The Attainability of the Evidentiary Standard for Genocidal Intent in Gaza

Written by Rana Moustafa Essawy

 May 3, 2024

Since 2019, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has been perceived as a viable instrument for stopping ongoing genocides after the UN political organs have failed to take effective actions to that effect. Thus, under Article IX of the Genocide Convention (1948), South Africa took Israel to the ICJ for its genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza after Israel’s defiance of the resolutions issued by the Security Council and General Assembly.

On 26 January, the ICJ issued an order on provisional measures against Israel. Many expected this order and even described it as a foregone conclusion. By contrast, an affirmative finding from the Court regarding the commission of genocide in Gaza has been described by many as certainly unlikely. The main reason put forward by proponents of that opinion is the very high threshold that the ICJ requires for proving ‘genocidal intent’, as it requires proof that the intent is ‘the only reasonable inference’ drawn from the evidence.

Despite the recent report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, demonstrating and concluding that the genocidal intent is the ‘only reasonable inference’ to be drawn regarding the objective of the Israeli Defense Forces’s (IDF) acts (see here as well), it is argued that the declared military objective to destroy Hamas after the attack on 7 October cannot be overlooked as another reasonable inference, making the ICJ’s standard for genocidal intent unattainable.

Even if one arguably assumes that the destruction of Hamas can reasonably be inferred as the objective of the IDF’s acts, this does not negate a finding of genocidal intent under the ICJ’s standard of ‘only reasonable inference’. Thus, it is the purpose of this blog post to discuss the ICJ’s threshold and demonstrate that it is not a legal impediment to making an affirmative finding on the commission of genocide in Gaza.

The ICJ’s Approach to Genocidal Intent

Genocide is defined in Article II of the Genocide Convention as any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Accordingly, genocide can be claimed to have been committed only if it can be proven that the perpetrator held a genocidal intent. Thus, this genocidal intent—usually referred to as ‘the specific intent’ or ‘dolus specialis’—distinguishes genocide from other serious crimes because the perpetrator should have not only the normal mens rea of intending to commit one of the acts listed above but also the intent to destroy the group, in whole or in part. 

The ICJ has dealt with genocidal allegations in two contentious cases: The Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in 2007 (Bosnia v. Serbia) and 2015 (Croatia v. Serbia). In both cases, the ICJ refused to make the positive finding that Serbia had ‘committed genocide, through its organs or persons whose acts engage its responsibility’ but concluded in the affirmative that Serbia had ‘violated the obligation to prevent genocide’ only in respect of the events that transpired in Srebrenica in July 1995 (Bosnia v. Serbia).

Although the Court accepted in both cases that genocidal intent could be established on the basis of circumstantial evidence as this intent is rarely declared or formulated explicitly, it did not find that a dolus specialis can be inferred from the pattern of atrocities presented by the applicants as evidence of such intent. In that respect, the Court required that the pattern of acts should ‘have to be such that it could only point to the existence of such intent’ (emphasis added) (Bosnia v. Serbia, para. 373). Using the terms of the decision for the case of Croatia v. Serbia, the Court stressed that ‘in order to infer the existence of dolus specialis from a pattern of conduct, it is necessary and sufficient that this is the only inference that could reasonably be drawn from the acts in question’ (emphasis added) (para. 148).

This threshold required for proving genocidal intent has been criticised since then (e.g. see here). Recently, in their joint intervention declaration in the case of Myanmar, Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Denmark warned against ‘rendering the threshold for inferring genocidal intent so difficult to meet so as to make findings of genocide near-impossible’ (para. 51).

Furthermore, in his dissenting opinion to the ICJ’s decision in the case of Croatia v. Serbia, Judge Cançado Trindade argued that the Court ‘seems to have imposed too high a threshold for the determination of mens rea of genocide, which does not appear in line with the jurisprudence constante of international criminal tribunals on the matter’ (para.467).

However, by reviewing the case law database for the international criminal tribunals (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia [ICTY]/International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda [ICTR]), it appears that the standard of ‘the only inference that could reasonably be drawn’ is the established standard of proof by inference. It has also been applied by tribunals in the context of genocidal intent (see Krstić ICTY Appeal Judgment para. 41; Nyiramasuhuko et al. ICTR Trial judgment, para. 5732; Karadžić ICTY Trial Judgment, para. 2592)

The ‘only reasonable inference’ standard is commonly perceived as similar to the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard of proof applied in the realm of international criminal jurisprudence. Consequently, it is understood as a standard of proof whereby the ICJ is required to discard any inference of genocidal intent if any other motive could reasonably be inferred from evidence.

Nevertheless, I believe that such an understanding would be oversimplistic in the context of the crime of genocide, given that the international criminal tribunals have envisaged the possibility of the co-existence of genocidal intent with other motives. For example, the ICTY Appeals Chamber decided in the Jelisić case that ‘the existence of a personal motive does not preclude the perpetrator from also having the specific intent to commit genocide’ (para. 49). Furthermore, in the Niyitegeka case, the ICTR Appeals Chamber rejected the argument that the word ‘as such’ in the definition of genocide should be interpreted to require a determination that the perpetrator’s acts were ‘solely’ motivated by the intent to destroy (paras.47-55).

In that respect, the ICTY and ICTR have referred to the motive ‘to obtain personal economic benefits, or political advantage or some form of power’ as examples of motives that can co-exist with genocidal intent. Furthermore, military considerations have been considered among the motives that can co-exist with genocidal intent. On that latter point, Judge Trindade warned (citing Ryan Y. Park) in his dissenting opinion to the ICJ’s decision in Croatia v. Serbia:

One cannot characterize a situation as one of armed conflict so as to discard genocide. The two do not exclude each other. In this connection, it has been pertinently warned that perpetrators of genocide will almost always allege that they were in an armed conflict, and their actions were taken “pursuant to an ongoing military conflict”; yet, “genocide may be a means for achieving military objectives just as readily as military conflict may be a means for instigating a genocidal plan” (para.144).

