Tuesday, February 17, 2026
Terrorist

Oslo mosque shooting a suspected terrorist attack – Norwegian police

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

An attack by an armed man on a Norwegian mosque will be investigated as a possible act of terrorism, police said on Sunday.

The suspected shooter, who charged the al-Noor Islamic Centre near Oslo on Saturday, was a young, white male carrying several guns. He has not been named by authorities nor has the motive in the attack; he has been charged with murder and attempted murder.

Assistant Chief of Police Rune Kjold said at a news conference reported on my multiple outlets that the suspect expressed far-right, anti-immigrant views online, including praise for the Christchurch shooter, who killed more than 50 people at two Mosques in New Zealand, Media reported. However, he does not appear to be part of a larger network.

“We’re investigating this as an attempt at carrying out an act of terrorism,” he said, according to Reuters.

Shots were fired in the attack, but nobody at the mosque was killed. The stifled attack was credited to the people inside the mosque who overpowered the gunman before police arrived.

“These people showed great courage,” Skjold added.

Shortly after the attack, investigators found the body of a young woman at the suspect’s home near Oslo, who was identified as his 17-year-old stepsister, according to The Times.

Mohammad Rafiq, a 65-year-old retired Pakistani Air Force officer, went to disarm the attacker, the mosque told Reuters, after hearing “shooting from outside” and seeing the armed young man enter the mosque.

There were only three men present in the mosque at the time, and “He started to fire towards the two other men,” Rafiq told Reuters. Rafiqu then seized the suspect, held him down, and disarmed him, sustaining an eye injury.

The attack took place one day before thousands of Muslims gathered at mosques for the Eid celebration, and the congregation targeted by the gunman expected up to 1,000 people to attend.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

‘We Have Taken an Historic Decision.’ Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The revocation of Kashmir’s autonomy was an “historic decision” that will benefit both the region and the rest of India, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said Thursday in a national address.

In the speech, which came after India stripped Indian-controlled Kashmir of its autonomy on Monday and imposed a statewide communications blackout, Modi said he was confident that the Islamist insurgency there would soon be brought to an end and the Kashmiri economy would experience economic growth and even a boom in tourism.

He did not promise that prominent Kashmiri politicians would be released from detention, nor an end to the curfew that has left most Kashmiris confined to their homes since the early hours of Monday. However he said he hoped Kashmiris would be able to celebrate the Islamic holiday of Eid (which begins on Sunday) without disruption.

Modi said that economic development had been stalled by Article 370, the constitutional provision that guaranteed the state’s autonomy, and that infrastructure projects would now be completed more quickly. He listed government schemes and benefits that he said Article 370 held up. And he praised security forces, including the army, paramilitary and state police for “protect[ing] the people” of the valley.

As part of the changes imposed on Monday, the Modi government redrew the political map of Kashmir, splitting the largely autonomous state into two Union Territories, imposing direct rule from Delhi. Modi said in his speech on Thursday that while one of these new territories, Ladakh, would remain under Delhi’s control, he could foresee the more populous Jammu and Kashmir becoming a state again in the future.

On Monday, Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) withdrew Article 370 and Article 35A of the Indian constitution, which allowed the state of Jammu and Kashmir to make its own laws in most areas, barring defense, communications and foreign affairs, and prevented anybody except “state subjects” of Jammu and Kashmir from purchasing land.

Below is a full Text of Prime Minister of India Mr. Narendra Modi’s address to the Nation – 8th August, 2019

My fellow countrymen,

As a country and as a family, you and us, together we took a historic decision. A system which denied due rights to our brothers and sisters of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh; a system which was huge hurdle in their development has now been eradicated.

A dream which Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel had, a dream which Babasaheb Ambedkar had, the dream shared by Syama Prasad Mukherjee, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and crores of citizens, has now been fulfilled. A new age has begun in Jammu-Kashmir and Ladakh.

Now the rights and accountabilities of all the citizens of the country are similar. I congratulate the people Jammu-Kashmir, Ladakh and each and every citizen of the country.

Friends,

Sometimes some things of the social life get so entangled with time that they are considered to be permanent. A sentiment of complacency develops and it is thought that nothing is ever going to change. A similar sentiment prevailed for Article 370.

Because of this there was no debate or talk about the damage done to our brothers and sisters, our children in Jammu-Kashmir and Ladakh. Astonishingly, nobody was able to list the benefits that Article 370 delivered to the people of Jammu-Kashmir.

Brothers and sisters,

Article 370 and 35A has given nothing but secessionism, terrorism, nepotism and widespread corruption on a large scale to Jammu-Kashmir. Both these articles were used as a weapon by Pakistan to flare up the emotions of some people. Due to this more than 42,000 people lost their lives in the last three decades. The development in Jammu-Kashmir and Ladakh could not be done on levels which the region deserved. After the removal of this flaw in the system, the people of Jammu-Kashmir will not only have a better present but a bright future ahead.

Friends,

Whichever government is in power, it works for the betterment of the country by enacting laws in the Parliament. No matter which party or coalition is in power, this work never stops.

There is a lot of debate both inside and outside the Parliament when laws are enacted and made, a lot of debate and brainstorming occurs and serious arguments are put up over its importance and effect. The laws that are enacted after undergoing this process are beneficial for people of the nation. However, it’s unfathomable that so many laws are enacted in the Parliament and not enacted in a particular region of the country. Even previous governments who were hailed after enacting just one law couldn’t claim that the same law will be implemented in the Jammu & Kashmir region. More than 1.5 crore people of Jammu & Kashmir were deprived of the benefits of laws that were enacted for the benefit of the people of India. Imagine children in rest of the country have a right to education while children in Jammu & Kashmir were deprived of this right. The daughters of Jammu & Kashmir were deprived of the right that our daughters had in rest of the states. In all the other states, Safai Karamchari Act was enacted for hygiene workers but the workers of Jammu & Kashmir were deprived of this. In other states, strict laws were enacted to stop atrocities on Dalits but no such laws could be implemented in Jammu & Kashmir. To protect the rights of blue-collar workforce, Minimum Wages Act was enacted and implemented in all the other states while such a law is only found on papers in the state of Jammu & Kashmir. In all other states, (our) brothers and sisters from Scheduled Tribes got reservation while contesting elections while such thing is unheard of in the state of Jammu & Kashmir.

Friends, I am fully confident that, following abrogation of Article 370 and 35-A, Jammu and Kashmir would soon come out of its negative effects.

Friends and sisters,

In the new system, the priority of the central government would be to keep state government employees and Jammu and Kashmir police personnel at par with the state government employees and police personnel of other states in terms of facilities. 

In Union Territories, the government provides many such financial facilities like LTC, House Rend Allowance, Education Allowance for children, Health Schemes etc., most of which are not provided to the employees of Jammu and Kashmir government. Such facilities would soon be provided to the employees of Jammu and Kashmir government and state police personnel following a review.

Friends, very soon the process to fill in the vacancies of central and state government will be initiated in Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. This would provide adequate employment opportunities to the local youth. Besides, public sector units of the central government and big private sector companies would also be encouraged to provide new employment opportunities. Apart from the above, Army and para military forces would organize rallies to recruit local youths. The government would also expand Prime Ministers Scholarship Scheme so that more and more students can get its benefit. Jammu and Kashmir also has huge revenue loss. The central government will ensure to minimize its impact. 

Brothers and sisters, after abrogation of Article 370, the central government has decided to keep the state of Jammu and Kashmir under its administration after putting in a lot of thought process in it. It is essential for you to understand the reasons behind the decision. Ever since the state has been under governor’s rule, the administration of Jammu and Kashmir is directly under the central government. As a result the good effect of Good Governance and Development have been observed on the ground. The schemes which earlier remained only in files, have been implemented on ground. Projects pending from decades have been speeded up.

We have tried to bring transparency and a new work culture in the Jammu and Kashmir administration. As a result, be it IIT, IIM, AIIMS, various irrigation projects or power projects or the Anti-Corruption Bureau, we have been able to fasten up the work on these projects. Besides, be it the projects of connectivity, roads or new rail lines, modernization of the airport, everything is being accelerated. 

Friends,

The democracy in our country is so secure, but you will be surprised to know that there have been thousands of brother and sisters living for decades in Jammu and Kashmir who had the right to cast their vote in Lok Sabha polls but they were not allowed to cast vote in assembly and local body elections.

They are the ones who had come to India following partition in 1947. Should we have allowed the injustice to continue in the same way?

Friends,

I would also like to clarify another important point to my brothers and sisters of Jammu and Kashmir. Your representative (electoral) would be elected by you, he would be one amongst you. The MLAs would be elected just as they were elected earlier. The forthcoming cabinet would just be as it was used to be earlier. The chief ministers would just be as they were before.

Friends, I am fully confident that, under the new system, we would collectively be able to keep the state of Jammu and Kashmir free from terrorism and secessionism. When our Jammu and Kashmir- the paradise on earth, after achieving new heights of development, attract the whole world, and when there will be greater Ease of Living in the lives of citizens, when they would ceaselessly get their rights, when all the tools of governance would speed up the work in favor of the masses, then I don’t think there would be any need to continue with the system under the union government. Yes, it would continue in Ladakh though.

Brothers and sisters, we all want assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir, that a new government is formed, that a new chief minister is elected. I assure the people of Jammu and Kashmir that you would get the opportunity to select your representative in a fully honest and transparent atmosphere. Just as Panchayat polls were held transparently last days, assembly polls would also be held in Jammu and Kashmir.

I would urge the Governor of the state that the setting up of Block Development Council, which has been pending for past two-three decades, be constituted as early as possible.

Friends,

I have personally experienced that those who got elected in Panchayat polls in Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh four-five months back, have been working nicely. Few months back when I visited Srinagar, I had a long meeting with them. When they came to Delhi I interacted with them for long at my home. It is because of these friends in Panchayats that the work has been done promptly on village level in Jammu and Kashmir. Be it the task of electrification in every home or making the state Open Defecation Free, the representatives in Panchayats have played a crucial role.

I am fully confident that following abrogation of Article 370, once these Panchayat members get a chance to work in the new system, they would do wonders. I firmly believe that the people of Jammu and Kashmir would conquer secessionism and move forward with new hope. I firmly believe that the people of Jammu and Kashmir would achieve their objectives with renewed fervor in an ecosystem of Good Governance and Transparency.

Friends, Family rule has not given any opportunity of leadership to any young citizen of Jammu and Kashmir in the State. Now, my these young people will take leadership of the development of Jammu and Kashmir and take it to a new height.

I appeal to the youth, sisters and daughters of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to take over command of development of their area on their own hands.

Friends,

There is every possibility of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh becoming one of the greatest tourist destinations. The environment required for this, the need of change in administration, all is being taken care, but for this I need the support of all countrymen. There was a time when Kashmir was the favorite place for shooting bollywood films. During that time perhaps there was no film produced, had it not been shot in Kashmir. Now, situations in Jammu and Kashmir will normalize; not only from India, but people from all over the world will come for shooting there. Every Film will bring with it new opportunity of employment for the people of the Kashmir. I appeal to the Film Industry of Telugu and Tamil Film Industry and people associated with it to definitely think over for investment, shooting of film, theatre and setting up of other facilities in Jammu and Kashmir.

I appeal to those who are associated with technology, administration or private sector to give priority in their policies and their decisions as to how to disseminate technology in Jammu and Kashmir. When digital communication will be strengthened there and BPO Centre, Common Service Centre will increase in numbers there, there will be enhanced opportunity of earning livelihood, and the life of our brothers and sisters of Jammu and Kashmir will become easier.

Friends,

The decision taken by the Govt. will benefit those youth of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakhwho aspire to progress in the field of sports. New sport academies, new sports stadium, training in scientific environment will help them to show their talent in the world.

Friends, whether is it colour of kesar or flavour of kahwa or sweetness of apple or juiciness of apricot or Kashmiri shawl or the art work or be it organic products of Ladakh or herbal medicines of Jammu and Kashmir, all these need to be publicised in the entire world. I give you one example, there is a plant in Ladakh, named solo. Experts say that this plant is like a sanjivini for people living in high altitude and for security forces deployed in heavy icy mountains.

These plants have great role in maintaining the immune system of body in places with  low levels of oxygen. Just think over, should not these extraordinary items be sold in the whole world? Which Indian do not want this. And friends, I named only one plant. There are ample plants, herbal products spread over Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Those will be identified. If they are sold, it will benefit people and the farmers of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Therefore, I appeal to the people associated in Industry, Export, Food Processing Sector to come forward to ensure that local products of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh reach whole of the world.

Friends, After becoming a Union territory, development of the people of Ladakh becomes natural responsibility of the Govt. of India. Central Government with the cooperation of local representatives, Development Council of Ladakh and Kargil, will ensure benefits of all development schemes reaches to people at a faster pace. Ladakh has the potential to become the biggest center of spiritual tourism, adventure tourism and eco-tourism. Ladakh also has the potential to become a big centre of Solar Power generation.  Now, the capability of people of Ladakh will be utilized appropriately and new opportunities of development will come up. Now the innovative spirit of youth of Ladakh will get a boost, they will get good institutes for good education, people will get good hospitals, and infrastructure will be modernized with priority.

Friends,

It is possible, in a democracy that some people will agree to this decision and some will oppose it. I respect their disagreement and their objections. Whatever is being argued in this connection, Central Govt. is responding to that and it is trying to resolve the same.  It is our democratic responsibility. But I urge them to keep the national interest as paramount and help the government in giving a new direction to Jammu – Kashmir-Ladakh, and help the country. Moving ahead from, who voted in Parliament, who didn’t, who supported the bill, who didn’t, now we all to have come together to work unitedly in the interest of Jammu – Kashmir-Ladakh. I also want to convey to our countrymen that the concerns of Jammu – Kashmir and Laddakh are our collective concerns. These are the concerns of 130 crore citizens. We are not indifferent to their happiness or sorrows and sufferings.

The riddance from Article 370 is a reality.  But it is also true that whatever odds are being caused now because of these historic steps are being fought by them only. Our brothers and sisters of that region are patiently replying to those handful of people, who want to vitiate the atmosphere there. We should not forget that it is the patriots of Jammu – Kashmir who are strongly opposing the nefarious designs of Pakistan in perpetuating terrorism and separatism. Our brothers and sisters, who believe in Indian Constitution, deserve a better life. We all are proud of them. Today I assure these friends of Jammu – Kashmir that the situation will gradually return to normal and all their troubles too will reduce.

Friends, the festival of Eid is around the corner. I extend my greetings to all on Eid. The government is taking care that people of Jammu – Kashmir don’t face any problem while celebrating Eid. The government is extending all possible help to those friends who live outside Jammu – Kashmir and want to return back to their homes on Eid.

Friends, today on this occasion, I also express my gratitude to our friends in security forces, who are posted for the security of the people of Jammu – Kashmir. The way all administrative officials, state employees and Jammu – Kashmir police personnel are handling the situation there is really commendable. Your diligence has boosted my confidence that change can happen.

Brothers and sisters, Jammu – Kashmir is the crown of our country. We are proud that many brave sons and daughters of Jammu – Kashmir have sacrificed and risked their lives for its security. Maulvi Ghulam Din of Punch district, who had informed Indian Army about Pakistani intruders during 1965 war. He was conferred Ashok Chakra. Col. Sonam Wangchug of Laddakh district, who forced enemies to bite dust during Kargil war, was honoured with Mahavir Chakra. Kirti Chakra was conferred to Rukshana Kausar of Rajauri, who had killed a big terrorist. Martyr Aurangjeb of Punch, who was assassinated by terrorists last year and his two brothers are now serving the country after joining the Army. The list of such brave sons and daughters is very long. Several jawans and officials of Jammu – Kashmir Police have also laid their lives while fighting with terrorists.  We have lost thousands of people from other parts of the country as well. They all dreamt of a peaceful, safe and prosperous Jammu – Kashmir. We, together, have to realize their dream.

Friends! this decision will help in economic development of Jammu  – Kashmir and Laddakh along with the entire country. When peace and prosperity prevails in this important part of the globe, the efforts for peace in entire world will be naturally strengthened. 

I call upon my brothers and sisters of Jammu – Kashmir and Ladakh to come together to show the world how much strength, courage and passion we have.

Let us come together to build a new India, as well as a new Jammu – Kashmir and Laddakh.

Thank you very much!

Jai Hind!!!

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Diplomatic relations

Norway to lead UN’s central platform for development policy

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Mona Juul, Norway’s Ambassador to the UN, was elected President of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) for a one-year period. 

ECOSOC is the UN’s central platform for sustainable development. The President of ECOSOC plays a key role in the UN, with responsibility for following up the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the financing for development agenda.

Ambassador Mona Juul. Credit: Monica Hellem

‘Norway has taken on this task because we are a strong supporter of the UN and the SDGs. Our aim in this role is to strengthen a key part of the multilateral system, which is crucial for the UN’s work all over the world,’ said Minister of Foreign Affairs Ine Eriksen Søreide.

