By API

Norway demands that humanitarian access should be allowed to the two conflict-affected states in Sudan and urges the parties to engage in political negotiations.

The crisis that began in the state of Southern Kordofan in June has now spread to Blue Nile state.

“I am concerned about the fact that the armed conflict between the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM-North) and the Government in Khartoum has now spread to new areas. The civilian population must be protected, and the use of aerial bombardments against non-military targets is unacceptable. I urge both parties to enter into negotiations immediately,” said Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile are both in Sudan, but they have strong ties across the border to South Sudan. The UN estimates that more than 250 000 people have been driven from their homes in the two states.

The Sudanese authorities will not allow either the UN or international aid organisations access to the conflict-affected areas. There is therefore no third party there who can provide objective information on the situation on the ground.

“I urge the Sudanese authorities to allow the UN immediate access. It is vital that the UN is able to assess the needs and distribute emergency relief to the affected areas. Sudan has a duty to ensure that humanitarian actors are given free and unimpeded access,” said Mr Støre.

South Sudan became an independent state on 9 July. The process leading to self-determination was in accordance with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005. In a letter to the UN Security Council, the Government in Khartoum has accused South Sudan of supporting the rebels in Southern Kordofan.

“I am worried about the turn taken in relations between Sudan and South Sudan during the past few months. We expect both states to respect each other’s sovereignty,” said the Foreign Minister.

Negotiations between the authorities in Khartoum and Juba on relations between the two states did not result in binding agreements in important areas before South Sudan became an independent state. There is still disagreement as to the border between the two countries, the transport of oil from South Sudan to Port Sudan in Sudan, and how to settle the currency issue.

End

————-

southern kordofan, sudanese authorities, blue nile, humanitarian actors, and south sudan.

—

Photo: Courtesy of Irrawaddy

Kyaw Zwa Moe spent eight years in prison

BANGKOK, 12 September 2011 (IRIN) – Human rights activists and exiles have expressed caution over an invitation by Burmese President Thein Shein to return home.

“If they really want the people of the country to come back to Burma, they should release all the political prisoners,” Kyaw Zwa Moe, managing editor of Thailand-based The Irrawaddy news magazine, told IRIN. “Everybody wants to go back home. But there is no guarantee for our safety when we go back.”

Kyaw Zwa Moe spent eight years in prison for his activities during and after the nationwide uprising on 8 August 1988, also known as 8888, which led to a bloody crackdown from the government, sending thousands into exile.

Few believe real freedom is on the table, despite talk of a policy confirming the informal August announcement made to businessmen in Napyidaw, the nation’s capital.

“How can he [the president] welcome some of the family members to return home while some of our family members are in prisons?” asked Aung Myo Min, director of the Human Rights Education Institute of Burma (HREIB) based in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Aung Myo Min left the country 23 years ago after his involvement in 8888. “We have a strong desire to work for the sake of our people and good changes for our country. But we want to go back in dignity, not like a criminal,” Aung Myo Min added.

While the president said the government would consider “leniency” for those who had not committed crimes, such qualifications are rejected by the exiles.

“We can’t consider going back home just because President Thein Sein said his government will consider leniency for us,” said Nyi Nyi Aung, a naturalized US citizen, who escaped Myanmar after 8888 and returned in 2009 only to be arrested and imprisoned. He was released after six months in prison and is now back in the US.

Four of Myanmar’s 2,100 Political Prisoners:
	Zargana, comedian and social activist, sentenced to 35 years in 2008 for talking to media about frustrations in aid distribution after Cyclone Nargis.
	Su Su Nway, labour rights activist, sentenced to 12.5 years for treason and intent to cause fear or harm to the public.
	U Ohn Than, rights activist, sentenced to life in prison after repeated protests and prison sentences.
	Nay Phone Latt, blogger, sentenced to 12 years in 2008 for his writing during the 2007 “Saffron Revolution”.
Source: Human Rights Watch

“I will return after all political prisoners are released, and peace talks with all ethnic groups reach national reconciliation and there is a path to democratization in Burma [Myanmar],” he said.

After safety, exiles also wonder if they will have the freedom to live as they have since escaping their country.

“My concern is whether I’ll be able to write freely or not while inside the country,” said Kyaw Zwa Moe.

Tight controls

Myanmar remains one of the most tightly restricted countries in the world in terms of press freedom, although the 2008 constitution provides for freedom of speech.

According to a 2011 press freedom survey by Freedom House, a Washington-based advocacy group, it is rated one of the worst 10 countries in terms of press freedom.

“As a journalist, I won’t stay silent without criticizing the government,” Kyaw Zwa Moe said. “As long as there is no freedom of press inside, we won’t be able to write critical issues that we’re doing now from here [Thailand].”

Meanwhile, the government’s announcement in May that the sentences of all prisoners, including those charged with political crimes, would be reduced by one year, was another meaningless gesture made under the auspices of a new democratic Myanmar, he added, especially for those prisoners only a few years into their decade-long terms.

Human Rights Watch called the reduction a “slap in the face” for the UN.

