position:border guard

  • The invention of Essex: how a county became a caricature | News | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/jun/27/the-invention-of-essex-how-a-county-became-a-caricature

    As a child growing up in the 80s and 90s in Southend, a sprawling seaside town in south-east Essex, I noticed that people on TV often laughed at the very word Essex. Some years later, in 2016, my wife, Hayley, crossed the border into Albania from Montenegro while travelling with an old friend who, like us, grew up in the county. The border guard asked where they were from – and when they told him, his response was quickfire: “I’ve heard a lot about Essex girls,” he said. “But I’m sure you are not like that.”

    #pierre_sansot #gens_de_peu #essex #royaume-uni

  • Avakov: Ukraine’s wall along Russian border nearly half complete

    Ukraine has built almost half of its 2,300-kilometer wall on the border with Russia, Interior Minister Arsen Avakov said on Nov. 24 during his visit to the border checkpoint in Kharkiv Oblast.

    “The project has been extended until 2021,” Avakov said. “The budget plan for the 2019 allocates Hr 400 million ($14.4 million) for it. But the head of the Border Guard Service hopes to receive additional funds.”

    The Kharkiv section of the Ukrainian-Russian wall has been almost completed with only 20 kilometers left, according to Avakov. The works will continue on the border sections in Sumy and Luhansk oblasts. It includes fortifications with a barbed wire fence, two-meter deep anti-tank trenches, 17-meter-high watchtowers, 40 border checkpoints as well as equipment with motion sensors, border security closed-circuit television (CCTV) and alarm systems.

    Overall, 47 percent of the 2,300-kilometer wall has been built, the minister said.

    In addition, starting from January, Ukraine has launched the biometric control system for Russian passport holders at all border-crossing checkpoints.

    Former Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who is running for president in the upcoming March presidential elections, joined Avakov on the trip to the border in Kharkiv Oblast on Nov. 24.

    The ambitious project known as the European Wall was announced by then-Prime Minister Yatsenyuk in 2014 in the wake of the Russian military intervention in the Donbas. Ukraine lost control over parts of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts and 400 kilometers that border with Russia. The wall was designed to protect Ukraine from further attacks on its territory as well as to stop illegal flow of weapons from Russia.

    In the aftermath of the EuroMaidan Revolution that drove pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych from power on Feb. 22, 2014, Kremlin incited mass anti-government demonstrations in eastern Ukraine and occupied Crimean peninsula. In Donetsk and Luhansk, protesters “declared independence” from Ukraine which escalated into an armed conflict between Ukrainian forces and Kremlin-backed forces. In April 2014, pro-Russian protesters took over the Kharkiv administration and “declared independence from Ukraine” but the Ukrainian government managed to retain control over the region.

    The construction of the wall, however, halted due to lack of funding and a corruption scandal.

    In 2015-2017, the Border Guard Serviced received Hr 800 mln ($28.8 million) — less than a quarter of the total cost of the project estimated at over Hr 4 billion ($147.6 million).

    In November 2017, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau arrested eight people on embezzlement charges. NABU detectives found that the officials of the Border Guard Service in cahoots with local contractors had siphoned off Hr 16.68 million ($600,800) from the Project Wall funds.


    https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/interior-minister-ukraines-wall-along-russian-border-nearly-half-complete.

    #Ukraine #Russie #murs #frontières #barrières_frontalières

  • EU border ’lie detector’ system criticised as pseudoscience

    Technology that analyses facial expressions being trialled in Hungary, Greece and Latvia.

    The EU has been accused of promoting pseudoscience after announcing plans for a “#smart_lie-detection_system” at its busiest borders in an attempt to identify illegal migrants.

    The “#lie_detector”, to be trialled in Hungary, Greece and Latvia, involves the use of a computer animation of a border guard, personalised to the traveller’s gender, ethnicity and language, asking questions via a webcam.

    The “deception detection” system will analyse the micro-expressions of those seeking to enter EU territory to see if they are being truthful about their personal background and intentions. Those arriving at the border will be required to have uploaded pictures of their passport, visa and proof of funds.

    According to an article published by the European commission, the “unique approach to ‘deception detection’ analyses the micro-expressions of travellers to figure out if the interviewee is lying”.

    The project’s coordinator, George Boultadakis, who works for the technology supplier, European Dynamics, in Luxembourg, said: “We’re employing existing and proven technologies – as well as novel ones – to empower border agents to increase the accuracy and efficiency of border checks. The system will collect data that will move beyond biometrics and on to biomarkers of deceit.”

    Travellers who have been flagged as low risk by the #avatar, and its lie detector, will go through a short re-evaluation of their information for entry. Those judged to be of higher risk will undergo a more detailed check.

    Border officials will use a handheld device to automatically crosscheck information, comparing the facial images captured during the pre-screening stage to passports and photos taken on previous border crossings.

    When documents have been reassessed, and fingerprinting, palm-vein scanning and face matching have been carried out, the potential risk will be recalculated. A border guard will then take over from the automated system.

    The project, which has received €4.5m (£3.95m) in EU funding, has been heavily criticised by experts.

    Bruno Verschuere, a senior lecturer in forensic psychology at the University of Amsterdam, told the Dutch newspaper De Volskrant he believed the system would deliver unfair outcomes.
    A neuroscientist explains: the need for ‘empathetic citizens’ - podcast

    “Non-verbal signals, such as micro-expressions, really do not say anything about whether someone is lying or not,” he said. “This is the embodiment of everything that can go wrong with lie detection. There is no scientific foundation for the methods that are going to be used now.

    “Once these systems are put into use, they will not go away. The public will only hear the success stories and not the stories about those who have been wrongly stopped.”

    Verschuere said there was no evidence for the assumption that liars were stressed and that this translated to into fidgeting or subtle facial movements.

    Bennett Kleinberg, an assistant professor in data science at University College London, said: “This can lead to the implementation of a pseudoscientific border control.”

    A spokesman for the project said: “The border crossing decision is not based on the single tool (ie lie detection) but on the aggregated risk estimations based on a risk-based approach and technology that has been used widely in custom procedures.

    “Therefore, the overall procedure is safe because it is not relying in the risk on one analysis (ie the lie detector) but on the correlated risks from various analysis.”