However, if genocidal intent can co-exist with those other motives, it would be nearly impossible to prove because in most cases, it will not be ‘the only reasonable inference’ that could be made on the basis of evidence. Therefore, I believe that understanding the nature of genocidal intent is essential to understanding how the ICJ’s approach of ‘the only reasonable inference’ should be interpreted and applied. It is to this point the following section turns to.

The Nature of ‘Genocidal Intent’

This section will explore the nature of genocidal intent and its relation to other motives. In this respect, it builds partly on Paul Behren’s article ‘Genocide and the Question of Motives’.

Although genocidal intent is established to be the distinguishing feature of genocide, the nature of this ‘dolus specialis’ is controversial. Several decisions of the international criminal tribunals tended to differentiate genocidal intent from the notion of motive. For example, in the Jelisić case, the ICTY Appeals Chamber emphasised ‘the necessity to distinguish specific intent from motive’ (para. 49). On the other hand, other decisions have used the word motive and other related terms to refer to genocidal intent. For example, in the Akayesu case, the ICTR Trial Chamber referred to genocidal intent as the ‘ulterior motive’ (para. 522). The question then is: Is the genocidal intent an intent stricto sensu or a motive? And why is this question of any importance in the first place?

When it comes to the relevance of intentions and motives in the realm of international criminal law, the ICTY Appeals Chamber clearly stated in the Tadić case that ‘motive is generally irrelevant in criminal law’, a finding that has been repeatedly stated in other decisions.

Nonetheless, when it comes to genocide, things are different. Motives can be relevant because –as I will explain in a minute– genocidal intent understood as a motive is a constituent element of the crime of genocide.

Generally, the intent to commit an act is understood as the will to carry out the act, while motive is ‘frequently perceived as the underlying reason that triggers the criminal act; as the aim for which the act itself is carried out’ (Paul, p. 503). In light of that, Paul rightly argues and demonstrates:

Motive does not lose its conceptual qualities by being incorporated into the definition of the crime, and if motive were simply understood as the (personal) cause for the actus reus and the (ordinary) mens rea, then the intent to destroy a protected group, would certainly qualify as motive (p. 509).

In other words, we can say that the génocidaire intends to commit one of the acts listed in Article 2 of the Genocide Convention with the motive to destroy the protected group. The consequence of characterising genocidal intent as a motive is that an examination of the motives of the perpetrator when committing any of the acts listed in Article 2 becomes relevant to proving the dolus specialis.

With this in mind, the following section turns to demonstrate how the ICJ’s standard of ‘the only reasonable inference’ could be met.

Satisfying The ICJ’s Standard for Genocidal Intent

In their above-mentioned joint intervention declaration, Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, and Denmark proposed a ‘balanced approach’ to ‘the only reasonable inference’ standard followed by the ICJ in the following sense:

When determining whether or not specific intent can be inferred from conduct, a court or tribunal must weigh the evidence before it and filter out inferences that are not reasonable. Put differently, the “only reasonable inference” test applies only between alternative explanations that have been found to be reasonably supported by the evidence (para. 52).

This ‘balanced approach’ holds the promise of avoiding rendering the ‘only reasonable inference’ standard as one that would make ‘findings of genocide near-impossible’. Furthermore, it accommodates the possibility of the co-existence of genocidal intent with other motives. Nevertheless, it does not provide a solution as to which of the two reasonable inferences should be preferred.

I believe that whenever there are two reasonable inferences of genocidal intent and another motive, the Court should examine the level at which each motive lies. In that respect, basing himself on an analysis of the decisions of the ICTY and ICTR, Paul clarified that motives can co-exist with the genocidal intent on two levels (each with differing consequences for their evidentiary significance): motives that underlie the genocidal intent and motives that exist on the same level as the specific intent. (pp.510,514)

When other motives clearly underlie genocidal intent, those motives become irrelevant, and only genocidal intent matters. However, when both motives appear to co-exist on the same level, the ‘only reasonable inference’ standard should be understood to invite the Court to thoroughly examine the facts and evidence presented to ensure that the other motive does not replace the genocidal intent, in the sense that the co-existence of both the genocidal intent and other motives becomes ‘the only reasonable inference’.

Applying the aforementioned to the Gaza situation, the destruction of Hamas as a reasonable inference of motive for the IDF’s acts shall not automatically negate an inference of genocidal intent, given that the co-existence of both motives is not ‘logically incompatible’. In other words, the destruction of Hamas as a reasonable inference of motive shall not automatically mean that civilian causalities should be reasonably regarded as incidental, thus precluding the inference of genocidal intent as the ‘only reasonable inference’.

Rather, the Court shall extensively scrutinize the totality of the evidence, mindful of the fact that military considerations can either underlie genocidal intent or co-exist with it on the same level. In the former case, it is genocidal intent which matters. In the second case, the Court’s job is to engage in the weighing of evidence to ensure that the co-existence on the same level of both the genocidal intent and the military motive is ‘the only reasonable inference’, in the sense that genocidal intent as distinguished from collateral civilian damage becomes ‘the only reasonable inference’ to be drawn from the totality of the evidence.

Conclusion

The approach advanced in this post to the ICJ’s standard of ‘only reasonable inference’: 1) preserves the gravity of the crime of genocide, 2) does not render the Genocide Convention meaningless and impossible to apply, and 3) reconciles the fact that genocidal intent can co-exist with other motives. Putting forward this approach should not be construed as a call for selective application of the law nor understood as a call for reversing the Court’s established jurisprudence. Rather, it is a plea to the Court to save humanity from ongoing and future genocides by holding accountable states committing genocide under the pretext of various justifications.