Myanmar’s exiles have received similar offers in the past. In 1980, General U Ne Win granted Myanmar’s first amnesty to U Nu, the first democratically elected prime minister of Myanmar after independence from Britain. After the 8888 uprising, the regime invited those who went underground to return, only to put them under watch. Many were arrested once they made political statements.

“We’re a long way off from any real amnesty here,” said Win Min, a former 8888 student activist and Burmese academic now living in the US, told IRIN. “We’re not even close.”

sk/nb/mw source www.irinnews.org

KABUL, 12 September 2011 (IRIN) – Despite billions of dollars in aid and government funding over the past decade, Afghanistan still has about four million school-age children out of school, officials say.

“Overall our biggest challenge is our operating budget, which is not enough to cover the salaries of our teachers… and of the roughly 14,000 primary and secondary schools in the country, some 7,000 lack buildings, forcing children to study in the open, under trees or in tents,” Education Ministry spokesman Aman Iman said.

Mir Khan, 10, a pupil at a primary school in Argu District in the northeastern province of Badakhshan, said his school did not have a building or even a wall around the compound, making learning difficult.

“My class is very close to the main road – in a tent. Sometimes even stray dogs get in,” Khan told IRIN. “Passing cars blow dust into our tent, which gets into our clothes, hair and even notebooks. I really do not want to go to school, but what can I do? My family is forcing me to go.”

The Education Ministry’s budget is 15 percent of the government’s budget, but 67 percent of all civil servants come under the Education Ministry, placing intolerable strains on the ministry’s budget, said Iman.

“We have made good progress in the last 10 years with support from our international partners, but still it is not enough,” he told IRIN, adding that the shortage of professional teachers was “another serious problem”.

In 2002, Afghanistan had 3,400 primary and secondary schools, but that number has risen to 14,000 countrywide. The goal, according to the Afghan Education Strategy, is to increase that to 17,000 by 2014 and to 23,000 schools by 2020. By 2020, every Afghan child should have access to school, says the strategy. Observers say this is a tall order.

Currently, only eight million of the 12 million school-age children are in school, according to the Education Ministry.

Conflict

A major impediment to education is conflict. Some 500 schools are still closed in insecure southern and eastern areas due to fighting, assassinations and threats against teachers and students by different anti-government elements, according to the Ministry of Education.

Photo: Mohammad Popal/IRIN

Helmand IDPs study under a tent built by UNICEF in the outskirts of capital Kabul

With the help of tribal elders, the ministry has reopened around 200 schools in the southern and eastern regions in the last couple of years. But in Zabul Province, in the south, 160 are still closed. According to Shir Agha Safi, Education Ministry director in Zabul, only 25 have reopened in different districts over the past year.

Countrywide, the Education Ministry estimates that closures have deprived more than 400,000 schoolchildren of an education. “We are very concerned that hundreds of thousands of our children can’t go to school due to insecurity,” Iman said.

Taliban not keeping their word?

Commenting on the Taliban, Iman said: “Officially the Taliban have never taken responsibility for any threat against schools, teachers or students, and they have repeatedly said they were not against education. But in insecure parts of the country we have got unidentified enemies.”

In March Taliban “supreme leader” Mullah Mohammad Omar issued a decree instructing insurgents not to attack schools and intimidate schoolchildren. However, in some provinces the Taliban do not seem to have kept their word.

Shahi Mohammad from Arghandab District, Zabul Province, for example, recently left his home after the Taliban threatened to close all the schools in the area.

“I am a farmer and illiterate, but my biggest desire is to educate my children,” Shahi, a father of four, told IRIN in Kabul as he looked for an apartment to rent. “But my desire wouldn’t be fulfilled if we lived in my village any longer.”

The Taliban and its factions – the Haqqani network, Hizb-e-Islami led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the Tora Bora Front, the Latif Mansur Network and Jamat Sunat al-Dawa Salafia – are also known to be recruiting children into their ranks.

According to the UN, such recruitment was observed throughout the country in 2010, with some children being used to carry out suicide attacks, plant explosives and transport munitions.

mp/eo/cb source www.irinnews.org

Photo: David Longstreath/IRIN

Few Asian countries are signatories to the UN Refugee Convention

BANGKOK, 12 September 2011 (IRIN) – A recent decision by Australia’s high court to stop its federal government from swapping refugees with Malaysia underlines what has fast become a major debate over how to treat Asia’s refugees.

The Canberra government signed a deal with Malaysia in July to exchange the next 800 refugees it would receive by boat for 4,000 refugees, mostly Burmese, in Malaysia. Typically, the people going to Australia are from Asia and the Middle East, including Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Iran and Iraq.

The court, ruling by six to one, said the proposal was invalid because of shortcomings in Malaysia’s treatment of refugees. Unlike Australia, Malaysia is not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and therefore does not officially grant protected status to those fleeing persecution.

For the Australian government to send refugees to another country, that destination, the court said in its ruling, “must be legally bound by international law or its own domestic law to: provide access for asylum seekers to effective procedures for assessing their need for protection; provide protection for asylum seekers pending determination of their refugee status; and provide protection for persons given refugee status pending their voluntary return to their country of origin or their resettlement in another country”.

