It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Wednesday, September 09, 2020
Alexei Navalny poisoning: what theatrical assassination attempts reveal about Vladimir Putin’s grip on power in Russia
September 9, 2020
Alexei Navalny remains in hospital in Germany after he was poisoned in Siberia. Anatoly Maltsev/EPA
Vladimir Putin’s intelligence and security organs have used a variety of lethal ways over the past few decades to dispatch those who oppose him or the Russian state – an increasingly difficult line to draw. These murders and attempted murders are often theatrical and laced with morbid messaging. The recent poisoning of Putin opponent Alexei Navalny with the nerve agent Novichok has again illustrated the Russian president’s willingness to sanction dramatic homicide as a tool of the state.
Putin’s prioritisation of theatrical vengeance – even at the expense of large-scale diplomatic reprisals and biting economic sanctions – reveals both the nature of his regime and his obsession with maintaining and projecting power.
Political assassination during Putin’s reign is in keeping with Soviet and Russian traditions, but the brazenness of the Navalny poisoning and its timing during the swelling Belarus protests shows both continuity and change. After Stalin’s death in 1953 the Politburo of the Communist Party, not a single person, was the embodiment of the state during the cold war. Putin has blurred and conflated such distinctions since he assumed power in 2000. Ruthlessness
Like his Soviet forebears, Putin presides over a declining state in which power intermingles with corruption and extrajudicial murder. The attempted poisoning of former Russian military intelligence officer and British spy Sergei Skripal in 2018 first introduced Novichok into the British vernacular. Fellow Russian intelligence officer and British agent Alexander Litvinenko did not survive his poisoning in 2006 with Polonium-210 in a cup of tea. His murder, according to the official British inquiry, was “probably” approved by Putin personally.
Putin’s well of ruthlessness runs deep, and he has not hidden his willingness to engage in “wet affairs” – such as murders, kidnapping or sabotage. It would be self-defeating to keep his readiness for vengeance secret: it’s a message he wants those Russians who may get grassroots political inspiration from the protests over the border in Belarus to hear.
When asked about specific killings, Putin routinely evades such questions as deftly as a talented spy evades surveillance. But when speaking in general terms, Putin has been clear. Globalsecurity.org and others quoted the Russian leader as threatening that “traitors will kick the bucket, trust me”, after Skripal was released in a spy swap in 2010.
Personal attacks on Putin are seen as existential attacks on the Russian state. Alexei Druzhinin/Sputnik/Kre/EPA
Given the melding of leader with state, Putin has increasingly characterised personal disloyalty as a threat to the Russian state. So although former intelligence turncoats are frequent targets of Putin’s vengeance, victims also include journalists and political rivals, particularly those who investigate, expose, and criticise corruption among Putin and his inner circle. Navalny’s apparently effective efforts to organise legitimate opposition through the ballot box would be intolerable for any autocrat who is unsure how to govern without complete control. Soviet poisoning playbook
Although poisoning is arguably the most dramatic form of Russian state-sponsored murder, outspoken Putin critics have been assassinated with more pedestrian means: in politician Boris Nemtsov’s case, four bullets in the back in February 2015. Likewise, Russian investigative journalist Anna Politkovskaya was shot on October 7 2006 – also Putin’s birthday – in her Moscow apartment building. Such killings could be cynically attributed to unfortunate street crime in a case of implausible denial, but Novichok leaves no room for doubt.
Perceived enemies of the Russian state, like the Soviet Union before it, have met their ends in a dizzying variety of gruesome ways, but why does the fascination with poison endure? There are tactical and strategic considerations. An assassin cannot expect a clean getaway after shooting a pedestrian on Waterloo Bridge in London, but a puncture wound with a ricin-tipped umbrella would suffice, as in the case of Bulgarian dissident Georgi Markov’s assassination by Soviet intelligence in 1978.
