Journalist Captures The Taliban's Tension With Women And The Media In Just One Photo

"A picture is worth a thousand words."


By Kate Nicholson

NEWS
12/10/2021 

Journalist Clarissa Ward shared a photograph of her time in Afghanistan on Twitter which neatly sums up her relationship with the Taliban.

Ward, chief international correspondent for the US broadcaster CNN, has been providing eye-opening coverage of the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan for months.

On Tuesday she tweeted an image of a senior figure in the Taliban government Mawlavi Abdullah Mohammad.

Her caption read: “A picture is worth a thousand words.

“You don’t have to zoom in to see how the Taliban’s head of the ministry for the propagation of virtue and prevention of vice in Ghazni feels about sitting down with me.”



Writing for CNN, Ward and fellow journalist Brent Swails explained: “The Taliban have turned Ghazni’s pink-walled Ministry of Women building into the new headquarters of the Ministry of the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice.”

The Ministry of Women was established in 2001 after the Taliban were pushed out of power and soon had 90% female staff – it protected the country’s women and girls and ran safe houses for women.

Most women lost their jobs under the new Taliban regime, too.

There are no women in the new Taliban government and girls are forbidden from going to secondary school.

CNN also explained how Ward came to be interacting with Mohammad, even though Taliban fighters have beaten Afghan journalists in recent weeks.

The Taliban have been keener to interact with the international press because Afghanistan depends on foreign aid to stay afloat.

Mohammad was speaking to Ward and unpacking the purpose of the Taliban’s new “religious police” who implore the public to follow Sharia Law.

One of these new commanders was overheard telling an Afghan crowd: “Treat your women according to Islamic law and make sure they cover themselves.”



CNN noted that when its camera crew was around, the religious police were ”on a charm offensive, more intent on shaking hands and introducing themselves” to the locals – but away from the media, beatings and punishments are still commonplace.

U.N. and Bangladesh sign deal to aid Rohingya relocated to island in Bay of Bengal

October 11, 2021
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

In this Dec. 29, 2020, file photo, Rohingya refugees wait on naval ships to be transported to an isolated island in the Bay of Bengal, in Chittagong, Bangladesh.

Mahmud Hossain Opu/AP

DHAKA,Bangladesh — The United Nations and Bangladesh's government have signed an agreement to work together to help Rohingya refugees on an island in the Bay of Bengal where thousands have been relocated from crammed camps near the Myanmar border.

More than 19,000 Rohingya have already been moved to the Bhasan Char island by the government, and the U.N. said one of the key reasons to sign the agreement was to start serving that population.

Bangladesh plans to relocate 100,000 Rohingya to the island in phases from the crowded refugee camps in Cox's Bazar district.

The agreement came as a paradigm shift after the U.N. and humanitarian groups criticized the relocation, saying the 30-year-old island regularly submerged by monsoon rains was not fit for habitation. But Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's government has spent more than $112 million on development, adding sea walls, hospitals, schools and mosques, and insists it is no more a vulnerable area.

After Saturday's agreement, authorities said another 81,000 refugees would be relocated to the island over next three months.

A U.N. team's visit to the island in March preceded the world body's changed view.

In a statement, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said the agreement was a further expression of the Bangladesh's "generosity and support toward the Rohingya population until they can return safely and sustainably to Myanmar."

The agreement allows for close cooperation between the government and the U.N. on services and activities to benefit the island's residents. The U.N. also said it had discussions with Rohingya living in Cox's Bazar as well as those already living on Bhasan Char island, prior to signing of the agreement.

"These cover key areas of protection, education, skills-training, livelihoods and health, which will help support the refugees to lead decent lives on the island and better prepare them for sustainable return to Myanmar in the future," according to the statement.

Johannes Van Der Klaauw, representative at the UNHCR, said the organization has seen the island and believes Bangladesh's government has added "significant infrastructure" to offset environmental hazards. The agreement also allows refugees to move back and forth between the island and the main camps in Cox's Bazar, he said.

Refugees will also have a chance to earn a living through odd jobs that will be accessible once aid organizations set up on the island. Klaauw also noted that movement to Bhasan Char would be on an informed and voluntary basis.

But most Rohingya refugees say they don't want to relocate.

A woman who had moved to the island with her family earlier this year said many escaped on boats back to the camp because life on the island is hard for the refugees.

"If people stay there for a couple of years, all of them might start having mental issues," she said, adding that medical and other aid facilities were not very well set up on the island. She was unwilling to be named, fearing retribution.

Amir Hamza, 63, another refugee said he won't relocate to the island.

"I will go to the country where I was born, my father and grandfather were born. I have love for that country, and I agree to go to that country. I don't agree to go to another country, island, or any place, even if I am offered milk and rice on a golden plate. I am ready and happy to go to my country, land, and to my home."

Bangladesh has been sheltering 1.1 million Rohingya from Myanmar, including more than 700,000 who fled a harsh military crackdown on the Muslim ethnic group in August 2017 following an attack by insurgents. Hasina says her administration will not force them to return.

The Rohingya are not recognized as citizens in Myanmar, rendering them stateless, and face other forms of state-sanctioned discrimination.

A U.N.-sponsored investigation in 2018 recommended the prosecution of Myanmar's top military commanders on charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity for the violence against the Rohingya.

DUBAI EXPO 2020

Art or censorship? Expo shows just top of famed David statue

By MALAK HARB 

In this Friday, Oct. 1, 2021 file photo, a 3D re-production of Michelangelo's David is on display at the Italy's pavilion of the Dubai Expo 2020 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. One of the most talked about attractions at the world's fair underway in Dubai is a towering statue made of marble dust that's raising eyebrows just as its original form did more than 500 years ago.

