country:philippines

  • #Global_media_Monitoring_Project (#GMMP)

    Who makes the news? is a knowledge, information and resource portal on applied media research. Our work focuses on gender and other axes of discrimination in and through media and communication.

    In 1987 a series of regional consultations on ‘women and media’ convened by the communication rights’ organisation WACC-UK culminated in the first-ever global conference on ‘Women Empowering Communication’ held in Bangkok in February 1994. Convened in co-operation with Isis International - Philippines and the International Women’s Tribune Centre-New York, the conference brought together over 430 people from 80 countries. At the conference, women from all over the world developed a series of strategies and resolutions for empowering women in and through the media in the ‘Bangkok Declaration’.

    The Bangkok Declaration and the recommendations contained in Section J on “Women and the media” of the Beijing Platform for Action of the 1995 UN Fourth World Conference on Women have provided a blueprint for our interventions. In March 2017 the Bangkok Declaration was revised with input from participants at a WACC pre-Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) symposium in New York. Dubbed The New York Declaration, the new text reflects pertinent gender issues in the current media landscape. The document articulates a feminist agenda for the media and charts a path for action by various actors.

    We promote critical media research to generate evidence for education, awareness, training and advocacy, supporting women’s use of media for their own empowerment and for the development of their communities. It advocates full and equal participation of women in public communication so that their multiple and complex interests, experiences and realities become part of the public agenda. It also supports civil society evidence-building on media and marginalized sectors of society in order to advance social justice goals for all in and through the media.

    Our work has resulted in an extensive network of individuals and organizations concerned about gender, media and critical communication broadly, from grassroots activists to academics and development organisations.


    http://whomakesthenews.org
    #femmes #genre #médias #presse

  • « Vos toilettes propres, nos propres papiers » Maxime Vancauwenberge - 17 Juin 2019 - Solidaire
    https://www.solidaire.org/articles/vos-toilettes-propres-nos-propres-papiers

    Ils et elles sont entre 100 000 et 150 000 en Belgique. Travailleurs et travailleuses sans-papiers. Hormis l’aide médicale urgente et la scolarisation de leurs enfants, les personnes sans-papiers ne jouissent d’aucun droit et ne reçoivent aucune aide. Beaucoup sont employées dans certains secteurs comme l’Horeca, la construction, et le nettoyage.

    « Elles ont peur parce qu’elles sont sans papiers. Elles ont peur des conséquences par rapport à leur employeur », commence Magali Verdier, l’animatrice du MOC (Mouvement ouvrier chrétien) qui coordonne la Ligue des Travailleuses Domestiques, juste avant le début de l’entretien. Nous voilà immédiatement plongés dans le quotidien des personnes sans-papiers : vivre caché et dans la peur. Mais depuis quelques mois, des travailleuses domestiques sans-papiers ont décidé de sortir de l’ombre. Elles revendiquent l’application de la Convention Internationale C189, ratifiée par la Belgique en 2011, qui garantit le respect de certains droits élémentaires comme un salaire minimum, le paiement des heures supplémentaires et la possibilité de porter plainte contre l’employeur en cas d’abus. Elles revendiquent également la possibilité de pouvoir rester légalement en Belgique et de pouvoir ainsi contribuer à la sécurité sociale de notre pays.

    « Le plus dur c’est de ne plus voir sa famille »
    « Je suis venue en Belgique un peu avant 2008 parce que je n’arrivais plus à joindre les deux bouts avec mes deux enfants lorsque leur papa nous a quittés. Je suis aide-soignante mais je travaillais souvent plusieurs mois sans être payée en Afrique. Je ne savais plus quoi faire. Mes enfants sont restés au Cameroun. Je ne savais pas où j’allais. Je ne pouvais pas emmener mes petits bouts avec moi. Je les ai laissés chez mes parents. Ils s’en sortent avec le peu que je leur envoie. Ils me manquent beaucoup. Je me sacrifie pour eux. J’aimerais pouvoir les revoir un jour. Ma maman aussi m’a demandé si elle allait me revoir avant de mourir », explique Lucie, la gorge nouée, avant d’éclater en sanglots. « C’est cela qui est vraiment le plus dur : ne plus pouvoir voir sa famille », confirme Alexandra, qui n’a pas pu assister à l’enterrement de son père. Alexandra est originaire de la Colombie, qu’elle a quittée il y a plus de 10 ans. Elle ne se voit pas retourner là-bas à présent. Elle se sent chez elle en Belgique. « Nous sommes beaucoup comme toi, Lucie. Il faut se battre », s’exclame Naima. Elle aussi, elle a quitté son pays, le Maroc, il y a plus de 10 ans, en laissant tout derrière elle. Là-bas, elle travaillait dans une banque mais n’était presque pas payée. « Je ne m’en sortais pas. » Elle a préféré tenter sa chance en Belgique.

    Maricel est un peu plus âgée. Elle a quitté les Philippines il y a 11 ans afin de pouvoir offrir un avenir à ses enfants restés aux pays. « Je discute avec eux chaque jour via Messenger mais je ne les ai pas vus depuis que je suis partie. Je suis aussi devenue grand-mère entre-temps et j’aimerais pouvoir voir mes petits-enfants… »

    « Certains me demandent de travailler pour 7 euros de l’heure »
    En Belgique, leur situation est cependant loin d’être enviable. Comme tous les sans-papiers, elles sont souvent utilisées comme main-d’œuvre corvéable à merci. « En 2008, j’ai commencé à travailler ici pour 800 euros par mois. De 8h du matin à 8h du soir. Je me suis enfuie. À présent, je suis payée 1 300 euros. Je travaille de 7h du matin à 7h du soir. Les employeurs savent que tu n’as pas de papiers. Ils savent qu’ils peuvent faire ce qu’ils veulent », raconte Maricel.

    « La situation se dégrade, précise Lucia. Des employeurs osent me demander des choses qu’ils n’osaient pas il y a plusieurs années. Certains me demandent aujourd’hui de travailler pour 7 euros de l’heure et me raccrochent au nez lorsque je refuse ».

    « Après la crise, l’employeur a diminué mon salaire. Mais je n’ai rien osé dire parce que je n’ai pas de papiers », enchaîne une autre. « Nous sommes des esclaves. C’est ça ou la rue. Et même quand tout se passe bien avec l’employeur et qu’on est bien payée, il y a tout le reste. On est par exemple angoissée dans un bus, même quand on a acheté un ticket, parce qu’on risque un contrôle de police et d’être envoyée en centre fermé », continue Lucia.

    Alexandra estime qu’elle a de la chance : « De mon côté, je suis super-bien payée. J’ai aussi droit à des congés payés et des congés maladie. » En fait, elle gagne un peu plus que le salaire minimum. C’est ce qui symbolise le mieux la condition de ces travailleuses : être complètement à la merci de son employeur et s’estimer chanceuse lorsque celui-ci n’en profite pas.