    The technology has been designed by a consortium of the Hungarian national police, Latvian customs, and Manchester Metropolitan and Leibnitz universities. Similar technology is being developed in the US, where lie detection is widely used in law enforcement, despite scepticism over its scientific utility in much of the rest of the world.

    Last month, engineers at the University of Arizona said they had developed a system that they hoped to install on the US-Mexico border known as the #Automated_Virtual_Agent_for_Truth_Assessments_in_Real-Time, or Avatar.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/02/eu-border-lie-detection-system-criticised-as-pseudoscience?CMP=share_bt
    #wtf #what_the_fuck #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #technologie #expressions_faciales #Grèce #Hongrie #Lettonie #mensonge #abus #gardes-frontière #biométrie #biomarqueurs #corps #smart_borders #risques #université #science-fiction
    ping @reka @isskein

    • Smart lie-detection system to tighten EU’s busy borders

      An EU-funded project is developing a way to speed up traffic at the EU’s external borders and ramp up security using an automated border-control system that will put travellers to the test using lie-detecting avatars. It is introducing advanced analytics and risk-based management at border controls.

      More than 700 million people enter the EU every year – a number that is rapidly rising. The huge volume of travellers and vehicles is piling pressure on external borders, making it increasingly difficult for border staff to uphold strict security protocols – checking the travel documents and biometrics of every passenger – whilst keeping disruption to a minimum.

      To help, the EU-funded project IBORDERCTRL is developing an ‘intelligent control system’ facilitating – making faster – border procedures for bona fide and law-abiding travellers. In this sense, the project is aiming to deliver more efficient and secure land border crossings to facilitate the work of border guards in spotting illegal immigrants, and so contribute to the prevention of crime and terrorism.

      ‘We’re employing existing and proven technologies – as well as novel ones – to empower border agents to increase the accuracy and efficiency of border checks,’ says project coordinator George Boultadakis of European Dynamics in Luxembourg. ‘IBORDERCTRL’s system will collect data that will move beyond biometrics and on to biomarkers of deceit.’
      Smart ‘deception detection’

      The IBORDERCTRL system has been set up so that travellers will use an online application to upload pictures of their passport, visa and proof of funds, then use a webcam to answer questions from a computer-animated border guard, personalised to the traveller’s gender, ethnicity and language. The unique approach to ‘deception detection’ analyses the micro-expressions of travellers to figure out if the interviewee is lying.

      This pre-screening step is the first of two stages. Before arrival at the border, it also informs travellers of their rights and travel procedures, as well as providing advice and alerts to discourage illegal activity.

      The second stage takes place at the actual border. Travellers who have been flagged as low risk during the pre-screening stage will go through a short re-evaluation of their information for entry, while higher-risk passengers will undergo a more detailed check.

      Border officials will use a hand-held device to automatically cross-check information, comparing the facial images captured during the pre-screening stage to passports and photos taken on previous border crossings. After the traveller’s documents have been reassessed, and fingerprinting, palm vein scanning and face matching have been carried out, the potential risk posed by the traveller will be recalculated. Only then does a border guard take over from the automated system.

      At the start of the IBORDERCTRL project, researchers spent a lot of time learning about border crossings from border officials themselves, through interviews, workshops, site surveys, and by watching them at work.

      It is hoped that trials about to start in Hungary, Greece and Latvia will prove that the intelligent portable control system helps border guards reliably identify travellers engaging in criminal activity. The trials will start with lab testing to familiarise border guards with the system, followed by scenarios and tests in realistic conditions along the borders.
      A mounting challenge

      ‘The global maritime and border security market is growing fast in light of the alarming terror threats and increasing terror attacks taking place on European Union soil, and the migration crisis,” says Boultadakis.

      As a consequence, the partner organisations of IBORDERCTRL are likely to benefit from this growing European security market – a sector predicted to be worth USD 146 billion (EUR 128 bn) in Europe by 2020.

      Project details

      Project acronym: #iBorderCtrl
      Participants: Luxembourg (Coordinator), Greece, Cyprus, United Kingdom, Poland, Spain, Hungary, Germany, Latvia
      Project N°: 700626
      Total costs: € 4 501 877
      EU contribution: € 4 501 877
      Duration: September 2016 to August 2019


      http://ec.europa.eu/research/infocentre/article_en.cfm?artid=49726

    • AVATAR - Automated Virtual Agent for Truth Assessments in Real-Time

      There are many circumstances, particularly in a border-crossing scenario, when credibility must be accurately assessed. At the same time, since people deceive for a variety of reasons, benign and nefarious, detecting deception and determining potential risk are extremely difficult. Using artificial intelligence and non-invasive sensor technologies, BORDERS has developed a screening system called the Automated Virtual Agent for Truth Assessments in Real-Time (AVATAR). The AVATAR is designed to flag suspicious or anomalous behavior that warrants further investigation by a trained human agent in the field. This screening technology may be useful at Land Ports of Entry, airports, detention centers, visa processing, asylum requests, and personnel screening.

      The AVATAR has the potential to greatly assist DHS by serving as a force multiplier that frees personnel to focus on other mission-critical tasks, and provides more accurate decision support and risk assessment. This can be accomplished by automating interviews and document/biometric collection, and delivering real-time multi-sensor credibility assessments in a screening environment. In previous years, we have focused on conducting the basic research on reliably analyzing human behavior for deceptive cues, better understanding the DHS operational environment, and developing and testing a prototype system.

      Principal Investigators:
      #Aaron_Elkins
      #Doug_Derrick
      #Jay_Nunamaker, Jr.
      #Judee_Burgoon
      Status:
      Current

      http://borders.arizona.edu/cms/projects/avatar-automated-virtual-agent-truth-assessments-real-time
      #University_of_Arizona

    • Un #détecteur_de_mensonges bientôt testé aux frontières de l’Union européenne

      L’Union européenne va tester dans un avenir proche un moyen de réguler le passage des migrants sur certaines de ses frontières, en rendant celui-ci plus simple et plus rapide. Ce moyen prendra la forme d’un détecteur de mensonges basé sur l’intelligence artificielle.

      Financé depuis 2016 par l’UE, le projet iBorderCtrl fera bientôt l’objet d’un test qui se déroulera durant six mois sur quatre postes-frontière situés en Hongrie, en Grèce et en Lettonie. Il s’avère que chaque année, environ 700 millions de nouvelles personnes arrivent dans l’UE, et les gardes-frontières ont de plus en plus de mal à effectuer les vérifications d’usage.