 (AP Photo/Kamran Jebreili, File)


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — One of the most talked about attractions at the world’s fair under way in Dubai is a towering statue made of marble dust that’s raising eyebrows just as the original did more than 500 years ago.

At Italy’s pavilion, a 3D replica of Michelangelo’s David stands tall, his gaze intense and defiant. For most visitors, though, the David’s head is all they will see as they tour the pavilion. Only VIPs with special access will be able to catch a view of the statue from head to toe while it’s on display for the next six months at Dubai’s Expo 2020.

The original David is nude and some visitors see the limited view offered as a form of artistic censorship. Others say the way David is displayed at the Expo is a form of artistic expression.

“It is no coincidence that David is not seen from the bottom to the top, as it normally is, but it welcomes people by looking at them in the face,” said David Rampello, the director of art at the Italian pavilion.

An art historian in Rome said choosing who can view the statue in full and who cannot creates a hierarchy.

“What the rich, the great and the good can see and what the ordinary folk can see shouldn’t be two different things,” said Professor Paul Gwynne, who teaches medieval and renaissance studies at the American University of Rome.

It took a team of Italian experts 40 hours of digital scanning to create the replica, made with what organizers describe as one of the world’s largest 3D printers. Artists used filaments from recycled plastic material, then a mix of resins and marble dust to create it.


In this Friday, Oct. 1, 2021 file photo, a 3D re-production of Michelangelo's David is on display at the Italy's pavilion of the Dubai Expo 2020 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. One of the most talked about attractions at the world's fair underway in Dubai is a towering statue made of marble dust that's raising eyebrows just as its original form did more than 500 years ago. (AP Photo/Kamran Jebreili, File)

At its home in Florence’s Galleria dell’Accademia since 1873, the original David draws gasps from onlookers to this day. Michelangelo’s mastery and his passion for human anatomy, from the contracted muscles of David’s abdomen to the flexing of his right thigh muscles, make the piece unforgettable for those looking up at the towering work of art.

In Dubai, those details get lost. David stands in the center of a narrow octagonal shaft, presented from his chest up and surrounded by replicas of Roman columns. Visitors in the public area can see parts of David’s torso if they lean over a railing.

The rest of his body sits inside a clear partition on the separate floor. His genitals and buttocks find themselves between the floors, though fully visible if an onlooker stands near the partition and peers up.

That position drew the ire of a La Repubblica reporter writing on Expo’s opening.

“Why can’t you see the whole body of the biblical hero, because you only see the head, the magnetic eyes staring at you silently? And where is the rest?” an article in the daily newspaper read, at one point referring to David’s “beheading.”

David’s nudity has been part of a centuries-old debate about art pushing boundaries and the rules of censorship. In the 1500s, metal fig leaves covered the genitals of statues like David when the Roman Catholic Church deemed nudity as immodest and obscene.

Nudity even bumps up against mores in the modern era. Controversy erupted in 2016 when officials erected wooden panels to shield nude statues at Rome’s Capitoline Museums during a visit by Iran’s then-President Hassan Rouhani. That spurred some politicians to accuse the government of caving in to “cultural submission” though Rouhani himself thanked Italians as being “ very hospitable people” when asked about the gesture.

In the wider United Arab Emirates, a few nude artworks can be seen at the Louvre Abu Dhabi, though the museum largely caters to more conservative pieces.

Expo visitor Calli Schmitz from Germany she said she didn’t think the way the replica was displayed at the Expo did it much justice.

“I think it was not as exposed as it should have been,” she said. “I think because of the gold everywhere, people did not really realize it was the statue of David.”

Italian visitor Ricardo Mantarano offered another take.

“It’s a different way of approaching the same sculpture and putting it in another perspective,” he said.

Dinara Aksyanova, a 31-year-old visitor from Moscow, however, wasn’t as forgiving.

“Why was it only half? It makes no sense,” she said. “The most interesting part is underneath.”

___

Follow Malak Harb on Twitter at www.twitter.com/malakharb.
ADVERTISEMENT

'1 STEP FORWARD 2 STEPS BACK' LENIN

China’s plan to build more coal-fired plants deals blow to UK’s Cop26 ambitions

Renewed commitment to coal could scupper Britain’s aim to secure global phase-out pact at climate summit

Engineers operating at the coal dock in Tianjin port, China.

 Photograph: Xinhua/Rex/Shutterstock

Rob Davies
THE GUARDIAN
Tue 12 Oct 2021

China plans to build more coal-fired power plants and has hinted that it will rethink its timetable to slash emissions, in a significant blow to the UK’s ambitions for securing a global agreement on phasing out coal at the Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow.

In a statement after a meeting of Beijing’s National Energy Commission, the Chinese premier, Li Keqiang, stressed the importance of regular energy supply, after swathes of the country were plunged into darkness by rolling blackouts that hit factories and homes.

While China has published plans to reach peak carbon emissions by 2030, the statement hinted that the energy crisis had led the Communist party to rethink the timing of this ambition, with a new “phased timetable and roadmap for peaking carbon emissions”.

China has previously set out plans to be carbon neutral by 2060, with emissions peaking by 2030, a goal analysts say would involve shutting 600 coal-fired power plants. President Xi Jinping has also pledged to stop building coal plants abroad.


What is Cop26 and why does it matter? The complete guide

“Energy security should be the premise on which a modern energy system is built and and the capacity for energy self-supply should be enhanced,” the statement said.