    « Nous voulons sortir de l’ombre »
    « En tant que travailleuse domestique, on est tout au fond du panier. Nous travaillons dans les soins aux personnes, nous occupons des enfants, des gens malades, des personnes âgées. Mais nous sommes vraiment précarisées, et c’est ça notre lutte. On veut rendre cette réalité visible », explique Lucia. « Nous faisons partie intégrante de l’économie. Nous remplissons des tâches essentielles dans la société. Nous voulons sortir de l’ombre », continue Lucie.

    « Le syndicat m’a rendu l’espoir que je pouvais améliorer ma situation. La Ligue nous permet de nous rendre compte que notre situation n’est pas unique. Que beaucoup d’autres sont dans notre situation. La Ligue nous aide beaucoup. J’espère qu’on va pouvoir rassembler toutes les femmes dans notre situation », s’enthousiasme Naima.

    Magali Verdier, l’animatrice du MOC, explique que la Ligue des Travailleuses Domestiques a en effet pour but de mettre en avant la situation très précaire dans laquelle les femmes sans-papiers se retrouvent, de lutter collectivement, d’intéresser les médias, et d’aller chercher du soutien dans la société. « La Ligue des Travailleuses Domestiques fait partie intégrante de la CSC et du combat plus large mené par l’organisation syndicale auquel les femmes de la Ligue prennent part également. »

    « Je suis optimiste. C’est déjà pas mal. Je pense que nous allons y arriver », dit Naima. « Moi aussi ! » répond Alexandra. Elles rient. Après deux heures de discussions, nous demandons si nous pouvons faire une photo d’elles. Elles hésitent. Certaines préfèrent se mettre de dos. Elles s’encouragent mutuellement et décident finalement de faire la photo à visage découvert. Pour sortir de l’ombre.

    #emploi #travail #femmes #sans-papiers #travailleuses domestiques #esclavage #luttes_sociales #Syndicats #syndicalisation #Belgique

  • Viols à distance en streaming : un Français jugé pour complicité d’agressions sexuelles - Le Parisien
    http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/viols-a-distance-en-streaming-un-francais-juge-pour-complicite-d-agressio

    Derrière son ordinateur, il tentait d’assouvir ses sordides fantasmes. Mais Stéphane L., renvoyé le 23 mai devant le tribunal correctionnel, ne se contentait pas d’agir en spectateur passif. Le pilote de ligne de 50 ans, domicilié en région parisienne, s’était tourné vers une forme d’exploitation sexuelle des enfants en plein essor : le live-streaming. Ou comment des Français commandent, sur Internet, des viols d’enfants diffusés en direct par des hommes où des femmes qui appliquent à la lettre les instructions des commanditaires.

    En 2010, un agent infiltré du FBI, explique avoir reçu de la part d’un certain « Benjibenji028 » des images explicites d’enfants. Il s’agit de Stéphane L. Les enquêteurs de l’Office central pour la répression des violences aux personnes (OCRVP) sondent les comptes en banque du suspect. Ils découvrent qu’il a effectué des dizaines de virements – en général 30 euros - à des femmes installées aux Philippines. Interpellé le 12 août 2014 à son hôtel parisien, Stéphane L. n’est alors que le deuxième français impliqué dans une affaire de live-streaming. Il plonge les enquêteurs dans un monde où des enfants sont violés pour quelques dizaines d’euros.

    Il donne des instructions à la « réalisatrice »

    L’exploitation des ordinateurs de Stéphane L. permet aux policiers de découvrir de sordides conversations sur Skype. « Le contenu […] démontre qu’il a bénéficié de shows pédopornographiques […] et qu’il donnait des instructions afin que des fillettes se soumettent à des attouchements de nature sexuelle par un adulte », écrit la juge d’instruction dans son ordonnance de renvoi. Dans une discussion datée du 27 octobre 2013, Stéphane L. demande par exemple à une femme – violeuse sur commande - de pénétrer une enfant avec ses doigts. Une fillette dont l’âge – 8 ans ! - est clairement évoquée par la « réalisatrice » de ce show en live. « Super, j’aime cet âge », s’enthousiasme l’ancien pilote de l’armée de l’air décrivant par le menu et avec des mots très crus ce qu’il souhaite voir infliger à la fillette.

    LIRE AUSSI >L’inquiétant phénomène des viols à distance

    Une fois devant la juge pourtant, Stéphane L. minimise son implication. Il explique ne jamais avoir donné d’ordre, et avoir même souvent versé de l’argent pour rien. Quant aux quelques prestations auxquelles il a pu assister, cela n’avait rien d’un viol, se défend-il. « Elle simulait… Par exemple, au lieu de mettre un doigt, elle courbait le doigt pour que l’on croie qu’il y avait une pénétration alors qu’il n’y en avait pas ». Des dénégations qui compliquent fortement le travail de la justice, qui ne dispose pas d’enregistrements de ces prestations réalisées en direct.
    Une fillette entraînée depuis ses 3 ans…

    D’ailleurs, contre l’avis du parquet de Paris qui souhaitait un procès aux assises, la juge, qui n’a pas pu « démontrer la réalité d’un acte de pénétration », a décidé de renvoyer Stéphane L. devant le tribunal correctionnel. Il sera, avant la fin de l’année, le premier Français jugé pour « complicité d’agressions sexuelles » dans un dossier de live-streaming. « Jusque-là, les auteurs de ces infractions étaient uniquement condamnés pour consultation d’images pédopornographiques », souligne Ludivine Piron, chargée de mission à l’Ecpat, association qui lutte contre l’exploitation sexuelle des enfants. « Nous aurions préféré un procès aux assises, mais cela reste un progrès significatif », appuie Me Emmanuel Daoud, l’avocat de l’Ecpat.

    Pour l’association, ce procès devra montrer le « véritable business derrière ces viols en direct ». Un gagne-pain familial parfois, à l’image de cette femme contactée par Stéphane L. qui mettait en scène sa fille. Une situation déjà entrevue en Roumanie. « Mais le live-streaming est aussi l’œuvre de réseaux mafieux, souligne Ludivine Piron. C’est un marché très lucratif, avec des enfants réduits en esclavage. » Le 11 août 2014, une Philippine explique ainsi à Stéphane L. « entraîner » une petite fille de 11 ans à réaliser de telles prestations « depuis ses trois ans »…

    Ce militaire n’est pas le complice, c’est le commanditaire des viols et c’est pas une agression sexuelle c’est un pédo-viol avec préméditation et en bande organisée.
    #viol #correctionnalisation #pedocriminalité #pornographie

    • Viols à distance en streaming : «Un phénomène exponentiel»
      http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/viols-a-distance-en-streaming-un-phenomene-exponentiel-17-06-2019-8095494

      Des enfants de moins de 10 ans violés en direct pour le plaisir d’Occidentaux cachés derrière leur ordinateur. Et pour un montant dérisoire : environ 50 dollars l’agression. Phénomène inquiétant, le live-streaming préoccupe magistrats et policiers depuis un peu plus de quatre ans. 7 dossiers sont actuellement entre les mains des enquêteurs spécialisés, 17 ont été traités depuis 2016. « Mais le phénomène est exponentiel, souligne le commissaire divisionnaire Philippe Guichard, patron de l’Office central de répression des violences aux personnes (OCRVP). Je crains que nous arrivions rapidement à plus de 90 Français impliqués dans ces faits abjects. »

      Preuve de l’engagement des autorités à circonscrire ce fléau, Jérôme Bonet, directeur central de la police judiciaire et Philippe Guichard ouvriront, ce mardi à Singapour, un séminaire international dédié notamment au live-streaming. « L’objectif est d’éviter que ce phénomène apparu aux Philippines ne gangrène davantage de pays pauvres, détaille le commissaire Guichard. Il est vital de mettre en place des collaborations internationales. » Car ces dossiers, dont certains concernent l’Europe de l’Est, sont épineux.