Today, Soviet-created Novichok has replaced ricin. It offers the assassin advantages such as stealth and time for escape. It can be administered by exposure to everyday items such as doorknobs or tea. It appears in a sleepy city like Salisbury, as in the case of Skripal, or on Navalny’s flight from Siberia.
Additionally, a poison victim suffers, often publicly, yielding strategic effects. The photographs of the pitiable Litvinenko, hairless, gaunt, suffering in his hospital bed, grimly underscored the intended message. While any thug can murder with a gun, Soviet and subsequently Russian leaders have made assassination into a dramatic art form. The use of exotic poisons shows that confrontations with power are not a battle between two people, but rather bring the full resources of the state to bear against an individual, framing the situation as hopeless and futile. Poison evokes fear that you are never safe, never out of reach.
Choppy waters
Putin is a standard-bearer, rather than a pioneer in the long history of Russian political assassination. Still, the brazenness of an unambiguous assassination attempt on a figure like Navalny, and the political circumstances in Minsk, matter. They can be interpreted as the act of a leader whose hand may be feeling unsteady on the rudder of the ship of state.
At the same time, however, recent Russian constitutional reforms have erased any line between leader and the state, and may give Putin the confidence to deal even more harshly with opponents. But this expanded power has not offered more tools to deal with, or co-opt, the most vocal opponents. Those who cannot be bribed must be intimidated. Those who cannot be intimidated must be silenced.
If Putin has successfully manipulated the political process to make himself president for life, the coronavirus has been less cooperative in bending to his will. Claims of a successful COVID-19 vaccine notwithstanding, Russia’s ineffective response to the pandemic has laid bare the inadequacy of the regime. With the economic consequences of the pandemic and the oil crisis, combined with general Russian Putin fatigue, opposition to Putin is likely to expand.
Given Putin’s apparent legal impunity, his need to distract from state failures and corruption, and disconcerting Belorussian anti-authoritarian protests on his doorstep, it’s hard to imagine Putin losing his taste for the loathsome theatre of political assassination.
By Jamie Gangel, Jeremy Herb and Elizabeth Stuart | CNN
President Donald Trump admitted he knew weeks before the first confirmed US coronavirus death that the virus was dangerous, airborne, highly contagious and “more deadly than even your strenuous flus,” and that he repeatedly played it down publicly, according to legendary journalist Bob Woodward in his new book “Rage.”
“This is deadly stuff,” Trump told Woodward on Feb. 7.
In a series of interviews with Woodward, Trump revealed that he had a surprising level of detail about the threat of the virus earlier than previously known. “Pretty amazing,” Trump told Woodward, adding that the coronavirus was maybe five times “more deadly” than the flu.
Trump’s admissions are in stark contrast to his frequent public comments at the time insisting that the virus was “going to disappear” and “all work out fine.”
The book, using Trump’s own words, depicts a President who has betrayed the public trust and the most fundamental responsibilities of his office. In “Rage,” Trump says the job of a president is “to keep our country safe.” But in early February, Trump told Woodward he knew how deadly the virus was, and in March, admitted he kept that knowledge hidden from the public.
“I wanted to always play it down,” Trump told Woodward on March 19, even as he had declared a national emergency over the virus days earlier. “I still like playing it down, because I don’t want to create a panic.”
If instead of playing down what he knew, Trump had acted decisively in early February with a strict shutdown and a consistent message to wear masks, social distance and wash hands, experts believe that thousands of American lives could have been saved.
The startling revelations in “Rage,” which CNN obtained ahead of its Sept. 15 release, were made during 18 wide-ranging interviews Trump gave Woodward from December 5, 2019 to July 21, 2020. The interviews were recorded by Woodward with Trump’s permission, and CNN has obtained copies of some of the audio tapes.
“Rage” also includes brutal assessments of Trump’s presidency from many of his former top national security officials, including former Defense Secretary James Mattis, former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Mattis is quoted as calling Trump “dangerous” and “unfit” to be commander in chief. Woodward writes that Coats “continued to harbor the secret belief, one that had grown rather than lessened, although unsupported by intelligence proof, that Putin had something on Trump.” Woodward continues, writing that Coats felt, “How else to explain the president’s behavior? Coats could see no other explanation.”