“Given the predominant place of coal in the country’s energy and resource endowment, it is important to optimise the layout for the coal production capacity, build advanced coal-fired power plants as appropriate in line with development needs, and continue to phase out outdated coal plants in an orderly fashion. Domestic oil and gas exploration will be intensified.”

Beijing’s ambitions for carbon dioxide output are seen as critical in the push to achieve global net zero carbon emissions by 2050 and fulfil the 2015 Paris agreement to limit average temperature rises to 1.5C. But Li said Beijing wanted to gather new evidence on when its peak emissions would be reached.

The statement said he had commissioned “in-depth studies and calculations in light of the recent handling of electricity and coal supply strains, to put forward a phased timetable and roadmap for peaking carbon emissions”.

Li’s rhetoric follows reports that China has ordered its two top coal-producing regions, Shanxi and Inner Mongolia, to combat the country’s power supply crisis.

Beijing’s renewed embrace of coal – apparently at odds with Xi’s state climate ambitions – are likely to cause alarm in the run-up to Cop26.

Alok Sharma, the UK’s president-designate of Cop26, has said an agreement to phase out coal power is a key aim of the summit.

George Magnus, a research associate at Oxford University’s China Centre and the author of Red Flags: Why Xi’s China Is in Jeopardy, said Beijing had been forced to revise its plans in the face of the reality of economic problems and power outages.

“China has stumbled into an energy crisis in much the same way the rest of us have done but it is exacerbated by the fact that the grid and the electricity companies are subject to price controls and cannot pass the prices on,” he said. “Many have decided to shut down production and they have had a lot of power outages for households and companies. This has come at a very bad moment in China, on top of [collapsed property giant] Evergrande and the property bust.

“They have basically cycled back on their coal policy. With Cop26 coming up, there is a lot of talk about how committed the Chinese are to net zero goals by 2050 but this is another setback. It has happened before, when the economy was weaker during the pandemic, that they relaxed restrictions on coal capacity. Now they are doing it again.

“If the new relaxations last a few weeks, it might not matter so much. If it lasts into 2022 as China strives to avoid bad economic outcomes ahead of its key CCP 20th party congress in November 2022, climate policy optimists might have to rethink for sure.”

20 ways the UK government's early response to Covid was the worst public health failing ever

LONG READ

A study has outlined serious errors and delays at the hands of the Government and scientific advisers that cost lives

“Decisions on lockdowns and social distancing during the early weeks of the pandemic rank as one of the most important public health failures the United Kingdom has ever experienced” according to a new report.

Serious errors and delays at the hands of the Government and scientific advisers cost lives during the Covid-19 pandemic, according to a study from the cross-party Science and Technology Committee and the Health and Social Care Committee.

The report found that the UK's preparation for a pandemic was far too focused on flu, while ministers waited too long to push through lockdown measures in early 2020.

In a wide-ranging report, which is very focused on England, MPs said the UK's pandemic planning was too "narrowly and inflexibly based on a flu model" that failed to learn the lessons from Sars, Mers and Ebola.

WalesOnline has already conducted substantial investigations into both the Welsh and UK Government responses to Covid that you can read below:

The 29 things a Covid inquiry absolutely must look at into how the Welsh Government handled the pandemic

19 mistakes the UK Government made during the Covid pandemic which cost Welsh lives

These are some (but by no means all) of the issues outlined in the report:

Pandemic preparedness

The anticipated future risk of pandemic disease focused too closely on influenza rather than diseases like SARS and MERS that had in recent years appeared in Asian countries.
COBRA was not well-suited to the modern demands of a pandemic response. It is especially concerning that its culture of confidentiality was considered by some to be so unreliable that alternative meetings were arranged .

Protocols to share data between public bodies involved in the response were too slow to establish and to become functional. This was especially true in the data flows from national to local government.

The NHS responded quickly and strongly to the demands of the pandemic, but compared to other health systems it “runs hot”—with little spare capacity builtin to cope with sudden and unexpected surges of demand such as in a pandemic.

Lockdowns and social distancing

During the first three months of the Covid pandemic, the UK followed the wrong policy in its use of non-pharmaceutical interventions. When the UK moved from the "contain" to "delay" stage, there was a policy of seeking to only moderate the speed of infection through the population—flattening the curve—rather than seeking to arrest its spread.
The lack of adequate data on the spread of covid-19, as a result of the inadequacy of the UK testing operation.

Overreliance on specific mathematical models when there were too many uncertainties
Assumptions about public compliance with rules that turned out to have underestimated the willingness to conform even for long periods.

The composition of SAGE suffered from a lack of representation from outside the United Kingdom.

A preference for a particular UK approach may have been favoured above advice based on emulation of what was being pursued elsewhere.

In the autumn it is likely that a “circuit break” with temporary lockdown measures if introduced in September 2020, and earlier lockdown measures during the winter, could have impeded the rapid seeding and spread of the Kent variant.

Testing and contact tracing

Despite being one of the first countries in the world to develop a test for covid in January 2020, the United Kingdom failed to translate that scientific leadership into operational success in establishing an effective test and trace system during the first year of the pandemic.

Testing capacity was treated too much as a parameter rather than a variable that could be changed by the Department of Health and Social Care and scientific advisers. What was being achieved in other countries, particularly East Asia, appeared to be of little interest in the initial weeks of the pandemic. This was "an inexcusable oversight".
The new Test and Trace (England only but wales had similar problems) operation eventually established in May 2020 was a step in the right direction but set up much too late.