Rana Moustafa Essawy

Rana Moustafa Essawy is Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Alexandria University, Egypt. She is also Expert Member of the Committee on the Protection of People Living with HIV 

Thai Villagers Turn to Cartoon Cat as Extreme Heat Wave Leaves Much of Region Helpless

Doraemon plushies

Elena Aquila—Pacific Press/LightRocket/Getty Images

BY CHAD DE GUZMAN

TIME
MAY 3, 2024 


Desperate times call for desperate measures, and across Asia, communities are responding to an extreme and deadly heat wave, which has battered the region since last month and has left few options for residents and governments to cope, in creative and even superstitious ways.

One city in the Philippines has rolled out free mobile showers, while in Vietnam, municipal authorities reportedly looked into the possibility of enlisting the help of a man who claimed he could pray for precipitation. In Thailand, a village in the central province of Nakhon Sawan resorted earlier this week to a rain-calling ritual that involved parading a Japanese manga cat.

According to Thai media, some 200 residents of the province’s Phayuha Khiri district conducted a traditional hae nang maew, or “female cat parade.” The ceremony has agricultural roots dating back hundreds of years ago in which farmers would hold a procession with a nang maew (female cat), carried in either a basket or cage, across the village as planting season approaches. Because of cats’ aversion to water, traditionally the captive cat is splashed with water with the belief that its cries will augur rainfall.

While in the past, real cats have been used, amid increasing concerns about animal abuse, Hello Kitty dolls and other lifeless alternatives have been subbed in instead in recent years.

The Thai villagers this week used plushies of Doraemon—a cartoon blue, male, robotic cat of Japanese origin popularized by its eponymous manga and anime. It’s not the first time Doraemon has played the central part in the rain-calling ritual. Doraemon, which first appeared in 1969, has become a beloved icon in the Southeast Asian country and has often been spotted over the years in Buddhist shrines and temples.

But Doraemon’s powers in this regard are likely limited, as Thailand’s dry weather conditions aren’t expected to let up until at least mid-May, as the rainy season’s start is delayed. Meanwhile, as climate change continues to push global temperatures upward, meteorological experts warn that the country’s sweltering summer heat that once would ease around June may now and in the future last through October.

UNDER THE RADAR

Universal donor blood is 'close' to reality

Scientists identify 'cocktail' of enzymes that destroy harmful antigens


(Image credit: Illustration by Julia Wytrazek / Getty Images)

BY REBECCA MESSINA, THE WEEK UK


Attempts to create universal donor blood have taken a "decisive step forward" after scientists discovered ways to significantly reduce the risk of a negative reaction.

A "cocktail" of bacterial enzymes identified by researchers at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and Lund University in Sweden effectively removes antigens, according to findings published in the scientific journal Nature Microbiology.

Around 50% of people naturally have type O or "universal" blood, but those with type A, type B and the rarer type AB blood can currently only give and receive blood from their own group. This is because antigens, the chains of sugars attached to the body's red blood cells, take on different forms in type A and type B blood and can "trigger life-threatening immune reactions when transfused into non-matched recipients", DTU said in a press release.

Scientists have "experimented with enzymes" to remove antigens from blood for decades, said The Economist. But the new combination appears to be effective on "lengthened antigen sugar chains, called extensions, that are not targeted by current enzymes".


"We are close to being able to produce universal blood from group B donors, while there is still work to be done to convert the more complex group A blood," said Professor Maher Abou Hachem, who led the study.

The research team will work on the project for another three and a half years, after which they hope to progress to human clinical trials.

The ability to convert donor blood into a universal type would "markedly reduce the logistics and costs currently associated with storing four different blood types", said DTU.

Every drop counts. Blood banks have warned of dwindling supplies in countries including the US and UK, and "ageing populations are expected to increase the demand for blood yet further", said The Economist.

Fistula and child marriages: The two epidemics plaguing Pak women in Gilgit-Baltistan

Seema's battle with fistula unveils the tragedy of early marriage, urging society to confront the intertwined dangers of child marriage and women's health crises.

Shereen Karim

Published May 3, 2024

Seema, a resident of Astore District of Gilgit-Baltistan, received the title, ‘Woman of the Year’, not for her achievements, but for a fate imposed upon her at a tender age: child marriage. One can’t help but wonder how entering into a marriage contract at a tender age warrants this title.

Visibly upset, Seema recounted her story, explaining why she received the honour. Married at the tender age of 13 and diagnosed with vaginal fistula when she was 16 years old, Seema’s existence has since become synonymous with agony.

Every villager, out of pity for her deteriorating health, would visit her, oblivious to the struggle she bore in silence. With no funds for treatment, her father-in-law had even asked the doctor to give her poison — a desperate plea for relief.

Before delving further into Seema’s story, it is important to understand what vaginal fistula is.

The condition occurs when an abnormal passage is created between the vagina and neighbouring pelvic organs like the bladder or rectum. This can lead to numerous complications, including urinary and faecal leakage, abnormal vaginal discharge, tissue damage, kidney infections, and various other symptoms. Doctors warn that untreated fistulas can escalate to reproductive system cancers, potentially even leading to death.

Seema described the pain to be so agonising that she wished for a quick death on several occasions. It’s a stark contrast to the dreams that typically fill the heart of a 16-year-old girl — dreams of a future adorned with aspirations and possibilities. However, Seema found herself teetering on the precipice of despair, grappling with the grim reality of her life-long disease.

It only makes sense for her to be called the ‘Woman of the Year,’ doesn’t it? Her journey isn’t merely reflective of the far-reaching consequences of fistula but is also a testament to the devastating consequences of child marriage.

Perils of child marriage

According to a Unicef report an estimated 18 per cent of young girls are wed before reaching adulthood [18 years of age], amounting to almost 19 million child brides in the country. The number of unreported instances is believed to be even higher.

As per the National Commission on the Rights of Child (NCRC), Pakistan has the sixth highest number of women married before the age of 18 in the world.

