Protocol Magazine

Peacekeeper Babies: Sexual Abuse by UN Peacekeepers in the Central African Republic

In UN circles, they are called ‘peacekeeper babies’. They are the infants inevitably born to local women after the UN has deployed troops to regions in turmoil, and the ages of these children map the dates and direction of operations in some of the most vulnerable parts of the world. In the Central African Republic, however, they are also indicative of something much more concerning: a scandal of extreme sexual abuse that has, since 2014, implicated UN peacekeepers on an institutional level. The scandal in the CAR is an example of abuse of power and betrayal of trust by those with the greatest duty to protect, where human rights are violated by individuals representing an organisation which supposedly has human rights at its very core.

UN Peacekeepers Day celebration in the DRC

Nestled at the heart of the African continent, the Central African Republic is a former French colony that gained independence in 1960, and has since experienced decades of political turmoil, violent unrest, and at times, all-out civil war. Its neighbouring states of Sudan, South Sudan, Chad, and the Democratic Republic of Congo all further contribute to the instability of the region. The latest wave of violence in March 2013 saw Seleka rebels overthrow the elected government and president, General Bozize, after which the UN launched its peacekeeping mission: the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilising Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA). Peacekeepers were deployed in September 2014, and the allegations of sexual abuse swiftly followed.

Particularly implicated in the CAR case are the French Sangaris Forces, against whom there are allegations of a pattern of institutionalised sexual abuse. Young children, most notably in an internally-displaced persons camp just outside of the CAR capital, Bangui, explained to human rights officers and UNICEF staff that certain peacekeepers could be approached for food or money in exchange for submitting to sexual abuse. They also described how it was not uncommon for children to be taken onto military bases in order to be subjected to abuse, suggesting that there was at least a proportion of peacekeepers aware of the abuse who did nothing to prevent it. As the extent to which French forces have been implicated comes to light, even prior to the UN mission officially beginning, an investigation of offences between 2013 and 2015 has now been opened by French prosecutors in Paris.

MINUSCA Peacekeepers in Bambari, CAR

The Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, Hérve Ladsous, has acknowledged that the UN needs to do more to tackle the problem of sexual abuse in its peacekeeping forces, even suggesting that DNA samples be taken anonymously from blue helmets upon recruitment. However, such a response fails to acknowledge how often victims are unwilling to come forward, and how many of those affected are minors who do not understand the legal protections and rights they might have. Furthermore, Ladsous’ suggestion is a plaster on a gaping wound; prevention of sexual abuse by peacekeepers in the first place is a significantly better way to protect the vulnerable. As the problem of abuse in MINUSCA has demonstrated, the threat of prosecution often does little to deter perpetrators. The list of victims of these abuses continues to grow.

As of 5th April 2016, three UN peacekeepers accused of sexual abuse in the CAR have gone on trial in the neighbouring DRC, the second of such trials against twenty-one Congolese peacekeepers. Yet, the abuse continues, and more allegations have been made, and the UN states it is now investigating 108 new cases of sexual abuses by peacekeeping forces, as of the same date. In some circumstances, girls were paid as little as 50 cents in return for sex, and one of the most harrowing cases brought to light by investigations into these allegations is the abuse of four young girls by a French commander, who is said to have forced them to commit bestiality.

It is made clear in an independent report, published in December 2015, that the UN has fundamentally failed the victims of peacekeeper abuse in the CAR, by treating the abuse as a disciplinary matter instead of a violation of human rights, humanitarian law, and international criminal law. The offending forces were asked to end the abuse, but little has been done by MINUSCA staff to ensure the safety of children, a failing in which UNICEF is also implicated. In the time since the issuing of the report’s recommendations and 7th April 2016, further allegations have arisen that suggest the UN is still failing its mandate to protect the human rights of vulnerable populations – especially children – in the CAR.

UN Peacekeeping Chief at a press conference during a visit to Bangui, CAR

These events come as the latest in a long line of abuse scandals involving UN peacekeepers, as the tainting of UN missions by allegations of sexual assault is not unique to MINUSCA. Operations in Bosnia, Haiti, Liberia, the DRC, and Kosovo – among others – have all had similar accusations levied against them, dating back at least twenty years to the start of the 1990s. Yet, despite investigation after investigation, the commissioning of countless UN reports, and significant pressure from human rights NGOs, the the problem persists with all its severe consequences. The abuses in the CAR are a single, if extreme, expression of a wider and significant problem.

Although not a new problem, the timeline of abuse in the CAR is still profoundly shocking. The integrity of UN operations in CAR – and by extension, other unstable states on the African continent and beyond – has been irrevocably damaged, and it remains to be seen whether the organisation will regain the trust of vulnerable populations, and whether perpetrators will receive the justice they deserve. What is clear is that there is a fundamental problem in the way the UN deals with peacekeepers who commit abuse; despite two decades of such cases, Sec. Gen. Ban Ki-Moon’s “cancer in our system” continues to metastasise.

Boiling Point: Turkey’s Evaporating Democracy

There is an old saying about how to cook a frog. If you drop it into a pot of boiling water, it will leap out immediately. However, place it in cold water and proceed to gradually increase the temperature, and the frog will fail to realize, until it is far too late.

The Turkish people know what it is like to be dropped into a pot of boiling water. Since the country’s founding, authoritarian influences like the military have succeeded, on multiple occasions, in overthrowing democratically elected governments. This happened in the fifties, seventies, eighties, and came within a hair’s breadth of happening in 2003; the ominously-named ‘Operation Sledgehammer’, a coup meant to remove the Justice and Development Party (AKP) under then Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The army has traditionally seen itself as the protector of national interest, and has sought to legitimize its involvement in political affairs by forwarding this claim. However, the failure of the 2003 plot lead to a crack down on the military’s anti-democratic procedures. Over 300 military officers were put on trial as a result of the plot and the civilian government gained significant oversight over military affairs. Over ten years, the AKP managed to erode the army’s interventionism.