Vast sums of taxpayers’ money were directed to Test and Trace, justified by the benefits of avoiding further lockdowns. But ultimately those lockdowns happened. Were it not for the success of the NHS vaccination programme, it is likely that further lockdown restrictions would have been needed in the summer 2021.
The Test and Trace organisation has not, despite its branding, been run by the NHS, and has seen senior executives brought in from external bodies for short term contracts which reduces the institutional learning, from what was an intense period, that has been retained.

Partly because it was set up too late, NHS Test and Trace ultimately fell short of the expectations set for it. It has failed to make a significant enough impact on the course of the pandemic to justify the level of public investment it received. It clearly failed on its own terms, given its aim in September to “avoid the need for a second lockdown” by contributing to a reduction in the ‘R’ number.

Social care

Social care had a less prominent voice in Government during the early stages of the pandemic than did the NHS.

Staff shortages, the lack of testing, difficulties in obtaining PPE and the design of care settings to enable communal living hampered isolation and infection control and the ability to keep Covid at bay. Social care staff in care homes and providing domiciliary care worked under strenuous conditions, at risk to themselves, to provide care to people. This was directed at England but Wales had exactly the same issues.

The discharge of elderly people from NHS hospitals into care homes without having been tested at the beginning of the pandemic—while understandable as the NHS prepared to accept a surge of Covid patients—had the unintended consequence of contributing to the spread of infection in care homes.. Again this is focused on England but you can see that Wales had the same issues here.

Former chief medical officer Professor Dame Sally Davies told MPs there was "groupthink", with infectious disease experts not believing that "Sars, or another Sars, would get from Asia to us".

The UK's national risk register, which was in place at the start of the pandemic, said "the likelihood of an emerging infectious disease spreading within the UK is assessed to be lower than that of a pandemic flu". It also said only up to 100 people may die during any outbreak of an emerging infectious disease.

Once Covid emerged in China, MPs said the UK policy was to take a "gradual and incremental approach" to interventions such as social distancing, isolation and lockdowns.

In their study, they said this was "a deliberate policy" proposed by scientists and adopted by UK governments, which has now been shown to be "wrong" and led to a higher death toll.

The MPs said the "decisions on lockdowns and social distancing during the early weeks of the pandemic - and the advice that led to them - rank as one of the most important public health failures the United Kingdom has ever experienced".

On the issue of whether the Government was pursuing a policy of herd immunity, which has proved controversial, MPs said that while it was not an official Government strategy, there was a "policy approach of fatalism about the prospects for Covid in the community".

Experts and ministers sought to "only moderate the speed of infection" through the population - flattening the curve - rather than seeking to stop its spread altogether.

The report added: "The policy was pursued until March 23 because of the official scientific advice the Government received, not in spite of it."

Even as late as March 12, 2020, Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government's chief scientific adviser, told a Government press conference that it was not possible to stop everyone being infected, and nor was that a desirable objective.

The following day, members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) also said they were "unanimous that measures seeking to completely suppress spread of Covid-19 will cause a second peak".

After hearing evidence from people including the Prime Minister's former adviser Dominic Cummings, and former health secretary Matt Hancock, the MPs concluded it was only in the days leading up to the March 23 lockdown that people within Government and advisers "experienced simultaneous epiphanies that the course the UK was following was wrong, possibly catastrophically so".

A paper from Imperial College London, presented to Sage, was among models showing that an unmitigated epidemic could result in around 500,000 UK deaths.

MPs concluded it was "astonishing" it took so long for Sage to say a full lockdown was needed and for the Government to implement one, adding they thought the evidence showed a lockdown was "inevitable".

In other criticisms, MPs said the UK also implemented "light-touch border controls" only on countries with high Covid rates, even though 33% of cases during the first wave were introduced from Spain and 29% from France.

They also argued that earlier social distancing and locking down "would have bought much-needed time" for vaccine research to bear fruit, for Covid treatments to be developed and for a proper test and trace system to be set up.

They said the "early weeks of the pandemic expose deficiencies in both scientific advice and Government action", with no real idea of how far the virus had spread and a downplaying of the role of asymptomatic transmission.

Furthermore, there was a false belief that the public would not accept lockdown, or would only do so for a short period of time.

The lack of testing capacity also meant there was nowhere near enough data on Covid spread, while abandoning community testing on March 12 was regarded by MPs as a "seminal failure".

Elsewhere, MPs said that thousands of elderly people died in care homes during the first wave of the pandemic, something that showed "social care had a less prominent voice in Government during the early stages of the pandemic than did the NHS".

The decision not to test people discharged from hospitals to care homes early on was a failure and led to deaths, they added.

In a joint statement, Tory MPs Greg Clark and Jeremy Hunt, who chair the committees, said: "The UK response has combined some big achievements with some big mistakes. It is vital to learn from both to ensure that we perform as best as we possibly can during the remainder of the pandemic and in the future.

"Our vaccine programme was boldly planned and effectively executed. Our test and trace programme took too long to become effective.

"The Government took seriously scientific advice but there should have been more challenge from all to the early UK consensus that delayed a more comprehensive lockdown when countries like South Korea showed a different approach was possible.

"In responding to an emergency, when much is unknown, it is impossible to get everything right.

"We record our gratitude to all those - NHS and care workers, scientists, officials in national and local government, workers in our public services and in private businesses and millions of volunteers - who responded to the challenge with dedication, compassion and hard work to help the whole nation at one of our darkest times."

The report also pointed to the regional tier system as being confusing for the public, adding that it was not "watertight" enough to prevent infection spreading.

Elsewhere, scientific evidence for some measures was lacking, such as the imposition from September 24 2020 of a 10pm curfew on pubs, or the banning of outdoor children's sports clubs, MPs said.