The book also contains harsh evaluations of the President’s leadership on the virus from current officials.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the administration’s top infectious disease expert, is quoted telling others Trump’s leadership was “rudderless” and that his “attention span is like a minus number.”
“His sole purpose is to get reelected,” Fauci told an associate, according to Woodward.
‘The virus has nothing to do with me’
Woodward reveals new details on the early warnings Trump received — and often ignored.
In a January 28 top secret intelligence briefing, national security adviser Robert O’Brien gave Trump a “jarring” warning about the virus, telling the President it would be the “biggest national security threat” of his presidency. Trump’s head “popped up,” Woodward writes.
O’Brien’s deputy, Matt Pottinger, concurred, telling Trump it could be as bad as the influenza pandemic of 1918, which killed an estimated 50 million people worldwide, including 675,000 Americans. Pottinger warned Trump that asymptomatic spread was occurring in China: He had been told 50% of those infected showed no symptoms.
At that time, there were fewer than a dozen reported coronavirus cases in the US.
Three days later, Trump announced restrictions on travel from China, a move suggested by his national security team — despite Trump’s later claims that he alone backed the travel limitations.
Nevertheless, Trump continued to publicly downplay the danger of the virus. February was a lost month. Woodward views this as a damning missed opportunity for Trump to reset “the leadership clock” after he was told this was a “once-in-a-lifetime health emergency.”
“Presidents are the executive branch. There was a duty to warn. To listen, to plan, and to take care,” Woodward writes. But in the days following the January 28 briefing, Trump used high-profile appearances to minimize the threat and, Woodward writes, “to reassure the public they faced little risk.”
During a pre-Super Bowl interview on Fox News February 2, Trump said, “We pretty much shut it down coming in from China.” Two days later during his State of the Union address, Trump made only a passing reference to the virus, promising, “my administration will take all necessary steps to safeguard our citizens from this threat.”
Asked by Woodward in May if he remembered O’Brien’s January 28 warning that the virus would be the biggest national security threat of his presidency, Trump equivocated. “No, I don’t.” Trump said. “I’m sure if he said it — you know, I’m sure he said it. Nice guy.”
The book highlights how the President took all of the credit and none of the responsibility for his actions related to the pandemic, which has infected 6 million Americans and killed more than 185,000 in the US.
“The virus has nothing to do with me,” Trump told Woodward in their final interview in July. “It’s not my fault. It’s — China let the damn virus out.”
‘It goes through the air’
When Woodward spoke to Trump on February 7, two days after he was acquitted on impeachment charges by the Senate, Woodward expected a lengthy conversation about the trial. He was surprised, however, by the President’s focus on the virus. At the same time that Trump and his public health officials were saying the virus was “low risk,” Trump divulged to Woodward that the night before he’d spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping about the virus. Woodward quotes Trump as saying, “We’ve got a little bit of an interesting setback with the virus going in China.”
“It goes through the air,” Trump said. “That’s always tougher than the touch. You don’t have to touch things. Right? But the air, you just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed. And so that’s a very tricky one. That’s a very delicate one. It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus.”
But Trump spent most of the next month saying that the virus was “very much under control” and that cases in the US would “disappear.” Trump said on his trip to India on February 25 that it was “a problem that’s going to go away,” and the next day he predicted the number of US cases “within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero.”
By March 19, when Trump told Woodward he was purposely downplaying the dangers to avoid creating a panic, he also acknowledged the threat to young people. “Just today and yesterday, some startling facts came out. It’s not just old, older. Young people too, plenty of young people,” Trump said.