Turkish police prepare to confront protesters in Cizre, Southern Turkey

However, when it comes to authoritarianism, there is more than one way to skin the cat. Increasingly clearly, the AKP’s clutch on power, particularly that of President Erdoğan, has grown progressively tighter. The party has turned to other methods than the military has used to grip onto control. Each measure is incremental, so people don’t notice the water slowly heating.

Freedom for the press is vital to any democracy. In Turkey, it has existed since the 1920s. However, restrictions on press freedoms in Turkey in the last few years have become increasingly obvious. The AKP party has used its power to either close down or restaff the country’s major news outlets on television and in print. The government has used the Türksat satellite company to take down TV stations that offer criticism of the government, on both sides of the political spectrum. The left-wing, pro-Kurdish IMC TV was denied a satellite contract at the end of February, as was the right-wing Turkish nationalist station, Bengü Türk TV, at around the same time. Censorship is by no means restricted to television. The print media in Turkey has been subjected to a full-scale assault by the government – in some cases literally. On March 4th – a Friday – the headquarters of the newspaper Zaman were stormed by armed police using rubber bullets, tear gas and water cannon. This action cleared the way for the management to be replaced by court-appointed trustees. Saturday morning’s mournful headline ‘The Constitution Is Dead’ stood in stark contrast to Sunday’s cheerful front page, featuring a smiling Erdoğan and a piece about a reception at the Presidential Palace. Zaman has the country’s biggest circulation, and the seizure of the Cihan news agency a few days later has ensured that the overwhelming majority of Turkey’s newspaper-readers look solely at pro-government articles. The only remaining independent news sources are online. Over 40% of Turks have no internet access, meaning that a very significant percentage of the electorate will never see sources that criticise the government.

The absence of independent media scrutiny allows the government to undertake questionable actions. The laws concerning private criticism of the government have been tightened recently, with little push-back from the weakened media. The most obvious case of these strict laws is the example of Bilgin Çiftçi, a doctor who posted a meme comparing President Erdoğan’s appearance to Gollum, the character from the Lord of the Rings. Çiftçi was fired and placed on trial for the charge of ‘insulting the President’. This gained international attention after the court demanded that ‘Tolkien experts’ determine whether Gollum could be regarded as a ‘good’ character, as claimed by the defence. While this led to amusement on the late-night show circuit, the dark reason for the ridiculous defence was explained by Çiftçi’s lawyer. Hicran Danisman said she ‘got nowhere’ with a defence based on freedom of speech. Such a fundamental right is now denied in Turkey to even the mildest critical voices.

President Erdoğan has placed himself at the centre of Turkey’s national unity

The AKP has also used the threat of terrorism to introduce further authoritarian practices. Turkey borders territory in Iraq and Syria controlled by the Islamic State (IS) group, and militant Kurdish groups operate within Turkey itself. A spate of bombings throughout the country (June 2015 in Diyarbakir; July in Suruç; July 2015 and March 2016 in Ankara; January and March 2016 in Istanbul) have created an atmosphere of paranoia in Turkey. Some have been claimed by IS, some by radical Kurdish groups like the ‘Kurdistan Freedom Falcons’ (TAK) – all are perceived by Turks as attacks by outsiders on them. The threat of terrorism is one that has held the country hostage.

As terrorism stokes nationalist tensions, the AKP has staked out its role as the defender of national unity. Erdoğan’s recent speeches have emphasised national integrity and solidarity, placing his leadership at the centre of the Republic’s unity. He has also vowed to ‘defeat terrorism’ and to ‘bring the terrorists to their knees’, defining ‘terrorists’ in terms as vague as they are broad. Along with rhetoric linking pro-Kurdish political parties such as the People’s Democratic Party (HDP) with the PKK, this legitimises further repression of opposition to the AKP, under the guise of anti-terrorism.

Under such conditions, it is becoming hard to argue that Turkey is now a democracy. The AKP has until 2019 before major elections are due, which gives plenty of time for further crackdowns and restrictions on opposition activities. Already it is virtually illegal to criticise the President or the government, either in public or private media, and it is routine for the government to brand opposition politicians terrorist supporters and ban their campaigns. Erdogan has gone as far as to brand HDP statements as “provocation” and “treason”. The water is boiling but it may be too late for the frog to leap to safety. By the next elections in 2019, it may well be all but impossible to run any meaningful campaign against the AKP, and Turkey will join its fellow Turkic countries like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan: a strong-man dictatorship with only the veneer of a democratic process.

For more information, check out the following sources.

Lewis, Bernard “The Emergence of Modern Turkey”, Oxford University Press 2002
Ahmad, Feroz “The Making of Modern Turkey”, Routledge 1993
Yücel, Clémence Scalbert; “Common Ground or Battlefield? Deconstructing the Politics of Recognition in Turkey” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 22(1) 2016
Dogi, Ihsan; “Democratic Transition in Turkey 1980-83: The Impact of European Diplomacy”, Middle Eastern Studies 32(2) 1996
Jones, Erik; “Turkey Reconsidered” Survival 54(6) 2012

Europe’s Refugee Solution: A Deal in Bad Faith

In recent years, the European Union’s goal of an ever closer union has come under increasing strain; the possibility of a GREXIT challenged the economic stability of the single-currency bloc, recent terrorist attacks have raised uncomfortable questions about national security, and the refugee crisis is placing enormous pressure on the existing rules and infrastructure. Yet, of these issues, none is more pressing and immediate than the refugee crisis.

The toll of the crisis, whether measured in money or lives, is staggering, and instead of collaborating to find a lasting solution that protects the rights and wellbeing of refugees, many EU governments have focused their efforts at preventing people from making the journey to Europe. In a desperate bid to stem the flow of refugees into Europe, Turkey and the EU struck a deal. Earlier this month, the first part of this deal came into effect, with boats carrying refugees deported from Greece arriving in Turkey.