Regarding the second lockdown, MPs said that had more stringent social distancing measures been adopted during the autumn, they could have "reduced the seeding of the Alpha variant across the country, slowed its spread and therefore have saved lives".

However, MPs also noted it was true that the Alpha variant only became known about in December 2020.

Across the board, the report criticised a national failure to share data between central and local government, adding that the NHS was squeezed due to shortages of staff.

Regarding test and trace, the "slow, uncertain, and often chaotic performance of the test, trace and isolate system severely hampered the UK's response to the pandemic", MPs said.

They also noted "unacceptably high death rates among people from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities" and those with learning disabilities.


But MPs offered praise in two areas - treatments and vaccines - saying ministers were "correct to identify that a vaccine would be the long-term route out of the pandemic" and supported research and development.

Shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth said of the report: "This is a damning report by a cross-party group of MPs into the monumental errors made by ministers in responding to the pandemic."

Facebook is not doing enough against anti-Palestinian hate

Opinion: Facebook's Oversight Board decision to investigate if there is bias against Palestinians is welcome, yet it is barely tackling an endemic problem, writes Sophie Driscoll.

Perspectives
Sophie Driscoll
11 Oct, 2021

A Palestinian demonstrator holds a banner during a protest against blocking of Facebook to Palestinian's accounts in front of the Office of UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process (UNSCO) in Gaza City, Gaza on 29 September 2016. [Getty]

Facebook's Oversight Board has recommended an independent review into whether or not the platform's content moderation policy is biased against Palestinians in favour of Israel.

The decision comes after years of complaints from Palestinians and their supporters that not only is Facebook deliberately censoring them and violating their freedom of speech, but the platform is also failing to address anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian hate speech, particularly during times of violent unrest. The situation is replicated across all of Facebook's brands, including Instagram and Whatsapp. There were at least two cases of Palestinian citizens of Israel being killed by Israeli lynch mobs who used Facebook-owned Whatsapp to organize the attacks. While the Oversight Board's decision to hold Facebook to account is welcome, it is not enough to tackle the endemic problem of violations against freedom of speech and government interference on the platform.
How did we get here?

The Oversight Board's decision was prompted by an incident on 10 May 2021, when an Egyptian Facebook user shared a news story from the verified Al Jazeera Arabic page to his 15,000 followers, referencing commentary from the spokesperson of al-Qassam Brigades, the military faction of the Palestinian political party, Hamas. The post was removed and then later restored after the user appealed directly to Facebook's independent Oversight Board.


"The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media (7amleh) documented in the period of May 6-19, 2021 there were 1,090,000 comments relating to Palestine on social media, and 183,000 instances of hate speech against Palestinians"

The lack of transparency surrounding Facebook's content moderation policy was made clear during the Oversight Board's investigation, when Facebook was still unable to explain how two human moderators had judged the Egyptian user's Al-Jazeera post to violate community standards, as the company does not require moderators to record their reasoning behind their decisions at any stage of the moderation process.

However, this particular instance of over-moderation against Palestinians is just the tip of the iceberg. During May this year as tensions escalated, Palestinians were faced with mounting on-the-ground human rights violations including ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem, intercommunal violence in Palestinian-majority cities in Israel, the Israeli army storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque, and an 11-day Gaza attack. Palestinians took to social media to document the events in real-time, and share the unfiltered reality of their lives with the rest of the world.

RELATED

Big tech is trying to deplatform Palestinians

Perspectives

Laura Albast

11 May, 2021

Yet, Palestinian users soon found that their content was being removed or restricted. The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media (7amleh) documented in the period of May 6-19, 2021 there were 1,090,000 comments relating to Palestine on social media, and 183,000 instances of hate speech against Palestinians. During the same period, Instagram removed or restricted at least 250 pieces of content related to Palestine and the #SaveSheikhJarrah campaign, while Facebook removed at least 179. These numbers represent just those content removals self-reported by users, and the true figures are likely to be much higher.

At the Palestine Digital Activism Forum in March 2021, Facebook discussed its human rights policy during a session, stressing its commitment "to be a place for equality, safety, dignity, and free speech." However, as events folded during May this year, it soon became clear that Facebook's policy of restricting Palestinian voices and their documentations of human rights abuses is still firmly in place. In fact, Palestinians are not the only marginalised community to experience such restrictive policies, as activists in Colombia and Kashmir reported similar issues.
Official explanations

When faced with accusations of bias, Facebook often dismisses its removal of Palestinian posts as a mistake made by human moderators. For example, when Facebook-owned Instagram removed posts about Israeli police storming Al-Aqsa mosque, a Facebook spokesperson claimed that human moderators had mistaken the words "Al-Aqsa mosque" for "Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigade" an armed Palestinian group, showing the platform’s lack of cultural understanding concerning the MENA region.

In other cases, the issue of over-moderation is blamed on vague technical issues, such as a fault within the algorithm. Indeed, Instagram promised to tweak its algorithm in response to accusations of widespread censorship from activists in Palestine, and even their own employees. However, these explanations typically only focus on the technical issues for such content removals and do not address the high frequency and diverse types of censorship documented by rights advocates.
RELATED

Anti-zionism isn't anti-semitism, Facebook should make the distinction

Voices

Mitchell Plitnick

24 February, 2021

It is also likely the Israeli Ministry of Justice's Cyber Unit is behind many of these content removals. Since 2015, the controversial unit has submitted tens of thousands of removal requests to Facebook, according to the Office of the State Attorney's annual reports. In 2016, Facebook began having regular meetings with senior Israeli government officials, leading Justice Minister at the time, Ayelet Shaked to claim that Facebook was compliant with 95% of their removal requests. During the period of 6th-19th May as unrest spread across the region, 7amleh contested content removals across Facebook and Instagram, and 20% were restored.