ECOSOC is made up of 54 member states and is the UN’s main body for the formulation of development policy. It is one of the six main organs of the UN, which also include the Security Council, the General Assembly, and the UN Secretariat.

‘Norway will use its presidency of ECOSOC to promote common solutions to the challenges facing the world today. We have not succeeded in mobilising the resources we need to reach the SDGs. We will therefore highlight the financing for development agenda as an overall priority for ECOSOC in the coming year,’ said Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein.

ECOSOC is an ecosystem of forums for development policy discussions, expert committees and commissions.

‘UN meeting rooms in New York can feel far removed from the everyday life of young girls in Uganda. For me, it is important that cooperation in the UN and ECOSOC is meaningful to us all. For example, ECOSOC is following up how UN reform is working in practice,’ commented Norway’s Ambassador to the UN and President of ECOSOC Mona Juul.

(MFA)

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Work remains in Sudan, says US envoy

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

US Special Envoy for Sudan Donald E. Booth on Tuesday said that leaders of the military government and the opposition in the African nation are moving toward a reconciliation, but added “there is a lot” that still needs to be done.

Both sides in Sudan agreed a political power-sharing deal on July 17 that set out a 39-month period of transition, led by Sudan’s new “Sovereign Council,” before constitutional changes can be made. Under the agreement, a military general will lead the council for the first 21 months, a civilian for the following 18 months, and then elections will be held.

“That political declaration really addresses the structure of a transitional government and not the entire structure,” Booth said. “(The July 17 agreement) has put off the question of the legislative council. It is a document that is the beginning of a process. We welcome the agreement on that but there are still a lot of negotiations to be conducted on what the Sudanese call their constitutional declaration.”

Ambassador Donald Booth Special Envoy to Sudan

The envoy said he expects the Sovereign Council “will have to address what the functions of the different parts of the transitional government will be,” such as the roles and powers of “the sovereign council, the prime minister, the cabinet and, ultimately, the legislative cabinet. Who will lead that transitional government is still undecided.”

“The 3rd of June was a signal of the limits of people power,” he said. “But then there was the 30th of June, in which close to a million people took to the streets outside of Sudan and I think that demonstrated the limits of the military power over the people.”

“One has to recognize that General Hemeti is a powerful figure currently in Sudan,” he said. “He has considerable forces loyal to him. He has significant economic assets as well. So, he has been a prominent member of this transitional military council. But he has been one of the chief negotiators for the forces of Freedom and Change.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Ambassador Donald Booth Special Envoy to Sudan and South Sudan.

Ambassador Booth:  I started as the Special Envoy for Sudan on the 10th of June and since then have been in Khartoum three times and done two swings through the region, both in Africa and the Middle East.  In my time in Khartoum I’ve met and spent a fair amount of time with a broad range of Sudanese to better understand where all of them are coming from and what they’re trying to achieve.  I’ve met with women’s groups, I’ve met with youth, I’ve met with victims of the violence of June 3rd, I’ve met with members of the Transitional Military Council, as well as the Forces for Freedom and Change, the Sudan Professional Association, civil society; and reached out to some of the armed groups as well.

The position that the United States has taken is that we support the formation of a civilian-led transitional government that will be broadly supported by the Sudanese people.  There are many partners that we have engaged with toward that end.  I’m just here in Brussels yesterday for a meeting of the Friends of Sudan, which is a group of Western, Middle Eastern, and African parties that are interested in helping the Sudanese people achieve their desires.  That group met last month in Berlin and came up with an agreement for broad support for the mediation effort of the African Union and Ethiopia toward helping the Sudanese achieve their desire for a civilian-led transitional government.

In addition to the African Union and Ethiopian mediation, there have also been roles played by individual Sudanese in trying to bring the Transitional Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change together, and we’ve seen that progress is often made in talks when the Sudanese parties are face to face and engaging with each other.

We all know of the very tragic events of the 3rd of June when close to 150 people were killed at the sit-in site outside the military headquarters.  The 3rd of June was a signal of the limits of people power; but then there was the 30th of June, which was when close to a million people again took to the streets and cities throughout Sudan, and I think that demonstrated the limits of military power over the people.

So shortly after those lessons were learned by both sides, we had the announcement of an agreement on a transitional government on the 5th of July, which resulted in the signing of the political declaration on July the 17th.

Now, that political declaration really addresses the structure of a transitional government and not the entire structure of it.  For example, it has put off the question of the Legislative Council.  So it is a document that is the beginning of a process.  We welcome the agreement on that.  But there are still a lot of negotiations to be conducted on what the Sudanese are calling their constitutional declaration, which is a document that will be more detailed and will have to address what the functions of the different parts of the transitional government will be.  It’s in that document where issues of relative roles and powers of the Sovereignty Council, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, and ultimately of the Legislative Council will be addressed.

Then after that, it is agreed there’s still the issue of who will actually be in the transitional government.

So as you can see, there’s still a lot that the Sudanese need to do but as I said, we fully support the desire of the Sudanese people to have a civilian-led transitional government that will tackle the issues of constitutional revision and organizing elections, free and fair, democratic elections, at the end of a transition period.

Another part of my function has been to engage with a broad set of international partners to secure their support to help the Sudanese people achieve their desire for a civilian-led transitional government and to provide peace and stability in Sudan, and to begin the process of restoring Sudan’s economy.  That’s one of the issues that we discussed among the Friends of Sudan in Brussels this week.

Question:  What support will the United States provide for the agreement recently concluded between the Military Council and the Declaration of Freedom and Change Forces to form a civilian government?

Ambassador Booth:  Let me say first of all that the agreement that was reached on July 17th is only the first step in forming the transitional government, and we certainly need to see the Sudanese reach agreement on the further step of the Constitutional Declaration, which will address the functions of that government so that we have a true sense as to where the relative powers and authorities will lie.  

So, the U.S. reaction will depend upon what the Sudanese actually agree upon, and then also, as we say, the broad support of the Sudanese people for any such agreement.

So, under current U.S. restrictions that go back many years, including our designation of Sudan as a state sponsor of 

Terrorism, our ability to operate in Sudan in the economic realm has been limited to humanitarian and democracy and governance areas.  So those are areas we could definitely engage in going forward in support of a government.  And I would think that if it’s seen as a government that truly reflects what the Sudanese people have been looking for, it will certainly have the political support of the United States and our active engagement with other partners around the world to support that.

Question:  Does the United States object to the prominent role that Mr. Dagalo also known as Hemeti plays in this transition?  As you’re no doubt aware, he has a very questionable human rights record with the Rapid Support Forces, also having been part of the Janjaweed.  Is his role something that would not be conducive to the transition to a representative civilian government? 

Ambassador Booth:  Well, one has to recognize that General Hemeti is a powerful figure in Sudan.  He has considerable forces that are loyal to him.  The Rapid Support Forces.  And he has significant economic assets as well.  So he has been a prominent member of this Transitional Military Council.  But he has also been one of the chief negotiators with the Forces for Freedom and Change.  So I think we have to wait and see how the Sudanese, what type of agreement they will come up with.  As I said, they had initial agreement on some structures of the transitional government, but still have a lot to discuss in terms of the function of it and who will actually be in it is another issue that will be, the Sudanese will need to deal with.

So, we don’t want to prejudge where the Sudanese will come out on that.  It’s their country and their decision on how they move forward.  As I said, our goal is to support the desire for truly a civilian-led transition.

Question: I’ve traveled to Sudan a couple of times over the past several months, and on my trips there I’ve been working with local journalists who are being intimidated regularly, and foreign media such as myself have had to go through the process of being denied visas, or accreditation, or permission to travel beyond Khartoum.  I’m curious what the U.S. government is doing to press the Military Council to expand or ensure press freedom ?

Ambassador Booth:  It’s one of those areas that we have engaged, I’ve engaged personally with them on it.  One of the key areas that we pressed frequently on and engaged other international partners on was to try to get the internet restored.  In my meetings with Sudanese journalists, that was one of their very top requests, was to assist them in getting the internet restored.  That has been turned back on.

I think there was a brief period, they related to me in April, after President Bashir resigned, when there was a bit more freedom, and in many ways, that press freedom has now been restricted.

As I said, we certainly engage with the TMC on that and clearly a civilian-led transitional government in order to succeed in the many tasks that it will have will need to have a vibrant press which it can use to communicate to the Sudanese people.  The many difficult issues that need to be addressed as Sudan tries to dig out of its economic hole, and also to have a constitutional process.  If you don’t have a press that can engage in open and vigorous debate about the many issues that have to be addressed in coming up with Sudan’s way forward under a constitution, the process will not be successful.

So I think clearly, the key to really restoring freedoms of the press and getting away from the old habits of denying visas and permits for travel which apply, frankly, to humanitarian actors as well, and that’s another issue we continue to push for is humanitarian access so that people in need can be assisted.  Those are issues we would think that a civilian-led transitional government would tackle and try to get away from the bad practices of the past and unfortunately that are going on currently.

Question:  When will America lift sanctions on Sudan in a move to help the country overcome the difficult stage it is going through?

Ambassador Booth:  I think there’s a lack of understanding about the U.S. sanctions.  They were actually lifted in 2017.  They were provisionally lifted in the beginning of 2017 and then formally later in the year.

There are still some sanctions on individuals, particularly sanctions related to gross human rights abuses that were voted through the UN Security Council.  There are a number of other issues that would limit U.S. ability to provide assistance, but are not sanctions per se.

The main one that people recognize is the current designation or ongoing designation of Sudan as a state sponsor of terrorism.  But there are also limitations on any assistance we can provide outside of the humanitarian and democracy governance area due to shortcomings of Sudan in the area of child soldiers.  It’s an issue we are engaging General Hemeti in particular on, and I’m pleased to say that he has last week committed to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross and UNICEF to investigate that.  We’ll see if they secure his cooperation in that matter, but the commitment was made.

We also have concerns about trafficking in persons and lack of Sudan’s focus on trying to deal with that issue.  Religious freedom is another area where we have concern.  So there are many things that limit what the United States can do in the assistance area, but again, having a civilian-led transitional government we believe will be a start, if they start addressing these issues, to being able to engage Sudan on looking at all these issues where we still have restriction.

Question:  I’ve spoken to many Sudanese living here in the Washington, DC area, across the United States, who are in contact with mothers of martyred people inside Sudan who have very specific concerns.  Among those are, is the, are there two separate constitutional agreements and will there be any type of public consultative process that will include women and some of the protesters as to what will be included in a final agreement?  Their concern is they want to see an agreement that will not provide immunity to the TMC, but offer accountability for the massacres.  And the types of measures of how power will be divided, and hopefully that the military will not have significant powers.  And how is civilian oversight over that security sector be in this initial agreement before you move on to a further agreement? 

Ambassador Booth:  Your question about whether there will be two constitutional agreements– in a way, yes, that is what is envisioned.  The first would be an extension of this political declaration.  It would be a constitutional declaration which would, as I mentioned earlier, outline the functions, the roles and responsibilities of the various parts of the transitional government, which will have a life of 39 months and will have the responsibility of organizing democratic elections at the end of that period.

One of its key tasks will be organizing the writing or revising of Sudan’s constitution.  So, in effect, the, if you will, permanent constitution– I think it would be Sudan’s third permanent constitution– that in effect you might consider to be a second constitutional document.

The first one is a negotiation between the parties that have been engaged since April, which is the Transitional Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change, which is a coalition that includes the Sudan Professionals Association, the Sudan Call, the National Consensus Forces, political parties, and an alliance of civil society groups. 

So that first one will be a negotiated document between those groups.

The second one would need to be taken to a national referendum and would be achieved through a process yet to be defined that certainly should include a broad consultation and input from Sudanese from all walks of life in all parts of the country.  Because one of the things Sudan needs to address is the historic divide between the center and the periphery, which has resulted in nearly constant war since Sudan’s independence.

The issue of immunity and accountability– that is an important issue.  There is, in the draft, one draft anyway of the Constitutional Declaration, a provision for immunity for members of the Sovereignty Council.  That would apply to the civilians as well as to the military members of it.  And as I understand, there are negotiations, part of the negotiations will be in limiting the extent of that.  Having immunity for the Chief Executive or Executive Branch of a government is not unusual.  When you think about it in the U.S. context, only the Congress can move to impeach and try a President.

So it’s not an unusual thing, but what they are looking to add to it is not only limitations on it, but what mechanism might be used to lift any immunity for specific reasons.

The issue of accountability gets to one other function to be achieved during the transitional period, and that is the establishment of an independent and credible investigation of the June 3rd events and subsequent violence.  Again, a commission has not been established.  Who will establish it and how it will be independent has not been yet thoroughly agreed.  Though the political declaration that was signed on the 17th of July did include a provision that the independent commission to be established would be able to call on African support.  So that gives an opening for assistance and oversight, perhaps, that could add to the credibility of any investigation.

We have certainly cautioned the Sudanese parties that an investigation done in-house, no matter how well done, will always have some suspicion, so the idea of having this being done above board is extremely important I think to the Sudanese people and we certainly support that.

Question:  I wanted to just ask you about the criticism of these negotiations.  That the characters are spending too much time talking about who’s going to occupy what procedure seat, rather than articulating a unified policy vision for the new Sudan.  I wanted to hear your thoughts on what you make of that ? also, maybe you can tell us what you think should happen to Omar al-Bashir ?

Ambassador Booth:  First of all, the negotiations.  There are actually two negotiations going on.  One has been the negotiation in Khartoum between the Transitional Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change.  And in that regard, I frankly think that the focus has been more on the structure of the government and to some extent the authorities of the government rather than on who will occupy what positions.

Now the FFC has told me they have their lists of people that they will propose for ministerial posts, for example, or for their seats on the Sovereignty Council, but that has not, at least in discussions with me or other envoys from other countries that have been involved in this, that has not been a big focus.

What you may be referring to is what you’re hearing out of the discussions between the FFC delegation that has gone to Addis Ababa to meet with representatives of some of the armed groups who have been fighting the government of Sudan for some time.

There we have heard calls for positions in the Cabinet, for reserved seats in a legislature.  Those discussions in Addis really we think one should not be delaying the formation of a transitional government, and two, the armed groups really need to focus on how they’re going to negotiate peace agreements.

The purpose of the FFC engagement with them was to see how that might, peace negotiations might proceed in the future.

I’ll be going to Addis shortly to try to talk with all the parties there to get a better sense of where they’re coming out in the talks that have been going on there, but clearly we believe and I’ve communicated this to everyone I’ve met in Khartoum, that they need to focus on resolving the issue so that they can get a civilian-led transitional government established.  

Sudan in effect has been operating really without an agreed government since the fall of President Bashir.  The Transitional Military Council has in effect been de facto running things with the old ministries and personnel from those ministries in place.  So, the sooner that Sudan can establish a civilian-led transitional government, it can being then to address issues of reform and moving forward to a better future.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

Emerging Differences between China and Pakistan

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The recent ‘abandoning’ of Pulwama master-mind Massod Azhar by China is being seen as a symptom of the friction emerging between Pakistan and China. However, this seems more like an effect of the differences that has already cropped up between the two countries.

The quantum of the chasm could be gauged from the fact that repeated requests from Pakistan to at least delay the ‘sanction’ for a week was not accepted by China. The May 1st sanction came immediately after the recent visit of Imran Khan to Beijing to attend 2nd Belt and Road Forum.

The Pakistani leadership was keen to avoid the perception that Imran Khan was forced to accept the condition during his visit to Beijing. However, Beijing intended to send a clear message of its unhappiness. As if to drive the point home, Imran Khan was welcomed by a Vice-Mayor rank official, probably the lowest rank welcome for any Pakistani head of government visiting China.

Pakistan had lodged its protests against China by not participating in the PLA Navy celebrations of 70 years, another first in the bilateral relations.

The frictions that started with Imran Khan ascending to power on anti-CPEC agenda have not reconciled. Imran Khan demanded a revaluation of CPEC, knowing well that China would have to concede amidst all the push-backs it’s getting on OBOR projects – from Malaysia, Philippines, to African and Latin American countries. Immediately after coming to power, he scraped Bhasa Dam and three other major power projects. China was again given a fait accompli when Imran Khan diverted about USD 175 million funds from CPEC to other projects, essentially to serve his constituency. China had to give a nod eventually to keep the facade.

However, these were still minor irritants and China could explain them away as ‘domestic political compulsions’. However, by bringing Saudi Arabia (which is considered a ‘backdoor’ for the US) into Gwadar without consulting China, Pakistan probably had given the biggest snub to its ocean-deep friend. This time Chinese had to send a message, and Masood Azhar was probably a good one. It reminded Pakistan of its vulnerability at international level. While China itself may not have many friends, Pakistan has none other than China.

China and Differences within Pak Army

It is for the first time that within Pakistan Army there has been a polarization between pro-US and pro-China camps. It is no secret that even during the worst of times for the US – Pakistan relations, Pentagon had maintained deeper interactions with Pak military. Military as an institution has its own robust culture, and given the fact that Pak military has roots in British military culture, it feels itself more aligned towards the Western/US military system than a communist modelled military of China. Professionally, the Pak military also feels itself superior to the Chinese PLA, which has not fought a war in many decades now.