Refugees arrive at Skala Sykamias Lesvos Greece

On 18 March 2016, the European Union struck a deal with Turkey that aimed to address the overwhelming number of refugees flowing from Turkey to the Greek Islands. While the specifics of the agreement are complex, its essence is simple: refugees arriving illegally in Greece from Turkey will be returned, with a cap of 72,000 refugees. In exchange, Turkey will get a package of incentives, including the promise of visa-free travel in the EU for Turkish citizens, increased resettlement of refugees in Turkey, and the distribution of €3 billion in aid. The deal has been roundly criticized by human rights groups, which cite the legal and ethical responsibilities that countries have to refugees. Assuming that the deal was made to comply with existing international laws – it is hard to imagine that the EU would expend this much political capital to forge a deal that cannot stand up in court – that still leaves the ethical obligations these states have to refugees.

In the wake of this deal, Doctors Without Borders (MSF) have decided to suspend their operations in Greece’s refugee “hotspots.” Citing the deal, Marie Elisabeth Ingres, MSF Head of Mission in Greece, said: “We will not allow our assistance to be instrumentalised for a mass expulsion operation, and we refuse to be part of a system that has no regard for the humanitarian or protection needs of asylum seekers and migrants.” This agreement does not actually seek to deal with the root problems of the crisis, nor does it come closer to finding a long-term solution. It merely pushes the problem outside Europe, and sends a clear message to refugees: do not come to Europe.

The refugee crisis is not a recent phenomenon. It is, however, new to Europe and the West. For the past five years, Syria has been mired in a civil war, which began with the Arab Spring protests. These pro-democracy protests have led to the toppling of several dictators in the region, but in Syria, President Bashar al-Assad tried to crush the protests using armed force. Violence escalated, and the country descended into civil war. According to the UN, since the beginning of the conflict, over 250,000 Syrians have been killed, and a further 10.3 million have been displaced; forced to either leave their homes in search of safety elsewhere in Syria, or flee the country entirely. This is not to say that Syrians are the only group of displaced people seeking refuge in Europe; there are also significant numbers of Afghans and Iraqis hoping to claim asylum as well. However, Syrians are by far the largest group, and make up nearly a third of all refugee applications in Europe. And while Europe may be struggling to cope with the number of refugees, more than 4.5 million Syrian refugees are in just five countries: Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt. These countries have borne the brunt of the refugee crisis, and their resources have been stretched incredibly thin; Turkey hosts 2.5 million Syrians, more than any other country in the world, and one-in-five people in Lebanon are refugees.

Aerial view of the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan, which hosts nearly 80,000 refugees

Though this crisis has often been called a migrant crisis, it is important to note that many of those fleeing to Europe are refugees, not migrants. This distinction is critical; migrants choose to leave their homes in search of better education or employment opportunities, whereas refugees are persons fleeing from armed conflict or persecution. To quote the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR): “these are people for whom denial of asylum has potentially deadly consequences.” Ever since the 1951 Refugee Convention, certain rights have been afforded to individuals recognized as refugees; of utmost primacy is the guarantee of safety upon repatriation. Using refugees and migrants as interchangeable terms can have drastic consequences for those seeking asylum. If a migrant arrives illegally in the European Union, they can be turned around and sent back to their home. If a refugee arrives illegally, the country has a responsibility to ensure their wellbeing; they have rights that nearly every country on Earth has agreed to uphold for the past 65 years. In short, European countries have no obligation to refugees, until they arrive in Europe. However, once those refugees do arrive, they have certain rights that those countries are obligated to uphold. Thus, European countries benefit from making the journey as difficult as possible, and many EU countries have actively avoided policies that would make the trip less dangerous. In its attempt to stem the flow of refugees, Europe’s moral compass has been tainted.

The overall response to this crisis has been woefully inadequate. European countries have offered resettlement places for less than 5% of the total refugee population. However, the continent is not alone in its failure. The Gulf nations including Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain have not offered a single resettlement place to refugees, nor have other developed countries like Japan, Singapore, and South Korea. In the US, the debate over refugees has grown increasingly racist and xenophobic. To find a thorough solution to the refugee crisis, its root causes must be addressed. This entails providing financial and humanitarian aid to countries shouldering the greatest burden of this crisis, offering safe harbor for those fleeing from conflict and persecution, and ultimately bringing an end to the violence and conflicts that have forced so many from their homes. It is a mistake to think that those solutions can be found by pushing the problem beyond the border. Only a united European front can bring an end to the crisis. Now is the time to reaffirm the values upon which the EU was built, and work towards a solution based on solidarity and humanity.

If you would like to help, please consider donating to the UN Refugee Agency.

Unnatural Disasters and the Fight for Gender Equality

Most people in the 21st century believe in global warming. Its impact on our physical environment is – literally – impossible to escape. The frequency and intensity of droughts, floods, storms, cyclones, heatwaves, and other extreme weather events – so-called ‘natural disasters’ – is ever-mounting, now killing more people annually than have been killed in terrorist attacks in the past forty years combined. With the global annual average temperature predicted to rise by over two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2050, and with current levels only five degrees Celsius above those experienced during the ice age, the transformations are only set to grow more extreme. Yet to most, this is background noise. As a species, we are collectively under-responding to a mass threat to our planet.

But what on earth does gender have to do with it?

“I don’t believe in global warming” Banksy, London, 2010 by Martin

An all too prevalent assumption when contemplating all things ecological was made explicit in remarks made by Kofi Anan at a press conference following the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami: “Women and men experience the same hardships.” The statement is categorically incorrect, and here’s why: women and children are fourteen times more likely to die during a natural disaster than are men. 80% of those killed in Aceh, India and Sri Lanka during the aforementioned tsunami, in fact, were female. And, while it is tempting to explain away such discrepancies with the unfortunate but unavoidable fact that women are physically smaller than men, weaker, and therefore less able to withstand the brute forces of nature, this does not hold in light of studies finding a correlation between the economic and social rights enjoyed by women, and the level of incongruity in natural disaster-related death tolls. In more equal societies, disasters caused the same number of deaths in both sexes.