Upon investigation, it was clear that much of the removed content did not go against community standards, and in fact, documented human rights violations against Palestinians on the ground. This raises a number of red flags, such as a lack of transparency into why certain content is removed - including documentation of rights abuses - and why Facebook allows governments to interfere with user content to such a far-reaching extent.

Moving forward

While the Oversight Board's recommendation of an independent investigation into bias in relation to Palestine and Israel is a step in the right direction, glaring questions still remain, not only about how content is reviewed and moderated but also how Facebook plans to protect freedom of expression and protect against government interference. This case is not an isolated incident and stresses the need for a thorough and transparent public audit of Facebook's policies and actions regarding Palestine.

Earlier this year, 7amleh along with 16 organizations and over 50 artists, journalists, and human rights defenders around the world, launched the #StopSilencingPalestine campaign to demand full transparency and an end to Facebook's censorship of Palestinian voices. The coalition supports the Oversight Board's recommendations and calls on Facebook once again to:
Public Audit: An independent, public audit of content moderation policies with regards to Palestine and a commitment to co-design policies and tools that address issues or over-moderation discovered during the audit. Furthermore, rules should be based on existing human rights frameworks and must be applied consistently across jurisdictions.

Government request transparency: Complete transparency on requests -both legal and voluntary - submitted by the Israeli government and Cyber Unit, including a number of requests, type of content enforcement; and data regarding compliance with such requests. Users should also have the opportunity to appeal content decisions.

Automation transparency: Transparency with respect to where automation and machine learning algorithms are being used to moderate content related to Palestine, including error rates as well as classifiers used.

Dangerous organizations: Transparency regarding any content guidelines or rules related to the classification and moderation of terrorism and extremism. Companies should, at minimum, publish any internal lists of groups classified as "terrorist" or "extremist." Users cannot adhere to rules that are not made explicit.

Commitment to co-design: Commitment to a co-design process with civil society to improve upon policies and processes involving Palestinian content.

Sophie Driscoll is a digital rights activist and communications specialist volunteering with 7amleh - The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media.

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.

Omani rescuers fail to save endangered beached whale shark

A whale shark that beached on the coast of Oman has died, despite the efforts of locals to save it.

Environment
The New Arab Staff
12 October, 2021

Whale sharks have been monitored off the coast of Oman since 1998 [Getty]

Rescuers have failed to save a whale shark that beached itself on the coast of Oman.

The six-metre-long whale shark was discovered by a local resident from the nearby village of Sohar, as he took his morning walk along the beach.

"We saw a whale swimming towards the shore," Abdullah Al-Neyadi told Times of Oman.

"I rushed to help it with some fishermen on the beach, to try to find out why it was injured, and so that we could help it back to sea, but we were surprised that the whale [shark] was bleeding profusely from the back,” he continued.

Despite calls to the Environment Agency, they were not able to determine the whale shark’s injuries were and were ultimately unable to save the animal.

"It took six hours before the whale [shark]’s ordeal ended and it finally ended up on shore, thanks to the momentum of the waves. I felt very sad that I was unable to save it," Al-Neyadi said.

According to an official from the Environment Department, the whale shark got tangled in the nets of fishermen off the coast.

The whale shark is considered an endangered species and can grow to lengths of 18 metres. It can live for as long as 130 years.

Despite their size and name, whale sharks pose no threat to humans.

The loss of this particular fish is considered a great loss for the local species.

"For this group to survive, it can at best lose one animal a year to human accidents," the official said.

A pod of whales sharks has been closely monitored off the coast of Oman since 1998.

"The Environment Department in North Al-Batinah Governorate calls on everyone to contribute to the preservation of whales, take precautionary measures to preserve them, do what is necessary to prevent them from accidentally falling into fishing nets, and work to safely remove them from nets, should they come across such a situation," the official added.

Jenin: The centre of a nascent Palestinian armed resistance?
Analysis
Qassam Muaddi
West Bank
12 October, 2021

Analysis: Israeli raids in the northern West Bank have increased in recent weeks, accompanied by armed clashes with Palestinians. But observers say a new wave of Palestinian armed activism is still too early to define

Armed clashes between Palestinians and Israeli forces have repeated in recent weeks at a rate unprecedented in the occupied West Bank for years, mostly in the northern Jenin governorate.

On Thursday, Israeli forces clashed with Palestinians while raiding the city of Nablus and the town of Kufr Dan, west of Jenin. At night armed clashes erupted in the town of Qabatia, south of Jenin. In late September Israeli forces raided the village of Burqin near Jenin, again clashing with armed Palestinians.

The raid ended with the death of one Palestinian and the injury of two Israeli soldiers. Simultaneously, three Palestinians were killed in an Israeli raid on their hide-out west of Ramallah. The Israeli army claimed to have found weapons and explosives at the site.

In mid-September, Israeli forces clashed with Palestinian gunmen at the Jenin refugee camp while arresting two of the six Palestinians who had escaped from the Gilboa prison. In the days prior to the arrest of the escapees, armed Palestinians had paraded through the camp, vowing to confront the Israeli army if it entered.

Since the Gilboa prison escape, Palestinians have also been opening fire on, and throwing local-made explosives at, the Jalamah Israeli checkpoint north of Jenin.