The adverse impacts of early marriage are manifold, encompassing the deteriorating health of the young bride, high-risk pregnancy, and impediments to both her education and personal growth. Moreover, in developing countries such as Pakistan, the unregulated cycle of childbirth places a heavy financial strain on parents, as they struggle to support multiple children, ultimately perpetuating poverty within these families.

Despite tireless global campaigns and legal enforcement in these countries, the insidious practice of child marriage persists. This prevalence is fuelled by a glaring lack of awareness regarding the severe repercussions of such unions, amplifying the issue.

The plight of girls under 18 is particularly dire, as depicted in Seema’s case. Her story serves as a stark reminder of the health complications faced by these young brides face. From debilitating conditions like fistula to a myriad of other ailments, many women are condemned to a lifetime of anguish. While some manage to recover through treatment, others suffer without ever experiencing improvement in their health.

What medical experts say

Dr Sajjad Ahmed, who offers free treatment to patients at Koohi Goth Hospital in Karachi, said that a significant number of women travel long distances from remote areas to seek treatment at the hospital located in the port city’s Bin Qasim Town. This reality underscores the inadequacy of basic facilities accessible to women in Pakistan.

At the other end of the country, Dr Sher Shah and his dedicated team annually organise medical camps in Gilgit, offering treatment and performing surgeries for fistula patients free of cost. While minor cases receive care at City Hospital Gilgit, those requiring more intensive procedures are referred to Koohi Goth Hospital in Karachi.

Dr Sher Shah mentioned how the hospital serves patients not only from across the country but also extends care to individuals from Afghanistan, Iran, Sharjah, and Yemen. Drawing patients from the farthest corners of Sindh, Punjab, Chitral, and Gilgit-Baltistan, including the remote locales of Skardu, Diamir, and Ghizar, individuals recover under their expertise. The hospital has provided free surgeries to almost 40 patients from Gilgit-Baltistan alone.

Despite the invaluable services rendered, the absence of more specialised hospitals for the condition remains a gap in the country’s healthcare infrastructure, he added.

Dr Nazneen Zamir Farooqi, a gynaecologist at City Hospital Gilgit, gets patients from remote areas of Gilgit-Baltistan, including Diamer, Astor, Skardu, Kharmang, Darel, and Ghizar. In many of these regions, the scarcity of healthcare facilities and the absence of skilled attendants during childbirth worsen the problem.

“The pervasive practice of child marriage significantly contributes to this crisis. When young girls are married off, their bodies are ill-equipped for childbirth — a biological reality — as physical maturity is typically achieved post-puberty,” she explained. Consequently, girls under 18 years face heightened risks of complications, and if they contract fistula, their suffering is only magnified.

The impact on women

Throughout pregnancy and childbirth, the absence of adequate treatment can result in a spectrum of deformities in women’s bodies, often leading to the onset of debilitating diseases. Among these, fistula stands out as one of the most distressing, inflicting not only physical discomfort but also profound psychological and social ramifications.

Girls married off at a young age have underdeveloped bodies and fragile bones. If they undergo childbirth before their bodies have fully matured, they are at risk of developing fistula. Similarly, older women who have borne numerous children may experience weakened muscles, rendering them incapable of delivering the baby during childbirth. In some cases, it may also lead them to develop this condition.

In both scenarios, giving birth to a child becomes an excruciating process for the woman, wherein the pressure exerted by the baby’s head against the muscles between the bladder and the vagina may result in the formation of a fistula. In many cases, the babies are stillborn. Without immediate medical intervention, the affected woman is condemned to endure the pain.

What does the Child Marriage Act say?

The Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929, a federal law in Pakistan in alignment with international conventions on children’s rights, unequivocally condemns a marriage involving a girl under 16 years of age and a boy under 18 years of age as a violation of fundamental rights. Although each province in Pakistan has established its own regulations, in the absence of specific provincial guidelines, national law takes precedence.

Any breach of this law carries severe penalties, including imprisonment for up to six months and fines reaching up to Rs50,000, meant to serve as a deterrent against such grave infringements.

As per the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) conducted in 2016-17, the prevalence of child marriages in Gilgit-Baltistan, especially in areas such as Chilas, Darel, Tangir, and Kharmang, stands alarmingly high, soaring to approximately 26pc. Despite concerted efforts to tackle the issue, including the introduction of legislation in 2015, progress has been hindered by opposition within the legislative assembly, leading to delays in its enactment.

While the Child Marriage Restraint Act of 1929 is in place, its enforcement in these regions falls well short of the mark. And without a legal mandate imposing age restrictions, many see no obligation to adhere to the law. Subsequently, the absence of robust legislation and effective enforcement mechanisms perpetuates the cycle of child marriages, leaving the issue entirely unresolved.

It’s time to break the cycle

Child marriage is not merely a tradition; it has a direct bearing on human health and development. While marriage may bring a sense of satisfaction for many, it also entails significant responsibilities, demanding mental, physical, and financial preparedness. Experts argue that minors lack the maturity essential for a thriving marriage, posing potential health risks.

We cannot afford the luxury of complacency while the innocence of our children is sacrificed at the altar of an archaic practice. It falls upon each of us, as guardians of our collective conscience, to demand comprehensive legislation that will dismantle the structures perpetuating child marriages.

For the sake of our daughters and sons, for the preservation of their health, dignity, and dreams, we must act decisively. The time for rhetoric has passed; it is now time for action.

Header image — taken from Reuters

Shereen Karim is a freelance journalist from Gilgit-Baltistan. She has worked with local and international media platforms.

It’s Not Biden V. Trump For America It’s Life V. Death For The Planet

On all fronts, Biden and Trump are more divided than ever on just about every important issue that comes to mind, so climate change is just one of many hot spots for the election.

