian visited had been bombed. In each instance, several surrounding buildings were damaged in the attack.

In one instance, in Donetsk region, at least three people died when the wave of the blast that destroyed a base hit a neighbouring residential building.

In one school that was being used as a base by Ukrainian forces in central Ukraine, the commander said schools and kindergartens across Ukraine were being bombed because they were being used as bases. The commander said that schools provided the necessary facilities: showers, multiple toilets, large kitchens, dining areas, basements and rooms. He said the invasion had meant the army had to accommodate masses of new recruits quickly.

Steven Haines, professor of public international law at London’s University of Greenwich who drafted non-legally binding guidelines on military use of schools and universities during conflicts – which 100 states, including Ukraine, have endorsed – said Ukraine’s actions had not necessarily broken them.

“The use of schools – if they are not also being used for their primary purpose – is not invariably unlawful. Very obviously, the situation in Ukraine counts as exceptional in this respect … so the Ukrainian military are not necessarily breaching the guidelines,” he said.

Guardian reporters have also seen three instances of empty schools that have been repurposed for civilian use since the war, such as a school in Kharkiv region now being used as a humanitarian aid centre and a school in Kyiv which is housing people displaced by the war.

Amnesty acknowledges that international humanitarian law does not ban parties from basing themselves in schools that are not in session, but the report emphasised “militaries have an obligation to avoid using schools that are near houses or apartment buildings full of civilians … unless there is a compelling military need”.

Haines agreed with Amnesty’s assessment. He said it was the responsibility of military commanders on the ground to avoid collateral damage and try to choose buildings that if attacked as legitimate military targets, would be hit without risking the lives of the civilians nearby.

In an ideal scenario, populated areas would not be part of the war, but the nature of the invasion meant city warfare had become inevitable in Ukraine, said Haines.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/04/ukraine-civilians-army-bases-amnesty-russia-war

donderdag 4 augustus 2022

Pro-Israel groups denounced after pouring funds into primary race

 

Pro-Israel groups denounced after pouring funds into primary race

Groups accused of using Republican mega-donors to hijack Democratic primaries following the defeat of Jewish congressman

Aipac, through its political action committee, has raised millions of dollars from Republican billionaires to defeat candidates not considered pro-Israel enough.
Aipac, through its political action committee, has raised millions of dollars from Republican billionaires to defeat candidates not considered pro-Israel enough. Photograph: Erik S Lesser/EPA

Hawkish pro-Israel lobby groups have been accused of using Republican mega-donors to hijack Democratic primaries following the “alarming” defeat of a prominent Jewish congressman because he criticised Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) spent more than $4m to defeat Andy Levin in Tuesday’s Democratic primary for a congressional seat in north-western Detroit.

Levin, who comes from a distinguished political dynasty including his father and an uncle who served long stints as Democrats in Congress, said he had been “the target of a largely Republican-funded campaign” because he dissented from Aipac’s support for hardline Israeli policies.

Aipac poured funds into supporting Levin’s opponent, Haley Stevens, who won with about 60% of the vote. The lobby group heralded her victory as evidence that “being pro-Israel is both good policy and good politics”. But critics noted that much of Aipac’s spending was on negative campaigning against Levin that did not mention Israel.

Levin was backed by the more liberal pro-Israel group, J Street. It contrasted Aipac’s endorsement of more than 100 Republican members of Congress who voted against certifying Joe Biden’s presidential election victory with the “onslaught of rightwing outside spending and baseless smears” to defeat a progressive candidate with a history of supporting unions and civil rights.

Aipac, through its political action committee, the United Democracy Project, has raised millions of dollars from Republican billionaires such as the Trump campaign funders Paul Singer and Bernie Marcus to defeat candidates not considered pro-Israel enough.

Other pro-Israel groups, such as the Democratic Majority for Israel and Pro-Israel America, have also spent heavily to oppose candidates regarded as anti-Israel in Democratic primaries from Texas to Ohio and California.

“This aggressive intervention in Democratic primaries – by a group funded in part by Republican mega-donors – to promote an unpopular agenda is harmful to American foreign policy, to the Democratic party and ultimately to the State of Israel,” said J Street, which is more critical of Israeli policies that perpetuate domination of the Palestinians.

In an interview with the Guardian during the campaign, Levin warned that Aipac’s involvement raised the specter of the entire primary process being hijacked by well-funded lobbies such as big oil and the gun industry.