Publicly, however, Trump has continued to insist just the opposite, saying as recently as August 5 that children were “almost immune.“
Even into April, when the US became the country with the most confirmed cases in the world, Trump’s public statements contradicted his acknowledgements to Woodward. At an April 3 coronavirus task force briefing, Trump was still downplaying the virus and stating that it would go away. “I said it’s going away and it is going away,” he said. Yet two days later on April 5, Trump again told Woodward, “It’s a horrible thing. It’s unbelievable,” and on April 13, he said, “It’s so easily transmissible, you wouldn’t even believe it.”
‘Dangerous’ and ‘unfit’
Woodward, a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, conducted hundreds of hours of confidential background interviews with firsthand witnesses for “Rage,” and he obtained “notes, emails, diaries, calendars and confidential documents,” including more than two dozen letters Trump exchanged with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Woodward is known to record his interviews with the permission of his subjects and sources.
He writes that when he attributes exact quotations, thoughts or conclusions, that information comes either from the person, a colleague with direct knowledge or documents.
Trump’s conscious downplaying of the coronavirus is one of numerous revelations in “Rage.” The book is filled with anecdotes about top cabinet officials blindsided by tweets, frustrated with Trump’s inability to focus and scared about his next policy directive because he refused to accept facts or listen to experts:
Mattis is quoted as saying Trump is “dangerous,” “unfit,” has “no moral compass” and took foreign policy actions that showed adversaries “how to destroy America.” After Mattis left the administration, he and Coats discussed whether they needed to take “collective action” to speak out publicly against Trump. Mattis says he ultimately resigned after Trump announced he was withdrawing US troops from Syria, “when I was basically directed to do something that I thought went beyond stupid to felony stupid.”
Woodward writes that Coats and his top staff members “examined the intelligence as carefully as possible,” and that Coats still questions the relationship between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Coats saw how extraordinary it was for the president’s top intelligence official to harbor such deep suspicions about the president’s relationship with Putin. But he could not shake them.”
Trump has come under fire in recent days for reportedly making disparaging remarks about US military personnel and veterans. Woodward’s book includes an anecdote where an aide to Mattis heard Trump say in a meeting, “my f—ing generals are a bunch of pussies” because they cared more about alliances than trade deals. Mattis asked the aide to document the comment in an email to him. And Trump himself criticized military officials to Woodward over their view that alliances with NATO and South Korea are the best bargain the US makes. “I wouldn’t say they were stupid, because I would never say that about our military people,” Trump said. “But if they said that, they — whoever said that was stupid. It’s a horrible bargain … they make so much money. Costs us $10 billion. We’re suckers.”
Woodward reports that Trump’s national security team expressed concerns the US may have come close to nuclear war with North Korea amid provocations in 2017. “We never knew whether it was real,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is quoted as saying, “or whether it was a bluff.” But it was so serious that Mattis slept in his clothes to be ready in case there was a North Korean launch and repeatedly went to the Washington National Cathedral to pray.
Trump boasted to Woodward about a new secret weapons system. “I have built a nuclear — a weapons system that nobody’s ever had in this country before,” Trump said. Woodward says other sources confirmed the information, without providing further details, but expressed surprise that Trump disclosed it.
Woodward obtained the 27 “love letters” Trump exchanged with Kim Jong Un, 25 of which have not been reported publicly. The letters, filled with flowery language, provide a fascinating window into their relationship. Kim flatters Trump by repeatedly calling him “Your Excellency,” and writes in one letter that meeting again would be “reminiscent of a scene from a fantasy film.” In another, Kim writes that the “deep and special friendship between us will work as a magical force.” CNN has obtained the transcripts of two of the letters.
Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner also weighs in with some unusual literary insights about his father-in-law. Kushner is quoted as saying that four texts are key to understanding Trump, including “Alice in Wonderland.” Kushner paraphrased the Cheshire Cat: “If you don’t know where you’re going, any path will get you there.”
Woodward pressed Trump on Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s role in the 2018 killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Once again, Trump dismissed the US intelligence assessment and defends bin Salman: “He says very strongly that he didn’t do it.”