      Ce projet iBorderCtrl destiné à aider les gardes-frontières n’est autre qu’un détecteur de mensonges reposant sur une intelligence artificielle. Il s’agit en somme d’une sorte de garde frontière virtuel qui, après avoir pris connaissance des documents d’un individu (passeport, visa et autres), lui fera passer un interrogatoire. Ce dernier devra donc faire face à une caméra et répondre à des questions.

      L’IA en question observera la personne et fera surtout attention aux micro-mouvements du visage, le but étant de détecter un éventuel mensonge. À la fin de l’entretien, l’individu se verra remettre un code QR qui déterminera son appartenance à une des deux files d’attente, c’est-à-dire les personnes acceptées et celles – sur lesquelles il subsiste un doute – qui feront l’objet d’un entretien plus poussé avec cette fois, des gardes-frontières humains.

      Le système iBorderCtrl qui sera bientôt testé affiche pour l’instant un taux de réussite de 74 %, mais les porteurs du projet veulent atteindre au moins les 85 %. Enfin, évoquons le fait que ce dispositif pose assez logiquement des questions éthiques, et a déjà de nombreux opposants !

      L’IA a été présentée lors du Manchester Science Festival qui s’est déroulé du 18 au 29 octobre 2018, comme le montre la vidéo ci-dessous :
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fsd3Ubqi38

      https://sciencepost.fr/2018/11/un-detecteur-de-mensonges-bientot-teste-aux-frontieres-de-lunion-europee

  • University lecturers must remain educators, not border guards

    The increasingly stringent control of student migration by the Home Office is damaging both the integrity of our relationships as teachers with students and the future of our universities. It was for this reason that 160 academics signed a letter published in The Guardian against the ways in which this crackdown corrodes relationships of trust that are essential to learning.

    https://theconversation.com/university-lecturers-must-remain-educators-not-border-guards-23948

    #home_office #frontières #frontières_mobiles #université #UK #Angleterre #gardes_frontières (#flexibilisation_introvertie, pour utiliser un concept de Paolo Cuttitta)

    Article de 2014, mais qui reste de très forte actualité !

    • UK academics oppose visa monitoring regime for foreign staff

      UK academics oppose visa monitoring regime for foreign staff
      UK university leaders are being urged to review their attitudes towards foreign staff and students, following fresh reports of visa holders being “unfairly monitored” and even threatened with home visits by nervous administrators.

      Institutions say that efforts to record the whereabouts of international employees and students on sponsored visas are necessary to comply with Home Office regulations, but union representatives argue that the requirements are being misinterpreted and create a “hostile environment” for foreign workers.
      One foreign academic employed by the University of Birmingham told Times Higher Education that they had become “confused and scared” after being told that they must report their attendance weekly or “risk deportation”.

      “I feel like I am not trusted, that I can’t do my job, that I’m assumed [to be] a criminal,” said the academic, who chose to remain anonymous. “Being constantly monitored in this way makes me feel like I don’t really want to be here…if I had an opportunity somewhere else I would consider leaving the UK.”

      A letter issued by Birmingham’s human resources department to international staff and seen by THE states that any individual who fails to report their attendance as well as any time spent off campus on a weekly basis will have their “name passed to the UK Border Agency”.

      Failure to comply may result in “disciplinary action and/or withdrawal of your certificate of sponsorship, and thereby your eligibility to remain in the UK”.

      Birmingham had to operate “within the requirements set out by the Home Office”, a university spokesman said. “Our priority is ensuring that we are supporting staff to remain in the UK.”

      Meanwhile, staff at the University of Sussex launched a petition last week calling on vice-chancellor Adam Tickell to “end the hostile environment” found towards “migrants, people of colour and Muslims” on campus, which they said had been made worse as a result of “immigration monitoring”.

      The Sussex branch of the University and College Union said that managers at the institution had chosen to interpret Home Office guidelines in a needlessly stringent manner. “Staff and students are made aware that if they are not able to attest to their whereabouts for 80 per cent of the semester, they risk having their [immigration] status withdrawn,” a spokesman said. “This is not necessary."

      Those on Tier 2 and Tier 5 visas were at one stage told to “expect home visits” if they chose to work out of the office, but the university has since admitted that this approach is “not feasible”, the UCU spokesman added.

      An email sent from one head of department on 10 April informs Sussex staff they must have “complete records of their movements at any given time” recorded via “electronic calendars, so if auditors turn up at any given time we can point to it”.

      “I found this procedure extraordinary,” said one academic, “and I am sure there would be revolt if this were imposed on everyone in the department.”

      A University of Sussex spokeswoman said that Professor Tickell was aware of the petition, and had “already clarified with members of our community why and how the university needs to comply with statutory regulations”.

      “Our policies and procedures are informed by UK and EU legislation, statutory regulations and duties and best practice,” she added.

      Separately, staff at UCL have written to the institution’s president, Michael Arthur, expressing “serious concerns” over rules that require staff to have “physical check-ins” with international students every three weeks in order to monitor visa compliance.

      The policy takes up staff time “in bureaucracy that is irrelevant”, “builds a culture of mistrust” and creates “added pressure...at a time when we have increasing evidence about risks to student wellbeing and mental health”, the letter says.

      A Home Office spokeswoman said it remained “the responsibility of individual sponsors to develop their own systems to ensure they meet their reporting responsibilities”.

      https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/uk-academics-oppose-visa-monitoring-regime-foreign-staff

    • #Frontex condemned by its own fundamental rights body for failing to live up to obligations

      Frontex, the EU’s border agency, has been heavily criticised for failing to provide adequate staff and resources to its own Fundamental Rights Office, a problem that “seriously hinders the Agency’s ability to deliver on its fundamental rights obligations.”

      The criticisms come in a report from the Consultative Forum on Fundamental Rights, an independent advisory body made up of experts from other EU agencies, international organisations and NGOs.

      As well as noting an ongoing “reluctance” to provide the Fundamental Rights Office with “sufficiently qualified staff,” the Consultative Forum report raises concerns over Frontex’s role at the Serbian-Hungarian border, a failure to update and effectively implement codes of conduct and a complaints mechanism, and the lack of independent monitoring of forced return operations coordinated by the agency.