BYPROF. GARY YOHE
MAY 3, 2024


Both of the major parties in the United States have now officially declared “presumptive” presidential candidates for the 2024 election. It has never been more critical to review their positions on major issues than it is right now, and so I write again to bring awareness to the climate challenge because candidate Trump will try to sweep it all under the rug despite its catastrophic implications for much of humanity.

On all fronts, Biden and Trump are more divided than ever on just about every important issue that comes to mind, so climate change is just one of many hot spots for the election. Despite political charades designed to keep the American public from focusing on any single issue for more than a day or two, we must discover and exploit the power that we have to at least keep climate risks in the rotation with the clear goal of stopping Mr. Trump’s return to the Oval Office.

Distraction is not the only challenge for socially motivated warriors. Damaging polarization is being amplified by Trump’s threatening to oversee a decline of democracy at home and abroad and fueled by deliberate campaigns of disinformation from his largest donors and most ardent supporters. It should surprise no one at this point that supporters of programs designed to promote their own “personal security” have been successful in implementing a decades-long strategy to prevent concerns about the “public good” from ever harming their own individual privilege.

When it comes to climate change, most Republicans fiercely believe that climate change is a hoax, and they support their dubious statements to that effect by citing biased scientists who work for apparently reputable but politically engaged consulting organizations; wolves in sheep’s clothing, they are.

Democrats usually accept the science as it stands and they understand that even the uncertainties that litter the state of our knowledge about the climate system cannot be used as an excuse for not acting. They support investment in climate actions that are, at their core, risk-reducing insurance policies: abatement (mitigation) efforts to lower the likelihood of extreme events, adaptation projects to ameliorate their consequences, and recovery programs to help citizens cope with the residual damages.

On state and local levels, investments in climate action may not change if either candidate were elected at the top of the ticket, but those investments are vulnerable to down-ticket results in state-wide elections all the way down to concentrations of local power like boards of education.

At the federal level, we know exactly what would happen almost overnight after a Trump inauguration next January. Trump would immediately pull us out of the Paris Accord, defund research and enforcement activity across every federal agency, fire everybody in all of the agencies who has been working on climate change (or has otherwise said bad things about his reactionary policies), defund the $600 million in clean energy and direct climate benefit that was included in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, eliminate the Climate Policy Office and its position in the President’s Cabinet, and so on.

How do we know? Because these immediate actions would simply return the government in Washington to where it was at the end of his first four years in office. We have already tried that experiment, and so we know the result if we try it again. That gravity and taxes are the only certainties left in this world.

So, what could climate activists do to preserve and enlarge climate action if Trump were elected in November? My colleagues and I have tried to write something about that. We worked for months brainstorming inside and outside of our sandboxes, but we came up with nothing.

We have decided that we all have to act before election day, but we recognize that those efforts will be hamstrung by a media that never seems to focus on any one policy issue that Trump announces for any significant length of time. This makes it impossible for the public to focus on the depths and consequences of his proposals. The reason for that is simple: Trump regularly and persistently moves the media’s and thus the public’s attention from one shiny object to the next. His campaign thrives on creating chaos, delay, and distraction so that the electorate does not see clearly that his policies on Ukraine, NATO, Gaza, the economy, women’s rights to 21st-century medical care, democracy, immigration, social security, Medicare and Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, and climate change (to name a few) would all unnecessarily cause people to die across the country and around the world starting early in the four years of his second term and lasting well into the middle of this century.

In response to this ADHD-like public disorder, climate action activists must be savvy as they work to keep voters constantly aware of climate change and climate risk. But what specifically can they do alone? They can accept help from a higher power – Mother Nature. News media of all sorts will continue to report extreme climate-related events daily and those reports should always end with something like “This event, or course, is only the most recent of the litany of events that are all signature hallmarks of human-induced climate change”. That might work, but only if people are paying close attention.

Perhaps, though, climate activists and activists working on other “black and white” issues that are single-issue litmus tests for many voters could turn the Trump campaign strategy into a source of strength by effectively leveraging their collective voting blocks to amplify their individual efforts. Imagine a campaign season where the strategy of rapidly and persistently switching attention from one issue to the next highlights dozens of “I can never vote for Trump” for distinct blocks of voters. What if those blocks came to understand that Trump is just feeding his base what they want to hear by shooting glancing jabs at people whose narrow concerns are irrelevant to the candidate himself?

There are large blocks of these people who have coalesced around a single issue; they are concerned about Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, women’s rights to 21st-century medical care, democracy, equity in the distribution of access to personal security, or even climate change. Creating a united “never Trump” front by tying those blocks together could be quite encouraging. What if “I could never vote for Trump” could be convinced not to stop halfway in their dissent? What if they decided that “I must vote for Biden”? Why? Because they see that well-informed and equally passionate voters across the widespread single-issue phenomenon have also decided that they cannot vote for Trump but for a different reason. If members of a single voting block were convinced that Trump is so wrong in his policies about so many issues, they would not be alone in taking a “never Trump” position. Then they might realize that it is not sufficient just to take their votes away from him. They have to vote for the only candidate who can actually beat Trump despite their secondary reservations about other things. They might decide, in short, that they “must vote for Biden” and work to make sure that their other single-issue compatriots do the same.

Were all of that to happen (and it won’t be easy), Trump’s numbers would fall and Biden’s numbers rise – a feasible opportunity for a powerful “twofer” that must be seized before it is too late. After all, what other choice do we have?

Prof. Gary Yohe is the Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental Studies, Emeritus, at Wesleyan University in Connecticut. He served as convening lead author for multiple chapters and the Synthesis Report for the IPCC from 1990 through 2014 and was vice-chair of the Third US National Climate Assessment.

ARACHNOPHOBIA TRIGGER

New species of spider discovered in Cornwall

John Danks, Georgina Barnes
BBC

GREAT CLOSE UP

Finley Hutchinson

The new species has been named Anasaitis milesae

A species of spider, previously unknown to science, has been found in the grounds of a university campus in Cornwall.