To view climate change only as an aspect of the physical world represents a naïve objectivity that will actually constrain any efforts to tackle it. The inconvenient truth is of course deeply embedded in a process of interaction with our social and cultural worlds too. That social inequalities between the sexes correlates to differing experiences of climate change should not actually come as a shock; we already know that the effects correlate strongly with wealth, and women make up 70% of those living in abject poverty worldwide. Cultural practices such as men’s prioritisation in the distribution of resources, the primary allocation of demanding household and family tasks to women, lack of emphasis on education for girls, and women’s lack of authority in decision-making mean that not only are women most vulnerable to death during a natural disaster, but they also tend to suffer uniquely in its aftermath. In Kenya for example, it is considered proper for men to eat first and be served the highest quality of food products at the dinner table; when resources become scarcer women are therefore more likely to go hungry, which can result in malnutrition especially for those who are pregnant or lactating. In many countries women are likely to be more reliant on subsistence too, and will thus be unduly vulnerable to alterations in the physical climate. In Myanmar, most women earn money primarily by vending dried fish; following the cyclone in 2008 87% of unmarried women and 100% of married women lost their main source of income. In this way, gender inequalities within societies actually worsen the total impact of global climate change.

But it is not a one way relationship. Global climate change, in turn, interacts with pre-existing social inequalities to further aid in their proliferation and perpetuation. Both droughts and floods are likely to result in girls (on whom the responsibility falls) having to walk farther to find clean sources of water. This distracts time and energy from their education. In fact, with less money coming in, girls are more likely to be called upon to leave school altogether and contribute to the family income, while boys continue their educations as they are expected to become the primary breadwinner. Discrepancies in levels of education is central to the perpetuation of inequality, and being deprived of an education will have a detrimental effect on the rest of their lives. In addition, it is likely that the industry entered by a young girl, such as the garment industry, will offer extremely poor working conditions. It is also not uncommon in these conditions for girls to instead be forced into prostitution or early marriage, resulting in the spread of sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV, or pregnancy – actually the leading cause of death for fifteen to nineteen year old girls in Bangladesh. Yet even those who escape prostitution or early marriage may be subject to STDs or unwanted pregnancy in the wake of a natural disaster due to the prevalence of sexual violence in emergency shelters and refugee camps. Dozens of rapes were reported in relief facilities following Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and it is estimated that over 2,000 orphaned girls have been abducted and sold as sex slaves following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

COP21 Heads of Delegations, 2015, Paris by Presidencia de la República Mexicana

When it comes to climate change, women and men do not experience the same hardships. Gender inequalities and natural disasters are locked in a mutually reinforcing cycle that is unlikely to be broken as long as women are excluded from decision-making processes. In recent years governing bodies have increasingly recognised gender as a factor to be integrated within both the mitigation of and adaptation to climate change, but thus far these integrations have been largely vague and therefore informed ineffective policies. As recently as last December, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) consisted of a decision-making body in which two thirds of delegates and nine tenths of heads of state were male. A lack of diversity in such bodies necessarily creates a limited understanding and inadequate response strategies. Women may be uniquely vulnerable to certain aspects of climate change, but they are by no means passive victims. Women know what they need: a safe place to live; access to education and information; healthcare; legal and cultural equality; a more diverse range of earning opportunities; and greater participation in climate change adaptation decision-making. And so far the world has not given it to them.

You can join the Young Feminists for Climate Justice Facebook group here and involve yourself in disaster relief efforts here. If you are already tackling climate change you could potentially win funded attendance to COP22 in November by submitting your project to Change’s 2016 Lighthouse Activities.

Review: Children Are Our Future

To mark the end of their Perspectives series, UNICEF On Campus hosted a panel discussion with three previous speakers on the 5th of April. The topic was children’s issues and the panelists delivered diverse perspectives rooted in their individual backgrounds which made the discussion lively, engaging, and informative. UNICEF has, once again, been able to host a successful event to broaden our minds regarding the issues facing our world today.

The discussion began with the main topic of the panel as the participants were asked if, in their opinion, children today are marginalized or prioritized. The three agreed that, while there is definite room for improvement in terms of self-advocacy and education, children today are prioritized to a higher degree than they were in the past. From there, the moderators turned to the United Nations’ 1959 Declaration of the Rights of the Child as the framework for the rest of the discussion.

Ben Sachs, of the School of Philosophy, argued for supporting children in conflict situations with the following quote: “Children are morally innocent… Children cannot be held responsible for what’s happening around them.” He went on to argue, in a seemingly unfeeling but realistic statement, that purely economically, it makes the most sense to invest in children over other people. Giving children food, shelter, and education, he said, is an investment in the future.

Alasdair Gordon-Gibson, a research post-graduate with years of experience with the Red Cross, used his involvement in refugee camps to discuss the realities facing displaced children. He emphasized the need to “give them a chance to exist as children” while explaining how refugee children are often forced to work, exploited, married at a young age, and more.

Dr. Arthur Morris, who has spent spent time volunteering his services in Ghana and who is an honorary senior lecturer in the School of Medicine, brought this medical experience to the table. He discussed the importance of planning for every outcome, citing the implementation of programs to combat high maternity death rates in former British colonies which led to an unintended boom in the birth rates of those countries.

On one last, light-hearted note, the discussion turned to entertainment. The Sarajevo National Theater remaining open during the Bosnian war; troops in Afghanistan encouraging cricket during the war; and, seemingly most ridiculously, the organization Clowns without Borders were all used as examples of how people attempt to inject normalcy into their lives during crises. As Gordon-Gibson pointed out, “we find creative humanity, still, in the midst of crisis.”