      See: Frontex Consultative Forum on Fundamental Rights - Fifth Annual Report (pdf): http://statewatch.org/news/2018/may/eu-frontex-consultative-forum-on-fundamental-rights-report-2017.pdf

      Fundamental rights sidelined

      While the Consultative Forum exists to provide “independent advice” to Frontex’s executive director and management board and is staffed voluntarily, the Fundamental Rights Officer is a Frontex official tasked with “contributing to the Agency’s fundamental rights strategy… monitoring its compliance with fundamental rights and… promoting its respect of fundamental rights.”

      The Officer has to oversee a large organisation - Frontex foresaw (pdf: https://frontex.europa.eu/assets/Key_Documents/Programming_Document/2018/Programming_Document_2018-2020.pdf) having 352 staff at the end of 2017, and 418 by the end of this year - yet “lacks the minimum capacity to carry outs its role,” according to the Consultative Forum, with just four staff working alongside the officer and one member of secretarial staff.

      The report states that “the lack of adequate staffing seriously hinders the Agency’s ability to deliver on its fundamental rights obligations including on key areas such as Frontex operational activities, the newly established complaints mechanism or the protection of children.”

      The Consultative Forum has come up against its own problems in attempting to carry out its tasks. According to Article 70(5) of the Frontex Regulation adopted in 2016, “the consultative forum shall have effective access to all information concerning the respect for fundamental rights.”

      Yet the report complains that the Forum “continues to face serious and further limitations” on access to information, “particularly in relation to relevant operational reference and guiding documents.” Despite “repeatedly raising this concern with Frontex management,” it is yet to receive a “final response or constructive proposal.”

      Given that Frontex operational documents have included (http://www.statewatch.org/news/2017/feb/eu-frontex-op-hera-debriefing-pr.htm) instructions for border guards to target “migrants from minority ethnic groups, and individuals who may have been isolated or mistreated during their journey,” the need for access to such information by fundamental rights monitoring bodies is clear.

      In this regard, the Consultative Forum highlights that “external oversight” - for example by the European and national parliaments and civil society groups - “remains of particular importance”.

      The Hungarian-Serbian border

      In November 2016 the Consultative Forum recommended that Frontex teams be withdrawn from the Hungarian-Serbian border due to fundamental rights concerns, but the Executive Director rebuffed the proposal, arguing that Frontex’s presence can “minimise potential risks related to the use of force” and can assist in documenting “circumstances on the ground.”

      Indeed, the positive effect of Frontex presence on national border guards has been noted elsewhere - following a trip to the Bulgarian-Turkish border, French MEP Marie-Christine Vergiat reported NGOs as saying that “whenever a Frontex officer was involved in a [Bulgarian border guard] patrolling group, there were no abuses.” (http://bulgarianpresidency.eu/marie-christine-vergiat-teaming-bulgarian-turkish-border-guards-)

      However, given the European Commission’s decision to launch an infringement procedure against Hungary for new asylum legislation that includes automatic detention, limitations on legal assistance and measures for automatic expulsion, the Forum reasserted its recommendation.

      The agency has apparently “significantly reduced the number of deployed officers and assets in Hungary,” according to the report, but a number remain in place and the Consultative Forum warns that the developments in Hungarian law and practice “have further exacerbated the risks of Frontex being involved in serious fundamental rights violations.”

      Complaints mechanism and codes of conduct

      The need for Frontex to establish a complaints mechanism so that individuals can seek redress for potential fundamental rights violations that they may have suffered during operations coordinated by the agency is a long-standing issue (https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/activities/speech.faces/en/73745/html.bookmark), and the 2016 Regulation (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32016R1624) introduced such a mechanism (in Article 72), to be overseen by the agency in cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Officer.

      There is now, however, a need to implement this mechanism and the Consultative Forum’s report notes that:

      “The rules should, among other points, provide further details on the respective roles of the different actors involved in the procedure, specify the timeframe for the processing of complaints, and provide for the possibility of anonymous complaints. In this context the Consultative Forum reiterates its calls for the allocation of more technical staff and means to the Fundamental Rights Officer.”

      The Forum also highlights the agency’s decision to discard its recommendations on the ’Code of Conduct for all persons participating in Frontex activities’, which would have seen the inclusion of “specific references to omissions or failures to act or to the prohibition to obey or obligation not to comply with and report instructions that are illicit or against international, EU or national legislation, the Code of Conduct or the legal framework of the activity.”

      The agency is also redrafting its ’Code of Conduct for Return Operations and Return Interventions’, which is expected to be adopted this year. The Forum notes that it is “essential to strengthen the wording relating to the legal framework and, in particular, fundamental rights obligations such as the right to an effective remedy,” and makes a number of specific proposals.

      Monitoring of forced return operations

      In 2017 the agency coordinated and/or co-financed 341 forced return operations - 150 national return operations (involving just one Member State), 153 joint return operations (involving one or more Member State) and 38 collecting return operations, in which the authorities of non-EU states are involved in the “collection” of their own nationals.

      Of these 341 operations, a human rights monitor accompanied 188 of them, just 41% of the total, but nevertheless an increase on the previous year. However, the report indicates that a particularly low number of national return operations - 20 of 150 - were monitored.

      The report also notes 50 “readmission” operations from Greece to Turkey conducted by Frontex, in the framework of the EU-Turkey deal. Only 22 of these were monitored. The Forum recommends treating readmission operations in the same way as return operations, “in order to make use of the already existing standards for return operations (code, monitoring, escorts training, etc.).”

      The list goes on

      Other problems for the Consultative Forum in 2017 include a failure to prioritise the revision of Frontex’s fundamental rights strategy (now foreseen for adoption sometime this year), the need to “mainstream” gender perspectives and issues into Frontex activities, and some issues with the terminology deployed in the Africa-Frontex Intelligence Community reports, such as references to “illegal” migrants and referring to operations by the Libyan Coast Guard as “rescues”.

      Elsewhere, the Consultative Forum notes good progress made on updating measures to try to ensure the protection of children and migration and the identification of minors at risk of abuse. Nevertheless, for an agency whose “mission” is “to promote, coordinate and develop European border management in line with the EU fundamental rights charter,” it seems that the former is being given priority over the latter.

      http://statewatch.org/news/2018/may/eu-frontex-fr-rep.htm

      #droits_fondamentaux #droits_humains #condamnation #frontières #asile #migrations #réfugiés

  • Palestinian teen shot dead at Israeli military checkpoint in stabbing attempt
    Aug. 19, 2017 6:15 P.M. (Updated: Aug. 19, 2017 9:13 P.M.)
    http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?ID=778752

    BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — Israeli border police shot and killed a Palestinian teenager at Israel’s Zaatara military checkpoint in the northern occupied West Bank on Saturday afternoon, with Israeli authorities alleging the youth attempted to carry out a knife attack on Israeli forces when he was shot.