The small jumping arachnid was discovered in 2023 during an annual nature survey to find and identify different species on the University of Exeter’s Penryn campus.

The University said several of the new species were collected and deemed "unlikely to be a Cornish native" - specimens were then sent to a spider expert at Manchester Museum, who confirmed they matched nothing in Europe.

The new species has been named Anasaitis milesae.

Tylan Berry

The spiders, previously unknown to science, were found at the University of Exeter’s Penryn campus

The University said they were related to another species of spiders found in the Caribbean, and had likely arrived in the UK on imported plants.

Student Finley Hutchinson said the spider was part of "over 500 species" found during the event.

He said: "I was brought a few specimens of the spider that were found by members of the public, kind of looked at them and gone 'what is that?'.
'Quite amazing'

“I hadn’t seen anything like them before, and neither had Cornish spider expert Tylan Berry.

“So, strangely, this species has not been formally identified in its native range – so the only records in the world are on the Penryn Campus, and another recent record in Penzance.”

Mr Berry said it was "quite amazing that a new species to science has been found in the UK".

He said: “This very rarely happens in modern times as the county is very well studied as far as spiders go.

"Who knew a pretty little 4mm jumping spider would be hiding in front of our eyes?”

US has opted to enhance B-2  NUCLEAR bombers with a $7 billion investment

By Boyko Nikolov On May 3, 2024 

The U.S. Dpartment of Defense recently earmarked Northrop Grumman to receive a significant contract, estimated to be worth $7 billion, for the upkeep and modernization of B-2 Spirit bombers. This announcement emerged on April 2nd. 

Photo credit: USAF

• Russian EWs disable newly developed US bombs – Pentagon said
• Chinese satellites shake up US hegemony in precision targeting
• ‘Threat to US Navy’: PLAAF fires air-launched ballistic missile

Within the military’s stipulations for this contract is the requirement that all corresponding maintenance and modernization tasks will be conducted at several air bases. These include Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, Tinker AFB in Oklahoma, Wright Patterson AFB in Ohio, Edwards AFB in California, and Hill AFB in Utah. Washington has set an early May 2029 deadline for this contract. 

As Northrop Grumman pushes forward with the development of their avant-garde B-21 Raider aircraft, the military’s interest in the B-2 Spirit bombers seems to be waning. However, a sizable $7 billion investment was recently designated for the upkeep and modernization of the existing fleet of 20 B-2 bombers for the U.S. Air Force. This could be seen as a clear commitment to the B-2. And rightly so, until the B-21 Raider is in service, the B-2 remains the only stealth bomber in America’s arsenal capable of carrying nuclear weapons.

Video screenshot

Disclosure of the upgrade

There is no explicit mention in the Department of Defense’s statement concerning what upgrades Northrop Grumman engineers plan to implement on the B-2. Known for its operational challenges, the B-2 is expected to undergo a transformation to increase its maintainability, enhance flight performance, and boost lethality. The ultimate goal is to achieve compatibility with the forthcoming B-21. 

Insider sources reveal that the B-2 upgrade will focus on two pivotal areas – stealth functionality and mission planning software. The existing panels on the B-2 that require opening can only be accessed upon removal of its stealth coating, as per the admission of the US Army. Once the task is completed, the stealth coating needs to be reapplied. This meticulous recoating procedure, although precise, influences the bomber’s form and function. 

Regarding the mission planning software, Northrop Grumman has already developed a version, purpose-built for the next-gen bomber – the B-21 Raider. To establish future compatibility between the B-2 and the B-21, this particular software will be installed in the Spirit. This specific software is separated from the B-2’s flight control software, thereby offering quicker testing and deployment of new applications. 

According to experts, the implementation of B-21-based software in the B-2 system would be beneficial for the U.S. Air Force. This integration will significantly speed up the process as there would be no need to wait for the production of several B-21 prototypes, and the software can undergo testing in an operational, airborne bomber.

B-2 will fly for a long time

In 2023, insiders from the US defense sector revealed Northrop Grumman’s ambitious plans to enhance the B-2’s stealth capabilities and software. But that’s not where the story ends. The aerospace giant also intends to bolster the bomber’s survivability and support systems. “The aim is to keep the B-2 not merely ready for action, but also relevant to the evolving nature of warfare,” stated Niki Kodama, the head of Northrop’s B-2 program in 2023, in a conversation with FlightGlobal. Although specific details remain under wraps, Kodama hinted that some of the latest long-range precision weaponry from the USAF will be integrated into the B-2. 

Video screenshot

The selected 2029 deadline for the B-2’s modernization reveals that the US Air Force is far from bidding farewell to these 20 bombers. On the contrary, the B-2 is expected to stay as an active stealth bomber fleet for many more years to come. This status quo is likely to persist until the much-anticipated B-21 becomes mass-produced and entirely operational, accomplishments which, as we’re all aware, may take quite some time.

An air defense nightmare

The B-2 Spirit serves as a crucial asset in the American Air Force inventory. This formidable heavy strategic bomber, renowned for its low observable stealth technology, is skillfully designed to infiltrate and penetrate the most secure anti-aircraft defenses. In simple terms, it’s a two-crew flying wing design able to demonstrate significant power. 

In the sky, the B-2 Spirit is a true colossus. With an impressive wingspan spanning 172 feet [52.4 meters] and a length that measures 69 feet [21 meters], its size cannot be denied. Also, standing at an imposing 17 feet [5.18 meters] tall and boasting a colossal wing area of 5,140 square feet [478 square meters], its ability to carry substantial payloads is unequivocal. 

The heart of the B-2 system is powered by four potent General Electric F118-GE-100 engines. These engines contribute 17,300 pounds of thrust individually, propelling the B-2 to achieve striking speeds of up to 680 miles per hour [1,100 kilometers per hour], or Mach 0.95. This high-performance aircraft functions optimally at an impressive elevation of up to 50,000 feet [15,200 meters].