Trump insulted his predecessors, saying Woodward made former President George W. Bush “look like a stupid moron, which he was.” Trump said of former President Barack Obama: “I don’t think Obama’s smart … I think he’s highly overrated. And I don’t think he’s a great speaker.” He also tells Woodward that Kim Jong Un thought Obama was an “asshole.”
Woodward discussed the Black Lives Matter protests and suggested to the President that people like the two of them — “White, privileged” — need to work to understand the anger and pain that Black people feel in the US. “You really drank the Kool-Aid, didn’t you? Just listen to you,” Trump responded, repeating his outrageous talking point that he’s done more for the Black community than any president besides Abraham Lincoln.
Woodward reports new details on Russia’s election meddling, writing that the NSA and CIA have classified evidence the Russians had placed malware in the election registration systems of at least two Florida counties, St. Lucie and Washington. While there was no evidence the malware had been activated, Woodward writes, it was sophisticated and could erase voters in specific districts. The voting system vendor used by Florida was also used in states across the country.
‘Dynamite behind the door’
“Rage” is a follow-up to Woodward’s 2018 bestselling book “Fear,” which portrayed a chaotic White House in which aides hid papers from Trump to protect the country from what they viewed as his most dangerous impulses.
While Trump slammed “Fear,” he also complained that he didn’t speak to Woodward for the book, which resulted in his agreeing to extensive interviews for “Rage.”
However, on August 14, Trump preemptively attacked Woodward’s new book, tweeting, “The Bob Woodward book will be a FAKE, as always, just as many of the others have been.”
Throughout the book, Trump provides insights into his view of the presidency. He tells Woodward when you’re running the country, “There’s dynamite behind every door.”
After his 18 interviews, Woodward issues a stark verdict: Trump is the “dynamite behind the door.” Woodward concludes his book with a declaration that “Trump is the wrong man for the job.”
UK
GRENFELL Victims' fury as Tory MPs block fire reforms
Kensington MP Felicity Buchan among Conservatives who stopped push for swifter action
THE RESULT OF FORTY YEARS OF AUSTERITY
Grenfell Tower continues to burn the day after the fire claimed the lives of 72 people on June 14, 2017
GRENFELL campaign groups and the Labour Party slammed the Tories today for voting against proposals to implement safety recommendations from the inquiry into the blaze.
On Monday night, 318 Tory MPs, including Felicity Buchan, MP for Kensington, where the tower’s remains stand, voted against acting on the recommendations proposed by Labour in an amendment to the Fire Safety Bill.
The amendment was tabled after it emerged that over 80 per cent of private-sector accommodation and nearly 50 per cent of social-sector buildings with Grenfell-style flammable cladding have not had the dangerous material removed.
It sought to implement the recommendations of the Grenfell Tower inquiry’s phase one report published last October, which states that the removal of aluminium composite material cladding “should be pursued as vigorously as possible.”
Ms Buchan was elected in 2019, succeeding Kensington’s first-ever Labour MP Emma Dent Coad. She won by 150 votes after the vote was split by Lib Dem candidate Sam Gyimah.
In the Conservative manifesto on which Ms Buchan was elected, it says: “We have already committed to implementing and legislating for all the recommendations of the Hackitt Review and the first phase of the independent inquiry.”
Grenfell United said it was “outraged” by Ms Buchan’s vote against the Labour amendment.
“It’s no surprise as the government continues to fail the country — almost a year since the recommendations and so little has been done. Thousands still in dangerous homes.”
Justice4Grenfell urged Ms Buchan to state why she voted against Labour’s amendment.
Ms Dent Coad described the Tories’ actions as “just despicable.”
“Why bother with the inquiry when they disdain findings?” she added.
Shadow justice secretary David Lammy said that Ms Buchan had “let the victims and their families down.”
Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner pointed to promises made by Downing Street on the third anniversary of the fire.
On June 14, Downing Street was lit up green in memory of the 72 people who lost their lives in the west London blaze.