    While initial reports suggested that an Israeli soldier was lightly injured after being stabbed by the Palestinian, it was later revealed that the border police officer was in fact wounded by friendly fire.

    Israel’s emergency medical service Magen David Adom reported that the MDA and Israeli army medics treated the Israeli soldier, an 18-year-old male, who was in a mild condition.

    Al-Samri said that the alleged assailant, a 17-year-old Palestinian, had approached border guard forces stationed at the Nablus-area checkpoint, “and when they saw he was carrying a bag in his hand, they started undertake procedures to arrest him.”

    The youth then allegedly brandished a knife “and started to battle an officer before other officers fired at him and neutralized him, and he was announced dead on the scene.” She released a statement shortly after saying the Palestinian was still alive but in a critical condition. Minutes later, a further statement confirmed he had succumbed to his injuries.

    The Israeli police spokeswoman also provided a photo of the knife allegedly found on the youth, who was identified by local sources as Qutayba Ziad Zahran from Illar village in the Tulkarem district.

    “A border guard police officer was taken to a hospital after he was hit by shrapnel in the foot,” al-Samri said in the statement, presumably referring to Israeli friendly fire.

    An eyewitness told Ma’an that a large number of Israeli soldiers arrived to the scene and closed Zaatara checkpoint, denying passage to Palestinians in either direction.

    A photo of the slain youth later circulated on social media.

    17-year-old Qutayba Ziad Zahran
    #Palestine_assassinée

  • AIDA 2016 Update : Poland

    The updated AIDA Country Report on Poland documents legislative reforms and developments throughout 2016 in relation to the asylum procedure, reception and detention, as well as content of protection.

    In 2016 access to the procedure remained a major problem in Poland. Reports say that, in spite of clearly formulated asylum requests invoking persecution in the country of origin, asylum seekers are refused the right to lodge an application and enter Poland. In August, representatives of the Polish Ombudsman conducted an unannounced inspection of the railway border crossing point in Terespol and stated that 5 families had explicitly declared their intention to apply for international protection, yet only one of them was admitted. During other interviews foreigners were describing situations or events which could indicate forced migration but again only in one case were the foreigners admitted.

    Problems with identification of vulnerabilities are reported both during the asylum procedure and during detention. During the asylum procedure a new vulnerability assessment is carried out by a Border Guard at the time of lodging an application. The officer screens the applicants to identify victims of trafficking in human beings or persons subject to torture. NGOs point out that this preliminary identification is conducted at the time of lodging asylum application, so often at the border, where the conditions are difficult. Some are of the opinion, that the questions from the application for international protection cannot be considered an early identification at all. Clear evidence that vulnerable persons are not identified correctly stems from the fact that victims of violence are still placed in detention, while the law prohibits the detention of such applicants. NGOs generally confirm that the system of identification envisaged in the law does not work in practice.

    In addition to this, 292 children were placed in detention in 2016. The best interests of the child is generally not taken into account in detention decisions. Children in detention in Poland have no access to adequate education.

    Poland did not relocate a single asylum seekers in 2016 and has repeatedly declared that it opposes the EU’s relocation mechanism. Since the last AIDA update, legislative reforms have taken place with respect to the provision of legal assistance, the rules of stay in reception centres and the amount of assistance for asylum seekers.

    “The refusal to participate in the EU’s relocation mechanism combined with problems to access the asylum procedure an even refoulement point towards a tendency to keep asylum seekers out of Poland. Added to this, problems such as malfunctioning vulnerability assessments and systematic detention of children show the asylum system in Poland to be excessively harsh for the weakest among the asylum seekers arriving in Poland,” says Ruben Fierens, AIDA Legal Officer.

    http://www.asylumineurope.org/news/27-02-2017/aida-2016-update-poland

    #Pologne #asile #migrations #réfugiés #procédure_d'asile #accueil #détention_administrative #rétention

  • Israeli forces shoot Palestinian girl, 13 after refusing orders to stop at checkpoint
    Sept. 21, 2016 9:53 A.M. (Updated : Sept. 21, 2016 2:12 P.M.)
    http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=773236

    QALQILIYA (Ma’an) — Israeli forces shot and injured a 13-year-old Palestinian girl at the Eliyahu checkpoint in eastern Qalqilya near the illegal Israeli settlement of Alfei Manashe in the northern occupied West Bank, after she was ordered to stop by border guards and continued walking.

    The incident was reported by Israeli media as an “attempted stabbing attack” and a “thwarted terror attack,” though an Israeli Defense Ministry statement reportedly said that Israeli forces found no traces of explosives or weapons after searching the teenager’s bag.

    The girl was reportedly shot in her legs, leaving her lightly-to-moderately injured, and subsequently detained by Israeli forces. She is reportedly being hospitalized at Meir Hospital in Kfar Sava in central Israel.

    No Israeli injuries were reported.

    The Defense Ministry statement said that after the girl approached the military checkpoint, Israeli authorities ordered her to stop, firing warning shots into the air. When she reached toward her shirt, a border guard shot her in the leg.

    During her initial detention and questioning, she reportedly told interrogators: “I came here to die,” according to the Israeli Defense Ministry.

    ““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““
    Une Palestinienne de 13 ans blessée par des gardes israéliens soupçonnant une attaque
    AFP / 21 septembre 2016 12h00
    http://www.romandie.com/news/738303.rom

    Une Palestinienne de 13 ans blessée par des gardes israéliens soupçonnant une attaque

    Jérusalem - Une Palestinienne de 13 ans a été blessée par balles mercredi à un checkpoint en Cisjordanie occupée par des gardes israéliens soupçonnant une tentative d’attentat, ont indiqué le ministère israélien de la Défense et le ministère palestinien de la Santé.

    La jeune fille a été légèrement blessée à la jambe et a été conduite à l’hôpital par les secours israéliens, a indiqué le ministère israélien de la Défense dans un communiqué.