Malaysia, the court ruled, did not make this cut. To many human rights groups that fact was well established long before Canberra sought Malaysia as a refugee trading partner. 

According to a report published in 2010 by Amnesty International, thousands of refugees in Malaysia are caned each year for violations, such as working, which is illegal for refugees under Malaysian law.

The report, Abused and Abandoned: Refugees Denied Rights in Malaysia, found that many refugees were held in unsanitary facilities and concluded that, for refugees, “Malaysia is an unwelcoming and dangerous place”.

In its 2010 global report, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) said its officials had that year secured the release of 3,800 refugees in Malaysia who had been rounded up and held in detention.

Given Malaysia’s track record, Australia was “taking a huge risk” in proposing a refugee exchange with Malaysia, Gram Thom, a spokesman for Amnesty on refugee issues and author of the report, told IRIN. The deal, he added, would have been a “breach of Australia’s international obligations”.

…the performance of the vast majority of Asia-Pacific governments towards refugees is absolutely shameful

Deterrent

Canberra had billed the deal as a way to deter refugees from making the dangerous journey to Australia by boat. In particular, the government said, denying boat refugees access to Australia would undermine the work of human traffickers – or “smash the people smugglers’ business model”, as Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard put it.

“My message to anyone who is considering paying money to a people smuggler and risking their life at sea and perhaps the lives of their family members as well, is do not do that in the false hope that you will be able to have your claim processed in Australia,” she said in July.

The government punctuated its intention to use the so-called Malaysian Solution as a deterrent to future would-be boat refugees by saying it would post footage on You Tube of refugees being carted off to Malaysia as a public message to people smugglers and the clients to whom they promise “a ticket to Australia”.

Offshore solutions

At present, refugees who reach Australia by boat are first taken to Christmas Island, which is much closer to Indonesia than the mainland.

The Pacific Solution, in effect from 2001 to 2007, was Australia’s previous policy of detaining and processing asylum seekers arriving by boat in offshore facilities, including the South Pacific island state of Nauru and Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island.

After much criticism from rights groups, who argued the policy unfairly isolated boat refugees, the Pacific Solution was discontinued in 2007, with the election of former prime minister Kevin Rudd and a new regime.

But, since 2010, the Gillard government has sought to renew a similar offshore holding and processing system for boat refugees and introduced the prospect of swapping refugees with other countries in the region.

Last year, Gillard approached Timor-Leste about hosting a refugee holding centre but parliamentarians and rights groups lambasted the proposal, arguing that the country had too many of its own problems.

After the High Court’s ruling against the Malaysia Solution on 31 August, Australia’s immigration minister, Chris Bowen, said his government had not ruled out similar deals with other countries in the region if they received court approval.

Canberra has been in talks with Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands about hosting refugee processing centres that would first be administered by Australia and later collectively by the region. In August, Canberra signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the reopening of a new refugee processing centre on Manus Island.

“This MoU sends a clear message that countries in this region are working together towards a lasting regional response in taking action necessary to ensure the integrity of our borders and undermine people-smuggling networks,” Minister Bowen is quoted as saying in a government press statement.

Photo: David Longstreath/IRIN

An Afghan refugee along the Afghan-Pakistani border

Grading refugees

Rights groups are sceptical of the Australian government’s motivations for wanting to reroute boat refugees to offshore locations.

The proposed swap with Malaysia and other similar deals amounted to “shovelling responsibility elsewhere”, said Denise Coughlan, director of the NGO Jesuit Relief Service’s office in Cambodia.

She said asylum seekers had borne the brunt of rising fears across the globe about terrorist infiltration, preventing many legitimate refugees from receiving the care they deserve.

Amnesty’s Thom said it set a troubling precedent when one of the richest and most stable and developed countries in the region sought to turn away refugees. “If Australia shuts down this basic right, what’s to stop Thailand from doing the same?”

Thom said Australia’s proposals reflected a tendency for countries to assign different ranks to refugees depending on their country of origin – a tendency that he says ran contrary to the point of treating asylum seekers equally.

“Failure of political will”

This concern was echoed by Phil Robertson, deputy director of the Asia division of Human Rights Watch: “Picking one group of refugees over another defies the principle of non-discrimination which is at the heart of refugee protection.

“What we’re seeing in the region is a fundamental failure of political will to undertake basic human rights obligations,” he added.

A case in point, he said, was China’s ability in recent years to pressure Cambodia, Malaysia and Thailand to forcibly send ethnic Uyghurs back to China, where rights groups say they face severe punishment – even death sentences – for any suspected involvement in protests.

Only three countries in Asia – Cambodia, Timor-Leste and the Philippines – are signatories to the UN Refugee Convention.

“In the year that the Refugee Convention marks its 60th year, the performance of the vast majority of Asia-Pacific governments towards refugees is absolutely shameful,” said Robertson. 

On 12 September, the Gillard government announced it would introduce legislation to parliament to amend the country’s Migration Act, allowing the Malaysian refugee swap deal to go forward.

“Malaysia offered the best answer to the issue of asylum seekers and people smuggling then. It offers the best answer now,” Gillard told reporters.

bb/ds/mw  source irinnews.org