      Multiplier les partenariats avec les autorités locales

      Très souvent, l’implication de ressortissants français est signalée à l’OCRVP grâce aux services de police étrangers, notamment américains. Tracfin ou Western Union ont aussi pris l’habitude d’alerter les policiers sur les mouvements de fonds suspects : l’île de Cebu, région pauvre des Philippes, concentre nombre de transactions. Ces hommes « de tous les profils » sont alors traqués sur Internet. « Mais les enquêtes sont difficiles, note Philippe Guichard. Comme nous n’avons pas d’accord judiciaire avec les Philippines, nous ne pouvons entendre ni les victimes ni les auteurs directs des viols. Les investigations se concentrent alors sur les supports numériques saisis chez les commanditaires français. »

      Reste que la justice peine jusque-là à obtenir des condamnations exemplaires. Ainsi, à Grenoble, un internaute mis en examen pour complicité de viols a finalement été condamné à deux ans de prison pour la simple « détention d’images pédopornographiques ». « Juridiquement, donner des instructions pour commettre un viol sur un mineur, c’est de la complicité de viol et cela doit être jugé devant une cour d’assises, plaide Aude Groualle, cheffe de la section des mineurs au parquet de Paris, qui sera représentée à Singapour. La difficulté tient au principe même du live-streaming, avec une vidéo en direct qu’il est difficile pour nous de récupérer. »

      La justice peine donc à matérialiser les viols, malgré des écrits sans équivoque. « Au parquet de Paris, notre position est claire, prévient Aude Groualle. Si nous avons des éléments permettant d’établir qu’il y a eu des instructions pour un viol, nous qualifions cela de complicité de viol. Pour parvenir à renvoyer des mis en cause devant la cour d’assises, nous devons multiplier les partenariats avec les autorités locales afin de retrouver les violeurs et les victimes. »

  • Call immigrant detention centers what they really are: concentration camps

    If you were paying close attention last week, you might have spotted a pattern in the news. Peeking out from behind the breathless coverage of the Trump family’s tuxedoed trip to London was a spate of deaths of immigrants in U.S. custody: Johana Medina Léon, a 25-year-old transgender asylum seeker; an unnamed 33-year-old Salvadoran man; and a 40-year-old woman from Honduras.

    Photos from a Border Patrol processing center in El Paso showed people herded so tightly into cells that they had to stand on toilets to breathe. Memos surfaced by journalist Ken Klippenstein revealed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s failure to provide medical care was responsible for suicides and other deaths of detainees. These followed another report that showed that thousands of detainees are being brutally held in isolation cells just for being transgender or mentally ill.

    Also last week, the Trump administration cut funding for classes, recreation and legal aid at detention centers holding minors — which were likened to “summer camps” by a senior ICE official last year. And there was the revelation that months after being torn from their parents’ arms, 37 children were locked in vans for up to 39 hours in the parking lot of a detention center outside Port Isabel, Texas. In the last year, at least seven migrant children have died in federal custody.

    Preventing mass outrage at a system like this takes work. Certainly it helps that the news media covers these horrors intermittently rather than as snowballing proof of a racist, lawless administration. But most of all, authorities prevail when the places where people are being tortured and left to die stay hidden, misleadingly named and far from prying eyes.

    There’s a name for that kind of system. They’re called concentration camps. You might balk at my use of the term. That’s good — it’s something to be balked at.

    The goal of concentration camps has always been to be ignored. The German-Jewish political theorist Hannah Arendt, who was imprisoned by the Gestapo and interned in a French camp, wrote a few years afterward about the different levels of concentration camps. Extermination camps were the most extreme; others were just about getting “undesirable elements … out of the way.” All had one thing in common: “The human masses sealed off in them are treated as if they no longer existed, as if what happened to them were no longer of interest to anybody, as if they were already dead.”

    Euphemisms play a big role in that forgetting. The term “concentration camp” is itself a euphemism. It was invented by a Spanish official to paper over his relocation of millions of rural families into squalid garrison towns where they would starve during Cuba’s 1895 independence war. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered Japanese Americans into prisons during World War II, he initially called them concentration camps. Americans ended up using more benign names, like “Manzanar Relocation Center.”

    Even the Nazis’ camps started out small, housing criminals, Communists and opponents of the regime. It took five years to begin the mass detention of Jews. It took eight, and the outbreak of a world war, for the first extermination camps to open. Even then, the Nazis had to keep lying to distract attention, claiming Jews were merely being resettled to remote work sites. That’s what the famous signs — Arbeit Macht Frei, or “Work Sets You Free” — were about.

    Subterfuge doesn’t always work. A year ago, Americans accidentally became aware that the Trump administration had adopted (and lied about) a policy of ripping families apart at the border. The flurry of attention was thanks to the viral conflation of two separate but related stories: the family-separation order and bureaucrats’ admission that they’d been unable to locate thousands of migrant children who’d been placed with sponsors after crossing the border alone.

    Trump shoved that easily down the memory hole. He dragged his heels a bit, then agreed to a new policy: throwing whole families into camps together. Political reporters posed irrelevant questions, like whether President Obama had been just as bad, and what it meant for the midterms. Then they moved on.

    It is important to note that Trump’s aides have built this system of racist terror on something that has existed for a long time. Several camps opened under Obama, and as president he deported millions of people.

    But Trump’s game is different. It certainly isn’t about negotiating immigration reform with Congress. Trump has made it clear that he wants to stifle all non-white immigration, period. His mass arrests, iceboxes and dog cages are part of an explicitly nationalist project to put the country under the control of the right kind of white people.

    As a Republican National Committee report noted in 2013: “The nation’s demographic changes add to the urgency of recognizing how precarious our position has become.” The Trump administration’s attempt to put a citizenship question on the 2020 census was also just revealed to have been a plot to disadvantage political opponents and boost “Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites” all along.

    That’s why this isn’t just a crisis facing immigrants. When a leader puts people in camps to stay in power, history shows that he doesn’t usually stop with the first group he detains.

    There are now at least 48,000 people detained in ICE facilities, which a former official told BuzzFeed News “could swell indefinitely.” Customs and Border Protection officials apprehended more than 144,000 people on the Southwest border last month. (The New York Times dutifully reported this as evidence of a “dramatic surge in border crossings,” rather than what it was: The administration using its own surge of arrests to justify the rest of its policies.)

    If we call them what they are — a growing system of American concentration camps — we will be more likely to give them the attention they deserve. We need to know their names: Port Isabel, Dilley, Adelanto, Hutto and on and on. With constant, unrelenting attention, it is possible we might alleviate the plight of the people inside, and stop the crisis from getting worse. Maybe people won’t be able to disappear so easily into the iceboxes. Maybe it will be harder for authorities to lie about children’s deaths.