    Je voulais mourir, a-t-elle dit aux forces israéliennes, selon ce ministère.

    La jeune fille, portant un sac suspect aux yeux des gardes, s’est approchée à pied sur une voie normalement réservée aux véhicules à un checkpoint près du point de passage de Qalqilia entre le territoire palestinien et Israël dans le nord de la Cisjordanie, selon le ministère israélien.

    Les gardes (israéliens) lui ont crié de s’arrêter à plusieurs reprises et ont procédé à des tirs de sommation en l’air, a-t-il ajouté.

    Comme la jeune fille a continué à avancer, les gardes lui ont tiré, une seule fois, dans les jambes.

    Les forces israéliennes n’ont rien trouvé de suspect dans son sac, a dit le ministère.

  • Weekly Report On Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (17– 23 March 2016) | Palestinian Center for Human Rights
    http://pchrgaza.org/en/?p=7977

    Thursday, 17 March 2016

    At approximately 11:20, Israeli forces opened fire at Ali Jamal Mohammed Taqatqah (19) and Ali Abdul Rahman Thawabtah (20), both form Beit Fajar village in Bethlehem. The aforementioned young men were at that time at the crossroad of “Ariel” settlement, north of Salfit. As a result, both of them were immediately killed claiming that they carried out a stab attack in a settlement.

    An eyewitness said to a PCHR’s fieldworker (PCHR keeps the name) that:

    “At approximately 11:20 on Thursday, 17 March 2016, I was selling as usual as well as my neighbour who owns a store, and most of the workers who enter “Ariel” settlement buy from us. We suddenly heard constant gunfire, so we rushed outside and saw two young men lying on the ground and Israeli soldiers were still shooting fire at them. Moreover, every soldier who arrived at the scene immediately opened fire at the two dead young men. The young men were about 150 meters away from us, but we were able to see the shooting. My neighbour told me that the two killed persons entered his shop a moment ago, bought cola and cigarettes and sat at the door of the shop and then he entered the shop. Two minutes later, he heard gunfire. We did not know if those young men came here by themselves or the Israeli police sent them as it is familiar that every person who tries to enter “Ariel” settlement due to committing an infraction, the police orders him to sit next to our shops and then they transfer him. We know nothing about these two young men and why they sat at the door of our shops.”

    Friday, 18 March 2016

    Approximately 15:00, Israeli forces stationed at al-Dowar area opposite to “Gosh Etzion” settlement, south of Bethlehem, killed Mahmoud Mohammed Ahmed Abu Fanunah (21), from Khelah al-Nafesa area, southeast of Hebron. Abu Fanunah was shot in an alleged stabbing attack and was left bleeding to death for more than an hour in the area. No first aid was given to him. An Israeli ambulance then transferred him to an unknown destination. Following this, Israeli forces raided and searched Abu Fanunah’s house and informed his family of his death. It should be noted that Abu Fanunah’s father has been arrested and placed under administrative detention for 5 months. At approximately 13:00, Israeli forces handed his corpse to the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) in the Israeli military liaison office “DCO”, south of Hebron. He was then taken to al-Ahli Hospital in the city. Following the examination of the body, medical sources said that Fanunah was hit with several live bullets throughout his body. One of the bullets directly hit his jaw directly causing laceration.

    Saturday, 19 March 2016

    At approximately 08:00, Israeli force stationed at Abu al-Rish checkpoint at the western entrance of al-Shuhada’a Street in the centre of Hebron. They killed Mohammed Ayed Fadel ‘Ajluni (16) from Jawhar Mount area, south of the city, and left him bleeding to death without offering him first aid. Israeli forces shot the abovementioned child claiming that he had a knife and attacked an Israeli Border Guard officer stationed at the checkpoint. As a result, the officer sustained minor wounds. Israeli forces brought members of his family, whose house is 1500 meters away from the checkpoint, to identify him. ‘Abdullah’s body was then taken to an unknown destination. At approximately 13:00, Israeli forces handed his family the corpse in the Israeli Military Liaison office “DCO”, south of Hebron. His family said that ‘Abdullah sustained twenty live bullet wounds throughout his body. Following this crime, Israeli forces closed the area and prevented Palestinians to move there.

  • Ukraine helicopter ’may have been human smuggling’ - BBC News
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34812405

    A Ukrainian helicopter has crashed in Slovakia, killing six people, Slovak officials say.
    They say the Mi-2 turbine-powered helicopter went down near Slovakia’s border with Ukraine, the eastern frontier of the European Union.
    Reports in Slovak media say the pilot may have been flying dangerously low in foggy weather to avoid being detected.
    Slovak and Ukrainian officials say the helicopter may have been involved in smuggling people across the border.
    Slovak Interior Minister Robert Kalinak was quoted by the novyny.sk website as saying illegal migrants could have been on board the helicopter.
    Ukraine’s border guard later said in a statement (in Ukrainian) that two Ukrainian nationals and four people from south-eastern Asia were on board.
    It said the helicopter was likely used to transport illegal migrants.
    Local officials say they found the bodies at the crash site near the village of Stretavka in Michalovce district on Friday.

  • Palestinian killed, one wounded after West Bank ’stabbing attempts’
    Nov. 10, 2015 3:56 P.M. (Updated: Nov. 10, 2015 8:19 P.M.)
    http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=768749

    BETHLEHEM (Ma’an) — Israeli forces shot dead one Palestinian and wounded another after they allegedly carried out separate stabbing attempts in the occupied West Bank, Israeli sources said.

    One of the Palestinians was shot dead after he allegedly attempted to stab an Israeli border guard at the Container checkpoint east of Jerusalem near Abu Dis.

    Israeli police said that Israeli forces opened fire on the Palestinian after he approached a border guard carrying a knife.

    They said the Palestinian was “neutralized,” and the Palestinian Authority Ministry of Health later said he had succumbed to his wounds.

    The ministry identified the Palestinian as 16-year-old Sadeq Ziad Gharbiyeh from the town of Sanur in southeastern Jenin.

    No Israelis were reported injured during the incident.
    (...)
    Later, at around 3 p.m., another Palestinian was reported to have entered the illegal Israeli settlement of Teqoa in Bethlehem district and “lunged at people with a knife,” according to Israeli news site Ynet.

    Israeli Border Police reportedly shot the Palestinian, and his condition was not yet known.