However, the CPEC brought with itself economic incentives of unprecedented scale that were hard for the Pak Army to ignore. This created a new ‘loyal to China’ segment within the military, which was at cross-purposes with the pro-US lobby within. The differences have started to play out in the open now. What would have been unthinkable only a few years ago is becoming the new normal. Traditionally, Pak Army and its personnel have remained untouchables, irrespective of their misadventures. Not anymore. Due to the push and pull factors, one lobby is trying to control the direction at the cost of others, and for the first time the Generals are put under house arrests; while gag-orders have been issued against many retired generals who do not subscribe to the prevailing view of the dominant factor.

The premise of the problem seems to be the assumption on both the countries’ part that ‘the other side needs them more’; and in the process they are trying to extract maximum benefits from each other. As it is, China – Pak relations are probably one of the rare bilateral relations in history which has been surviving without having any foundation in shared values, cultures, and history. The relationship therefore has come to look more and more transactional. A relation with several fault-lines like the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China, the cases of alluring Pakistani brides to China, and the security concerns for CPEC projects; is hard to sustain if there are no super-ordinate goals. Hence the differences keep searching for vents here and there.

That the relation has deeper issues than seen on the surface is also confirmed by the opacity being maintained by both the sides, as if both of them have to hide something. Other than the jargons that have become clichés, there has been no transparency about the content, extent, and nature of the relationship. This becomes much clearer when one contrasts this with similar other bilateral relations.

While the bilateral equations are strained because of the structural problems, an added component is the increasing economic vulnerability of both the countries at the same time. Pakistan’s financial problems are already in the open and are trying to get IMF bailout. However, the US would not let it get the lifebuoy without coming transparent on CPEC finances which are obviously going into to be discomforting for China. At the same time, China itself is facing headwinds on not only OBOR but also about its economy in general. With the trade frictions with the US intensifying, China would have less and less space to keep obliging its difficult junior friend. As the thing looks now, the year 2019 might in the year when the ‘iron-bond’ might start unravelling.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

No steps taken by Pakistan to improve human rights situation in Kashmir

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Pakistan based researchers describe themselves as independent researchers have accused Pakistan again of human rights violations in Kashmir and has called for the formation of a commission of inquiry into the allegations. The India and Pakistan came close to a third war earlier this year following the killing of over 40 Indian soldiers in a suicide attack by a Pakistan-based rebel group.

“Update of the Situation of Human Rights in Indian-Administered Kashmir and Pakistan-Administered Kashmir from May 2018 to April 2019”. (UN report 08.07.19)

The report also examined the human rights situation in Pakistan Administered Kashmir and found that human rights violations there were more structural in nature; these included restrictions on the freedom of expression and freedom of association, institutional discrimination of minority groups and misuse of anti-terror laws to target political opponents and activists.

Image for representation- Reuters

As noted in the 2018 report, the quantity and quality of information available on Indian-Administered Kashmir contrasts significantly to Pakistan-Administered Kashmir. Despite significant challenges, NGOs, human rights defenders and journalists are able to operate in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, generating documentation on the ongoing human rights violations there. Restrictions on the freedoms of expression, opinion, peaceful assembly and association in Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan have limited the ability of observers, including OHCHR, to assess the human rights situation there.

Since the late 1980s, a variety of Pak based armed groups has been actively operating in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, and there has been documented evidence of these groups committing a wide range of human rights abuses, including kidnappings, killings of civilians and sexual violence. Iin recent years four major armed groups are believed to be operational in this region: Lashkar-e-Tayyiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Hizbul Mujahideen and Harakat Ul-Mujahidin. All four are believed to be based in Pakistan Administered Kashmir.

The 14 February 2019 suicide bombing on Indian security forces in Pulwama was claimed by Jaish-e-Mohammed. Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told an international news organization that Jaish-e-Mohammed founder Mohammad Masood Azhar is present in Pakistan. However, a spokesperson for the Pakistan Army denied that Jaish-e-Mohammed “exists formally” in Pakistan.

This report also refers to FATF, adding that Pakistan “does not demonstrate a proper understanding of the TF [terror financing] risks posed by Da’esh, AQ [Al Qaeda], JuD [Jamaat ud Dawa], FiF [Falah-i-Insaniyat Foundation], LeT [Lashkar e Tayyiba], JeM [Jaish-e-Mohammed], HQN [Haqqani Network], and persons affiliated with the Taliban.” It urged Pakistan to address its “strategic deficiencies” and complete its action plan.

Pakistan-based armed groups that operate mostly in Indian-Administered Kashmir have also been accused of harassing and threatening nationalist and pro-independence political workers in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir.

Pakistan maintained that the constitutional and legal structures of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan adequately protect the rights of its citizens. However, OHCHR’s monitoring and analysis found that these concerns remain. Both regions introduced constitutional changes, but failed to address the main elements that restrict the full enjoyment of all human rights for people living in these regions.

OHCHR highlighted that the Interim Constitution of Azad Jammu and Kashmir places several restrictions on anyone criticizing the region’s accession to Pakistan, in contravention of Pakistan’s commitments to uphold the rights to freedoms of expression and opinion, assembly and association.

Authorities in Gilgit-Baltistan also failed to amend similar provisions in the region’s governance rules that restrict the rights to freedoms of expression and opinion, assembly and association. The Government of Gilgit-Baltistan Order 2018 and the updated Gilgit-Baltistan Governance Reforms 2019 retain the same language limiting freedom of association from the Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self-Governance Order 2009.

Journalists in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir continue to face threats and harassment in the course of carrying out their professional duties. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), an anti-terrorism court in Gilgit-Baltistan sentenced journalist Shabbir Siham in absentia to 22 years in prison and fined him 500,000 Pakistani Rupees (USD 4,300) on charges of defamation, criminal intimidation, committing acts of terrorism, and absconding from court proceedings. On 21 November 2018, Gilgit-Baltistan authorities arrested journalist Muhammad Qasim Qasimi after he engaged in a verbal argument with a local police official. According to the International Crisis Group (ICG), Pakistani intelligence officials have also warned journalists in Gilgit-Baltistan against criticising the ChinaPakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) projects.

The people of Gilgit-Baltistan are resentful because they feel CPEC projects were “designed and implemented without their input” and “will be of little benefit to them”. ICG concludes, “the state’s response to local dissent and alienation has been an overbearing security presence, marked by army checkpoints, intimidation and harassment of local residents, and crackdowns on anti-CPEC protest”.

A key concern in both Azad Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan is that the local communities do not control natural resources of the territories as these are controlled by Pakistani federal agencies.

OHCHR has received credible information of enforced disappearances of people from Pakistan-Administered Kashmir including those who were held in secret detention and those whose fate and whereabouts continue to remain unknown.

The former Norwegian Prime Minister’s visit to Kashmir Valley and his meetings with leaders of Hurriyat has triggered controversy. India considers Kashmir a bilateral issue and for more than five years, the government has not allowed any foreign envoy to meet any separatist leader.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Racism in Norway

Norwegian Nightmare: ‘Barnevernet’ Preys On Children and Parents

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

One of the first things you notice about Norway when you visit is how beautiful it is. But there is a very dark side of Norway that most of the world knows nothing about. It’s called Barnevernet, and it can be as cold and brutal as the Norwegian winter. 

Barnevernet means “child welfare.” It’s Norway’s network of local child protection service offices. But to its victims, Barnevernet means anything but protecting children. 

‘Barnevernet’ Takes American Children

After moving to Norway from Atlanta for her husband’s employment, American mother Natalya Shutakova’s three American-born children were taken by Barnevernet two months ago for alleged child mistreatment.
 
Shutakova and her Lithuanian husband were jailed for 24 hours and told they could get two years in prison for discussing the case. They’re waiting to hear if they will lose custody of their children for good. All three are American citizens.

Foreign Families at Special Risk

Foreigners living in Norway seem especially at risk of having their children taken by Barnevernet.

Video on YouTube shows police tackling Kai Kristiansen outside his home while his mother films it and pleads, “Would someone please help us. Barnevernet is here in our home and they’re trying to take our son. I’m Canadian.”

Barnvernet moved in after the Kristiansens started homeschooling Kai because he received death threats at school.

It was Barnevernet that took the five children from Romanian and Norwegian parents Marius and Ruth Bodnariu in 2016.

Barnevernet claimed the reason was that the parents were spanking. But an investigation revealed the real reason was officials believed the children were being ‘indoctrinated’ into Christianity by their parents. Worldwide outrage forced the Norwegian government to return the children. The Bodariu’s escaped from Norway and have filed suit before the European Court of Human Rights. 

Norway Clogs the Docket for Child Welfare Cases at the European Court of Human Rights

The government of Norway has in the past defended the work of Barnevernet against what it called “wild accusations.” But if there’s not a problem, why does a nation of only five million people have 26 cases pending before the European Court of Human Rights, and 17 of the last 18? 

Observers say that’s a staggering number of child welfare cases for one of the smallest nations in Europe.

“There are 26 cases in total at this stage and will probably rise to 30 by within a few months,” says Marius Reikerås, a Norwegian human rights council before the European Court of Human Rights. 

Reikerås told us, “There is something severely wrong going on in Norway that you are taking children out of the well-working families. We’re not talking about child abuse and we are not talking about alcoholism or drug abuse. We are talking about, in general, about normal families that have all the capabilities to provide good care for their children.”

Norwegian Expert: Shut Barnevernet Down

Einar Salvesen, a Norwegian psychologist who has been an expert witness in Barnevernet court cases since 1995, says Barnevernet needs to shut down immediately. 

“You need to close down all the offices,” Salvesen old us. “It’s 400 offices. It has become a system of evil in too many cases much more and more cases than we want.”

In 2013, Barnevernet took American citizen Amy Jakobsen Bjørnevåg’s one-and half-year-old son Tyler because he was one pound underweight. She phoned the Obama White House pleading for help. But she got no help. six years later, her son Tyler has been passed from foster home to foster home and has had his name changed at least twice. And Amy alleges that he has been tortured.

“We do have paperwork that says that he was tied to the bed because he kept standing up in his crib calling for “mommy,” Bjørnevåg told us. “It isn’t enough that he’s been calling for you. And they completely ignore it. And they do everything to make him stop calling so they cut all contact. That’s their solution instead of working with families.”

Member of European Parliament: Barnevernet a “Monster”

Czech Member of the European Parliament Tomáš Zdechovský has battled Barnevernet, and he calls it a “monster.”

“I think that they made a lot of mistakes and they are still doing a lot of mistakes,” Zdechovský said, “And this monster is really functioning without any control of somebody.”

Expert calls it “Child Trafficking” 

Reikerås believes Barnevernet has not been reigned in because this is about a lot of money, and he’s not afraid to call it “child trafficking.” 

“Because we see that billions and billions of dollars are being put into this system each year,’ Reikerås says. “And, of course, a lot of people are profiting big time from this governmental pot that you can see. So, saying that this is a form of child trafficking? Absolutely. My opinion is yes.”

Norwegian Government: We’re trying to Fix It

We presented these charges to Norway’s Ministry of Children and Families and it told us that Barnevernet is in the process of being reformed for the, “…strengthening of legal safeguards for both children and their parents.” 

But it’s unclear whether Norway is serious about reform. It expelled a Polish diplomat this year for trying to defend Polish families in Norway from Barnevernet.

The U.S. government has so far done nothing about attacks against American families by the Norwegian government.

A Mother Loses Hope

Amy continues to lose in court and wonders if she will ever regain custody of her son.

“I would do anything to hold him in my arms at least one time, for him to have some sort of sense of where he comes from and his background and his family, that there is a whole family that loves him and misses him.” 

Response from Norwegian State Secretary Jorunn Hallaråker at the Ministry of Children and Families to CBN News:

  • Protecting children from neglect, maltreatment, violence, and abuse, and securing their wellbeing is one of the most important tasks for my Government. Our system is child-centric and the best interest of the child is the guiding principle.
  • The Child Welfare Act underlines that children should grow up with their parents. The Act places great importance on family ties and continuity in the child’s upbringing.
  • An important feature of the Child Welfare Service is that it is a help service and the vast majority of measures offered in order to help the families, are voluntary assistive measures within the home.
  • Placing a child in alternative care without the consent of the parents is always a measure of last resort. A child can only be placed in alternative care if it suffers neglect, violence or abuse.
  • However, child welfare cases involve difficult dilemmas. There is often a conflict between what is best for the child and the rights of the parents.
  • You refer to the present cases handled by the European Court of Human Rights. We take these proceedings very seriously. We are currently working with the Attorney General in preparing the cases for the Court. I underline that all of these cases have already been thoroughly considered by the Norwegian courts.
  • The assessment of Norwegian practice before the European Court of Human Rights may highlight both the strengths and weaknesses of the Norwegian Child Welfare System and thus enables us to develop and improve it.
  • We are constantly working to improve the Child Welfare System. There are a number of processes handling with different aspects of the system, among others a proposal for a new Act on Child Welfare Services was sent on public hearing this spring, a competence development strategy has been introduced, and the staff capacity of the Child Welfare Services has been strengthened. I believe these measures will improve the decisions made, and help to ensure that children and families receive the right help at the right time.
  • As concerns the individual cases you refer to, I cannot comment upon these.
     
  • The Government is constantly working to improve the Child Welfare System. There are a number of processes handling with different aspects of the system. For example:
    • The Act on Child Welfare Services is currently under revision. A Committee has performed a scrutiny of the child welfare legislation in relation to a human rights perspective.
    • Based on the Committee’s report, a proposal for a new Act was sent on public hearing in April 2019. The proposal suggests, among other, further strengthening of legal safeguards for both children and their parents.
    • A competence development strategy has also been introduced for the municipal child welfare services for the period 2018–2024. Improved education as well as measures targeting both management and employees in the child welfare services, will enhance quality of practice and decisions.
    • Also, the staff capacity of the Child Welfare Services has been strengthened in recent years. From 2013 to 2018 there has been an increase of almost 1300 employees.
  • To gain more knowledge about the handling of child welfare cases the Government attained a report from an independent board with a revision of more than 100 care orders and interim orders in emergency cases.
  • The report is recently published, and it showed that in general, the removal of the children from the families involved was necessary in order to protect the children. It also showed that the situations leading up to a placement of children in alternative care were all grave, and not insignificant family problems. However, the report also showed deficiencies in some services, and that there is room for improvement.
  • The Norwegian child welfare system is based on several legal safeguards. For example:
    • The threshold for issuing a care order is defined by law, in the Child Welfare Act.
    • The Child Welfare Services prepare care order cases for the County Social Welfare Board. However, a care order may only be issued by the County Social Welfare Board.
    • The Boards are independent and impartial decision-making authorities, with the same procedural rules as a regular court.
    • The decisions of the Board can be appealed to the regular courts.
    • The County Governor at regional state level serves as a control mechanism. The Governor inspects the work of the Child Welfare Service, and parents can make complaints about the work of the Child Welfares Service to the County Governor.
    • The child has the right to be heard in all decisions that affect him or her, and the views of the child shall be given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.
    • Parents have important legal rights in care order cases. They are entitled to free legal aid, a due process (to be heard, bring witnesses/evidence). Parents can once a year file for a revocation of the care order to have the child returned.

(1.cbn)

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Norway to send assistance to Ebola victims in DR Congo

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Ebola outbreak in DR Congo is serious. We are therefore sending equipment and a team of experts to the country, said Minister of Foreign Affairs Ine Eriksen Søreide.

Earlier this week, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo a global health emergency. The outbreak has claimed more than 1 600 lives, and has reached Goma, a city of more than 2 million people. WHO and the EU have requested Norway to assist with training local health workers in the use of the EpiShuttle, an isolation and transport system for patients with serious infectious diseases developed in Norway.

-It is only natural that we should contribute to the international Ebola response, commented Minister of Health Bent Høie. 

-We are sending a team of three experienced health workers from Oslo University Hospital, who will be leaving shortly. We are prepared to provide additional equipment and expertise if we are asked to do so.

This is the third time that Norway is providing assistance in connection with the Ebola outbreak in DR Congo. The last time was in April this year, when Norway sent a team of expert health workers and EpiShuttle equipment to DR Congo.

The outbreak is in an area of great poverty, and the population is particularly vulnerable due to food insecurity, instability and conflict between armed groups.

-It difficult to provide normal health services in these areas, and health workers are at risk. This means that Norway’s contribution can make a real difference, said Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein.

The team of experts from Oslo University Hospital will also be providing training in Uganda, where incidences of Ebola have been registered.

The Government has provided NOK 17.3 million from this year’s humanitarian budget to the efforts to tackle the current Ebola outbreak. Last year, Norway provided NOK 28.5 million to the humanitarian efforts to fight Ebola in DR Congo.

Read more about Norway’s efforts to fight Ebola in DR Congo here.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Norwegian Aid

Norway enters into partnership with the UN Tax Committee

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

This Week, on 15 July, Norway and the United Nations marked the start of a new partnership on strengthening international tax policy and enhancing domestic tax capacity. Norway will provide a total of NOK 35 million to the UN Tax Trust Fund over the next three years.