    Maybe Trump’s concentration camps will be the first thing we think of when we see him scowling on TV.

    The only other option is to leave it up to those in power to decide what’s next. That’s a calculated risk. As Andrea Pitzer, author of “One Long Night,” one of the most comprehensive books on the history of concentration camps, recently noted: “Every country has said their camps are humane and will be different. Trump is instinctively an authoritarian. He’ll take them as far as he’s allowed to.”

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-katz-immigrant-concentration-camps-20190609-story.html
    #terminologie #vocabulaire #mots #camps #camps_de_concentration #centres_de_détention #détention_administrative #rétention #USA #Etats-Unis
    #cpa_camps

    • ‘Some Suburb of Hell’: America’s New Concentration Camp System

      On Monday, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez referred to US border detention facilities as “concentration camps,” spurring a backlash in which critics accused her of demeaning the memory of those who died in the Holocaust. Debates raged over a label for what is happening along the southern border and grew louder as the week rolled on. But even this back-and-forth over naming the camps has been a recurrent feature in the mass detention of civilians ever since its inception, a history that long predates the Holocaust.

      At the heart of such policy is a question: What does a country owe desperate people whom it does not consider to be its citizens? The twentieth century posed this question to the world just as the shadow of global conflict threatened for the second time in less than three decades. The dominant response was silence, and the doctrine of absolute national sovereignty meant that what a state did to people under its control, within its borders, was nobody else’s business. After the harrowing toll of the Holocaust with the murder of millions, the world revisited its answer, deciding that perhaps something was owed to those in mortal danger. From the Fourth Geneva Convention protecting civilians in 1949 to the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, the international community established humanitarian obligations toward the most vulnerable that apply, at least in theory, to all nations.

      The twenty-first century is unraveling that response. Countries are rejecting existing obligations and meeting asylum seekers with walls and fences, from detainees fleeing persecution who were sent by Australia to third-party detention in the brutal offshore camps of Manus and Nauru to razor-wire barriers blocking Syrian refugees from entering Hungary. While some nations, such as Germany, wrestle with how to integrate refugees into their labor force—more and more have become resistant to letting them in at all. The latest location of this unwinding is along the southern border of the United States.

      So far, American citizens have gotten only glimpses of the conditions in the border camps that have been opened in their name. In the month of May, Customs and Border Protection reported a total of 132,887 migrants who were apprehended or turned themselves in between ports of entry along the southwest border, an increase of 34 percent from April alone. Upon apprehension, these migrants are temporarily detained by Border Patrol, and once their claims are processed, they are either released or handed over to ICE for longer-term detention. Yet Border Patrol itself is currently holding about 15,000 people, nearly four times what government officials consider to be this enforcement arm’s detention capacity.

      On June 12, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that Fort Sill, an Army post that hosted a World War II internment camp for detainees of Japanese descent, will now be repurposed to detain migrant children. In total, HHS reports that it is currently holding some 12,000 minors. Current law limits detention of minors to twenty days, though Senator Lindsey Graham has proposed expanding the court-ordered limit to 100 days. Since the post is on federal land, it will be exempt from state child welfare inspections.

      In addition to the total of detainees held by Border Patrol, an even higher number is detained at centers around the country by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency: on a typical day at the beginning of this month, ICE was detaining more than 52,500 migrants. The family separation policy outraged the public in the 2018, but despite legal challenges, it never fully ended. Less publicized have been the deaths of twenty-four adults in ICE custody since the beginning of the Trump administration; in addition, six children between the ages of two and sixteen have died in federal custody over the last several months. It’s not clear whether there have been other deaths that have gone unreported.

      Conditions for detainees have not been improving. At the end of May, a Department of Homeland Security inspector general found nearly 900 migrants at a Texas shelter built for a capacity of 125 people. On June 11, a university professor spotted at least 100 men behind chain-link fences near the Paso del Norte Bridge in El Paso, Texas. Those detainees reported sitting outside for weeks in temperatures that soared above 100 degrees. Taylor Levy, an El Paso immigration lawyer, described going into one facility and finding “a suicidal four-year-old whose face was covered in bloody, self-inflicted scratches… Another young child had to be restrained by his mother because he kept running full-speed into metal lockers. He was covered in bruises.”

      If deciding what to do about the growing numbers of adults and children seeking refuge in the US relies on complex humanitarian policies and international laws, in which most Americans don’t take a deep interest, a simpler question also presents itself: What exactly are these camps that the Trump administration has opened, and where is this program of mass detention headed?

      Even with incomplete information about what’s happening along the border today and what the government plans for these camps, history points to some conclusions about their future. Mass detention without trial earned a new name and a specific identity at the end of the nineteenth century. The labels then adopted for the practice were “reconcentración” and “concentration camps”—places of forced relocation of civilians into detention on the basis of group identity.

      Other kinds of group detention had appeared much earlier in North American history. The US government drove Native Americans from their homelands into prescribed exile, with death and detention in transit camps along the way. Some Spanish mission systems in the Americas had accomplished similar ends by seizing land and pressing indigenous people into forced labor. During the 245 years when slavery was legal in the US, detention was one of its essential features.

      Concentration camps, however, don’t typically result from the theft of land, as happened with Native Americans, or owning human beings in a system of forced labor, as in the slave trade. Exile, theft, and forced labor can come later, but in the beginning, detention itself is usually the point of concentration camps. By the end of the nineteenth century, the mass production of barbed wire and machines guns made this kind of detention possible and practical in ways it never had been before.

      Under Spanish rule in 1896, the governor-general of Cuba instituted camps in order to clear rebel-held regions during an uprising, despite his predecessor’s written refusal “as the representative of a civilized nation, to be the first to give the example of cruelty and intransigence” that such detention would represent. After women and children began dying in vast numbers behind barbed wire because there had been little planning for shelter and even less for food, US President William McKinley made his call to war before Congress. He spoke against the policy of reconcentración, calling it warfare by uncivilized means. “It was extermination,” McKinley said. “The only peace it could beget was that of the wilderness and the grave.” Without full records, the Cuban death toll can only be estimated, but a consensus puts it in the neighborhood of 150,000, more than 10 percent of the island’s prewar population.

      Today, we remember the sinking of the USS Maine as the spark that ignited the Spanish-American War. But war correspondent George Kennan (cousin of the more famous diplomat) believed that “it was the suffering of the reconcentrados, more, perhaps, than any other one thing that brought about the intervention of the United States.” On April 25, 1898, Congress declared war. Two weeks later, US Marines landed at Fisherman’s Point on the windward side of the entrance to Guantánamo Bay in Cuba. After a grim, week-long fight, the Marines took the hill. It became a naval base, and the United States has never left that patch of land.

      As part of the larger victory, the US inherited the Philippines. The world’s newest imperial power also inherited a rebellion. Following a massacre of American troops at Balangiga in September 1901, during the third year of the conflict, the US established its own concentration camp system. Detainees, mostly women and children, were forced into squalid conditions that one American soldier described in a letter to a US senator as “some suburb of hell.” In the space of only four months, more than 11,000 Filipinos are believed to have died in these noxious camps.