    The incidents came after two other alleged attacks in occupied East Jerusalem left two Israelis injured, with one alleged Palestinian attacker shot dead and a 12-year-old Palestinian boy shot and critically injured.

    #Palestine_assassinée

  • Mur à la frontière russo-ukrainienne : Kiev manque de fonds pour le projet

    L’Ukraine a renforcé seulement plusieurs centaines de mètres de la frontière avec la Russie en y construisant une clôture métallique avec des barbelés.

    http://fr.sputniknews.com/international/20150815/1017582922.html
    #Russie #Ukraine #mur #barrière_frontalière #frontières
    cc @albertocampiphoto @marty @daphne

    • Ukraine completing ‘wall’ with Russia in #Kharkiv region

      Head of Ukraine’s State Border Guard Service Viktor Nazarenko said that the authority is completing the creation of an intellectual guarding model for the state border with Russia in Kharkiv region. Works are underway in Sumy and Luhansk regions.


      https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/ukraine-completing-wall-russia-kharkiv-region.html

    • Ukraine’s ’European Rampart’ Risks Getting Lost In The Trenches

      Ukrainian border guard Oksana Ivanets winds her way past a 2-meter-tall green metal fence topped with coiled razor wire and through serpentine, timber-lined trenches to a bedroom-sized bunker built to withstand a direct hit from a 152-millimeter artillery shell.

      Out of a small window that looks north into a sprawling field of golden sunflowers, she points to a spot on the horizon where Ukraine ends and the territory of its adversary begins.

      “It’s only about 400 meters to the Russian border,” says Ivanets, dressed in a forest-green uniform.

      This outpost was a part of the first segment of an ambitious $520-million, four-year defense plan announced by then-Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk with great fanfare at the peak of the war in eastern Ukraine against Moscow-backed separatists in late summer 2014.

      Dubbed in its early days “Project Wall” and known also as “The European Rampart,” the barrier was intended to fortify a significant section of Ukraine’s porous eastern frontier while both literally and symbolically separating the country from its Soviet-era hegemon.

      But four years on, it’s not exactly the bulwark the government planned.

      A struggling economy has forced a fourfold reduction in its budget and pushed its scheduled completion date to 2020. And an embezzlement scandal has put the entire project in question. Fresh indictments this month have brought it back into the public eye.

      For some, the section of the wall that stands today is more a physical reminder of the country’s enduring corruption than a symbol of progress and security.

      Yatsenyuk responded in English via e-mail to RFE/RL questions about the project, insisting that it has been a success.

      “This is part of one of the greatest achievements of the post-Maidan government and the efforts of all Ukrainian people: restoring the country’s defense capabilities,” he argued, using the colloquial term for Ukraine’s 2014 street uprising that ousted a Moscow-friendly president.

      ’It Can’t Stop Tanks’

      As it stands, the wall project covers merely a fraction of Ukraine’s 2,300-kilometer eastern border with Russia. It comprises 170 kilometers of trenches; 72 kilometers of fencing; a 165-kilometer patrol road; a 19-kilometer ground strip fitted with seismic sensors to detect objects of more than 60 kilograms; and four frontier posts with 17-meter-high watchtowers equipped with security and thermal-imaging cameras.

      There is also a 20-kilometer section of fencing and trenches in the war-torn Luhansk region to the south.

      In some places, there are natural boundaries that prevent crossings.

      “It would be naive to expect that this type of structure...would make any difference,” Oleksiy Melnyk, a Ukrainian political and security analyst at the Kyiv-based Ruzumkov Center, a nongovernmental public-policy think tank, says of a possible Russian attack. “This so-called wall is not suitable, in military terms.”

      Border guard Ivanets still views it with optimism. She says that even the work so far is better than nothing, adding that something needed to be done to try to safeguard Ukraine and, in particular, Kharkiv, from the same fate as occupied regions to the south.

      Kharkiv, an industrial city 480 kilometers from Kyiv, is the country’s second-largest city with 1.4 million residents and a Ukrainian military stronghold. It withstood an initial attempt by pro-Russia separatists to seize control in 2014.

      Swaths of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions with more than 4 million inhabitants and a 400-kilometer border with Russia remains under the control of Moscow-backed separatists. Kyiv and international observers accuse Russia of exploiting Ukraine’s loss of control there, slipping its forces and equipment easily across the border to back separatist offensives and even launch its own when those fighters need extra help against government troops.

      “It was determined that if a Russian attack against the Kharkiv region is initiated, they will try to go right through this point,” says Ivanets.

      She concedes that the wall would not defeat a Russian offensive. But that’s not its point.

      “It gives us time to organize the first line of defense while we wait for the [Ukrainian] Armed Forces to arrive,” she says. “We understand very well that it can’t stop tanks.”

      ’For 100 Years We Didn’t Need A Wall’

      It’s this aspect of the project that has drawn ridicule from many Ukrainians. A well-known journalist and commentator called the wall a “pathetic fence,” and a member of parliament described it as a “4 billion-hryvnya pit.”

      It has also angered residents of border towns and villages who complain it’s an eyesore and a barrier that has disrupted their lives. Some complain it keeps family and friends apart. Local farmers bemoan the loss of fields that stretched into Russian territory where their livestock used to graze.

      A major reason locals were able to move so freely across the border and constructing the project has been such a headache is that the countries’ shared border was never properly demarcated after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

      “We lived here without a wall for 100 years. It’s a big shame to [build it] now,” 83-year-old Alisivka village resident Lyubov Dekhnich says during a break from picking raspberries outside the house her family built in 1955.

      Beyond the barrier itself, new bureaucratic procedures for crossing official border points have been put into effect, further limiting freedom of movement.

      Until recently, both Russian and Ukrainian citizens could cross the administrative border with internal passports. Today, to the chagrin of locals, they need international passports.

      “They must understand that that there’s an aggressor on the other side,” Ivanets says of such complaints, adding that she hopes critics will come around at some point. “We must keep Russia out.”

      Corruption Allegations

      Project Wall’s construction should have been faster, wider, and better, according to Ukraine’s National Anticorruption Bureau (NABU).

      That FBI-trained anticorruption agency — formed in the wake of the Euromaidan protests as Kyiv set out to implement crucial reforms to secure Western aid — found that some of the patrol roads along the wall where border guards cruise in fourwheelers, for instance, were narrower than the planned three meters and that at least $365,000 was stolen from its budget.