“I don’t think the Democratic party can really stand for it and maintain the integrity of our own elections,” he said.

Following his defeat, Levin said he “will continue to speak out against the corrosive influence of dark money on our democracy”.

J Street has called on Democratic candidates to decline Aipac’s support, saying that it is intended to warn politicians against criticism of Israel’s actions or risk a well-funded campaign against them.

“With their overwhelming spending, Aipac hopes to send an intimidating message to others: cross our red lines, and you could be next. While political space for open and healthy debate over US foreign policy has opened up considerably in recent years, they appear determined to close it down,” it said.

Aipac has poured more than $24m in to defeating Democratic primary candidates critical of Israel. Last month it celebrated defeating former congresswoman Donna Edwards who was favorite to win a Maryland seat until the UDP spent $7m to unleash an advertising blitz against her.

But Aipac suffered an unusual setback on Tuesday in another Detroit seat where it spent heavily to defeat a member of the Michigan state legislature, Shri Thanedar, who has strongly criticised the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories.

Thanedar, an Indian immigrant and wealthy entrepreneur, beat state senator Adam Hollier, who is Black and strongly pro-Israel, in a field fractured between several candidates in the majority African American district.

Some of Aipac’s supporters have suggested that the focus on Aipac’s funding of campaigns against candidates critical of Israeli government policies is antisemitic because the group is doing no more than other lobby organisations.

In response, Lara Friedman, president of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, tweeted: “So AIPAC can do it… & AIPAC can brag about doing it… But talking about what AIPAC did (at least in a critical way) is antisemitic. See how that works?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/04/aipac-pro-israel-groups-primary-race

woensdag 3 augustus 2022

From ‘study guides’ to trolling raids: how UK far-right groups target children online






 From ‘study guides’ to trolling raids: how UK far-right groups target children online

Platforms such as Discord being used to build ‘far-right ecosystem’ to radicalise young people, say experts

Far right graphic 2
Analysis found Discord sometimes ‘acts as a hub for extreme rightwing socialising and community building’. Composite: Guardian Design/Rex/Shutterstock/Getty Images/AFP

“B

e proud of YOUR people,” reads the cover of the slick leaflet, offering “resources, activities and tips for parents and children”. But the list of contents, promising discussions of pre-Raphaelite artists and Britain’s “rich and varied cuisine”, quickly strikes a jarring note.

“Who are Black Lives Matter? … BLM is an international, Marxist organisation,” readers are told. “It is supported by big business and endorsed by ‘celebrities’; its aims are to destroy western civilisation, the white nuclear family, Christianity and private property.”

The online leaflet is a “study guide” under an “alternative curriculum” aimed at families and produced by a group called Patriotic Alternative, which boasted of thousands of downloads when schools were closed to most pupils during the pandemic.

The cover of the Patriotic Alternative ‘study guide’
The cover of the Patriotic Alternative ‘study guide’.

It is just one example of how far-right groups in Britain are using online content to steer children and young people towards communities linked to extreme ideologies.

While the leaflet begins by telling parents to show their children “things which have been built and created by their ancestors”, it ends with undisguised white supremacism: “Who were the first to sail around the world? White people … Who were the first to put a man on the moon? White people.”

Julia Ebner, a senior fellow of the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) who researches far-right activism, said similar study guides or reading lists flourished during lockdowns, often distributed through digital channels such as the Telegram messaging app.

Ebner, who has gone undercover among extremist groups in the UK, says there is a “far-right ecosystem” operating with the goal of attracting young people and radicalising them to support, or carry out, extreme acts.

“They are basically providing materials for school pupils or children to educate themselves on being racist and in antisemitic conspiracy theories,” said Ebner.

The groups appeal to young people by promoting gaming tournaments, including hugely popular multiplayer online games such as Call of Duty or Fortnite, as a way of making contact.

The younger generation of rightwing extremists deride their predecessors as “dads” for their reliance on rules and hierarchies, says Jacob Davey, an ISD researcher who co-authored an analysis of far-right activity on Discord, a messaging platform originally designed to complement online gaming.

These extremists prefer to copy the strategies used by mainstream social media influencers, establishing communities of fans or subscribers and adopting memes and aggressive online trolling. “They’re not going down to the backroom of the shady pub in south London, they are much more likely to be logging on to a Discord server or Telegram chat channel,” said Davey.