Downing Street’s tweet accompanying the photo said at the time: “We remain committed to uncovering the causes of this tragedy and ensuring it is never repeated.”
Ms Rayner said: “So why did Tory MPs, including the Tory MP for Kensington, vote down an amendment to implement the recommendations of Phase 1 of the Grenfell Tower inquiry last night?
“You should be ashamed of yourself Boris Johnson, if you were capable of it.”
The Fire Brigades Union tweeted: “Every single Tory MP who voted against this amendment should hang their heads in shame.”
Ms Buchan claimed that Labour was “trying to play politics with this tragedy” and was “misrepresenting the vote in the House of Commons.”
She said that the Tories’ vote was based on concerns regarding “sequencing for the legislation to be properly enacted.”
She added that she and the government were “absolutely committed to implementing the first phase recommendations of the Grenfell inquiry.”
Australian government accused of climate change cover-up and gagging scientists
Bleached coral on Australia's Great Barrier Reef
THE Australian government was accused of covering up the impact of the climate crisis and suppressing the work of scientists today as it seeks to amend the country’s environmental legislation.
A report by the Ecological Society of Australia found that scientists are routinely blocked from publishing results of their studies and warn that changes are made to their findings before their work is released.
It found that half the government scientists and nearly 40 per cent of those working in industry had been blocked from releasing or discussing their findings.
Past president of the society Don Driscoll, who authored the report, warned that some of Australia’s best scientists were being silenced and prevented from speaking to the media and policy makers.
This meant that policies on issues including climate change, bushfires and the regulation of development projects were not being informed by the best science, he said.
“In reality, these findings may be the tip of the iceberg,” Mr Driscoll said. “It reflects on a type of corruption that’s going on in the system.”
The reports co-author Euan Deakin said it showed “pretty clear evidence the democratic process, which is based on having an informed public, is being interfered with.”
The allegations come after the government was accused of gagging opposition as it rammed a controversial Bill through the lower house to outrage from the Labour Party and Greens.
It would amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act and push through deregulation and the transfer of development approval powers to state and territory governments.
Debate was blocked with no government members speaking to the Bill, which has been described as an act of “economic vandalism.”
Labour’s environmental spokeswoman Terri Butler said now was the time for more scrutiny, not less.
“To just gag that debate, to prevent people from having their say, I think is a real disgrace,” she said.
US companies are defying Trump's demands to 'decouple' from China
AMERICA CREATED GLOBALIZATION TO OFFSHORE PRODUCTION
Adam Payne U.S. President Donald Trump meets with China's President Xi Jinping at the start of their bilateral meeting at the G20 leaders summit in Osaka, Japan, June 29, 2019. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo/File Photo
American companies based in China are ignoring Trump's calls to return to the US, a new survey has found.
Trump this week reiterated his plan to "decouple" the US economy from China's and transform the country into the "manufacturing superpower of the world."
However, research for the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai found that over 70% of companies with operations in China had no plans to move production back to the US. US companies in China want the two governments to repair relations, the research found.
American companies based in China plan to continue operating their as normal despite President Donald Trump urging them to abandon the country and return to the US.
Trump this week reiterated his plan to "decouple" the US economy from China's amid an ongoing trade war between the two countries and tension over issues like telecoms firm Huawei and Beijing's actions in Hong Kong.
"If we didn't do business with [China] we wouldn't lose billions of dollars," he said in a White House press conference on Monday, adding: "We will make America into the manufacturing superpower of the world and will end our reliance on China once and for all."
However, US companies with operations in China are not heeding Trump's call, according to a new survey commissioned by the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai and reported by The Financial Times.
The survey of more than 200 companies, carried out by PWC, found that fewer than 4% were relocating production capacity back to the US, while over 70% had no plans whatsoever to move operations out of China.
Ker Gibbs, president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai, said that rather than break away from Beijing, US companies want to continue doing business in China
.
"COVID-19 hit the Chinese economy hard in early 2020, but the recovery was quick," he told The Financial Times. "American companies still see China's consumer market as a great opportunity."