      Eight people from the Border Guard Service of Ukraine and local contractors were detained in August and November 2017 for alleged embezzlement. On July 5, NABU announced it had completed its pretrial investigation into their actions and prepared an indictment for special anticorruption prosecutors to send to court.

      While it is unclear who was behind the alleged scheme — especially since an order from the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) made all information about the wall project a state secret — some point the finger at Yatsenyuk, as the wall was his idea.
      Yatsenyuk calls those who accuse him of orchestrating any wrongdoing “Goebbels-style” liars perpetuating “Kremlin propaganda.”

      “Moscow openly does not want to have a border between Ukraine and Russia,” he says. “Therefore, the Kremlin is making tremendous efforts to disrupt or discredit any border project.”

      “Even if contractors and local officials had something stolen (the investigation will have to prove it in court), how could [a] prime minister be involved in this?” he adds in an e-mail.

      Russian Activity ’Practically Every Day’

      Yatsenyuk argues that his brainchild has also succeeded in halting smuggling and illegal migration while helping Ukraine secure a visa-free regime with the European Union and lay the groundwork for possible NATO membership.

      “Our partners have always made it clear that Ukraine has to create a reliable border with Russia,” he says.

      Ukraine secured visa-free travel with the EU in June 2017, but it is unclear what role the construction of the wall played in that agreement. And with the conflict in Donetsk and Luhansk grinding on, NATO membership remains a distant prospect.

      Driving along the fence, Ivanets says the only border violators around there these days are wild boars and deer that roam the surrounding forests and tall grass.

      But a greater threat looms just over yonder.

      Ivanets says the most extensive and aggressive Russian military activity was observed along the Kharkiv border throughout 2014 and 2015, but that border guards still see men in military uniforms on the Russian side “practically every day,” sometimes driving armored personnel carriers.

      A Completed ’Wall’ By 2020 — Maybe

      The war in eastern Ukraine is in its fifth year, with no end in sight. More than 10,000 people have been killed and a peace deal known as the Minsk II accord has failed to stick.

      Recently, the rhetoric from Moscow and Kyiv has become more aggressive, with Russian President Vladimir Putin predicting just days after his Helsinki summit with U.S. President Donald Trump a “serious risk of escalation” in eastern Ukraine.

      As Ukrainian troops continue still dug in and preparing for the worst, Ukraine is pressing on with Project Wall.

      The chief of the Ukrainian Border Guards Service, Petro Tsyhykal, predicted recently that the Kharkiv section of the wall would be completed by the end of this year, with more construction planned in Luhansk, Sumy, and Chernihiv scheduled for completion in 2020.

      “We understand that this is a matter of national security,” he says, “so we need to complete it under any conditions.”


      https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-s-european-rampart-risks-getting-lost-in-the-trenches-/29396996.html
      cc @reka

  • Russia warns Ukraine not to move against humanitarian convoy crossing border without clearance (UPDATED)

    Russia’s foreign ministry warned Ukraine not to take any action against its humanitarian convoy that crossed into #Luhansk region without clearance from border guard or the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).


    http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/russia-warns-ukraine-not-to-move-against-humanitarian-convoy-which-moved-a

    #Russie #Ukraine #convoi_humanitaire

  • Iron Curtain of the Mind—Our Tangled Thoughts on Geography - Facts So Romantic
    http://nautil.us/blog/iron-curtain-of-the-mindour-tangled-thoughts-on-geography

    An East German border guard keeps a lookout for people trying to escape from communist Berlin to freedom on the other side of the wall. US National ArchivesHow well do we know the countries we call home? It seems obvious that travel and study would improve a person’s knowledge of geography. But could attitudes about politics also affect your mental map of the world? Psychologist Claus-Christian Carbon, of the University of Vienna, asked Germans to estimate the distance between several German cities. They found, even 15 years after German reunification, that people tended to overestimate the distance between cities that were on opposite sides of the former East-West German border. (The subjects also overestimated the distance between cities on the same side of the border, but the (...)

  • Just another interrogation: My encounter with the Shin Bet | +972 Magazine
    http://972mag.com/just-another-shin-bet-interrogation/68619

    For one Palestinian citizen of Israel, interrogations by the Shin Bet are a routine which include delays and harassment for no apparent reason.

    By Awad Abdel Fattah

    I was fortunate this week. I had a quick and easy crossing from Jordan back into Israel. No delays, no questions, no invasive body searches and no lengthy rummaging through my luggage. The border guard sitting next to the computer took my passport, opened it and looked at the screen, presumably to check for any special alert. Unlike previous occasions, she didn’t leave her seat and disappear into another room to take instructions on what to do next. She simply handed back the passport, and I walked outside to my car.

    For years, on almost every occasion, I have been routinely delayed and harassed for no apparent reason upon my return to Israel, whether following a speaking engagement or a personal trip, which I do with increasing infrequency given my treatment by these officials.

    A month ago I went through the humiliating routine on my return from Amman. I find it impossible to let the procedure pass without responding. Possibly, it was this previous, heated exchange that suspended, if only briefly, my expected round of humiliation this week.

    On that earlier occasion, as so often before, I ended up in an argument with two “security” men from the Shin Bet. (Similar confrontations occur when I arrive at or leave from Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion airport.) After an hour of unnecessary delays, the two asked me to put my bag on a raised bench. One of them opened it and roughly began searching the contents: some clothes and two books.

    I protested angrily: “Why don’t you do that more gently?”

    He answered with a feigned calm: “You must accept everything that happens here in a nice way.”

    I responded: “How can I deal with racist treatment and humiliation in a nice way?”

    The other man, annoyed by the comment, interrupted loudly: “Tell me, why do you hate us?”

    Next, the confrontation developed into a back-and-forth of accusations, with a subtext of politics.

    I answered: “Who hates whom, me or you?”

    He said: “I read your writings and you hate us.”

    I replied: “I hate your racism, and the humiliating way you treat me and my people.”

    Angrily, he declared: “Go to the Arab countries and you will see what will happen to you there.”

    This statement, regularly uttered by Israeli Jews, irritated me. He wanted to erase the differences between our situation as Palestinians in Israel and that of other “Arabs” in Arab countries as a way to justify his country’s racist polices, and to silence us. The implication of his comparison was that we are not the indigenuous people of Palestine, and that Israel is doing us a favor by “allowing” us to express our opinions and vote