Check out UNICEF On Campus’ Facebook page and website for information about upcoming events or to get involved with the organization.

Stateless and Illegal: Haitian Sugar Cane Workers in the Dominican Republic

Bateyes: a Spanish word literally meaning “outbuildings (of sugar [refineries]).” The bateyes located in the Dominican Republic are home to up to a million Haitians. These communities are where Haitians reside after they are brought across the Haitian-Dominican border or rounded up from within the Dominican Republic itself. Within these primitive residences, Haitians are forced to cultivate, cut, and collect sugar cane, the Dominican Republic’s “most important agricultural industry.” The situation on the plantations, the environment, the pay, and the physical work are so torturous that the State Sugar Council (CEA) is incapable of recruiting the number of voluntary workers that it needs to produce the sugar; as a result, the five sugar cane companies in the Dominican Republic recruit, roundup, and kidnap Haitians to do the work for them.

Living spaces in Bateye Margarita, by Lily Rose Longton

The CEA receives assistance from the Dominican military, which, after the buscones—individuals employed by the sugar cane companies—collect and kidnap approximately 30,000 men every harvest season, oversees the process of taking the Haitians “into the bateyes at two or three o’clock in the morning so that they don’t know where they are and cannot escape.” Once inside the communities, any Haitian identification information is taken and destroyed. The Haitians are then “stateless, illegal, and subject to arrest everywhere in the Dominican Republic, except on the plantation.”

Once in the bateyes, the workers and their families are living in conditions that Children’s Hospital Boston’s Dr. Kim Wilson described as “some of the worst conditions [she had] ever seen.” They are forced to “live in shacks that lack cooking facilities, running water, latrines, electricity or medical facilities.” Men, children, and some women, work in the fields for over 12 hours everyday, earning less than 90 cents which they receive in the form of vouchers to use at a store within the bateye. An individual living in a bateye in the Los Llanos area explains that “all the children have parasites and are malnourished” and most people endure physical abuse from the men guarding the plantations for escape attempts. An individual living and working in a bateye in Los Llanos explained that “it hurts to say but you just watch your children die of hunger and you can’t do anything about it.” Gustavo Peña, editor of an online newspaper located in the Dominican Republic, described the situation within the bateyes as “truly reminiscent of medieval times and the days of slavery” and Reverend Christopher Hartely, one of the leading human rights activists trying to help the Haitian sugar cane workers, described the bateyes as “the threshold of hell.”

Children walking over 10 miles each way to get clean water, by Lily Rose Longton

The exploitation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic is an old yet infrequently discussed topic throughout the international community. In the Dominican Republic, the problem is partially rooted in the deep animosity toward Haitians that is an integral part of the majority of Dominican society. However, some relate the more central cause of the stagnant conversation of the human rights violations to economic incentives. This is predominantly powered by the United States’ connection to Dominican sugar production and trade. The U.S. is both the principal trading partner and consumer of the Dominican Republic’s sugar crop. When discussed at high-levels of influence in the international community, reports often lack the relevant information and exact numbers; the U.S. State Department’s latest report on the human rights situation in the Dominican Republic thoroughly downplayed the abuses that the Haitians are currently facing.

However, there are several influential organizations trying to raise awareness for the Haitians such as Americas Watch, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch. In the late 1980s the United States Trade Representative finally accepted a petition, filed by the organization Americas Watch, challenging the CEA’s labor rights maltreatments for review. Additionally, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights put into place The 2014 Law on Trafficking in Persons as well as a program to support Haitian immigrants in the Dominican Republic. This change resulted in some successes, such as the improvement of the system of citizen identification. However, the majority of work taking place in support of the Haitian sugar cane workers is done by individuals such as young human rights activists, religious persons, and journalists. Reverend Christopher Hartley and Father Pedro Ruquoy are at the forefront of this activism. Both men dedicated their lives to helping improve the conditions the Haitians face as well as promoting awareness of the situation and have done so with some success. Father Hartley, who is most well known for his documentary The Price of Sugar, was able to set up “feeding centers” in some of the bateyes controlled by the Vicini family’s sugar company as well as bring American doctors into several communities.

A Haitian worker cutting sugar cane, by Alkan Boudewijn de Beaumont Chaglar

Others helping to promote awareness are news outlets such as the previously mentioned online newspaper edited by Gustavo Peña which recognizes the grip that the sugar companies have over the Dominican government and, through trade, the U.S. government. Peña’s newspaper is one of the few that publishes information promoting the rights of Haitian workers. Another influential individual is 2010 International Children’s Peace Prize winner Francia. Francia was born to Haitian immigrants living in the Dominican Republic, and because of a 2013 ruling by the Dominican Constitutional Court, which declared “anyone born to undocumented foreign parents or grandparents in the Dominican Republic since 1929 does not have the automatic right to the nationality and hence to a birth certificate,” she was denied the ability to go to school, receive health care, or get government funding for food. After thorough research, Francia was able to obtain her right to an education and is now finishing her last year of secondary school. She now “dedicates herself to the rights of other children in similar situations.”

One of the main ways to help the Haitians working in the Dominican Republic is to spread awareness. As a result of the United States’ close ties to the Dominican sugar trade, there is little discussion of the human rights abuses taking place on the small island in the Caribbean, thus awareness is one of the best ways to help. Additional ways to help the Haitians are by sending letters of encouragement, signing petitions, donating money, and volunteering for organizations focused on going to the Dominican Republic to help.

Brexit: A Human Rights Issue?

23rd June 2016. As David Cameron sets this date for the upcoming European Union (EU) referendum, the majority of the media coverage focuses on the financial issues the country may face as a result of each outcome. The matter of whether to remain as part of the EU has divided opinions not just across the country but also within political parties. As the people of the UK are forced to choose between either backing David Cameron to stay or agreeing with Boris Johnson to leave the EU, one question remains. If Britain does leave the EU, what will the impact be on the Human Rights Act?