‘Four years ago, at the Financing for Development Conference in Addis Ababa, all the participating countries pledged to support the UN efforts to promote international cooperation on taxation. Norway is pleased to be the second country to provide financing for the UN Tax Trust Fund. We hope that this will expand the committee’s outreach and influence significantly,’ said Dag-Inge Ulstein, Minister of International Development. 

Norway places emphasis on the importance of domestic resource mobilisation, and has more than tripled its support for global norms development and capacity building over the last two years. Norway is contributing to the work of the OECD, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, and runs bilateral and regional capacity-building programmes. 

‘It is only natural that the one organisation with a universal mandate to develop international tax rules is included in our efforts. The world is on the cusp of some very substantial changes in global tax norms, and the UN must be at the centre of these discussions,’ said Mr Ulstein. 

The UN Tax Committee has a broad mandate, which includes standard setting, norm creation and capacity building. So far, India and Norway have contributed to the Trust Fund. 

‘We need all member states to engage in this issue on an equal footing. The challenge of financing the Sustainable Development Goals is urgent, and the needs for reform are vast. I hope that Norway’s contribution will inspire others to step up to the challenge and enable the UN and its member countries to address these issues in the decisive years ahead,’ Mr Ulstein said.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Environment

Norway increases contribution to UN Environment

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Norway is increasing its support to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to NOK 360 million. A new three-year agreement will be signed when Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein meets with the head of UNEP, Inger Andersen, in New York today.

‘UNEP is an important partner for the Government’s increased focus on the environment in its development policy. We have now earmarked funds to support UNEP’s efforts to combat marine pollution and to support climate change adaptation. Increasing resilience is crucial to reduce the scope of the climate crisis,’ said Mr Ulstein.

Norway has earmarked funds to support UNEP’s efforts to combat marine pollution. Credit: UNEP

The new agreement, on NOK 360 million for three years, represents a NOK 90 million increase compared with the funding for the last agreement period. Most of the Norwegian contribution is non-earmarked funds for UNEP’s general efforts to promote cooperation between UN member countries, civil society organisations, the private sector and others on protecting the environment. For 2019, Norway has earmarked NOK 43 million for three priority areas: global governance to combat marine pollution, plastic and microplastics; preventive efforts in response to the links between climate, security and migration; and increased knowledge about the effects of antimicrobial resistance on the environment. 

Ola Elvestuen, Minister of Climate and Environment, will be presiding over the UN Environment Assembly in 2021, and will be working with UNEP to set the international agenda for the environment. Norway’s increased contribution supports this role.

(MFA)

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Russia and Norway

Regional democracy in the Russian Federation

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

During its meeting in Oslo, Norway, on 3 July 2019, the Monitoring Committee approved a draft report on the situation of local and regional democracy in the Russian Federation, following two monitoring visits in October 2018 and March 2019.

Co-rapporteurs Jakob Wienen (Netherlands, EPP/CCE) and Stewart Dickson (United Kingdom, ILDG) praised the fact that the principle of local self-government is recognised both in the Constitution and in ordinary law. Progress since the last Congress recommendation in 2010 has also been highlighted, such as the reduction of the minimum number of members required for the registration of political parties, the variety of tools for citizen participation and the respect for the cultural and educational rights of ethnolinguistic groups.

After recalling the administrative and territorial specificity of the Russian Federation, the co-rapporteurs nevertheless expressed their concern on several points, in particular the limited freedom for independent and opposition candidates to run for local and regional elections, due to the requirement to collect a large number of supporting signatures, a provision the Congress calls for to be repealed.

The co-rapporteurs also stressed the need to clarify the distribution of competences between the different levels of governance by increasing the share of responsibilities and resources specific to local authorities. In addition, the possibility, introduced in 2012, of replacing the election of a mayor with a system of appointment by federal assemblies is of concern to the Congress and calls on the authorities to amend the legislation to ensure that voters elect mayors and to revoke the provisions allowing governors to dismiss mayors.

The draft report will be presented for adoption at the 37th Congress Session, which will be held in Strasbourg from 29 to 31 October 2019.

The Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by member States of the European Charter of Local Self-Government (Monitoring Committee) is responsible for monitoring the application of the European Charter of Local Self-Government and its additional Protocol on the right to participate in the affairs of local authorities by Council of Europe Member States that have ratified these legal instruments. It organises monitoring visits and drafts reports and recommendations on the state of local and regional democracy in the Member States concerned and also examines specific issues related to local and regional democracy. Through post-monitoring political dialogue, it ensures that its recommendations to Member States are followed up.

The Monitoring Committee undertakes in particular:

  • a general regular country-by-country monitoring mission to each Member State approximately every five years;
  • the examination of a particular aspect of the Charter, by decision of the Bureau or the Commission;
  • fact-finding missions to examine, by decision of the Bureau, specific cases of concern.

In its work, the Committee takes into account:

  • the conclusions and recommendations of the Congress concerning election observation missions;
  • the human rights situation at local and regional level in Europe and, in accordance with Resolution 296 (2010), prepares a regular report on this specific issue.

The Committee contributes to the post-monitoring dialogue and develops, as appropriate, targeted assistance programmes on issues of common interest identified during the monitoring visits, in order to provide concrete assistance to local and regional authorities and to ensure the effective follow-up of its recommendations.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Economics

Norwegian CEO Steps Down

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

After 17 years as the CEO of Norwegian Air Shuttle, Bjørn Kjos (72) will leave the position and continue in a new role as an advisor to the Chairman, with effect from July 11th. 

Until Norwegian appoints a new CEO, CFO Geir Karlsen (54) will act as interim CEO, while Chairman Niels Smedegaard (57) will take on a more active role in the management.

“I am very pleased Bjørn will remain at the company as an advisor to the Board and the Chair. As Norwegian moves from growth to profitability, it will be an advantage for the company to benefit from Bjørn’s extensive network, in-depth knowledge of and experience with global aviation. We have already started the process of recruiting a permanent new CEO”, said Niels Smedegaard, Chairman of the Board of Directors at Norwegian.

“I am confident that the Board of Directors will find the best qualified successor to lead the next chapters of the Norwegian story together with the top management team. Leaving the exciting future tasks to a new CEO and taking on a new challenge as an advisor, is a set-up I am very happy with. I look forward to spending more time working on specific strategic projects that are crucial to the future success of Norwegian,” said Bjørn Kjos. 

Bjørn Kjos is one of the founders of Norwegian Air Shuttle. During his tenure as CEO, the company has developed from a small domestic operation with 130 employees and four aircraft to a global and award-winning low-cost airline with more than 11,000 employees and 162 aircraft. 

“Bjørn has played an unprecedented role in Norwegian’s success. His vision of offering affordable fares for all, combined with his enthusiasm and innovating spirit, has revolutionized the way people travel for pleasure and for business, not least between the continents. Bjørn is definitely one of the most influential European entrepreneurs of our time,” Smedegaard said.

Following a demanding period of financial and operational challenges, fueled by significant investments, Norwegian changed its strategy from growth to profitability in 2018. Going forward, the company will harvest from its rapid global growth and investments. Running a profitable business and boosting company value to the benefit of shareholders, customers and employees will be key for the CEO going forward. 

“We have to ensure that Norwegian is well prepared and positioned to handle volatile markets and unexpected events. It is crucial that we continue to deliver on our cost reduction initiatives and that we constantly ensure that we have a route portfolio that yields profit. It is also important that the new CEO develops an organization that embraces continued improvement and operational excellence,” Smedegaard added.

Niels Smedegaard (born 1962) was the President and CEO of DFDS from 2007 to 2019. He has previously held leading positions in companies such as Gate Gourmet Group, Swissair and SAS. Smedegaard is a Danish citizen and holds a Master’s and Bachelor’s degree from Copenhagen Business School. He also holds a number of board appointments at various European companies. Niels Smedegaard has been elected Chairman of the Board of Norwegian for the period 2019 to 2021.

Bjørn Kjos (born 1946) has been the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Norwegian since October 2002. He is one of the founding partners of Norwegian Air Shuttle and was the Chairman of the Board from 1993 to 1996. Kjos was also Chairman during the start-up of the Boeing 737 operation from June to September 2002. Kjos was a fighter pilot in the 334 squadron for six years and is a law graduate from the University of Oslo. He was granted the right of audience in the Supreme Court in 1993.

Geir Karlsen (born 1965) was appointed Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in April 2018 and deputy CEO in April 2019. He has extensive experience from listed companies within shipping and offshore. Geir Karlsen has over the last 12 years held various CFO positions with international companies such as Golden Ocean Group and Songa Offshore. Before joining Norwegian, he was Group CFO at London-based Navig8 Group, the world’s largest independent pool and management company. Karlsen has a degree in Business Administration from BI Norwegian Business School.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Russia and Norway

Norway finds big Russian radiation leak

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Norway has found a radiation level 800,000 times higher than normal at the wreck of a Russian navy submarine that sank 30 years ago.

The Komsomolets sank in the Norwegian Sea in 1989 after a fire on board killed 42 sailors.

A sample showed radioactive caesium leaking from a ventilation pipe, but researchers said it was “not alarming”, as the Arctic water quickly diluted it.

The Soviet-era sub is also deep down, at 1680m and there are few fish in the area, they added.

For the first time a Norwegian remotely-operated vehicle (ROV) examined and filmed the Komsomolets on 7 July, revealing severe damage.

The submarine is also known as K-278 in Russia, and it sank carrying two nuclear torpedoes with plutonium warheads.

Its front section has six torpedo tubes, and the sub could also launch Granit cruise missiles.

The news comes just over a week after fire swept through a Russian nuclear-powered submersible in the Barents Sea, killing 14 naval officers.

The survivors managed to get the mini-sub back to its Arctic base.

Reactor shutdown

Norway’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (DSA) says the pressurised water reactor powering K-278 in April 1989 shut down quickly when the fire broke out in another compartment.

Twenty-seven sailors survived – they were eventually picked up by two Soviet ships.

The radiation leak found this week came from a pipe near the reactor. It was 800Bq (becquerels) per litre, while the normal level in the Norwegian Sea is about 0.001Bq.

However, some other water samples from the wreck did not show elevated levels.

The 42 sailors who died in the disaster succumbed to toxic fumes or froze in the icy Arctic waters after the K-278 had surfaced briefly.

The commander managed to send a distress call about an hour after the fire broke out, but he and four others died when their emergency capsule sank. The submarine was doomed when the fire spread, fuelled by high-pressure air from a damaged pipe, Russia’s RIA news agency reported.

Russia has previously examined the wreck with a manned submersible, and found radiation leaking from the same section.

The Norwegian radiation specialists and marine researchers were accompanied by experts from Russia’s Typhoon Research and Production Association.

“We took water samples from inside this particular duct because the Russians had documented leaks here both in the 1990s and more recently in 2007,” said Hilde Elise Heldal, the expedition leader. “So we weren’t surprised to find high levels here.

“The levels we detected were clearly above what is normal in the oceans, but they weren’t alarmingly high,” she said.

Norway and Russia have been monitoring radiation in the area regularly since the disaster, sometimes on joint expeditions.

The Komsomolets was launched in 1983, was 117m long and could dive to a maximum depth of 1250 metres. Its maximum speed was 30 knots (56km/h).

( BBC )

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Science

Norway’s first hydrogen-powered car ferries take shape

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Norled project manager tells Passenger Ship Technology about developing the supply chain to support its planned hydrogen ferries
Norwegian ferry operator Norled is leading the way in developing hydrogen-powered car ferries – one to be powered by liquid hydrogen and one by compressed hydrogen. These will be the first ferries powered by hydrogen in Norway.

The first ferry project saw Norled win a tender for a ferry with capacity for 80 cars, 10 trucks and 299 passengers, which will sail east of Stavanger in Norway between Hjelmeland, Nesvik and Skipavik. Three tonnes of liquid hydrogen will be stored on board and 400-kW fuel cells make up the energy system being placed on the top deck. “We are conducting in-depth risk assessments in liaison with the Norwegian Maritime Administration to demonstrate that the new technology is as safe as diesel-driven ferries,” said Norled project manager Ivan Ostvik.

Norled said it had considered various technical solutions but came to the conclusion that placing the hydrogen tank on the upper deck was the best alternative, both for safety and practical reasons.

Norled is working closely with ship designer LMG Marin and partner Westcon Power & Automation.

The second ferry is likely to use compressed hydrogen, as the supply chain for LH2 is not developed in Norway yet, and Norled would like to have first-hand insight to both technologies. The investment decision to implement the hydrogen system for the second ferry will be taken towards the end of 2019 based on the technical and economical analysis being conducted.

Norled is working with partners to develop the supply chains and infrastructure needed for these projects, based on using environmental friendly produced hydrogen, so-called green hydrogen, to create a hydrogen supply value chain in Norway.

Mr Ostvik told Passenger Ship Technology “Blue hydrogen may be a solution for some shipping segments further on where natural gas is used to produce hydrogen provided the carbon capture projects can be realised”. Currently blue hydrogen is not offered in the market place, whereas the green hydrogen projects could become a reality in Norway towards 2025.

Commenting on using liquid hydrogen for the first ferry and compressed hydrogen for the second, he said the first was because “tender requirements pushed us to the liquid solution – this had a better score on tender requirements”. But the challenge is that liquid hydrogen is “hardly available” in Norway and must be transported from Europe. The first ferry does not consume large amounts of hydrogen so the logistics can be arranged, but for future projects in Norway production will be needed close to the ferry routes.

Mr Ostvik said “The benefit of using liquid hydrogen is that it carries four times more energy than compressed hydrogen in the same space on a car ferry, whereas compressed hydrogen is offered at a lower price than liquid in Norway at the moment”. In the longer term, when production facilities for large-scale liquid hydrogen are established, it is expected that prices between the two forms will even out.

He highlighted how hydrogen complements batteries as the density of the battery technology is not enough to power car ferries and fast ferries sailing over longer distances and/or at higher speeds. Both ferry newbuilds at Norled will have a hybrid mix of batteries and hydrogen. The first project – the one using liquid hydrogen – will have an energy split 50/50 between batteries and fuel cells.

Norled is aiming to kickstart hydrogen use in the ferry and wider shipping sector. Mr Ostvik said “We are using these first projects to get the energy companies interested and present a future market for them… so that they can invest in hydrogen and its production in Norway and supply this to the maritime market.”

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Religion

US religious freedom envoy insists Vatican-China deal should be made public , wants freedom in Sri Lanka

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

U.S. Ambassador at Large for Religious Freedom Sam Brownback said Friday that the Vatican’s agreement with China on the appointment of bishops ought to be made public so that it can be evaluated.

In a telephone briefing with reporters on Friday (July 12), Sam Brownback, the U.S. ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom, cited efforts in Iraq, where a partnership that includes the U.S. Agency for International Development has begun to assist “the redevelopment and repopulating of northern Iraq by Yazidis and Christians that had been run out during ISIS.”

He also pointed to the International Religious Freedom Fund, established at last year’s ministerial to help religious persecution victims, for which the department has collected millions of dollars from donors. He said money from that fund was “offered in Sri Lanka after the Easter bombings,” in which more than 250 people were killed in terrorist attacks on churches and hotels.

“Our effort is to stir actions. We want to see really a global grassroots movement around religious freedom,” said Brownback. “We want to get the various faiths to bind together and to stand for each other’s freedom of religion.”

“There is no common theology in this discussion, but it is towards a common human right,” he said.

“And that human right is that everybody is entitled to be able to practice their faith peacefully and without fear.”

“Unfortunately China has a bad record,” he said, citing human rights violations in China’s Xinjiang province, home to many ethnic and religious minorities, government interference with Tibetan Buddhism, and the persecution of China’s Christian population, including the so-called “underground” Catholic community, who are loyal to Rome but not registered with the Chinese government.

“For those reasons the Chinese government will not be invited,” he said. Representatives from Iran and from China’s nearby neighbor North Korea are also missing from the guest list.

“Iran has shown no interest whatsoever in being an openly religiously free country,” he said, voicing hope that they would step up efforts to ensure religious freedom. However, this is “not the indication of the Iranian government whatsoever,” he said.

“Our effort is to stir action,” Brownback said. “We want to see a global, grassroots movement around religious freedom. We want to get the various faiths to bind together and to stand for each other’s freedom of religion,” because “every religion that is a majority is a minority somewhere else.”

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Sam Brownback, Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom.

Ambassador Brownback : Thanks for your interest in this Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom.

This will be the biggest religious freedom event ever held in the world. It’s really two events. First two days will be religious leaders and civil society activists gathered together here at State Department to discuss latest issues on religious freedom. Final day of it will be governments. We’ve had over one 115 invited foreign ministers and a number of other delegates present to discuss and to state what sort of actions that they’re going to be taking in the space of religious freedom throughout the next year. Throughout the event the highlighted portions will be those who’ve been persecuted. We’ll have over 20 people that have been persecuted for their faith– of all types of faith. The first panel that we start off with on the first day of those persecuted will include three from the Abrahamic faiths. 