      Meanwhile, in southern Africa in 1900, the British had opened their own camps during their battle with descendants of Dutch settlers in the second Boer War. British soldiers filled tent cities with Boer women and children, and the military authorities called them refugee camps. Future Prime Minister David Lloyd George took offense at that name, noting in Parliament: “There is no greater delusion in the mind of any man than to apply the term ‘refugee’ to these camps. They are not refugee camps. They are camps of concentration.” Contemporary observers compared them to the Cuban camps, and criticized their deliberate cruelty. The Bishop of Hereford wrote to The Times of London in 1901, asking: “Are we reduced to such a depth of impotence that our Government can do nothing to stop such a holocaust of child-life?”

      Maggoty meat rations and polluted water supplies joined outbreaks of contagious diseases amid crowded and unhealthy conditions in the Boer camps. More than 27,000 detainees are thought to have died there, nearly 80 percent of them children. The British had opened camps for black Africans as well, in which at least 14,000 detainees died—the real number is probably much higher. Aside from protests made by some missionaries, the deaths of indigenous black Africans did not inspire much public outrage. Much of the history of the suffering in these camps has been lost.

      These early experiments with concentration camps took place on the periphery of imperial power, but accounts of them nevertheless made their way into newspapers and reports in many nations. As a result, the very idea of them came to be seen as barbaric. By the end of the first decade of the twentieth century, the first camp systems had all been closed, and concentration camps had nearly vanished as an institution. Within months of the outbreak of World War I, though, they would be resurrected—this time rising not at the margins but in the centers of power. Between 1914 and 1918, camps were constructed on an unprecedented scale across six continents. In their time, these camps were commonly called concentration camps, though today they are often referred to by the more anodyne term “internment.”

      Those World War I detainees were, for the most part, foreigners—or, in legalese, aliens—and recent anti-immigration legislation in several countries had deliberately limited their rights. The Daily Mail denounced aliens left at liberty once they had registered with their local police department, demanding, “Does signing his name take the malice out of a man?” The Scottish Field was more direct, asking, “Do Germans have souls?” That these civilian detainees were no threat to Britain did not keep them from being demonized, shouted at, and spat upon as they were paraded past hostile crowds in cities like London.

      Though a small number of people were shot in riots in these camps, and hunger became a serious issue as the conflict dragged on, World War I internment would present a new, non-lethal face for the camps, normalizing detention. Even after the war, new camps sprang up from Spain to Hungary and Cuba, providing an improvised “solution” for everything from vagrancy to anxieties over the presence of Jewish foreigners.

      Some of these camps were clearly not safe for those interned. Local camps appeared in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 1921, after a white mob burned down a black neighborhood and detained African-American survivors. In Bolshevik Russia, the first concentration camps preceded the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922 and planted seeds for the brutal Gulag system that became official near the end of the USSR’s first decade. While some kinds of camps were understood to be harsher, after World War I their proliferation did not initially disturb public opinion. They had yet to take on their worst incarnations.

      In 1933, barely more than a month after Hitler was appointed chancellor, the Nazis’ first, impromptu camp opened in the town of Nohra in central Germany to hold political opponents. Detainees at Nohra were allowed to vote at a local precinct in the elections of March 5, 1933, resulting in a surge of Communist ballots in the tiny town. Locking up groups of civilians without trial had become accepted. Only the later realization of the horrors of the Nazi death camps would break the default assumption by governments and the public that concentration camps could and should be a simple way to manage populations seen as a threat.

      However, the staggering death toll of the Nazi extermination camp system—which was created mid-war and stood almost entirely separate from the concentration camps in existence since 1933—led to another result: a strange kind of erasure. In the decades that followed World War II, the term “concentration camp” came to stand only for Auschwitz and other extermination camps. It was no longer applied to the kind of extrajudicial detention it had denoted for generations. The many earlier camps that had made the rise of Auschwitz possible largely vanished from public memory.

      It is not necessary, however, to step back a full century in American history to find camps with links to what is happening on the US border today. Detention at Guantánamo began in the 1990s, when Haitian and Cuban immigrants whom the government wanted to keep out of the United States were housed there in waves over a four-year period—years before the “war on terror” and the US policy of rendition of suspected “enemy combatants” made Camps Delta, X-Ray, and Echo notorious. Tens of thousands of Haitians fleeing instability at home were picked up at sea and diverted to the Cuban base, to limit their legal right to apply for asylum. The court cases and battles over the suffering of those detainees ended up setting the stage for what Guantánamo would become after September 11, 2001.

      In one case, a federal court ruled that it did have jurisdiction over the base, but the government agreed to release the Haitians who were part of the lawsuit in exchange for keeping that ruling off the books. A ruling in a second case would assert that the courts did not have jurisdiction. Absent the prior case, the latter stood on its own as precedent. Leaving Guantánamo in this gray area made it an ideal site for extrajudicial detention and torture after the twin towers fell.

      This process of normalization, when a bad camp becomes much more dangerous, is not unusual. Today’s border camps are a crueler reflection of long-term policies—some challenged in court—that earlier presidents had enacted. Prior administrations own a share of the responsibility for today’s harsh practices, but the policies in place today are also accompanied by a shameless willingness to publicly target a vulnerable population in increasingly dangerous ways.

      I visited Guantánamo twice in 2015, sitting in the courtroom for pretrial hearings and touring the medical facility, the library, and all the old abandoned detention sites, as well as newly built ones, open to the media—from the kennel-style cages of Camp X-Ray rotting to ruin in the damp heat to the modern jailhouse facilities of Camp 6. Seeing all this in person made clear to me how vast the architecture of detention had become, how entrenched it was, and how hard it would be to close.

      Without a significant government effort to reverse direction, conditions in every camp system tend to deteriorate over time. Governments rarely make that kind of effort on behalf of people they are willing to lock up without trial in the first place. And history shows that legislatures do not close camps against the will of an executive.

      Just a few years ago there might have been more potential for change spurred by the judicial branch of our democracy, but this Supreme Court is inclined toward deference to executive power, even, it appears, if that power is abused. It seems unlikely this Court will intervene to end the new border camp system; indeed, the justices are far more likely to institutionalize it by half-measures, as happened with Guantánamo. The Korematsu case, in which the Supreme Court upheld Japanese-American internment (a ruling only rescinded last year), relied on the suppression of evidence by the solicitor general. Americans today can have little confidence that this administration would behave any more scrupulously when defending its detention policy.

      What kind of conditions can we expect to develop in these border camps? The longer a camp system stays open, the more likely it is that vital things will go wrong: detainees will contract contagious diseases and suffer from malnutrition and mental illness. We have already seen that current detention practices have resulted in children and adults succumbing to influenza, staph infections, and sepsis. The US is now poised to inflict harm on tens of thousands more, perhaps hundreds of thousands more.

      Along with such inevitable consequences, every significant camp system has introduced new horrors of its own, crises that were unforeseen when that system was opened. We have yet to discover what those will be for these American border camps. But they will happen. Every country thinks it can do detention better when it starts these projects. But no good way to conduct mass indefinite detention has yet been devised; the system always degrades.