"Armed clashes between Palestinians and Israeli forces have repeated in recent weeks at a rate unprecedented in the occupied West Bank for years, mostly in the northern Jenin governorate"

Rising tensions

Palestinian factions have praised these incidents, saying that they represent the beginning of a new phase of Palestinian resistance in the West Bank.

Palestinian media reported that the Secretary-General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad called the families of Palestinians killed in Jenin and west of Ramallah, declaring that “their blood has lit the way to liberation”.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) also said in a statement that the latest incidents “demonstrate that the Palestinian people are marching towards a total Intifada”. However, beyond political speech, the recent incidents in the West Bank seem to be a phenomenon whose nature and consequences are too early to be determined, observers say.

Mahmoud Abbas and the PA's succession dilemma

Analysis

Tariq Dana

12 August, 2021

Shatha Hanayesh, a Palestinian journalist based in Jenin, told The New Arab that the current situation “evolved out of the aftermath of the Gilboa escape in early September”. According to Hanayesh, “Israeli threats to invade the camp following the escape were met with acts of defiance by Palestinian activists, who showed an armed, seemingly organised force for the first time in years, and this caused tensions to rise in the region”.

Hanayesh also explained that Israeli raids and repeated armed confrontations have impacted the daily life of Palestinians in the area. “People are wondering on a daily basis if the Israeli army will eventually launch a wide attack on Jenin. There are less people in the streets and markets, commerce has dropped back and some businesses have been closed in the past weeks”.

'Jenin, where armed activism never disappeared'

Bilal Shalash, a Palestinian researcher specialised in the history of Palestinian resistance, told The New Arab that “Palestinian factions make declarations sometimes out of wishful thinking, and sometimes as a form to state their official policy”.

For Shalash, “It is still early to know the size and nature of the current Palestinian armed actions, which in any case are a sign of Israeli failure to contain the situation in the West Bank”.

The Palestinian Authority's growing authoritarianism

In-depth

Alessandra Bajec

08 July, 2021

According to Shalash, the fact that these incidents have taken place mostly in the area of Jenin also has a reason. “Jenin has been away from the centre of the PA in Ramallah, practically in the margins of the West Bank, where little control is possible," he said.

"Especially in the Jenin refugee camp, where armed forms of activism never disappeared since the Second Intifada”.

Fed-up youth

Qaher Abed, Secretary of the Fatah movement in the west Jenin area, noted that "when I speak to young people in Jenin, they tell me that they are fed-up of life under constant military raids, arrests and closures. Some of them have been through prison several times at a very young age, and they have lost all fear".

Abed also highlighted that "these youngsters are not, for the most part, members of organisations. They come out and clash with Israeli forces because raids happen in their towns and neighbourhoods, and most of them are armed by nothing else but stones".

"Jenin has been away from the centre of the PA in Ramallah, practically in the margins of the West Bank, where little control is possible"

Bilal Shalash agrees with Abed. "What happens in Jenin is the same that happens in the rest of the West Bank, when youngsters throw stones at the Israeli forces. The difference is that in Jenin, there are more firearms available, and a strongly rooted culture of armed resistance". However, Shalash stresses; "It's only one step away from real organisation, and there are indicators that this transformation is already happening".

From her side, Shatha Hanayesh believes that “the Israeli army is trying to contain Palestinian activists through targeted raids, without risking a wide confrontation, especially at the Jenin refugee camp”.

Hanayesh pointed out that “Palestinian activists' reaction might increase, but nobody can guess where things might lead in the coming days”. Although Bilal Shalash insists that “there is a bit of exaggeration about what is happening in the West Bank”, he holds to the idea that “anything can happen”.

Qassam Muaddi is The New Arab's West Bank reporter, covering political and social developments in the occupied Palestinian territories

Bernie Sanders pushes for Gaza aid in exchange for 'yes' vote on Israel's Iron Dome

US Senator Bernie Sanders will reportedly vote 'yes' on extra funding for the Iron Dome in exchange for humanitarian aid to Gaza.

MENA
Brooke Anderson
Washington, D.C.
12 October, 2021

Bernie Sanders is reportedly planning to vote 'yes' on extra funding for the Iron Dome [Getty]

WASHINGTON: Left-wing US Senator Bernie Sanders is expected to back an additional $1 billion worth of funding for Israel's Iron Dome missile system in an upcoming Senate vote in exchange for more aid to Gaza.

The quarterly Jewish Currents magazine - which obtained a copy of a letter from Sanders to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer - said that although he was critical of Israel's Iron Dome request the Vermont Senator is planning on voting "yes" in a bid to push for increased humanitarian relief for Palestinians in Gaza.

Sanders appears to see this exchange as a strategic counterbalance to the massive US military funding Israel already receives.

In addition, there is no indication that a "no" vote from Sanders would affect the final outcome of the Senate vote.

Last month's vote in the House of Representatives went 420-9 in favour of the extra $1 billion for the Iron Dome system.

"In reality, the funding for the Iron Dome was going to pass because it is viewed as a system of self-defence rather than a system for orchestrating attacks," Anwar Mhajne, assistant professor of political science at Stonehill College told The New Arab.

Mhajne said that while she did not necessarily agree with Sanders' potential move, she saw the reasoning behind it.

"Using the 'yes' vote to bargain won't stop the blockade [of Gaza] or Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories. It won't push Israel to consider the proper solution for its security issues, achieving a just peace agreement with the Palestinians. However, the bargain achieves a minuscule gain in the form of financial relief for civilians in Gaza," Mhajne said.

Israel’s assault on Gaza in May left more than 250 Palestinians dead and nearly 2,000 wounded, while more than 75,000 were displaced from their homes.