We’ll have the Jewish rabbi here from the San Diego synagogue shooting. We’ll have a Christian that’s been working with those in Sri Lanka from the Easter bombings that took place in that country. And we’ll have a Muslim here from New Zealand who was part of those who were attacked in the mosque attacks at Christchurch and other places in New Zealand. Probably the best known people that are persecuted for their faith that’ll be here will be Nadia Murad. She’s the Nobel Peace Prize winner that is a Yazidi from northern Iraq and, of course, unfortunately experienced the horrific genocide that ISIS did towards the Yazidis and Christians in northern Iraq. And then Andrew Brunson will be here speaking as well– Andrew Brunson the U.S. pastor that was held in a Turkish prison for two years and was eventually released.

Our effort is to stir actions. We want to see really a global grassroots movement around religious freedom. We want to get the various faiths to bind together and to stand for each other’s freedom of religion. Our effort is and towards a common theology. There is there is no common theology in this discussion but it is towards a common human right. And that human right is that everybody is entitled to be able to practice their faith peacefully and now without fear. And this is a universal human right that was set forth in the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. It’s in most countries’ constitution, and yet 80 percent of the world experiences some form of religious persecution. And often for religious minorities in various countries it can be deadly. The number of killings that have taken place of people of faith is unfortunately very high. A recent British report had Christian persecution and deaths at the highest levels ever. So we really hope to start this grassroots movement.

We’ll be pushing to have religious freedom roundtables established in countries around the world. This is where various religious adherents get together to stand for each other’s religious freedom. We anticipate and hope there’ll be announcements of follow-on meetings in various regions around the world where other countries will host gatherings like this to host in a regional context or a specific issue context things about religious freedom like reform of textbooks so that religious minorities aren’t denigrated. 

We want this grassroots movement to be global. As I mentioned to uniting the faiths to stand for each other– every faith that’s a majority somewhere is a minority somewhere else. And we hope we can get this grassroots movement somewhat like the human trafficking effort has really gone global and in a grassroots way as well.

We anticipate there’ll be announcements by various governments including our own on the Ministerial Day, Thursday July 18th , of various actions to take place. In addition to all of this there will be 80 sidebar events done around the margins of the ministerial. These are sponsored by activist groups. There’ll also be a second stage because we can’t accommodate everybody here at State Department, we’ve had to close registration several weeks ago because we’re just over capacity. But the second stage will be done at George Washington University and hosted there by the Loeb Institute. 

They’ll also have a youth track and that second stage can accommodate the overflow. If you’re interested in finding out more about the sidebar events now you can go on the international religious freedom roundtable website. That website is IRFroundtable.org. Again that website is IRFroundtable.org to get the list of these sidebar events and they really span a gamut and span the various faiths and issues as well.

The entire event will start actually on Monday July 15th with the start with a meeting of the victims at the Holocaust Museum followed by a private tour and a ceremony there. We’ll have a victim of the Holocaust speak briefly at that. I found this to be a very moving event last year when some of the victims of religious persecution saw pictures on the wall that the uniforms that looked like the uniforms they were in in prison and one of them said, “Evil is not very imaginative it’s doing the same thing.” And it’ll end on the Thursday evening at the African-American museum with a large reception at that time. We’re very excited about the event. This is a major foreign policy initiative of the United States. It’s an issue that has not gotten its due as far as focus around the world, particularly given really the amount of persecution that’s been taking place in recent years and growing. And we want to push back on that and start a movement pushing the other way. We hope that this really is the launch of that global grassroots movement for people to stand for religious freedom and to stand for each other’s religious freedom. With that let me open up for questions.

Question: We intend to have some level of freedom, religious freedom as compared to the past, depending on which part of the country you come from I can identify or I can assume what kind of religion you practice. So how dangerous do you think that would be or what are the opportunities for the country community as we are experiencing some ethnically motivated clashes in the country, you might be aware of that. So how does it affect the freedom of religion that people are identified by, their religion is identified by the topography that they are from ?

Ambassador Brownback: Well it’s a good question and it’s one we see happening in various parts of the world. I’d say that the key then in a situation like what you’re in is this notion that we should stand for each other’s religious freedom. So if you’re in a part of the country where Christianity is the dominant faith but you’re a Muslim, the Christian should stand- the Christian leaders in particular – we want and need to have standing for the right of the Muslims to practice their faith freely and without fear. And if you’re in the Muslim part of the country or tribal area we need the Muslim leaders to stand up for the Christians’ right to practice their faith freely and to protect them. 

That’s why we’re asking for these religious freedom round tables to be stood up in places all over the world. We stood one up in Nigeria earlier this year and we’re very hopeful for that. Nigeria is a country that has many different divides and one of them is religious divide. But that may not be what powers the violence but it can be a factor and often is a factor in the violence and that’s why we really need you know these religions really to practice their faith in that most call for loving one another and caring for one another and certainly respecting each other. 

And we need that to take place and we hope to push that here and push it aggressively because religion is upstream from politics and government. It’s a foundational piece of a society. We need that that religious component to really press for respect and care for people of other faiths and loving people of other faiths.

Question: Will there be representatives of the Uighurs to present their views as survivors of religious persecution? On the other hand, were Chinese officials invited to explain their point of view and what is it you are asking for?

Ambassador Brownback: There will be Uighurs here and presenting their view. The Chinese government was not invited. We invited nations to this that are like-minded, that support religious freedoms, or are aspirational to really engage more religious freedom in their nation. And unfortunately China has had a bad record, is a country of particular concern. In our report that was just issued recently we had a full section on Xinjiang. We have a full section on Tibet. What’s taking place there towards the Tibetan Buddhists. What’s happening to the Uighur Muslims. And we had a large section too on what’s happening to the Chinese Christians particularly the house church and the underground Catholics and on what’s happening to Falun Gong. So for those reasons the Chinese government will not be invited.

Question: A very important challenge to promoting religious freedom in the world is the amount of cooperation among countries and at the moment, as you also know, with the rise of tensions between Iran and the United States, are you hopeful that you can help – the United States – can help improving religious freedom in Iran while we know that the Iranian officials deny any violation of religious freedom in the country?

Ambassador Brownback: I don’t know what that denial is based upon by the Iranian government itself of denying that there’s no religious violations. Iran has one of the worst records on religious freedom in the world. Many of their Iranian religious minorities–  this would include Baha’is, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Sunni, Sufi, Muslims– are facing substantial harassment, imprisonment for their beliefs, blasphemy laws. Proselytizing of Muslims in Iran is punishable by death. Even then really, February of last year, the Iranian authorities detained over 300 Sufi dervishes after police even opened fire on them during a demonstration to protest the house arrest of one of their spiritual leaders. Really the list goes on and on of what’s taking place in Iran. So Iran has shown no interest whatsoever in being an openly religious free country. We’ve stated that in our report. They as well not been invited and we would hope they would step up as a nation and say: “We’re confident enough in our own faith that we can allow other faiths to practice here and be able to work in peace together.” But that’s not been the indication by the Iranian government whatsoever.

Question: Does the United States government have any plan to cooperate or to work on the religious freedom in Iran? What are the main challenges for the United States government?

Ambassador Brownback: I think the main challenge is to get any willingness on the part of the Iranians to even discuss the issue. There’s been no indication whatsoever of interest to address the issue whatsoever by the Iranian officials.

Question: And so is there any plan on behalf of the United States government to overcome this issue?

Ambassador Brownback: They are a country of particular concern. We do have sanctions associated with this to try to press the Iranian government. But at the end of the day it’s going to have to be the Iranian officials themselves that decide that they want to abide by the U.N. Charter of Human Rights and provide for that and if they are unwilling it’s pretty hard, other than the tactics we’ve already used, to press them to do more.

Question: Ambassador you mentioned there will be about 20 people who will make testimony about the religious persecution that they suffered. Among them, is there any North Korean defector who shared their testimony like Ji Hyeona last year?

Ambassador Brownback: Let me look on my list to see if we have somebody from North Korea. We had an excellent, as you noted, presentation last year. Somebody who had been able to escape out of North Korea and was persecuted for her faith.

Yes we do have a North Korean that was able to get out of North Korea that will be speaking to the overall group.

Question: I wanted to ask you a question following up on China and the Vatican in this agreement they have on the appointment of bishops. In the past you’ve been very critical of that saying that it could make religious persecution in China worse. Many people have called for the details of that agreement to be made public so that it can be evaluated. 

Would you still state that religious persecution has been made worse in China because of this deal and do you agree that the terms of that deal should be made public?

Ambassador Brownback: Well it has certainly seemed like to me that it’s in everybody’s interest for the agreement to be made public so people can appraise it and it can be subject to the light of day and people understand what the parameters of it are.

And I don’t know that I can state, or should have, that it’s made things worse. The Chinese government has taken these actions. The Chinese Communist Party has taken these actions, I should refrain, because the regulation of religion has moved from the government to the Chinese Communist Party two years ago and more aggressive actions have happened towards virtually every faith in China.

So I don’t know that it’s made it worse. It certainly, I believe, is true that the agreement should be made public.

Question:  Beyond declarations and conversation, what specific policy accomplishments have been made at the result of the first Ministerial? Especially with continued concerns about the Uighurs in China and the Rohingya in Myanmar ?

Ambassador Brownback: Let me go through some of the things that have come out of the First Ministerial. We’ve started a development track and you’ll see that in full and fuller bloom at this Ministerial where now there are development agencies that are focusing on religious freedom. This particularly happened in northern Iraq working with the redevelopment and repopulating of northern Iraq by Yazidis and Christians that had been run out during ISIS. This is partially a response to a conference it was held by the U.K. at Wilton Park in November of last year and a strong push by AID here in the United States.

We put forward last year the Potomac Plan of Action. And in that as well there was the establishment of an International Religious Freedom Fund. This is to help victims of religious persecution. There is five million dollars in that fund. And we hope to have more funds coming into that and that fund has been offered to some places already for its use. It was offered in Sri Lanka after the Easter bombings. There have been a number of new ambassadors on religious freedom established by other countries to get a stronger effort put forward and more united by more voices.

Last year we saw the U.K., Germany, Mongolia create special religious freedom ambassadors and this year Taiwan appointed one. There was called for in the agreement last year, a global day of remembrance of victims of religious persecution and recommitment really to action. Poland took that forward to the U.N. General Assembly and it’s established August 22nd now as the Day of Remembrance. And then a series of international religious freedom roundtables. I mentioned that in my comments our efforts that we really hope to get this driven down more to nations and grassroots. Ten of those have been stood up around the world and eight are planned. The ten stood up I’ve got a series of those countries that we really hope to get a lot more of those because that’s the effort to get this grassroots in an indigenous setting.

So those are some of the accomplishments out of last year’s Ministerial. And then also I would just point out the number of things that didn’t happen negative in some places has been positive. I was meeting with a Baha’i man in Tennessee and he was saying “Well because of your advocacy there have been fewer Baha’i killed particularly in countries like Iran that have been very brutal to the Baha’i because the international community is watching and pushing back.”

So even though there’s been way too many killings, taking that have happened without the international effort I think there will be, unfortunately, there’d be more.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Science

US Must See Cyber warfare by Russia – State Dept.

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Russia must halt destabilizing cyber activity before the United States will resume cooperation on digital security, US Deputy Assistant Secretary for Cyber and International Communications and Information Policy Robert Strayer told reporters on Thursday.

“We need to see the Russian destabilizing cyber activity… be discontinued. Those are unacceptable,” Strayer said when asked what needs to happen to resume cooperation with Russia.

He also said that Washington was concerned that a Russian company would sign an agreement with Huawei.

Speaking to journalists, the US deputy assistant secretary for cyber security Robert Strayer said that Washington would have to assess the UK’s network itself if Huawei was allowed a role in its 5G infrastructure.

He said: “One of the most important responsibilities that we have as US government officials [is] that we protect our sensitive information, sensitive information that we’ve acquired.

“And people put themselves sometimes at substantial risk to acquire that information. Therefore, we need to ensure that that information is only transmitted on high security environments.
“We consider Huawei to be a substantial risk to the communications infrastructure.

“Therefore any country that deploys Huawei equipment in any part of its 5th generation infrastructure will be a network… that we need to assess ourselves and make a determination about how we will respond going forward.”

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Ambassador Robert L. Strayer, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Cyber and International Communications and Information Policy , BUREAU OF ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS AFFAIRS.

DAS Strayer:  The fifth generation of wireless technology or 5G will be transformative, and we’re all very eager to see that rolled out and for all the potential that it’s going to offer to our economies and to people in our countries.

It’s going to offer up to 100 times faster connections than what the 4th generation of wireless technology provides and with very low latency, that is very low delay in the time it takes to transfer data.  That’s going to enable tens of billions of new devices to be connected to the internet in just the next few years.  That’s what we call the internet of things.  Those connections are going to empower a vast array of new critical services, from autonomous vehicles and transportation systems to telemedicine to automated manufacturing as well as empowering our traditional critical infrastructure such as the provision of electricity through the smart grid.

With all these services relying on 5G the stakes for safeguarding our critical networks could not be higher.  

It’s also important to not there will be increased blurring of the differentiation between the core and the edge of the 5G network.  There will be smart components that are doing computing throughout the network, therefore we need to ensure that we secure the entire network and not just leave untrusted parts of the network to the periphery.  

It’s going to be very important for us to have a risk-based approach to carefully evaluate the hardware and software equipment vendors that are going to supply this next generation of networks.  We should evaluate closely and exclude vendors that are subject to the control of a foreign government that has no meaningful checks and balances on its power to compel cooperation of those vendors with its intelligence and security agencies.

Those vendors, of course, could be asked to play a role in undermining network security to, for example, steal personal information or intellectual property or to conduct espionage or to disrupt the critical services that are going to ride over the top of the sensors and devices that are connected by the 5G network.

I want to take a minute to talk about our particular concern about Chinese vendors and why we’re particularly concerned about those vendors being involved in the supply of 5G networks.

As is made clear by Chinese law, most notably its National Intelligence Law, that Chinese citizens and organizations are required to cooperate with Chinese intelligence and security services.  In addition, the government does not have any meaningful checks or balances on its power in China.  President Xi Jinping has told security officials that China does not intend to walk down the “Western road of constitutionalism, separation of powers or judicial independence.”  Therefore, we are concerned that China could compel actions by network vendors to act against the interests of our citizens or citizens in countries around the world.

We’ve also seen China in recent years undertake troubling uses of data and conduct industrial espionage through cyber means.  Chinese technology firms are already working hand in hand with the Chinese government to suppress freedom of expression and human rights.  They do this through arbitrary surveillance, censorship and targeted restrictions on internet access.

We only need to look at the Xinjiang Province in China to see the use of this technology already where it’s being used to identify individuals based on use of security cameras and artificial intelligence to identify individuals that are then in some cases put into reeducation camps.  We now know there’s more than a million Uighurs that have been placed in reeducation camps for their beliefs.

If Chinese companies continue to build the underlying 5G infrastructure they will be in a better position to take advantage of their access to this data.

We also know that China was behind one of the largest thefts of information from companies as was attributed to them in December of last year.  What was known as the Cloud Hopper attacks were Chinese attacks from the Ministry of State Security that compromised global-managed service providers and cloud providers.  That gave them access to large companies’ entire networks of information.  Some of that information was then supplied to other Chinese companies in order for them to benefit economically.

Next I’d like to turn just briefly to what the United States has done.  

On May 15th to secure our networks President Trump signed an Executive Order entitled Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain.  This Executive Order allows the Secretary of Commerce to prohibit transactions involving information communications technology that could be controlled by or subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign adversary and that pose an unacceptable risk to our national security.  We’re now in the implementation phase of that executive order with regulations to come in the coming months.

Also on that same day the United States added Huawei to what’s called the Restricted Entities List.  Huawei was added to this list because of its years of supplying, in violation of international sanctions, years of supplying telecommunications equipment to Iran and then being deceitful about its practice of supplying that technology to Iran.

Under the entities listing, license can be granted.  So the Commerce Department announced almost immediately that there would be temporary general licenses that U.S. companies could use to continue providing limited services and sales to Huawei.  In addition, U.S. companies can apply for export licenses to provide service and sales that were not captured in that temporary general license.

Under the recent announcement by President Trump, Commerce will now take prompt action to issue certain additional licenses to companies that apply which permit transactions that will not pose a risk to our national security and that are not contrary to U.S. foreign policy interests.  In general they will be for widely available commodity chip sets and software and tools that are generally available to the public.  The idea here is that we should not penalize U.S. companies when there is already a worldwide market for devices that are being sold to Huawei.  Our companies should not be at a disadvantage to others that are already selling to Huawei.  So licenses that pose no national security threats, and they’re not contrary to our U.S. foreign policy can be considered under the entities listing still.

I also would just like to highlight a couple of recent events.  For some time Huawei has maintained that they would not be able to be compelled by the National Intelligence Law of China to comply with the mandates of the Chinese Communist party and the Chinese state, despite there being a lack of independent judiciary review for them to object to such requirements.  A researcher recently identified a number of employees of Huawei who also have close links with the Peoples Liberation Army, the military in China, as well as the intelligence services.  