The flag of the European Union

The Human Rights Act 1998 is a piece of legislation that incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law. This means that human rights cases can be brought to court in the UK without the need to take them to Strasbourg, to the European Court of Human Rights. The ECHR was first drafted in 1950 (predating the EU) and outlines, but is not limited to, the following rights: right to life; prohibition of torture and slavery; right to liberty and security; right to a fair trial and the prohibition of retroactivity (a person cannot be punished for an act which was not a crime at the time it was committed); right to privacy; the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as well as freedom of expression; the right to freedom of assembly; the right to marriage; and prohibition of discrimination.

After the Conservatives initially proposed the idea in 2007, David Cameron, to much controversy, made known his plans to scrap the human rights act. In a 2014 speech at the Conservative Party Conference, he stated “We do not require instruction on this from judges in Strasbourg. So at long last, with a Conservative government after the next election, this country will have a new British Bill of Rights to be passed in our parliament rooted in our values. And as for Labour’s Human Rights Act? We will scrap it, once and for all.” It has become very clear that moving from the Human Rights Act 1998 to the ‘British Bill of Rights’ is a very divisive and confusing issue, with opinions across Britain ranging from seeing it as a way “not only to restore judicial balance, but to return human rights law to its original noble purpose” to the view that “such an approach is inconsistent with the very notion of fundamental human rights.”

Currently, the ECHR is abided by all 47 member states of the Council of Europe (which is separate from the 28 nations of the EU). This includes countries, such as Russia and Turkey, who are not members of the EU. The EU Treaty of Lisbon contains a protocol binding the EU to comply with the ECHR. However, not being a member of the EU does not necessarily mean that Britain would cease to be a part of the ECHR. At least not immediately.

British Prime Minister David Cameron

Given that the ECHR predates the European Union by many years and that a country does not need to be a member of the EU in order to sign the Convention, will leaving the EU actually have an impact on human rights law in the UK? Probably not immediately. However, it may open the doors to changing the way that human rights are implemented in the UK and make it easier to possibly exit the ECHR. The question that would really decide the fate of human rights in the UK is not ‘Will the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?’ but rather, ‘If the UK leaves the EU as a result of the referendum in June, if the Conservatives proceed to abolish the Human Rights Act 1998 and if the UK also left the ECHR, would there be an impact on human rights law in the UK?’ That is a lot of ‘ifs’.

With the Conservatives having yet to say how a British Bill of Rights would differ from the current Human Rights Act 1998 nine years after the initial proposition, and a lot of disagreement on whether the UK should ever cease to be part of the European Convention on Human Rights even if it left the EU, it’s unlikely any significant changes to the Human Rights Act would be made as a direct result of the outcome of the EU referendum.

Remember, all British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens over 18 who are resident in the UK, along with UK nationals living abroad who have been on the electoral register in the UK in the past 15 years are eligible to vote in the upcoming referendum on 23rd June 2016. Visit https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote to register to vote or find out more.

Out of the Spotlight: Democracy and Women’s Rights in Afghanistan

With the media mostly focused upon Taliban aggression, less attention has been given to an important human rights topic: gender equality and democracy in Afghanistan. Despite a male population of which only 35% believe that women should have equal representation in government positions, and only 51% believe women should be allowed to work outside the home, there are still indications of a growing movement in Afghanistan that is standing up for democracy and the inalienable rights of women.

Afghan Women’s Network by The Institute for Inclusive Security

A 2014 Pew Research Center Poll found that “90% of Afghans agreed that everyone should have equal rights under the law (regardless of gender), and 83% agreed that women should have the same opportunities as men in education—including a strong majority (78%) of Afghan men.” There is also widespread support for democratic institutions, with between eighty and ninety percent of the population in support of electoral accountability, political parties, and peaceful opposition.

While in many post-civil-war societies, successive elections are often marked by a decrease in voter turnout, this has not been the case in Afghanistan. Despite the Taliban, the Afghan people keep coming bravely to the polls. Eight million voted in the 2014 elections, 38% of whom were women. This accounts for 60% of the eligible voting population, a 35% increase in turnout from the 2009 elections. It appears that interest in democracy in Afghanistan is steadily increasing, and the 2014 elections were described as the “most vibrant ever” with 74% of Afghans believing that the democratic elections have “improved the country.”

This interest has been accompanied by a public demand for an exchange of political ideas. Tolo News, Afghanistan’s primary media outlet, has broadcast several presidential debates where issues such as security, women’s rights, the economy, corruption, Pakistan, the Taliban, extremism, sovereignty, the Durand Line, and the U.S. Bilateral Security Agreement were openly discussed. Polling sites even ran out of paper due to the increased public participation. Judge Najla Aybui, the Deputy Country Representative of the Asia Foundation Afghanistan, believes that the 2014 elections demonstrated a population that is more optimistic and a media that is more willing to engage women.

Women are steadily becoming more involved at the official level, as well. Zalmai Rassoul, who was a 2014 presidential candidate, chose Habiba Sarabi, a woman, to be his running mate. Ms. Sarabi was previously the governor of Bamiyan, a central province. First Lady Rula Ghani, meanwhile, is unprecedented in her visibility and support for women’s rights, and recently challenged the Afghan Supreme Court’s decision to reduce the severity of sentences of the four men who murdered a woman named Farkhunda.

Rula Ghani, the First Lady of Afghanistan by CSIS

Where there were none before, there are now approximately five hundred female journalists in Afghanistan. The Afghan Women’s Network now has approximately three thousand members, and seventy-five nongovernmental organizations under its auspices. They have also obtained signatures from both President Ghani and Executive Officer Abdullah pledging to enact thirty recommendations in support of woman’s rights. After the disappointing Supreme Court decision in the Farkhunda murder trial, Director of the Afghan Women’s Network Hasina Safi stated “We are going to begin again tomorrow to organize on social media, and we are trying to take this case up internationally. Justice for Farkhunda is justice for all of Afghanistan’s women.”