      When, in 1940, Margarete Buber-Neumann was transferred from the Soviet Gulag at Karaganda to the camp for women at Ravensbrück (in an exchange enabled by the Nazi–Soviet Pact), she came from near-starvation conditions in the USSR and was amazed at the cleanliness and order of the Nazi camp. New arrivals were issued clothing, bedding, and silverware, and given fresh porridge, fruit, sausage, and jam to eat. Although the Nazi camps were already punitive, order-obsessed monstrosities, the wartime overcrowding that would soon overtake them had not yet made daily life a thing of constant suffering and squalor. The death camps were still two years away.

      The United States now has a vast and growing camp system. It is starting out with gruesome overcrowding and inadequate healthcare, and because of budget restrictions, has already taken steps to cut services to juvenile detainees. The US Office of Refugee Resettlement says that the mounting number of children arriving unaccompanied is forcing it to use military bases and other sites that it prefers to avoid, and that establishing these camps is a temporary measure. But without oversight from state child welfare inspectors, the possibilities for neglect and abuse are alarming. And without any knowledge of how many asylum-seekers are coming in the future, federal administrators are likely to find themselves boxed in to managing detention on military sites permanently.

      President Trump and senior White House adviser Stephen Miller appear to have purged the Department of Homeland Security of most internal opposition to their anti-immigrant policies. In doing so, that have removed even those sympathetic to the general approach taken by the White House, such as former Chief of Staff John Kelly and former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, in order to escalate the militarization of the border and expand irregular detention in more systematic and punitive ways. This kind of power struggle or purge in the early years of a camp system is typical.

      The disbanding of the Cheka, the Soviet secret police, in February 1922 and the transfer of its commander, Felix Dzerzhinsky, to head up an agency with control over only two prisons offered a hint of an alternate future in which extrajudicial detention would not play a central role in the fledgling Soviet republic. But Dzerzhinsky managed to keep control over the “special camps” in his new position, paving the way for the emergence of a camp-centered police state. In pre-war Germany in the mid-1930s, Himmler’s struggle to consolidate power from rivals eventually led him to make camps central to Nazi strategy. When the hardliners win, as they appear to have in the US, conditions tend to worsen significantly.

      Is it possible this growth in the camp system will be temporary and the improvised border camps will soon close? In theory, yes. But the longer they remain open, the less likely they are to vanish. When I visited the camps for Rohingya Muslims a year before the large-scale campaign of ethnic cleansing began, many observers appeared to be confusing the possible and the probable. It was possible that the party of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi would sweep into office in free elections and begin making changes. It was possible that full democracy would come to all the residents of Myanmar, even though the government had stripped the Rohingya of the last vestiges of their citizenship. These hopes proved to be misplaced. Once there are concentration camps, it is always probable that things will get worse.

      The Philippines, Japanese-American internment, Guantánamo… we can consider the fine points of how the current border camps evoke past US systems, and we can see how the arc of camp history reveals the likelihood that the suffering we’re currently inflicting will be multiplied exponentially. But we can also simply look at what we’re doing right now, shoving bodies into “dog pound”-style detention pens, “iceboxes,” and standing room-only spaces. We can look at young children in custody who have become suicidal. How much more historical awareness do we really need?

      https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/06/21/some-suburb-of-hell-americas-new-concentration-camp-system

    • #Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez engage le bras de fer avec la politique migratoire de Donald Trump

      L’élue de New York a qualifié les camps de rétention pour migrants érigés à la frontière sud des Etats-Unis de « camps de concentration ».

      https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2019/06/19/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-engage-le-bras-de-fer-avec-la-politique-migratoire-

  • A beginner’s guide to Philippine feminism

    Sister #Mary_John_Mananzan, the co-founder of women’s organization Gabriela, was a political activist in the Philippines before she became a feminist.

    It was only when she went to a women’s conference in Venice, Austria and heard discussions about incest and wife-beating that she felt the need to call herself a feminist. “It dawned on me, ‘My goodness these [abuses] are in the Philippines too,” she says. “[I realized] you cannot have a social transformation unless this gender question is resolved.”

    Another known feminist, #Ging_Deles, who helped develop one of the first laws protecting women in the Philippines, got into feminism in the ‘80s. She says that she was working in the social development sector, but after meetings of bigger social development conferences, women began gathering together. Through these smaller get-togethers, it became clear how the issues of women were largely different from men, urging them to further push for women’s rights.

    Mich Dulce, a designer and co-founder of the women’s community collective Grrrl Gang, shares that she got into feminism because of music. In a previous interview with CNN Philippines Life, she said: “The [feminist music movement of the ‘60s] was what led me to become a feminist. I was not born ‘woke.’ I lived in a bubble for such a long time.”

    Deles, Mananzan, and Dulce all call themselves feminists and yet they all had different access points to feminism. We all come from diverse contexts, so if you’re looking for an entry point towards understanding the women’s movement in the Philippines, here’s a list of literature, films, and video discussions that you can consume:

    “The Woman Question in the Philippines”

    According to Gantala Press’ Faye Cura, this booklet by Sr. Mary John Mananzan offers an introduction to the state of women in the Philippines. “It contextualizes the oppression of Filipinas within the country’s colonial/neocolonial history,” she says. “It [also] discusses the challenges faced by women today — inequality and discrimination, gender-based violence, trafficking, and poverty, as well as Filipina women’s constant efforts to overcome these through feminism and the women’s movement.”

    “Daloy I” and “Daloy II”

    Batis AWARE (Association of Women in Action for Rights and Empowerment) is an organization that advocates for the rights of Filipino migrant women. In 2016, together with the publishing outfit Youth and Beauty Brigade, Batis AWARE published “Daloy 1,” a zine that features writings of Filipino migrant women. In 2018, Batis AWARE and YBB published “Daloy 2,” which dives deeper into the issues of Filipino migrant women — their day-to-day struggles, the abuses they face, and the continuous fight for their rights, among others.

    “Centennial Crossings: Readings on Babaylan Feminism in the Philippines”

    While there is a scarcity of recorded historical data on pre-colonial Philippines, there have been pieces of literature that reveal the central role women play during this era. A significant icon of pre-colonial Philippines is the babaylan, a healer or shaman who is usually a woman. In the book “Centennial Crossings: Readings on Babaylan Feminism in the Philippines,” the editors Fe Mangahas and Jenny Llaguno shine a light on how babaylanism is the inherent source of a Filipina’s strength and that babaylanism may perhaps be the forebearer of the women’s movement in the country.

    “Amazons of the Huk Rebellion: Gender, Sex, and Revolution in the Philippines”

    Written by Vina Lanzona, this book details how women in the Philippines were central to the revolution against Japanese occupation. “[This] provides an in-depth narration and analysis of the life and heroism of women warriors of the Hukbong Bayan Laban sa Hapon (Hukbalahap),” says Faye Cura. “[It begins] at the onset of the Japanese occupation of the Philippines until after the war has ended and the ‘Amazons’ were vilified in popular imagination. A must-read for all Filipinos.”