Most US companies based in China are continuing to operate there as normal despite Trump's ongoing trade war with Beijing and his insistence that the US should grow its manufacturing to the extent that is no longer relies on China.
Gibbs said that tension between the Trump administration and President Xi was the number one concern of American companies based in China and that they would like to see the two governments repair relations.
"The geopolitical tension is the number one concern among business operations managers, which is remarkable," he said. "Dynamics caused by the pandemic coupled with uncertainties around the trade tensions, strong local competition and... regulatory change have really put management of US multinationals operating in China to the test."
Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies research group and The ECMC Chair in Islamic Studies support the following event:
Virtual Book Launch: Co-authors Yasmeen Abu-Laban and Abigail Bakan
Israel, Palestine and the Politics of Race: Exploring Identity and Power in a Global Context
The University of Alberta respectfully recognizes it is located in ᐊᒥᐢᑿᒌᐚᐢᑲᐦᐃᑲᐣ (Amiskwacîwâskahikan) on Treaty 6 territory of the Papaschase, and the homeland of the Métis Nation.
L’Université de l’Alberta reconnait respectueusement qu’elle est située à ᐊᒥᐢᑿᒌᐚᐢᑲᐦᐃᑲᐣ (Amiskwacîwâskahikan) sur les terres du Traité 6, le territoire du Papaschase, et les territoires de la nation Métis.
____________________________
Hello
My name is Sara, and I am a Palestine refugee.
I was born in 2006 in an "unofficial" refugee camp in the Syrian coastal city of Latakia.
I love technology and computer programming. I also have a creative side – I enjoy acting, public speaking, and drawing too. What I love most though, is to bring joy to my friends. I really strive to understand them, and to ease their worries. It warms my heart to watch a smile appear on their faces.
I love going to school – sometimes so much that I don’t want to go home at the end of the school day! Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, we’ve had to stay home and continue with our studies virtually.
My most important priority is to complete my education in the fullest, because there are so many things that I want to see and do in my life. I want to defend women’s rights, to be an active citizen in my community and I want to leave a positive mark on this society. I wish that bullying would disappear and that racism and discrimination would fade away entirely. I want to see the end of conflict between states and for peace to take hold of all societies. I wish that we could all join together as one and promise to live in peace on this planet, together as humans.
With the new school year beginning, UNRWA is focused on getting students back to learning.
To keep children safe, the UNRWA back to learning modalities will prioritize physical distancing and healthy hygiene practices. A blended learning approach will be introduced, with students studying at home on some days.
This will require additional teachers and more school attendants, as well as specific hygiene and sanitation materials.
My teachers have really been amazing... but even with their support, some students had a hard time keeping up with their schooling – especially those who don’t have the internet or a smartphone. I’ve been exerting all my energy into keeping up with my lessons, but I do miss learning in a real classroom. I can’t wait until the doors of my school are opened again. I miss my books, my friends and my teachers. I miss my school down to the smallest details.
I was five years old when the conflict began in Syria. Luckily, nobody from my immediate surroundings has been directly harmed. In other places, many schools were destroyed and students couldn't continue their education. There are students that should be in ninth grade, who haven't finished elementary school.
I am not afraid of the virus, but I am not reckless either. In my opinion, fear cannot help us – only caution and prevention will.
Thankfully, my family and I are fine and healthy. I am worried about my community though. This pandemic has made it even harder for people to afford the food they need to survive. As the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish once wrote, “we love roses, but we love wheat more.”
Sooner or later, I do believe that things will get better. This pandemic will end, or at least stabilize. In the meantime, I will never lose hope. I know that one day, I will achieve all that I have been dreaming of.
With respect,
Sara UNRWA Agency-wide Student Parliament member
Going back to school is a moment of celebration.
In spite of the financial challenges facing UNRWA, we are committed to protect the right of every Palestine refugee child to an education.
We at UNRWA are doing all we can so that no child is left behind.