Meanwhile, the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan has stated that it seeks “the establishment of an independent, free, democratic and secular Afghanistan.” Additionally, an investigation undertaken by Foreign Policy found examples of religious leaders calling for tolerance by invoking the example of Prophet Muhammad standing up in respect for a Jewish funeral procession; and examples of Tribal elders, in the Uruzgan province, starting a program whereby former Taliban members could reintegrate into society by finding employment. As Aziz Rafiee, Executive Director of the Afghan Civil Society Forum, said, “The involvement of Afghan people today in the political arena is remarkable…Never in the history of Afghanistan have we experienced this kind of participation. The state of civil society in the past nine years has changed enormously and dramatically.”

These examples suggest that Afghans, and especially women, will not so willingly abandon the democratic strides they have made since 2001. As female Afghan lawmaker Shukria Barakzai stated, “The past 12 years were the golden era and we don’t want to lose that.” Or as President Ghani said in March 2015, “To date, Afghanistan’s people have rejected the allure of violent movements. We are willing to speak truth to terror…Afghanistan is joining a new consensus that is emerging in the Muslim world, a consensus that rejects intolerance, extremism, and war.” In a reification of his words, on 11 November 2015, tens of thousands of Afghans—of varying age, gender, tribe, and ethnicity—mounted a peaceful demonstration in Kabul to rally against the beheading of seven Zabul residents by alleged ISIS militants.

Hasina Safi, Director of the Afghan Women’s Network by Ministeria van Buitenladse Zaken

The next generation of youths is demonstrating their rejection of Islamic militant groups. Lotfullah Najafizada, the twenty-seven-year-old head of the Tolo TV News Network, said “For the new generation it’s about survival…It has the most to lose if the country reverses.” Or, as twenty-one-year-old blogger Aarya Nijat said, “It is time that we put the future of Afghanistan ahead of our individual ethnic and tribal allegiances.”

Hopefully, these sentiments will increase as the education system in Afghanistan continues to grow. During the Taliban rule, women and girls were completely barred from attending school or university. Meanwhile, there were only one million boys enrolled in school. Today, there are 3.75 million girls in school, and five million boys. Just as importantly, 40% of the teaching staff—which has grown from 20,000 to over 187,000—is now female. A number of universities, such as Kandahar, Nangarhar, Khost, Herat, Balkh, have been created or rebuilt. The American University of Afghanistan offers a number of economic and development courses. Kabul University’s enrolment is up to 11,000 students, and faculties include a Department of Peace Studies dedicated to creating a society without discrimination or violence.

These signs of progress do not suggest that the pervasive gender problems and democratic deficits still adversely affecting the Afghan people should be ignored. It does, however, indicate that a powerful movement is taking shape, signifying a crucial moment in Afghanistan’s history. Those men and women working bravely to advocate for gender equality and democracy must be supported and continue to have a spotlight shined upon them.

General and membership information about the Afghan Women’s Network can be found here: http://www.awn-af.net/index.php/cms/content/57.

It’s Not Over Yet: The Economic Impact of Ebola in Sierra Leone

A woman working in a field in Sierra Leone

An outbreak of the Ebola Virus Disease in West Africa that began in 2014 and has continued to the present day has rocked the world. Over 9,700 people have died and almost 24,000 have been infected since the beginning of the outbreak, mainly in Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone. Symptoms include fever, fatigue, diarrhea, vomiting, and unexplained hemorrhaging; the virus is transmitted through contact with an infected person’s bodily fluids. In the areas where this outbreak has been focused, especially in Sierra Leone, Ebola has tended to spread due to burial rites which involve touching and washing the body of the deceased and therefore coming into contact with highly infectious bodily fluids.

As is usually the case in epidemics like this, the initial focus was on containing the disease and treating those who had already been infected, though there is no known cure or vaccine for Ebola. Organizations like Médicins Sans Frontieres were on the frontlines, setting up impromptu clinics to diagnose and treat those that had contracted the disease. Now, however, as the outbreak reaches the one year mark, the focus has shifted. Sierra Leone is currently attempting to assess the economic damages caused by the outbreak and figure out how to turn this negative growth around.

Almost immediately, the outbreak affected tourism. Though Sierra Leone hasn’t been one of the major tourist destinations for those visiting West Africa, this loss of revenue still affected the country. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office in the United Kingdom advised against all but essential travel to Sierra Leone, except for health workers involved in halting the disease. Many other countries, including the United States, have followed suit. This has led hotels and other tourist operations to shut down and lay off workers.

An aid worker in an Ebola treatment center in Sierra Leone disinfecting boots

However, the greatest impacts have been seen in other sectors. Those in quarantine for the disease were not able to plant crops and many farmers fled the disease. This is a huge problem considering that, in Sierra Leone, 2/3 of the population is involved in farming. Markets have been shut down due to fears that large gatherings of people could spread the disease faster, meaning that those who do grow crops have no way of selling them. Mining, which constitutes a large portion of the economies in affected countries, has been slowed or halted as foreign companies pull their workers out of affected areas.

Road blocks in Sierra Leone, put into place to stop the spread of the disease, have also made it difficult if not impossible to move goods and labourers around the country. This, in turn, further impacts upon the agricultural sector, with farmers planting far fewer crops. Unfortunately, this will cause a vicious cycle in which the shortage of crops generates food shortages and puts adverse pressure on food prices.

This disease was not just devastating for those who suffered through it or lost family members to it. On a much larger scale, the three countries affected lost at least $1.6 billion in economic growth this year, which amounts to over 12% of their combined gross domestic products. Sierra Leone alone accounts for over half of that loss at $920 million, while its economy is expected to contract by 2%.