    ... and so on...

    http://cnnphilippines.com/life/culture/2019/4/15/philippine-feminism.html
    #femmes #féminisme #Philippines #femmes_philippines #livres #livre

  • Les États-Unis risquent de perdre leur statut de pays ayant éliminé la rougeole Afp à Washintown - 30 Mai 2019 - Le Devoir
    https://www.ledevoir.com/societe/sante/555680/les-etats-unis-risquent-de-perdre-leur-statut-de-pays-ayant-elimine-la-rou

    Le nombre de cas de rougeole aux États-Unis a atteint son plus haut niveau en 25 ans, et le pays pourrait « perdre son statut d’élimination de la rougeole » si l’épidémie se poursuivait au-delà de l’été, ont prévenu jeudi les autorités sanitaires américaines.

    Le nombre de malades depuis le début 2019 a atteint 971 jeudi, selon les Centres de contrôle et de prévention des maladies (CDC), un record depuis les 963 cas enregistrés sur toute l’année 1994.

    En 2000, la rougeole a été déclarée « éliminée » aux États-Unis, un but qui avait été fixé en 1963 avec le début de la vaccination. Ce terme correspond à l’absence de transmission continue pendant 12 mois dans une zone géographique particulière (le terme d’« éradication » correspond à une élimination sur toute la planète).


    Dans le cas présent, c’est l’épidémie persistante de la région new-yorkaise qui alarme les autorités. Elle a commencé officiellement à New York le 30 septembre 2018, et dans le comté voisin de Rockland le 1er octobre. Si elle continuait pendant encore quatre mois, selon cette convention, les États-Unis ne pourront plus dire qu’ils ont « éliminé » la maladie.

    Malgré la vaccination obligatoire décrétée par le maire de New York début avril dans les quartiers de la communauté juive les plus touchés, la ville a eu 173 cas en avril et 60 en mai.

    En pratique, les États-Unis ne sont jamais descendus à zéro cas. Depuis 2000, le nombre de cas oscillait entre quelques dizaines et quelques centaines par an, le maximum étant de 667 malades en 2014, une épidémie qui était alors concentrée pour plus de la moitié dans des communautés amish de l’Ohio (nord).

    La résurgence de foyers est principalement due à des voyageurs non-vaccinés ou sous-vaccinés contaminés à l’étranger et revenant aux États-Unis. C’est le cas depuis l’an dernier dans diverses régions des États-Unis, avec des souches importées notamment des Philippines, d’Israël et d’Ukraine.

    « Le seul moyen de mettre fin à l’épidémie est que tous les enfants et adultes qui peuvent être vaccinés le soient », a déclaré Robert Redfield, le directeur des CDC. « Je veux rassurer à nouveau les parents et leur dire que les vaccins sont sûrs, ils ne causent pas l’autisme. Le danger plus grave est la maladie que la vaccination prévient ».

    #santé #rougeole #vaccination #vaccins #vaccin #maladie #religion #ultra-orthodoxes #ultra-orthodoxe #israel #religieux #Philippines #Ukraine

  • Environnement. La #Malaisie va retourner à l’envoyeur des tonnes de #déchets plastiques

    Le ministère de l’Environnement malaisien a indiqué, mardi 28 mai, qu’il renverrait les déchets plastiques dont se sont débarrassés des pays plus développés. Les #États-Unis, le #Royaume-Uni mais aussi la #France font partie des destinataires.


    https://www.courrierinternational.com/revue-de-presse/environnement-la-malaisie-va-retourner-lenvoyeur-des-tonnes-d
    #plastique #it_has_begun #retour_à_l'expéditeur #résistance #UK #gestion_des_déchets

    Pour rappel, la Malaisie fait partie des pays envisagés pour y déposer les déchets des pays occidentaux que la #Chine refuse de prendre...
    https://seenthis.net/messages/777612
    https://seenthis.net/messages/777612
    (signalés par @aude_v )

    ping @ieva @reka

  • Chagos : l’ONU somme Londres de rendre l’archipel de l’océan Indien à l’île Maurice
    https://www.francetvinfo.fr/monde/afrique/maurice/chagos-l-onu-somme-londres-de-rendre-l-archipel-de-l-ocean-indien-a-l-i


    Au milieu de l’océan Indien, Diego Garcia, la plus grande des îles de l’archipel des Chagos, est devenue en 1966 une base militaire conjointe britannique et américaine d’importance, au détriment des habitants.
    STRINGER . / X80002

    Les Chagos se trouvent au cœur d’un litige vieux de cinq décennies, depuis la décision britannique de séparer en 1965 cet archipel de l’île Maurice et d’y installer une base militaire commune avec les Etats-Unis sur l’île principale de Diego Garcia.

    Cinglant revers pour le Royaume-Uni. Le 22 mai 2019, à l’Assemblée générale de l’ONU, une majorité de pays lui a demandé de rétrocéder l’archipel des Chagos à l’île Maurice, d’ici au mois de novembre. L’ensemble, constitué de 55 îles, abrite une base conjointe britannique et américaine, stratégique.

    Initiée par les autorités mauriciennes de Port-Louis, une résolution de rétrocession, non contraignante, mais à forte valeur politique, a été adoptée par 116 pays, six s’exprimant contre, dont le Royaume-Uni, les Etats-Unis, l’Australie et la Hongrie. Cinquante-six Etats ont choisi l’abstention. Les pays africains ont, en revanche, voté massivement en faveur de la résolution.

  • #ordures #déchets Les Philippines rappellent leur ambassadeur et leurs consuls au Canada Fabien Deglise Avec La Presse canadienne - 17 mai 2019 - Le Devoir

    La détérioration des relations entre le Canada et les Philippines a atteint un nouvel état de dégradation jeudi avec le rapatriement ordonné par Manille de l’ensemble des hauts gradés de son corps diplomatique au pays afin de forcer Ottawa à accélérer le processus de récupération de plusieurs tonnes d’ordures canadiennes envoyées depuis Vancouver, entre 2013 et 2014, dans ce pays d’Asie.


    Photo : Jay Directo Agence France-Presse Depuis plusieurs années, les Philippines réclament le rapatriement de plusieurs tonnes d’ordures canadiennes, comme le montre cette photo prise en 2015.

    Devant ce qui est en train de devenir une « guerre des déchets », le Canada s’est dit « déçu » par la décision des Philippines et a indiqué qu’il allait continuer à « collaborer étroitement » pour « voir à ce que cette importante question se règle rapidement », a indiqué Affaires mondiales Canada dans une déclaration adressée aux médias.

    Depuis cinq ans, le climat se gâte entre les deux pays, après l’envoi par le Canada aux Philippines d’une centaine de conteneurs de déchets étiquetés comme étant des matières à recycler. Dans les faits, il s’agissait plutôt d’ordures ménagères, contenant entre autres des résidus de cuisine, des bouteilles de plastique et des couches pour adultes souillées, selon des groupes environnementaux qui ont dénoncé cette cargaison illégale.

    En 2016, un tribunal de Manille a ordonné le renvoi de ces conteneurs au Canada, un processus qu’Ottawa aurait cherché à éviter en convainquant les Philippines de traiter ces déchets sur son territoire, avant d’accepter ce retour à l’envoyeur.