Earlier this year the Huawei Oversight Board in the United Kingdom found that there were hundreds of vulnerabilities in Huawei’s products.  In addition, they determined that there were serious and systematic defects in Huawei’s software engineering and cyber security competence.  

Those findings were recently buttressed by a cyber security firm called Finite State in the United States, which studied firmware on a number of Huawei devices and found that they were of substantially lesser quality from a cyber security perspective than their competitors.  In fact they found there were hard coded passwords in the firmware as well as unsafe cryptographic practices in the firmware itself.  Those vulnerabilities collectively amount to not just a back door but above door.  That is vulnerabilities that are so significant that an adversary could easily take advantage of these, as well as because they’re so vulnerable and are filled with so many flaws, they could then have plausible deniability that they knew that a particular vulnerability was being used for exploitation of networks. 

Question:  What does the U.S. think the release of Piotr D from detention in Poland?  Is it fair to say that our ally in Poland is taking a lighter approach to Huawei in the wake of the G20 Summit?

DAS Strayer:  I can’t comment on what’s in the minds of the Polish government and why they take legal actions.  I will also note that at the same time there was arrested a Huawei employee that was charged with that same type of espionage in Poland.  I did read that article that Drew wrote yesterday, and at the end it does state that, I think incorrectly, that Huawei is the only company prepared to roll out 5G.  A number of U.S. telecom operators are all going to roll out 5G, have already begun.  There’s more than roughly two dozen trials by both, commercial roll outs actually, by Verizon and AT&T in the United States, and they’re using other vendors, others than Huawei — that is they’re using Ericsson in Sweden; Nokia in Finland; and Samsung from South Korea.  We are moving ahead with 5G roll outs and it’s estimated by the trade association, GSMA, for the wireless industry that by 2025 the U.S. will have 50 percent of its wireless connections being 5G whereas in Asia it will be roughly 17 percent that will be 5G.  So we think we will be leading the world using trusted technology vendors.

Question:  The professional dialogue and cooperation on digital security between the U.S. and Russia.  We used to have that IT was suspended by the American side.  So how soon do you expect it to be renewed?  What needs to happen for that?  Do you need to talk on issues such as 5G as you described?  Or maybe others?

DAS Strayer:  From our side we’ve been very clear, talking to the most senior Russian officials, that we need to see the Russia destabilizing cyber activities be discontinued.  Those are unacceptable from an international perspective.  

I’d also note that I understand that one of the Russian operators recently concluded an agreement with Huawei.  As I noted in my opening remarks authoritarian states are using Huawei to enable surveillance networks and other ways of depriving people of their individual liberties, so it’s quite concerning that a Russian company would be signing an agreement with Huawei for a full commercial deployment.

Question:  Your recent visit to the UK, what’s your assessment of the current pause or indecision by the UK government as to Huawei’s role?  And do you expect a change in stance under Boris Johnson should he succeed Theresa May?

DAS Strayer:  We’re talking about our views around the world with a wide range of governments.  We always emphasize that it’s the sovereign decision of those governments at the end of the day about how they want to protect their citizens.  We, of course, have a substantial interest in the United States because we’re so interconnected with all these governments and we share sensitive information with those governments.  So we want to talk with them in a frank way about our security concerns, so hopefully we can come to understandings that will meet our mutual interests.

So I don’t have any real comment on the United Kingdom’s processes, but just to say that we are in active dialogue with a number of countries around the world.

Question:  Previously you said that the U.S. would have to reassess its relationship, its information sharing relationship with any country that has Huawei as part of its network.  Does that extend to the UK?  How do you anticipate information sharing with the UK would change if the UK decided to have Huawei gear involved at either the core or the edge of its infrastructure?

DAS Strayer:  One of the most important responsibilities that we have as U.S. government officials, that we protect our sensitive information.  Sensitive information that we’ve acquired.  And people put themselves sometimes at substantial risk to acquire that information.  Therefore, we need to ensure that that information is only transmitted on high security environments.  We consider Huawei to be a substantial risk to the communications infrastructure.  Therefore any country that deploys Huawei equipment in any part of its 5th generation infrastructure will be a network, a set of systems that we need to assess ourselves and make a determination about how we will respond going forward.

Question:  The remark that Senior Trade Advisor Pete Navarro made a couple of days ago saying that U.S. firms would likely get licenses to sell less than $1 billion products to Huawei which is roughly less than 10 percent that Huawei was said to have bought in 2018.  Could you comment on that amount? Also, how are software components, androids updates, are they going to be okay in the future?

DAS Strayer:  Thanks for that question.  I can’t really offer more than I said earlier.  It’s not possible for me at the State Department to put a number on what will be licensed.  Licensing decisions can occur over time and so the next set of licenses will shed light on which additional products and services can be sold to Huawei.

As I said, widely available commodity chip sets, integrated circuits, as well as software and tools that are generally available to the public on the market already are the types of software and hardware that we will license, of course if they do not have any impact on our national security or foreign policy interests.

Question:  You’ve talked about 5G, core, networks, where the intelligence sits and the use of trusted suppliers.  Have you put any pressure on governments around the world in the field of broadband networks as well?  Obviously they’re a big supplier in that set of equipment too.  Some of it considered passive, some of it less.  Is it only really 5G that you’re concerned about?

DAS Strayer:  It’s important I guess to say that as part of our overall emphasis on the importance of protecting all of our information and communication technology, we believe there needs to be a risk-based approach to it, and that includes looking at the supply chain.  The suppliers and the equipment that goes into all ICT networks, as you mentioned.  Whether that’s for a 4G network or 5G or other types of technology infrastructure.  So we think a risk-based approach needs to be applied to that that includes looking at supply chain components.  It’s just that on 5G we’ve made the determination that no part of it can come from, within the United States, come from a vendor that is in China subject to their National Intelligence Law.

Question:  President Ramaphosa, our South African President, had expressed some sentiment last week about how the real reason for the U.S. restricting Huawei’s 5G sales and operations was because they were jealous of the fact that they have been overtaken technologically.  And I just want to know, if you haven’t already answered the question, if you could address that. But also in the sense of a follow-up, do you have as U.S. all the same technology that would otherwise come from Huawei in the 5G department?

DAS Strayer:  There’s a worldwide market for 5G equipment including what they call the radio access network.  The other key suppliers outside of China are in Sweden, Finland and South Korea, those being Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung.  The United States telecom operators, the largest ones here, are not going to use any Chinese suppliers.  They’re going to use those other three trusted vendors.  And we think we’re going to be leading the world in commercial deployments.  There’s almost two dozen commercial deployments in cities for both our two largest carriers — Verizon and AT&T — already.  Really the two first commercial deployments were in the United States and in South Korea.  So in no way do we think that Huawei has superior technology.  In fact when we look at what the objective source for that seems to be, it is the subjective source of Huawei itself asserting that it has the best technology.  There are some, I think, telecom operators who have repeated that point, but they would cite back, I think, to the attestations they received form Huawei that they have the best technology.  We’d encourage telecom operators in countries to look at the other options that are available.

At the end of the day, this is technology that we have somewhat had around for many years, whether we’re talking about computing servers, storage devices, networking equipment, radios, antennas.  Those are all equipment that can be found in a number of suppliers.  They are integrated by those three larger ones including the Chinese five large ones that I mentioned just a minute ago.

Question:  You talked about the administration now permitting some sales from U.S. companies to Huawei, but also concern about Huawei’s rolling out 5G.  And you also — sorry, I was wondering if you could just expand a little bit about Huawei’s role in Xinjiang because you also mentioned concern over China’s use of surveillance there, maligned use of surveillance.  And in connection to that, should U.S. companies be doing any business at all with a firm that is involved in surveillance in Xinjiang? 

DAS Strayer:  Our understanding is that Huawei, among a set of other Chinese companies, tend to form an ecosystem that is used for both the communications devices as well as the computing power that’s necessary to undertake surveillance, to undertake other activities as well, such as the assigning of social credit scores that we’ve seen in China.  So we advise companies that they should be very cautious about the end uses for their technology, that they’re not used in ways that are not consistent with our Western values.  They’re not going to be used to violate people’s rights to privacy, and for our European listeners, not being used for ways that might violate GDPR.  I would note that the founder of Huawei recently noted that it would take at least five years for them to comply with GDPR.  He said that in an interview to the Financial Times last week.

So we advise companies to think carefully about how technology might be used by authoritarian states if they work with certain companies.

Our understanding generally is that Huawei and other Chinese companies tend to work together on these projects.

Question:  UK mobile networks have decided to leave Huawei out of the core networks, and you today have stressed that both and the more peripheral equipment needs to be considered as well.  Huawei has naturally pushed back at the idea that radio access network equipment is peripheral.  But I just wanted to get an idea from you about how seriously mobile networks should be considering Chinese involvement in this edge equipment?

DAS Strayer:  As I said, in the 5G network because of the way it’s architected, because there’s going to be smart computing components throughout it, components are going to provide the ability to have autonomous vehicles with very low latency, that is the time it takes from the sensor detecting something to it being transmitted to the computing facility.  So you’re going to have to have that computing closer to the user, to the vehicle.  The same way with telemedicine.  So all these critical things will rely on computing near the edge.

We think that any of that computing, any of that very sensitive data that’s generated needs to be only on vendors’ equipment that we trust.  Trusted vendors.  Trusted vendors from the perspective of not being able to be subject to a National Intelligence Law like they are in China, to undertake activities that are of interest only to the Chinese government and its intelligence agencies, from the perspective of the best of corporate practices, for example having an independent board of directors subject to our Western legal systems to ensure compliance with privacy laws.

So we think that any of those types of equipment, wherever they might reside in a network are areas that we need to have secure vendors providing, and because of the way that the future 5G network will be architected and roll out as new use cases are developed, there really is no part of the network that will not potentially have the computing and the access to that very sensitive data of the future that will really empower, that the underlying infrastructure will power all types of new critical uses in the years to come.  So we need to make sure every component is secure and is sort of under a governance structure that is consistent with our Western values.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Crimes

$5 million reward offered for Slovenian drug family – US

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

A Slovenian drug family is on the run from federal authorities and now a $5 million reward is being offered for each of their captures.

Authorities say the investigation started more than 10 years ago before the Dark Web and still, this family had more than 200 sites advertising and selling illegal steroids.

“What we quickly found out when we took on the case was that literally millions of dosages of anabolic steroids were being shipped into the United States, including Massachusetts,” said Andrew Lelling, U.S. Attorney for Mass.

“What we realized was that he was probably one of the largest steroid traffickers in the world and was making tens of millions of dollars from this trade,” said Lelling.

Lelling says these fugitives were caught but evaded European law enforcement officials and are believed to be in Slovenia.

“People need to, one, be careful what they’re buying online. Two, be careful what your kids are buying on the internet. So we shut this guy down, right now he’s a fugitive but we don’t think he’s active. But there’s ten people to replace him,” said Lelling.

The Karners allegedly hid all the cash they have earned using corporate shell accounts and payment methods, including Western Union/MoneyGram.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Kevin Scully, Regional Director of the Drug Enforcement Administration and Andrew Lelling, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts Narcotics Reward Program.

Mr. Lelling:  I’m the United States Attorney in the District of Massachusetts in the United States, which means that essentially I’m a prosecutor with the U.S. Justice Department.

We’re here today to publicize the fact that these three targets, the Karners — Mihael, Lenka and Matevz — have been added to the U.S. Department of State’s Narcotics Reward Program, meaning that the U.S. government will pay up to $5 million for information leading to the arrest of one or more of these targets.

As some of you know already, this investigation and prosecution out of the United States has been going on for many years.  It was really a model of coordination, both within the U.S. government, meaning differing agencies; and between the U.S. government and Central and Eastern European governments.  We’ve been looking at the Karners since the early 2000’s when at the request of European authorities we began to look into the Karners’ activities which essentially involved using dozens of web sites to sell steroid dosage units by the millions into the United States and other countries.  The money made from this activity was laundered through corporate shells worldwide, eventually making its way back to the Karners who are Slovenian nationals.

This kind of investigation requires extensive cooperation among governments which happened here.  The Karners were charged by U.S. authorities in 2010.  Mihael Karner and his wife were arrested by Austrian authorities I believe in 2011 or 2012 but ultimately released on bail after which the Karners became fugitives, returning to their native Slovenia.  They have been there ever since.

In the interim, U.S. authorities have looked into seizing assets of the Karners.  There’s been some success there, some not.  And at this point we feel that a public reward is a prudent step because we’ve taken most other available steps.  We need the public, the European public, to help us collect information that might lead to the arrest of these three people.  Often tips from the public are the best way to gather intel on the location and activities of the people we’re trying to find.

We appreciate you all joining us today, and of course I appreciate the continuing cooperation of foreign authorities and also especially the DEA in Europe and here.

With that, I’ll hand it off to Kevin Scully who is the Regional Director for DEA in Europe.

Mr. Scully:  It’s a privilege to be here in Belgium representing the United States Drug Enforcement Administration.  DEA has a tremendous global presence with approximately 90 offices in 70 countries.  Here in Europe we currently have 15 offices where we work closely with our host country counterparts, and recently the United States Congress approved DEA to open a 16th European office in Kyiv, Ukraine, which we’ll be doing in the next year.

Since our inception in the early 1970s, DEA has enjoyed bilateral and multilateral relationships with many European law enforcement counterparts in the region.  DEA’s priority is the safety and security of American citizens and the citizens of our partner nations.  Together we target the transnational criminal organizations that threaten our countries and the rule of law.  The Karners are one example of those organizations impacting both the United States and Europe with their international steroid distribution network and their drug money laundering organization.

DEA realizes that we are stronger when we work together with other agencies, both domestically and internationally.  This investigation spanned multiple DEA offices including DEA in Boston, the Special Operations Division, as well as multiple foreign offices that DEA has in Vienna, Rome, Zagreb and Bangkok.  In addition, DEA has worked extensively with the United States Attorney’s Office in the District of Massachusetts, the United States Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, and our European partners in gathering evidence against this organization which has resulted in multiple U.S. indictments.

Now with the assistance of the United States Department of State Interagency Narcotic Rewards Program, we have a bounty of $5 million per individual being offered for information leading to their arrest.  With the public’s assistance we can bring these individuals to justice.

Again, thank you for being on the call today and we look forward to answering any questions you may have.

Question:  I hear that a lot of people in Slovenia, at least in [Brianna] I think, know where the designated persons live and then probably Slovenian police have the same information.  So do you cooperate with Slovenian police on that?  And if you do, why there has been no arrest yet?  Is that not a criminal activity in Slovenia?  can they be extradited from Slovenia to U.S.?  Do we have a treaty?  If not, what other avenues can you pursue once you get the information on their whereabouts?  I mean without cooperation with Slovenian law enforcement.

Mr. Lelling:  You’ve put your finger on a key issue here, which is that so far the Slovenian government has not been willing to take the Karners into custody and extradite them to the United States.  That is why the Karners sought refuge in Slovenia and stay there.

I agree with your point, which is that it’s my understanding as well that the Karners are not hiding in Slovenia.  I assume they’re living openly in Slovenia.  I’ve seen Mihael Karner on Slovenian TV stations.  But we would need the Slovenian authorities to be willing to cooperate with us to extradite them.

Short of that, it would require us having information on the Karners’ travel plans, because if they were to leave Slovenia then using the cooperation of surrounding countries we then could have them arrested, much as the Austrians did at the request of U.S. authorities in 2012.

Question:  Do you have an idea of the size of this organization?  And does this organization have links with transnational organized crime?  For example with groups of Mexico and other countries?

Mr. Scully:  We know the Karners to have been a very successful organization, sending steroids not only to the United States but to other parts of the world.  And we see that they were very successful and they made millions of dollars in their illegal activity.

What we also see here in Europe and across the world are these different transnational organizations working with each other.  So it’s very common in these type of investigations where we see different organizations from different countries and different parts of the world working together, breaking the law, and making a lot of money in the drug trafficking.

Mr. Scully:  In this investigation it’s a steroid investigation, so we don’t have links in this investigation relating to Colombians or Mexicans.

Question:  Slovenia does not extradite their people.  So you are actually willing to have information if the Karners family is going to travel abroad like Italy for example, and you need that kind of information, right?

Mr. Lelling:  I think that kind of information would be especially useful to us.  That’s correct.

Question:  But in this case here are some media speculations.  Would someone get a reward if he could, I don’t know, like kidnap them and took them to Italy?  Because that means criminal act in Slovenia.

Mr. Lelling:  I should be clear that we are not encouraging anybody to commit a criminal act in order to try and get this reward.  So no, we’re not asking anyone in Slovenia to kidnap the Karners and take them to a different country.

I know it’s something of a strange circumstance because the Karners are living openly in Slovenia, but we find it unlikely that they never leave Slovenia.  And so I think the most likely useful information for us is information about the Karners being elsewhere, leaving Slovenia for some reason.