Getting away with murder: Saudi fund’s Newcastle United purchase puts Khashoggi assassination in rearview

Opinion: With English Premier League teams regularly losing money, this Saudi deal is likely more about 'sports washing' than making a profit, writes Kristian Coates 

Newcastle United supporters dressed in robes pose with 'sold' placards as they celebrate the sale of the club to a Saudi-led consortium, outside the club's stadium at St James' Park in Newcastle upon Tyne in northeast England on 8 October 2021. [Getty]

Kristian Coates Ulrichsen
12 Oct, 2021

A consortium led by the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia has acquired ownership of Newcastle United in the English Premier League after an 18-month long controversy over whether the Saudi state, rather than its sovereign wealth fund, would exercise control over the soccer club. Almost three years to the day after Jamal Khashoggi walked into the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul and never came out, the scenes of jubilation involving up to 15,000 Newcastle supporters celebrating the takeover vividly illustrated some of the soft power benefits the Saudi leadership anticipates will accrue from the purchase.

One of the oldest and historically more successful teams in England, Newcastle United has developed a reputation for having one of the most passionate fanbases in the country. In recent years, supporters had turned on the previous owners, accusing them of under-investing in the team and of presiding over years of poor performances.

Against this background of chronic underachievement, the April 2020 announcement that the Public Investment Fund was partnering with RB Sports & Media and PCP Capital Partners to purchase the team sparked the excitement of Newcastle fans who anticipated the deal would catapult the team into a European powerhouse just as Abu Dhabi’s takeover of Manchester City in 2008 and Qatar’s purchase of Paris Saint-Germain in 2010 did.

"The fact that the Newcastle takeover was finally given the green light by the English Premier League a day after the resolution of the beIN issue was announced is unlikely a coincidence"

Although the decision to proceed with the Newcastle takeover, which had been stalled since July 2020, was framed by assurances the English Premier League received from the Public Investment Fund regarding its separation from the Saudi state, the key to unlocking the deadlock appears to have been a Saudi decision to unblock the Qatar-owned beIN Sports from broadcasting in the Kingdom.

beIN holds the Middle East North Africa rights to show English Premier League games, as well as a host of other sporting competitions, but its signal had been blocked in Saudi Arabia since 2017 as part of the blockade of Qatar. The Saudi authorities were also accused of turning a blind eye, at best, to an audacious shadow company, tellingly named beOutQ, that systematically pirated beIN broadcasting rights, including for Premier League games, in 2018 and 2019, in an apparent effort to score points against Doha during the blockade.

The fact that the Newcastle takeover was finally given the green light by the English Premier League a day after the resolution of the beIN issue was announced is unlikely a coincidence. The unpalatable truth is that business and commercial considerations were paramount over issues such as the Public Investment Fund's apparent ownership of the planes that transported Khashoggi's killers to Istanbul in 2018.

The enthusiasm that has greeted the new Saudi owners in Newcastle is another signal that the post-Khashoggi cold-shouldering of Mohammed bin Salman has come to an end, just as Joe Biden did not follow through on a campaign statement that he would make Saudi Arabia "the pariah that they are."

What do the Saudis get from purchasing a team that currently lies second-last in the Premier League and without a championship since 1927? The 20 teams in the English Premier League collectively lost almost a £1 billion in the pandemic-hit 2019-20 season, and Abu Dhabi-owned Manchester City has recorded yearly losses upwards of £100 million. Buying a team hardly guarantees a conventional return on investment.

It is likely the Saudis see themselves as buying a prestige asset for state-branding (or "sports-washing") purposes because the acquisition does not contribute to the Public Investment Fund’s mission to assist in economic diversification and job creation in Saudi Arabia. There is, instead, an intangible factor that the new owners will be seeking which is about soft power projection, changing the image of Saudi Arabia, and utilizing the mass appeal of soccer to reach new audiences around the world.

Like it or or not, sport will always be political

Voices

Sam Hamad

03 August, 2021

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who doubles as the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Public Investment Fund, has staked his credibility as the ruler-in-waiting of Saudi Arabia on Vision 2030 and the premise that he, and he alone, can transform the Saudi economy and society. Sport, entertainment, and tourism feature heavily in Vision 2030 and in the associated "giga-projects" announced by MBS since 2017 (and entrusted to the Public Investment Fund for delivery).

These include Qiddiya, a large-scale entertainment, sports, and cultural complex near Riyadh that was launched by the Crown Prince in 2017. Under Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia has also become far more active in trying to harness the power of culture and sport to burnish its image, with the first Saudi Arabia Grand Prix set to take place on a street circuit in Jeddah in December and the Kingdom is leading a push to hold the FIFA World Cup every two years, instead of four, with hopes that it might host the tournament as well.

"To be sure, sports-washing is neither a new concept nor associated with Saudi Arabia alone"

To be sure, sports-washing is neither a new concept nor associated with Saudi Arabia alone; one need only recollect the spectacle of the 1936 Olympic Games in Berlin to appreciate the convening power of elite-level sport. English Premier League games are viewed in more than 200 countries and territories and Newcastle could play a visible role in "selling" Saudi Arabia to a genuinely global constituency.

Mohammed bin Salman may therefore be hoping that the passage of time may dim the memory of Khashoggi’s murder and dismemberment, to say nothing of the Saudi war on and blockade of Yemen, and that turning Saudi Arabia into an international sporting powerhouse "normalises" the Kingdom and its leadership after a difficult couple of years.

Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, PhD, is a Fellow for the Middle East at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.

Follow him on Twitter at @Dr_Ulrichsen.

This article was originally published by our friends at Responsible Statecraft.

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.