The analysis found that Discord sometimes “acts as a hub for extreme rightwing socialising and community building”, with an average age of 15 among users on servers associated with far-right activists.

The research showed how games served as a means of finding common ground with potential recruits for activities such as trolling “raids” – where groups disrupt online discussions or forums, often by heckling or being abusive, in an effort to subvert the subject or aims and drive away legitimate users and debate.

“This semi-organised cyberbullying could be a vector which brings young people into contact with extremist communities,” the report said.

Paul Jackson, a professor studying the history of radicalism and extremism at the University of Northampton, said that compared with earlier far-right organisations, “the reality now is something much more messy”.

“Young people find messages online that push and promote a moral acceptance that violence is justifiable or acceptable somehow. So people become radicalised, they self-radicalise, it’s a complex picture,” said Jackson.

The most enthusiastic participants are invited into private channels on Telegram or chatrooms, where the content is what Ebner calls “traditional far-right” racism and antisemitism.

“Often radicalisation happens through this sort of socialisation process, and then ideological indoctrination or radicalisation is a byproduct of becoming part of an appealing subculture, where people use their own insider references and jokes and memes,” she said.

“That’s what makes the exploitation of youth culture and pop culture elements so dangerous, especially for children or young people who have been bored or even lonely in the recent lockdowns. I do think that what we are seeing, the radicalisation among young people in extremist groups, is often stemming from that phenomenon.

“They have become very savvy in exploiting the youth culture elements and creating very appealing, exclusive online communities, where young people have a sense they can be someone special and in this group they can be entertained. It’s an antidote to boredom but also to loneliness.”

Jackson said private channels allow the sharing of “whole collections of online documents that give [young people] a world view and ways to act on it in potentially violent ways. That doesn’t definitely mean that they’ll act in those ways but the ease of access is very notable.”

Recent arrests and court appearances in the UK show that police have become more active in charging young people who have allegedly downloaded extremist material, especially documents detailing past extremist attacks such as the 2019 mosque massacre in Christchurch, New Zealand, or give instructions in creating explosive devices or weapons.

One ideological development that concerns Jackson is the growth of “accelerationism”: encouraging attacks designed to provoke racial conflict and accelerate the breakdown of existing societal structures. “Over the last 10 years or so, we’ve seen that specific culture pose very significant threats of violence against entirely innocent people,” Jackson said.

One adviser to the Home Office, who declined to be identified, warned that young people were still making active decisions to become involved with far-right groups rather than stumbling across the most extreme content.

“It’s not the large social networks, for all their faults. They [major technology platforms] have chased the worst stuff off most mainstream networks. The really extreme stuff … is difficult to find on Twitter and Facebook and all the rest of it,” the adviser said.

“You’ve got to know where to start looking for that stuff, you’ve got to know the right accounts. They’re not being tricked into being rightwing extremists. And there isn’t some mastermind at the centre pulling the wool over everybody’s eyes.”

A wide range of experts who spoke to the Guardian, from Prevent coordinators to counterterrorism officers and school leaders, agreed that the number of young people involved with the extreme right in Britain remained tiny. Home Office figures show that, in each of the last two years, fewer than 200 people aged 20 or younger were adopted into Channel, Prevent’s far-right deradicalisation programme.

But Ebner points out that a small number of radicalised people can cause significant damage or violence, as shown by the shootings in Christchurch and in Buffalo, New York.

“There might also be bigger problems for the future of our democracy and our political system, if an increasing number of young people endorse ideas like the ‘great replacement’, the belief of whites being taken over by non-whites,” Ebner said. “And I do think that’s a major problem.”

The Home Office adviser said young people charged and sentenced for far-right terrorist-related activity could continue to pose a threat after release, often following relatively short sentences. “Unless they’ve got family connections or help, those kids are cut off now. And there’s no way for them to come back. There’s no way for them to atone for what they’ve done or reconnect with society in any meaningful way.”

Patriotic Alternative was contacted for comment. Asked whether its “alternative curriculum” is a deliberate effort to lure children and young people into contact with white nationalist ideology and promote ideas likely to cause racial conflict, a spokesperson said: “Are educational resources that are black-positive likely to ‘cause racial conflict’ too?”

On its website, the group says: “We do not seek to indoctrinate and neither do we seek to dictate. Our wholesome and objective resources allow you and your child to explore education at your own pace and to learn the skills necessary to succeed in the wider world.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/03/study-guides-trolling-raids-how-uk-far-right-groups-target-children-online