Question:  Do you have maybe some tips that they are leaving Slovenia or something like that?  Because we, our journalist was just speaking with Mr. Karner and he told that he will never leave Slovenia.

Mr. Lelling:  I think that that’s unlikely.  Slovenia, I think the issues that the Karners have is that Slovenia begins to feel very small if you’re told you’re never allowed to leave it, and so I actually do not believe both based on common sense and based on some information we’ve seen in the past, that the Karners never leave Slovenia.  I suspect that they do.

Question:  Why now?  What is nowadays different than it was nine years ago or for last nine years?  Did some facts change that you are offering a reward up to $15 million for the whole family?

Mr. Lelling:  The short answer is no.  Nothing in particular has changed.  It’s more that we’ve done what we can do.  U.S. authorities invested a lot of resources into this investigation.  We were able to charge the Karners.  We had them through the Austrians in custody and then they got away.  So since then we’ve looked into issues of seizing assets.  We’ve added the Karners to what we call the OFAC list through the U.S. Department of Treasury.  We’ve sort of done what we can do short of offering a reward.  But there’s nothing that happened recently that prompted us to offer the reward.  It’s really just the next step you would do in a major case where you’re trying to find out the location of a fugitive.

Question:  You mentioned earlier you’re cooperating with other law enforcement offices from European Union.  In the past there have been some activities about steroid traffickings in Italy and Great Britain, if I go right.  The question is, since Slovenia delivers the citizens to European Union, are you planning to work that way so you could possibly try to get them extradited to USA from some other European countries?

Mr. Lelling:  If they were to physically appear in another European country, with that country’s assistance we could have them extradited to the United States.  The problem is that in Slovenia we can’t really do that.  But over the course of this case we have worked with Great Britain, we have worked with Italy, we’ve worked with Slovenia, we’ve worked with Austria, we’ve worked with many countries in Western, Central and Eastern Europe.  On this case and actually also on a related case that we successfully prosecuted.

So the short answer to your question is that if they travel within the European Union we can have them extradited by whatever country they travel to.  The issues is them staying in Slovenia, because Slovenian authorities are not willing to extradite them.

Question:  So what does someone have to do to get the award?  So do you only need some kind of information?  Photos? 

Mr. Lelling:  There’s a lot of different things that I think could lead to getting the reward.  I think the phrase that we use is information leading to the arrest of one or more of these people.  So the State Department in the U.S. decides whether it was information that led to the arrest, and they would just have to consider it as it happens.

I don’t think I can give you a really specific checklist about what actions would or would not qualify for the reward.

Kevin, do you have any thoughts on that?  Anything to add?

Mr. Scully:  I think the message that we really want people to understand is, the Karners are fugitives and we’re not giving up.  And we want to see them arrested and then brought to justice in the United States.  So if anyone has information that can identify their location, we have a process in place where we want them to contact the, for example, if it’s in Europe contact the United States Embassy or the Consulate in that country with the information.  Then if that information leads to the arrest, then the process of people receiving a reward is through the committee back through the Department of State.  There’s a committee and the Secretary of State make a determination of that information that was provided which led to the arrest.

Again, we said it before, but we’ll say it again.  We’re not asking anyone to commit any crime or to violate the law.  It’s very simple.  If the Karners, who are fugitives, are traveling outside of Slovenia and you have that information, report it to the Embassy, let’s get them arrested, and then you will be rewarded.

Question:  My question is about the charges actually.  So is it the sale of these illicit steroids or also money laundering?  And on the steroids, do you have any information where they are, where they come from, where they are put together and how the entire scheme works? 

Mr. Lelling:  As to the first, they are charged with distribution of steroids and with money laundering.  They’re charged with both ends of the operation.

When we were investigating this, what we determined was the way this worked was for the most part the Karners were receiving the ingredients for anabolic steroids from China, among other places.  They would assemble the anabolic steroids in a factory in Moldova, though I think perhaps elsewhere also, and then they would sell them over the internet through a network of re-mailers.  What that means is if you got on the internet and you bought steroids from one of the Karners’ web sites, the drugs would not be mailed directly from the factory or directly from an address in Slovenia.  The Karners would have other people spread around Europe do the mailing instead in order to make it harder to determine where the Karners were and where the drugs were being made.

Also when packages were coming through U.S. Customs, if packages are coming from certain countries they will receive less scrutiny from U.S. Customs than from other countries, and I think they took advantage of that as well.

Question:  I was just kind of wondering, in the past what kind of success rate has the NRP seen?  How successful has it been in international DEA investigations?

Mr. Lelling:  I think it varies.  I’m going to hand this one off to Kevin, though, who I think probably knows more about the overall success of the program.

Mr. Scully:  The program’s been around for a while.  It was established by Congress back in 1986.  It’s just another tool that we use in our investigations, but it’s been very successful.  It’s led to major traffickers being arrested, and as a result those people that provided information received the reward.  So we think this is an effective tool for us to use in this investigation.  The Karners are fugitives.  They were identified as major traffickers.  They made a lot of money in the business.  And we’re doing everything we can to try to bring them to justice.

We know the Department of State has paid over $130 million in rewards to individuals who have come forward in the past that provided information that led to the arrest or conviction of major narcotic traffickers.

Also this program is successful because the U.S. government will ensure confidentiality to those individuals who are providing the information.  And if appropriate, there’s even been instances where we may relocate those people and their families.

So it’s a very effective tool, and we hope that it’s effective in this investigation.

Question:  I was wondering is this kind of criminal activity still going on?  And Mr. Lelling, you were talking about the asset seizure, right?  Can you elaborate a little more, where did you confiscate what, maybe in Slovenia or somewhere else.  And what penalty is expected if they are convicted?

Mr. Lelling:  As to whether this activity is still going on, the short answer is I don’t know.  It may be, it may be not.  The Karners being in fugitive status, our primary desire is to have them back on the charges that we have existing, so I couldn’t tell you sitting here now whether he’s still involved in the steroid trade.

As to assets, we tried to seize certain assets of the Karners in Slovenia.  That was ultimately unsuccessful.  It looked promising initially, but it did not work out.  We were able to seize a yacht belonging to the Karners that was docked in Croatia, and we liquidated that yacht.  We auctioned it off and we have the proceeds of it.  Also the Karners own a ski lodge in Austria, which is under a modified form of restraints, meaning it may be forfeited by us, we may liquidate it.  Right now I think it’s still available for use by the Karners, but they are not allowed to sell it.  The Austrian government is preventing them from selling it.  And if in the future the Karners are convicted of a criminal offense, we will be able to liquidate the ski lodge.

So on the asset side, it’s complex.  There were many different kinds of assets and they’re all at different stages.

As to the penalties they’re facing, it’s up to 20 years on each charge in the U.S. indictment.  Whether they would actually face that amount of time I can’t really comment.  Often people do not.  But as far as the United States government is concerned these are serious felony charges.  It would be tough to overstate the amount of anabolic steroid dosages that the Karners distributed into the United States through their activity.

Mr. Scully:  Just the last remark would be that we’re reaching out to the public.  We need your assistance to locate the Karners when they are outside of Slovenia, and reach out to the U.S. Embassy in those countries.  We look forward to hearing from everyone.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Terrorist

US Treasury imposes sanctions on Hezbollah MPs

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Treasury Department on Tuesday targeted a Hezbollah security official and two members of Lebanon’s parliament suspected of using their positions to further the aims of the Tehran-backed militia and “bolster Iran’s malign activities.”

The US Department of the Treasury’s said they designated the Hezbollah political and security figures for “leveraging their privileged positions to facilitate Hezbollah’s malign agenda and do Iran’s bidding.”

“Hezbollah uses its operatives in Lebanon’s parliament to manipulate institutions in support of the terrorist group’s financial and security interests, and to bolster Iran’s malign activities,” said US offical Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence.

“Hezbollah threatens the economic stability and security of Lebanon and the wider region, all at a cost to the Lebanese people. The United States will continue to support efforts of the Lebanese government to protect its institutions from exploitation by Iran and its terrorist proxies, and to secure a more peaceful and prosperous future for Lebanon,” official said.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference on terrorist funding in the Middle East.

Senior Official 1:  Good afternoon.  Today the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, took action against three Hezbollah political and security figures.  Specifically we designated two Hezbollah members of Parliament — Muhammad Hasan Ra’d and Amin Sherri; and a Hezbollah security official, Wafiq Safa.

This action addresses our top tier Hezbollah strategic priorities of targeting individuals and entities that enable Hezbollah to advance its terrorist objectives and disrupting and exposing Hezbollah involvement and affiliation with violent and criminal activity.

This specific action exposes Hezbollah’s abuse of Lebanon democracy and manipulation of the Lebanese political apparatus, protects Hezbollah’s own power, and bolsters its influence.  Hezbollah continues to use its position to pursue its own interests and those of its primary benefactor, Iran, all at the cost to the Lebanese people.

With today’s designation, this administration will have designated 50 Hezbollah-related individuals and entities since 2017.  That’s on top of the over a thousand designations that we’ve had related to Iran.

Let me provide you with a brief description of the three individuals we designated today, and of course we have more details in our press release.

First, Amin Sherri.  Amin Sherri is a Hezbollah member of Parliament.  As such he represents the maligned interests of Hezbollah as opposed to the communities and citizens he pledged to stand up for.

As a financial interlocutor, Sherri’s role has included influencing decision-making and pressuring financial institutions in Lebanon to assist Hezbollah in limiting the impact of U.S. Treasury designations. 

Just last year Sherri threatened violence against bank officials and their family members after the bank froze the accounts of a U.S. designated Hezbollah financier.  This behavior, of course, is unacceptable for anyone, much less a member of Parliament who instead of advancing the interests of the Lebanese people that he supposedly represents, is using Mafia-like behavior.  The threats of violence he uses against Lebanese citizens demonstrate the length to which Hezbollah will go to preserve its interests at the continual cost to the Lebanese people, stability in the region, and stability within the Lebanese financial sector.

I would also refer you to the picture that we published in our press release about Amin Sherri where you will see Qasem Soleimani with his arm around Sherri.  What more do you need to know about him?

Second, we designated Mahammad Hasan Ra’d.  Ra’d is a member of Hezbollah’s Shura Council.  He has been a member of Hezbollah’s Shura Council since 2009.  As we have noted before, the Shura Council is Hezbollah’s highest command and is responsible for deciding religious and strategic matters and has overall administrative planning and policy-making powers.  In other words, he is also a key Hezbollah decision-maker.

Ra’d is a member of Parliament in Lebanon.  He is the head of the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc in the Lebanese Parliament, which is Hezbollah’s parliamentary bloc.  In the Shura Council he heads up their parliamentary council, which is one of five subordinate councils under the Shura Council.  This specific council ensures that parliamentary representatives like Ra’d himself carry out Hezbollah’s decisions and policies in the parliament.

Like Sherri and Wafiq Safa who I will address in a minute, Ra’d also has ties to designated Hezbollah financiers.  In fact, in 2017 he met with two designated Hezbollah businessmen, Adham Tabaja and Husayn Ali Faour who was OFAC designated in 2015 to ensure Hezbollah’s funding mechanism would remain open despite sanctions.

Next we have Wafiq Safa.  Safa is the head of Hezbollah’s security apparatus.  In this role, he is responsible for coordinating between Hezbollah and the Lebanese security agencies.  He has exploited Lebanese institutions to advance Hezbollah maligned objectives.  He facilitated among other things the entry of illegal drugs and weapons into Beirut.  Hezbollah relies on Safa for a very specific reason.  He can facilitate the passage of illicit items without scrutiny.

His corrupt actions directly threaten the security of Lebanon and its people.

Today’s action also highlights the extent to which Hezbollah is entrenched in the Lebanese political fabric.  Hezbollah has been able to exploit Lebanon’s political apparatus to embed members at several levels.  This action today, once again, points to the false distinction between Hezbollah’s so-called political wing and military wing.

The group that is running for political office is the very same group that is responsible for numerous attacks worldwide against the United States, Israel, Jewish communities, other European and Latin American targets, and the Lebanese people.  They are one and the same.  In fact, as you’ll see in the press release, Ra’d himself declared, “Hezbollah is a military resistance party.  There is no separation between politics and resistance.” 

Just this year the UK designated the entirety of the terrorist group.  We believe it is time for other nations around the world to recognize that there is no distinction between Hezbollah’s political and military wing.  To expose this terrorist organization for what it is in confronting its networks and its sponsors and in mobilizing a global response to counter the threat it poses to the civilized world.

To any member of Hezbollah considering running for office, know that you will not be able to hide beneath the cover of political office.  This administration will continue targeting Hezbollah businessmen, its companies, its operatives, its officials and anyone who facilitates its activities, and we will use all available tools including sanctions to degrade Hezbollah’s capabilities and mitigate its threats to Lebanon, the region and the world.

Senior Official 2:  As my Treasury colleague emphasized, today’s action shows that there is truly no distinction between Hezbollah’s military and so-called political wing.  Hezbollah’s politicians use their positions to enable Hezbollah’s military activities, terrorist operations and illicit business enterprises.

Today is also a new kind of action because it is aimed partially at Hezbollah members of parliament, but the documented behaviour of the two members of parliament that are designated today shows that they’re not really members of parliament.  They’re in actuality thug enforcers who systematically intimidate other actors in the government of Lebanon and in the Lebanese private sector and they’ve done so with impunity for many years.

Their behavior which is documented today also shows that they’re money-launderers and sanctions evaders, and they’ve behaved as though they’re untouchable, but today’s actions show they and others like them are not untouchable.

For Wafiq Safa in particular, he has a special role within Hezbollah and within Lebanon.  His special role is that of an intimidator of the Lebanese government’s security institutions.  He is the enforcer with regard to other Lebanese security institutions on behalf of Hezbollah and also on behalf of the IRGC Quds Force.  But all three of the Hezbollah members who are being designated today have been key enablers of Hezbollah’s military and terrorist interventions around the region.  First and foremost in Syria, but also in Yemen, Iraq and beyond.  And all three are key actors in the broader network that is run by Qasem Soleimani and the IRGC Quds Force, so they represent the actors who allow the Iranian regime to reach inside Lebanon and use it as a particularly destabilizing platform.

Senior Official 3:  From an NSC perspective, once again, it’s always our pleasure to thank our indefatigable colleagues at Treasury who have been the tip of the spear that is President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran.

I’m also pleased to have our friends from State here as well, demonstrating that this campaign is a joint exercise supported across the administration as we harness all of our diplomatic and economic tools to further the President’s Iran policy.

With this action to designate three key Hezbollah figures including two members of the Lebanese parliament for their open affiliation with Hezbollah, the gloves are officially off, to paraphrase Secretary Pompeo.  Lebanon cannot have the stable, prosperous and secure future the people of Lebanon deserve when the maligned proxy of another country, in this case Iran, has infiltrated its government.  And the United States cannot continue to support this infiltration through ongoing unconditioned aid to Lebanon.

There is no distinction, as my colleague said, between Hezbollah’s military and political wing, both of which advance its terrorist ideology and both of which take orders from Tehran.

The whole organization is toxic for Lebanon and will only become more so as Iran’s increasingly moribund economy cannot meet its historic level of support for Hezbollah, forcing the terror groups to turn to the people and the government of Lebanon for more resources to pay for the fighters, the terror tunnels, and the ever-increasing arsenal of rockets and missiles aimed at Israel.

This action should serve as a wakeup call to the government of Lebanon that the United States will no longer turn a blind eye to the expanding role of Hezbollah which poses a direct threat to Lebanese sovereignty as well as an intolerable security threat to Israel.  We stand by to help our friends in Beirut roll back this maligned actor, but they are also going to have to want to help themselves as well.

Question:  To all three speakers.  You talked a lot about the distinction, that you say there is no distinction between the military wing and the political wing of Hezbollah.  I want to ask how do you draw a distinction between Hezbollah and other parts of the Lebanese state and government, especially given that the organization is increasingly bold in a lot of institutions in Lebanon ?

Senior Official 2:  The simple answer is we draw a distinction based on the behavior of the individuals in the organizations.  I think today’s action shows that others in the government of Lebanon and in the Lebanese private sector should sever their ties with the people that we’ve designated today, just as we believe they should sever their ties with Hezbollah itself, because it’s a terrorist organization.

Senior Official 3:  The big question for the Lebanese people, as we’ve described the activities of these individuals and what they’ve been up to in many different respects to support Hezbollah’s engagement in violent activity, criminal activity to threaten banks, to smuggle drugs, et cetera, is this really who they want to be representing them in the Lebanese government, because these are people who are not representing their interests.  They’re representing the interests of a terrorist group.

Question:  I’m a little bit astonished because while the majority in the UN I think exempt certain Hezbollah gentlemen and maybe women too as elected members of the parliament and members of the government, you supposedly don’t.  The other one is, in those cases, you told us why it doesn’t go to the International Court to let it rule out there?  Is it just because the U.S. doesn’t accept the International Court?  Or what’s the reason?  

Senior Official 3:  Thank you for the opportunity to clear this up.  The United States government does not set its policy based on majorities in the United Nations, and we’re not a signatory to the ICC.