The major fear now is that the virus will continue to spread. Though infections are being reported at a much lower rate than at the beginning of the crisis, there remain several avenues by which the disease could continue to disseminate. Liberia has just opened its borders, meaning that the already porous frontier regions could see new cases from Sierra Leone and Guinea enter the country. Another fear is that cases are being underreported and hidden from authorities.

However, Liberia has just released its last ebola patient. At the same time, Guinea and Sierra Leone have seen new cases drop to a tenth of what they were at the height of the crisis. In Sierra Leone, there have been around 75 new cases reported weekly, though that number is dropping slowly. There is a tentative hope that the epidemic may, in fact, be almost over.

Four boys carrying water in Sierra Leone

The issue which must now be addressed is that of how best to help the economies of three developing countries recover from this epidemic. The effects of the disease are expected to continue to have a large economic impact long after Ebola is eradicated, and the risk of a surge in cases and thus even harder hitting impacts is still high.

The leaders of the three affected countries met at an international conference in Brussels in early March to discuss how best to rebuild their economies. From this meeting, they have begun to urge the world to develop an aid plan along the lines of the Marshall Plan, which was implemented to help Europe recover from the effects of World War II.

Whether their urgings will encourage other countries to step up with aid and development money remains to be seen. No one knows exactly how to rebuild after catastrophe. But the world cannot and must not turn its back on these countries in their time of need and, in our interconnected global society, must help them recover in order to boost the worldwide economy.

The author, Emma Middleton, and her partner, Marlene Paradee, are implementing community-driven sustainable agricultural projects in Sierra Leone this summer as part of their commitment through Clinton Global Initiatives University 2015.

Can Obama Close Guantanamo Bay?

In January 2002, Guantanamo Bay detention centre opened its doors to receive the first of 779 total detainees, prisoners of President George W Bush’s War on Terror. The new facility, situated in Cuba, soon attracted criticism from humanitarian institutions and legal professionals alike. Yet, despite the US Supreme Court ruling the centre unlawful, it remained open until the departure of the Bush administration. At the start of his Presidency in 2009, Barack Obama announced plans to finally close the Guantanamo Bay detention centre. Six years later, however, the prison is still running. The question remains, as Obama reaches the end of his presidency: will he be able to close Guantanamo Bay for good?

Ever since the opening of Camp Delta in 2002, Guantanamo Bay has been plagued with accusations of injustice and torture. Prisoners have been detained for up to 13 years without being granted rights to a fair trial and only three have ever been charged and convicted of a crime. Meanwhile, 92% of detainees have not been categorised by the US government as Al-Qaeda fighters. Their alleged guilt has never been, and it appears never will be, proven. 21 were children at the time of imprisonment and 9 have died in custody. A senate report on the CIA’s use of torture, published in December, found that water boarding, rectal feeding, mock executions and sleep deprivation were just some of the torture techniques employed at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere in the years following 9/11. More than 200 FBI agents have reported abuse of Guantanamo’s prisoners over the years. In short, the prison represents the antithesis of the humanitarian and ethical values that the United States claims to stand for.

Three times during the Bush administration, in 2004, 2006 and 2008, the US Supreme Court found detention policy at Guantanamo to be in violation of the constitution. Although 532 prisoners were released during his Presidency, the demands of the Supreme Court to close the centre entirely were not met. When Obama made his oath to close Guantanamo in 2009 it seemed that the remaining detainees would finally have their freedom. This was until Congress blocked the move that May, with the Senate voting 90 to 6 to keep the detainees from being moved to other US establishments. The concern was that this might make US prisons a greater terrorist target and thus impact negatively on national security. This has been the nature of negotiations ever since, with the President attempting to reach consensus while Congress maintains its ban on transferring prisoners to US soil for reasons of American national security. A poll carried out last year discovered that only 29% of Americans agree with Obama on this matter, yet human rights will continue to be infringed if the detention centre remains open.

Despite lack of Congressional backing, some progress has been made in recent months. President Obama called in November for the speedier transfer of those detainees cleared for release. Over the course of December, 11 men were resettled in Uruguay and Kazakhstan and as a result there are now only 122 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay; less than half of the number at the start of Obama’s time in office. In the eyes of Clifford Sloan, State Department special envoy on Guantanamo until December 31, these transfers are a good sign. He said in December, “I strongly believe that momentum leads to more momentum. The smaller the number, the more manageable the issue is and the more overwhelming the arguments for closure.”

Some of the individuals remaining within the walls of Guantanamo Bay are considered highly dangerous criminals, including the five men implicated in the 9/11 attacks. Others, however, still protest their own innocence and have received support from thousands around the world demanding their freedom. Shaker Aamer is the last UK citizen to remain at the prison and his case has received attention across the globe. Arrested in Afghanistan in 2001, where he maintains he was doing charity work, he was transferred to Guantanamo Bay as one of its first detainees in 2002. Aamer has spent much of the last 13 years in solitary confinement, suffering torture which has brought about post-traumatic stress disorder, in addition to coping with other health conditions including diabetes and arthritis.

Cleared for transfer six years ago, Aamer will never face trial and has a wife and children still awaiting his return to Britain. Following calls from the UK government, President Obama has promised to prioritise his release, but it is not yet clear whether this is another empty promise.

In addition to giving this assurance, Obama used his penultimate State of the Union address in January to renew his pledge to shut down Guantanamo Bay once and for all. It still seems unlikely that Congress will ever make this a reality by allowing prisoner transfers into the US. If they do not, it remains to be seen whether Obama will achieve his goal by the end of his time in office. What is clear, for now, is that 122 men, innocent until proven guilty, are still suffering at the hands of the US government. As President Obama said in his State of the Union address: “As Americans, we have a profound commitment to justice …[Guantanamo Bay] is not who we are,” and nor should it be.