40,000 pounds of weapons

Boasting an impressive carrying capacity, the B-2 bomber can house up to 40,000 pounds [18,144 kilograms] of weaponry. It’s capable of hauling both conventional and nuclear weapons, making it quite the powerhouse. With two spacious internal bays, the B-2 gladly accommodates a range of war gear, from gravity bombs to precision-guided munitions, and even cruise missiles. 

One of the most stunning features of the B-2 is its impressive operational reach. Covering a hefty 6,000 nautical miles [11,112 kilometers] on internal fuel alone, it doesn’t stop there. With just one mid-air refueling, it extends its range to over 10,000 nautical miles [18,520 kilometers]. This lengthy range means it’s ready to undertake strategic bombing missions that require extended durations. 

What really sets the B-2 apart are its stealth characteristics. Besides the striking ‘flying wing’ design, the B-2 is equipped with radar-absorbing materials, making it a tough one to spot on radar. It also does an admirable job of reducing its heat signature, keeping it well hidden from infrared tracking systems. Because of its low-observable, or ‘stealth’, capabilities, the B-2 boldly ventures into enemy territory, breaching even the most advanced defenses and posing a credible threat to heavily guarded targets.

***

Follow us everywhere and at any time. BulgarianMilitary.com has responsive design and you can open the page from any computer, mobile devices or web browsers. 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for PERMANENT ARMS ECONOMY 

International organisations call for immediate release of arrested Kurdish journalists

International Media Freedom and Human Rights Organisations condemn the alarming surge in arrests of Kurdish journalists in Turkey.


ANF
NEWS DESK
Friday, 3 May 2024,

The International Press Institute (IPI), Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) and 25 press freedom, freedom of expression and human rights organizations vehemently condemn the arrest of three Kurdish journalists last week. We call upon the authorities of Turkey to uphold their commitment to press freedom and release the detained journalists immediately. Turkey must abide by its Press Law, Constitution and ECHR, and refrain from targeting the Kurdish media and allow all journalists to carry out their professional role, which is vital to a functioning democracy, without fear of intimidation.

Three Journalists Arrested

On April 23, authorities of Turkey carried out a raid targeting Kurdish journalists in Istanbul, Ankara and Şanlıurfa. Authorities took nine people into custody, among whom were Mezopotamya Agency (MA) reporters Esra Solin Dal, Mehmet Aslan, former MA reporter Doğan Kaynak and journalist Erdoğan Alayumat. They were denied access to their lawyers for 24 hours. The following day, the detention period was extended by another 24 hours.

After giving their statements and appearing in court, Kaynak was released while Dal, Aslan, and Alayumat were arrested on April 27. They were accused of “membership in a terrorist organization”.

Despite this accusation, their case files do not contain any evidence to substantiate the claim, according to the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA) Legal Unit who are part of the defense lawyers. During police questioning, they were interrogated solely about their journalistic work, sources, and activities on social media. The MLSA Legal Unit appealed the confidentiality order and additional restrictions imposed on their case.

Continued Harassment and Intimidation of Kurdish Journalists

Kurdish media outlets and journalists have increasingly been targeted by the government of Turkey in recent years. Last year, an alarming number of Kurdish journalists - nine in total - were jailed for up to seven months. In another instance, 11 Kurdish journalists were arrested immediately before the country's presidential and parliamentary elections in May 2023. Going further back, at least 25 Kurdish journalists were arrested and put in pre-trial detention in 2022 alone. The Mapping Media Freedom database records 43 alerts impacting 118 Kurdish journalists, media workers or outlets since 2022. The alerts are mostly instances of legal harassment that often result in arrest and imprisonment.

On the occasion of World Press Freedom Day, May 3, we renew our urgent call to the authorities of Turkey to cease the harassment and intimidation of Kurdish journalists. We urge them to ensure the safety and protection of all journalists in line with Turkey's obligations under its own Press Law and Constitution. We also call for a halt to the constant violation of the rights of freedom of expression and media freedom as protected under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Signed by:

International Press Institute (IPI)
Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)
English PEN
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF)
Index on Censorship
Irish PEN/PEN na hÉireann
Kurdish PEN
OBC Transeuropa
PEN America
PEN Armãn
PEN Canada
PEN Catalan
PEN Croatia
PEN International
PEN Melbourne
PEN Netherlands
PEN Norway
PEN San Miguel
PEN Sydney
PEN Québec
South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO)
Swedish PEN
The World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)
Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project
Vietnamese PEN Abroad
Wales PEN Cymru

RSF: With authoritarianism gaining ground in Turkey, media pluralism is being called into question

 All possible means are used to undermine critics, stated the RSF.


ANF
NEWS DESK
Friday, 3 May 2024, 

Press freedom around the world is being threatened by the very people who should be its guarantors – political authorities. This is clear from the latest annual World Press Freedom Index produced by Reporters Without Borders (RSF). This finding is based on the fact that, of the five indicators used to compile the ranking, it is the political indicator that has fallen most, registering a global average fall of 7.6 points.

A growing number of governments and political authorities are not fulfilling their role as guarantors of the best possible environment for journalism and for the public's right to reliable, independent, and diverse news and information. RSF sees a worrying decline in support and respect for media autonomy and an increase in pressure from the state or other political actors.

“As more than half the world's population goes to the polls in 2024, RSF is warning of a worrying trend revealed by the 2024 World Press Freedom Index: a decline in the political indicator, one of five indicators detailed in the Index. States and other political forces are playing a decreasing role in protecting press freedom. This disempowerment sometimes goes hand in hand with more hostile actions that undermine the role of journalists, or even instrumentalise the media through campaigns of harassment or disinformation,” said Anne Bocandé, RSF editorial director.

At the international level, this year is notable for a clear lack of political will on the part of the international community to enforce the principles of protection of journalists, especially UN Security Council Resolution 2222. The war in Gaza has been marked by a record number of violations against journalists and the media since October 2023. More than 100 Palestinian reporters have been killed by the Israel Defence Forces, including at least 22 in the course of their work.