Senior Official 2:  However, since your country is, an observer might think it’s a perfectly reasonable case for your government to take these people to the International Criminal Court for their terrorist crimes and illicit activities.

Question:  What steps are the U.S. doing to try and influence more countries to sanction also Hezbollah political, Iranian-backed Hezbollah political figures outside the U.S.?

Senior Official 2:  We have an ongoing engagement with all of our allies and partners about getting rid of the false distinction between Hezbollah’s military/terrorist and political wing.  So we were very gratified to see the United Kingdom take the step of dropping that false distinction recently.  But in many engagements when we discuss the problems of Hezbollah with our allies and partners, we emphasize to them that this is a necessary step to drop the façade, and I think today’s designations show why.  It’s because within Lebanon, Hezbollah uses its place in the Parliament and its place in the Lebanese ministries as a cover for insulating Hezbollah’s military and terrorist operations from pressure that they might otherwise get from the Lebanese political system and the Lebanese public and essentially to run interference for Hezbollah’s military and terrorist operations and to run interference for the IRGC Quds Force’s use of Hezbollah as essentially a forward strategic missile base to threaten Lebanon’s neighbors in the region.

So this is a discussion that we have with our allies and partners.  I think we’re leading by example today by showing exactly what it is we think that our allies and partners ought to do.  They ought to look at the behavior, they ought to look at the behavior of the people that we otherwise, that in the past they’ve categorized as Hezbollah politicians.  These are not politicians.  These are military operatives.  These are terrorist operatives.  These are enablers of a terrorist organization that has worldwide reach.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Russia and Norway

Norway, UK should be on alert over accident with Russian submersible – media

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Almost all media agree that the AS-12 is not a research submersible, while its function was to perform specific operations in the territorial waters and exclusive economic zones of other countries.

The accident at the nuclear AS-12 “Losharik” submersible, one of the Russian navy’s most secret projects, raises many questions about the causes of the disaster, and the actual tasks the crew were fulfilling in the Barents Sea.

Moreover, Russian media are coming up with more and more versions regarding the Losharik’s mission, the BelarusPartisan news outlet wrote. It is not surprising that the most popular now are the versions suggesting very specific works, like placing at the bottom of the Barents Sea of the devices aimed to counter the American SOSUS anti-submarine system. Such a version was voiced not only by the Russian Lenta.ru, but also by the U.S. Naval Institute.

It might as well be the case that the AS-12 was installing a Russian positional underwater observation system “Harmony”, which is an analog of SOSUS. In turn, the Izvestia newspaper adheres to the version of the research mission to study the seabed, currents, and depths. But much more realistic is the version of working out the interaction of various weapons systems, in particular, the imitation of the Poseidon submarine project with Losharik using the carrier boat, such as, for example, the BS-136 Orenburg.

It is this version of events that the Russian defense ministry’s “Krasnaya Zvezda” newspaper spins, or span, to be more precise, since the article was soon deleted from the website. This only suggests that the editors actually released a report which they never should have without consulting with the authorities. Nevertheless, almost all media agree that the AS-12 is not a research submersible, while its function was to perform specific operations in the territorial waters and exclusive economic zones of other countries.

However, a common feature of all versions, which is seen through the information noise, is that the “Losharik” and its crew, most likely consisting of officers of the naval special operations forces, was deployed to perform some kind of secret operation or prepare for it. This version of the special operation in foreign territorial waters has solid grounds to be voiced because Russia has already practiced sabotage operations more than once, for example, in the waters of Norway.

Recall the mining of oil drilling platforms in the waters of the North and Norwegian Seas, carried out in the summer of 1991 by a team of Baltic Fleet combat swimmers brought to the site of the operation by the hydrographic vessel GS-301. Interestingly, the crew of the GS-301 consisted of 15 people. This is noted by the Russian Kont outlet in the context of the tragedy with the Losharik crew. Given the overall secrecy around the accident, it will not be surprising if in reality it turns out that the AS-12 mission was in fact an aggressive act in relation to one of Russia’s maritime neighbors.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Science

SpareBank 1 chooses Nets for open banking

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan
Norwegian bank group SpareBank 1 has selected Nets, a player in the European payments industry, to provide its open banking infrastructure.

The group of 14 savings banks will implement Nets Access to Account Services (NAAS) – a single platform that enables access to banks across the Nordics and Europe.

The revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2), which comes into effect in September, will facilitate new digital banking services and enable better overviews of consumers’ finances. Nets’ single integration solution will give all the banks in the SpareBank 1 alliance access to all bank accounts in Norway and beyond for payment initiation and account information through a single application programming interface (API). This will enable the banks to develop new services for their customers.

When PSD2 comes into effect on 14th September 2019, consumers will have more opportunities to access their own financial data and share it with service providers of their choosing. Banks and Third-Party Providers (TPPs) will be able to retrieve information from different sources and present consumers’ financial information in a more understandable and informative way.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Norway support ongoing African Union-Ethiopian mediation

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The UK, US, and Norway have issued a Troika statement on Saturday calling on Sudan’s Transitional Military Council to respect the Sudanese people’s right to freedom of expression and avoid any use of violence.

The statement comes as the country prepares to hold a mass rally on Sunday, the first attempt to mobilize protesters after the June 3 crackdown on the protest camp outside the military headquarters in Khartoum.

“The Troika continues to support the demand of the Sudanese people for a peaceful, agreed transition towards democracy in Sudan, the statement read.

“We also support the ongoing African Union-Ethiopian mediation. We call on the Transitional Military Council and the Forces for Freedom and Change to engage constructively with the African Union-Ethiopian proposal to achieve a peaceful democratic transition through the formation of a civilian-led transitional government,” the statement added.

Lieutenant General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the head of the Transitional Military Council, said the ruling council was ready to hand over control to “any authority elected by the Sudanese people.”

“It is our responsibility to listen to the demands of the Sudanese people. We are with the Sudanese people to complete the revolution and build the future of the country,” he said.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Norwegian Aid

Norway reaffirms commitment to stabilizing Iraq with new contribution

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Government of Norway and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) signed a partnership agreement today for USD 9 million (NOK 75 million) to support stabilization and recovery efforts for Iraq post-ISIL.

Norway’s contribution will be channelled through UNDP’s Funding Facility for Stabilization (FFS) which finances fast-track initiatives in areas liberated from ISIL. This is Norway’s 10th contribution to FFS since 2015, bringing its total contributions to USD 45,000,000 (NOK 376,200,000). Norway is the 7th largest contributor of the 27 donors that fund the FFS.

Based on priorities identified by the Government of Iraq and local authorities, FFS helps quickly repair essential public infrastructure, boosts the capacity of local government, and provides short-term employment opportunities.

“Our biggest priority at the moment is to focus on areas that were the longest-held territories by ISIL and the last to be liberated,” says Resident Representative of UNDP, Zena Ali-Ahmad.

“These areas have experienced lower returns, and through UNDP and partners’ stabilization efforts we’re working hard to bring people back home. This generous contribution from Norway is critical in helping us achieve this important objective.”

“Our gratitude goes to the Government of Norway for all the support, and for reaffirming its commitment to not only stabilizing Iraq but securing long-term prosperity for its people,” adds Ms Ali-Ahmad.

At the request of the Government of Iraq, UNDP established the Funding Facility for Stabilization (FFS) in June 2015 to facilitate the return of displaced Iraqis, lay the groundwork for reconstruction and recovery, and safeguard against the resurgence of violence. This is done through rehabilitating essential infrastructure and restoring basic services. To date, UNDP’s Funding Facility has implemented more than 2,500 projects in key critical areas of Anbar, Salah al-Din, Diyala, Kirkuk and Ninewa, with another 600 in the pipeline, pending additional funds.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Norwegian Aid

Qatar Charity releases Arabic version of GRID

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Qatar Charity (QC) has translated the Global Report on Internal Displacement (GRID) 2019, the world’s most important annual report on monitoring internal displacement worldwide, in cooperation with the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) of the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC).

Qatar Charity also announced the release of the Arabic version of the report for the first time during a panel discussion held by Al Jazeera Public Liberties & Human Rights Centre on internal displacement issues, in which officials from Al Jazeera, IDMC and Qatar Charity have taken part.

The Global Report on Internal Displacement (GRID) provides an overview of the world’s most significant situations of internal displacement and highlights the political and operational investments needed to address its impacts and reduce the risk of it happening in the future. The report also notes the scale of the human tragedy in the Arab region, where large communities are suffering due to disasters and conflicts.

The cover page of the Arabic version of the Global Report on Internal Displacement 2019.

During the panel discussion, Mohammed Al Ghamdi, assistant to CEO in the Governance and Institutional Development Sector of Qatar Charity, expressed his pride in Qatar Charity’s

contribution in releasing the first Arabic version of GRID.

He noted that the information and data contained in the report would help humanitarian workers identify areas in need and appropriate intervention and raise awareness about the phenomenon of tragic displacement and its figures growing year after year.

He pointed out that the year 2018 witnessed more than 28 million new cases of internal displacement across the world, 10.8 million cases due to conflict and violence and 17.2 cases due to natural disasters in several countries, including many Arab countries such Syria, Yemen and Somalia.

He said that the Arabic version of the report was one of the aspects of Qatar Charity’s cooperation with IDMC and the result of the partnership agreement signed between two sides in Geneva last May, noting that the displacement issue has become a source of concern for charitable organizations, humanitarian workers, and UN agencies.

  For his part, Tariq Al-Ansari, director of the International Cooperation Department at the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs, applauded Qatar Charity for its partnership agreement with IDMC and translating GRID into Arabic.

The phenomenon of internal displacement is a serious issue, with its impact on the regional and international level, Al-Ansari added, emphasizing a great need to obtain correct data from specialized displacement and asylum monitoring centers, including IDMC.

On the sidelines of the panel discussion, Alexandra Bilak, director of IDMC, considered the translation of GRID into Arabic a significant development. “Strategically, this is very important development in our history that our report is finally going to be available in Arabic,” said Bilak, extending thanks to Qatar Charity for this translation.

Hassan Saeed Elmogumme, head of the Partnerships and Research Section of Al Jazeera Public Liberties & Human Rights Centre, said the translation of GRID underscored the great role of Qatar Charity in sharing information with the Arabic-speakers, and its significant efforts in drawing the attention of decision-makers and humanitarian organizations in the region to the issue of internal displacement.

It is worth mentioning that Qatar Charity has signed a strategic cooperation and partnership agreement with IDMC in Geneva, Switzerland in the field of training and capacity building to improve data collection and analysis and collaborate on research projects on internal displacement worldwide.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Trinidad and Tobago PM holds bilateral talks with Norway

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Trinidad and Tobago Prime Min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley has met with Prime Min­is­ter of Nor­way, Er­na Sol­berg for dis­cus­sions on a num­ber of is­sues of mu­tu­al in­ter­est, the Of­fice of the Trinidad and Tobago Prime Min­is­ter said.

The talks with Prime Min­is­ter Sol­berg cov­ered sev­er­al is­sues in­clud­ing cli­mate change, the up­com­ing EU-ACP trade ne­go­ti­a­tions and the im­pact of the po­lit­i­cal and hu­man­i­tar­i­an sit­u­a­tion in Venezuela on Trinidad and To­ba­go.

Ear­li­er in the day, Dr Row­ley, to­geth­er with Bar­ba­dos Prime Min­is­ter Mia Mot­t­ley and St Kitts and Nevis Tim­o­thy Har­ris, met with Prime Min­is­ter Sol­berg for talks which fo­cussed on the ap­proach to the Venezue­lan is­sue.

Par­ties to this dis­cus­sion re­it­er­at­ed their com­mit­ment to con­tin­ue sup­port­ing the search for a peace­ful so­lu­tion to the sit­u­a­tion in the coun­try.

In May the Gov­ern­ment of Nor­way fa­cil­i­tat­ed talks be­tween rep­re­sen­ta­tives of the main po­lit­i­cal ac­tors in Venezuela who demon­strat­ed a will­ing­ness to move for­ward in the search for an agreed-up­on and con­sti­tu­tion­al so­lu­tion to the po­lit­i­cal, eco­nom­ic and elec­toral is­sues.

Sol­berg spoke to the is­sue when she ad­dressed the wider group of re­gion­al lead­ers at to­day’s ple­nary ses­sion of the 40th Reg­u­lar Meet­ing of the CARI­COM Heads of Gov­ern­ment.

The Prime Min­is­ter of Nor­way said, “We have been en­gaged in con­flict res­o­lu­tion on sev­er­al con­ti­nents and have act­ed as a fa­cil­i­ta­tor in sev­er­al peace process­es, most re­cent­ly in Colom­bia and Venezuela. In Venezuela, the Gov­ern­ment and the op­po­si­tion have asked us to fa­cil­i­tate a ne­go­ti­at­ed so­lu­tion. There have been two rounds of con­struc­tive talks in Oslo.”

She not­ed, “Al­though the process is still frag­ile, it is my im­pres­sion that we have a win­dow of op­por­tu­ni­ty. In­ter­na­tion­al and re­gion­al back­ing for the ne­go­ti­a­tion process is cru­cial for its suc­cess. We there­fore ask CARI­COM and its mem­bers to sup­port the peace process in any way you can, in­clud­ing through your con­tact with the par­ties.”

Dur­ing the ple­nary ses­sion, heads re­ceived the in­ter­im re­port from the CARI­COM Com­mis­sion on the Econ­o­my which is led by Econ­o­mist Pro­fes­sor Avinash Per­saud.

The main ob­jec­tive of the re­struc­tured com­mis­sion is to pro­vide ad­vice on the im­ple­men­ta­tion of so­lu­tions to build re­silience and re­turn CARI­COM economies to a path of sus­tain­able growth and de­vel­op­ment.

The com­mis­sion will ad­dress the struc­tur­al chal­lenges af­fect­ing growth prospects of CARI­COM States and as­sist in the mo­bil­i­sa­tion of re­sources to un­lock the growth po­ten­tial of the Com­mu­ni­ty tak­ing in­to ac­count: fis­cal sus­tain­abil­i­ty and build­ing re­silience; debt re­lief and re­struc­tur­ing; cru­cial eco­nom­ic in­fra­struc­ture ser­vices, specif­i­cal­ly en­er­gy and in­for­ma­tion com­mu­ni­ca­tions tech­nol­o­gy to­wards the pro­mo­tion of eco­nom­ic ef­fi­cien­cy and the fin­tech and blockchain tech­nol­o­gy.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Racism in Norway

Top European Court To Hear Child Welfare Case, Bodnariu Family Forced To Flee Norway

by Nadarajah Sethurupan
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

On 4 July, ADF International filed an intervention in Bodnariu v. Norway at the European Court of Human Rights. In 2015, the five children of the Romanian Bodnariu family were taken away from their parents by Barnevernet, the Norwegian child-welfare agency. The Bodnariu case is one of eight cases at the European Court of Human Rights where Barnevernet is being investigated concerning decisions to take children away from their parents.

“Parents have the right to direct the upbringing of their children. Norway intervened in the family life of the Bodnariu family by taking the five children into state care without  any compelling reason. Removing children from their families should always be a last resort. Recent years have seen an increasing number of cases of overreach by the Norwegian state into family life, with numerous cases coming before the European Court of Human Rights. The Bodnariu case resulted in an international outcry and the Bodnariu family fleeing Norway. No family should be put through such an ordeal, especially not at the hands of the state. We are encouraged by the decision of the European Court of Human Rights to hear this case,” said Robert Clarke, Director of European Advocacy for ADF International.

Brief case history

In 2015, all five of the Bodnariu children, including a three-month-old baby, were taken away from their parents by the child-welfare agency Barnevernet. “Initially, Barnevernet claimed that the children were taken into state care due to allegations of corporal punishment, which is illegal in Norway. However, upon further investigation, the real reason behind the removal of the Bodnariu children was revealed—officials in the community felt that the children were being ‘indoctrinated’ by their parents’ Christian beliefs,” an ADF International press release says.

Intense pressure from the international community, including protests outside Norwegian embassies around the world, forced Barnevernet to return the children to their mother and father who then, together with the children, fled Norway.

In December 2016, the family filed their case before the European Court of Human Rights claiming a violation by Norway under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It protects the right to private and family life. ADF International was granted permission by the Court to intervene in the case.

A 2018 report by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) into the practices of the Norwegian child protection agency, Barnevernet, revealed a number of troubling discoveries. The report was prompted by the case of the Bodnariu family. For example, it showed a high frequency of “emergency” interventions by the agency. The reasoning behind these interventions were of particular concern as well as the exceptionally short visitation times which usually followed.

“Removing children should always be the very last resort. Even when this is truly necessary, family reunification should remain a central aim. The investigation into Norway showed that without effective safeguards, child protection agencies can cause long-term damage to families and undermine the prior right that parents have to raise their children. It is time for Norway to act on the recommendations made by the Council of Europe and respect the right of parents to raise their children unless there is evidence of a serious breach of the parents’ duties,” said Clarke.

(romaniajournal)

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts
@2025 - All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by Norway News