Occupied and under constant Israeli bombardment, Palestine is ranked 157th out of 180 countries and territories surveyed in the overall 2024 World Press Freedom Index, but it is ranked among the last 10 with regard to security for journalists.

While 2024 is the biggest election year in world history, 2023 also saw decisive elections, especially in Latin America, that were won by self-proclaimed predators of press freedom and media plurality, like Javier Milei in Argentina (down 26 to 66th), who shut down the country’s biggest news agency in a worrisome symbolic act.

Elections are often accompanied by violence against journalists, as in Nigeria (112th) and the Democratic Republic of Congo (123rd). The military juntas that seized power in coups in the Sahel, especially Niger (down 19 to 80th), Burkina Faso (down 28 to 86th) and Mali (down one to 114th), continue to tighten their grip on the media and obstruct journalists’ work. Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s reelection in Turkey is also a source of some concern: ranked 158th, the country’s placement in the Index continues to lose points in the Index.

RSF reported that many governments have stepped up their control over social media and the Internet, restricting access, blocking accounts, and suppressing messages carrying news and information. Journalists who say what they think on social media in Vietnam (174th) are almost systematically locked up. In China (172nd), in addition to detaining more journalists than any other country in the world, the government continues to exercise strict control over information channels, implementing censorship and surveillance policies to regulate online content and restrict the spread of information deemed to be sensitive or contrary to the party line.

The overall decline in the political indicator has also affected the trio at the top of the World Press Freedom Index. Norway, still in first place, has seen a fall in its political score, and Ireland (8th), where politicians have subjected media outlets to judicial intimidation, has ceded its leading position in the European Union to Denmark (2nd), followed by Sweden (3rd).

Regarding the political context in Turkey, RSF stated that: “The 2023 elections, won by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, were marked by the arrests of dozens of Kurdish journalists. However, neither the almost systematic online censorship, the arbitrary lawsuits against critical media outlets nor the exploitation of the judicial system have allowed, so far, the “hyper-president” to recover his popularity ratings, as he continues to be embroiled in a major case involving corruption and political clientelism.”

“Discriminatory practices against critical journalists and media outlets, such as stripping them of press passes, are commonplace. Judges who do the government’s bidding try to limit democratic debate by censoring online articles tackling corruption and other sensitive topics. In this difficult environment, some journalists have nonetheless tried to remain faithful to their mission to report the news with complete independence and are demanding recognition of a “media ombudsman”. New legislation on “disinformation” constitutes yet another weapon in the government’s oppressive arsenal.”

RSF noted that members and leaders of the ultranationalist MHP party, an ally of President Erdogan's AKP, do not hesitate to threaten journalists who dare to draw attention to embarrassing issues: “Cases of violence against journalists during the 2019 elections resulted in lenient sentences or endless trials, highlighting the culture of impunity in the country. Journalists daring to cover attacks on secularism, the impact of religious groups (Tarikat) or regional jihadist organisations are increasingly exposed to threats.”

YRA called on the UN and international organisations not to remain silent against the repression of journalists.


ANF
NEWS DESK
Friday, 3 May 2024, 14:21

The Free Press Association (YRA) made a written statement on the occasion of 3 May World Press Freedom Day.

The statement called on the United Nations and international institutions and organisations to "act in accordance with international agreements and standards and fulfill your duty".

The statement emphasised that violations of press and journalism are increasing worldwide despite the resolutions of the United Nations, and that Turkey is among the states that exert pressure on journalists the most. YRA highlighted the cases of attacks, repression and arrests against journalists, especially in Northern Kurdistan and Turkey.

The statement pointed to the attacks of the occupying Turkish state against journalists in Northern and Eastern Syria and recalled the killing of television employee Najimedin Fêsel Hajî Sînan and the serious injury of reporter Delila Egid in an attack on Jin TV's vehicle. The statement emphasised that the occupying Turkish state fears the free press and targets journalists.

The statement also denounced the repression against journalists in Southern Kurdistan and noted that YRA member and Roj News Editor Silêman Ehmed has been detained for more than 6 months and his fate is still unknown.

Condemning the oppression and practices against journalists around the world, the statement included the following call upon the United Nations and international institutions and organisations: "Do not remain indifferent to the pressures and practices against journalists in Northern and Eastern Syria and around the world, act in accordance with international agreements and standards, and fulfil your duty."

Israel delays vote on closure of Al Jazeera television

Vote to take place during meeting of Cabinet next Sunday, says Israeli media

Anadolu staff |03.05.2024 -


JERUSALEM

The Israeli Cabinet postponed voting on a decision to ban Al Jazeera television in the country until next Sunday, local media reported on Friday.

The Israeli Walla website said that the Cabinet did not vote at its meeting on Thursday evening on a decision to close Al Jazeera in Israel.

“The Cabinet, which met on Thursday evening, was supposed to vote on a decision by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Minister of Communications Shlomo Karhi to ban Al Jazeera's activities in Israel, but at the last minute, the vote was postponed,” the website added.

It said that the vote “will take place during a meeting of the Cabinet next Sunday,” without revealing the official reasons for this delay.

While no statement has been issued by the Israeli government on this matter, the website quoted senior officials believing that the postponement of the vote is “due to political reasons related to Qatar and a hostage deal.”

Reports have emerged of a cease-fire proposal being discussed by Israel and Palestinian resistance group Hamas to end the conflict in the Gaza Strip.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, has vowed to invade Rafah, home to more than 1.4 million displaced Palestinians, with or without a deal with Hamas.

Hamas, which is believed to be holding more than 130 Israeli hostages, demands an end to Israel’s deadly offensive on the Gaza Strip in return for any hostage deal with Tel Aviv.

*Writing by Rania Abu Shamala