    Comme signataire de la Convention internationale de Bâle, le Canada n’est pas autorisé à se débarrasser de déchets toxiques ou dangereux dans des pays en développement sans une autorisation de leur part, obtenue en toute connaissance de cause.

    Fin avril, le président philippin, Rodrigo Duterte, a menacé de « déclarer la guerre » au Canada si Ottawa ne venait pas récupérer ses ordures, tout en indiquant être prêt à organiser lui-même le voyage de retour. « J’indiquerai au Canada que leurs déchets sont en chemin, a indiqué le populiste lors d’une conférence de presse. Préparez un grand accueil. Mangez-les si cela vous chante. » Un porte-parole du président a, par la suite, indiqué que cette menace de guerre était à prendre au deuxième degré, mais que l’irritation, elle, était très sérieuse. Le président avait alors donné jusqu’au 15 mai au Canada pour agir.

    Jeudi matin, au lendemain de cette échéance, le ministre des Affaires étrangères des Philippines, Teodoro Locsin, a pris la plume sur Twitter afin d’indiquer que l’ambassadeur et les consuls des Philippines au Canada avaient été rappelés au pays. Son pays dit vouloir maintenir « une présence diplomatique réduite au Canada jusqu’à ce que ses déchets » aient disparu du territoire philippin. « Ce rappel montre que nous leur demandons très sérieusement de récupérer leurs déchets, sinon nous romprons nos relations avec eux », a-t-il ajouté.

    Questionné sur cette crise à l’occasion d’une conférence de presse à Paris, où il se trouve, Justin Trudeau a dit que le Canada travaillait de près avec le gouvernement des Philippines depuis des mois « et nous allons continuer à le faire avec l’espoir d’arriver à une entente rapidement », a-t-il indiqué.
 

    #canada #ordures #déchets #pollution #ordure #plastique #écologie #recyclage #environnement #recyclage #manille #Duterte

  • Comment Israël arme les dictatures à travers le monde

    Arming dictators, equipping pariahs: Alarming picture of Israel’s arms sales - Israel News - Haaretz.com

    Extensive Amnesty report cites Israeli sales to eight countries who violate human rights, including South Sudan, Myanmar, Mexico and the UAE ■ Amnesty calls on Israel to adopt oversight model adopted by many Western countries ■ Senior Israeli defense official: Export license is only granted after lengthy process
    Amos Harel
    May 17, 2019 5:59 AM

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-arming-dictators-equipping-pariahs-an-alarming-picture-of-israel-s

    A thorough report by Amnesty International is harshly critical of Israel’s policies on arms exports. According to the report written in Hebrew by the organization’s Israeli branch, Israeli companies continue to export weapons to countries that systematically violate human rights. Israeli-made weapons are also found in the hands of armies and organizations committing war crimes. The report points to eight such countries that have received arms from Israel in recent years.

    >> Subscribe for just $1 now

    Often these weapons reach their destination after a series of transactions, thereby skirting international monitoring and the rules of Israel itself. Amnesty calls on the government, the Knesset and the Defense Ministry to more tightly monitor arms exports and enforce transparency guidelines adopted by other Western countries that engage in large-scale weapons exports.

    In the report, Amnesty notes that the supervision of the arms trade is “a global, not a local issue. The desire and need for better monitoring of global arms sales derives from tragic historical events such as genocide, bloody civil wars and the violent repression of citizens by their governments …. There is a new realization that selling arms to governments and armies that employ violence only fuels violent conflicts and leads to their escalation. Hence, international agreements have been reached with the aim of preventing leaks of military equipment to dictatorial or repressive regimes.”

    >> Read more: Revealed: Israel’s cyber-spy industry helps world dictators hunt dissidents and gays

    The 2014 Arms Trade Treaty established standards for trade in conventional weapons. Israel signed the treaty but the cabinet never ratified it. According to Amnesty, Israel has never acted in the spirit of this treaty, neither by legislation nor its policies.

    “There are functioning models of correct and moral-based monitoring of weapons exports, including the management of public and transparent reporting mechanisms that do not endanger a state’s security or foreign relations,” Amnesty says. “Such models were established by large arms exporters such as members of the European Union and the United States. There is no justification for the fact that Israel continues to belong to a dishonorable club of exporters such as China and Russia.”

    In 2007, the Knesset passed a law regulating the monitoring of weapons exports. The law authorizes the Defense Ministry to oversee such exports, manage their registration and decide on the granting of export licenses. The law defines defense-related exports very broadly, including equipment for information-gathering, and forbids trade in such items without a license.
    Stay up to date: Sign up to our newsletter
    Email*

    The law does not include a clause limiting exports when there is a high probability that these items will be used in violation of international or humanitarian laws. But the law does prohibit “commerce with foreign agencies that are not in compliance with UN Security Council resolutions that prohibit or limit a transfer of such weapons or missiles to such recipients.”

    According to Amnesty, “the absence of monitoring and transparency have for decades let Israel supply equipment and defense-related knowledge to questionable states and dictatorial or unstable regimes that have been shunned by the international community.”

    The report quotes a 2007 article by Brig. Gen. (res.) Uzi Eilam. “A thick layer of fog has always shrouded the export of military equipment. Destinations considered pariah states by the international community, such as Chile in the days of Pinochet or South Africa during the apartheid years, were on Israel’s list of trade partners,” Eilam wrote.

    “The shroud of secrecy helped avoid pressure by the international community, but also prevented any transparency regarding decisions to sell arms to problematic countries, leaving the judgment and decision in the hands of a small number of people, mainly in the defense establishment.”

    The report presents concrete evidence on Israel’s exports over the last two decades, with arms going to eight countries accused by international institutions of serious human rights violations: South Sudan, Myanmar, the Philippines, Cameroon, Azerbaijan, Sri Lanka, Mexico and the United Arab Emirates. In some of these cases, Israel denied that it exported arms to these countries at specifically mentioned times. In other case it refused to give details.
    Israeli security-related exports

    In its report, Amnesty relies on the research of other human rights groups, on documentation published in the media in those eight countries, and on information gathered by attorney Eitay Mack, who in recent years has battled to expose Israel’s arms deals with shady regimes. Amnesty cross-checks descriptions of exported weapons with human rights violations and war crimes by those countries. In its report, Amnesty says that some of these countries were under sanctions and a weapons-sales embargo, but Israel continued selling them arms.

    According to the organization, “the law on monitoring in its current format is insufficient and has not managed to halt the export of weapons to Sri Lanka, which massacred many of its own citizens; to South Sudan, where the regime and army committed ethnic cleansing and aggravated crimes against humanity such as the mass rape of hundreds of women, men and girls; to Myanmar, where the army committed genocide and the chief of staff, who carried out the arms deal with Israel, is accused of these massacres and other crimes against humanity; and to the Philippines, where the regime and police executed 15,000 civilians without any charges or trials.”

    Amnesty says that this part of the report “is not based on any report by the Defense Ministry relating to military equipment exports, for the simple reason that the ministry refuses to release any information. The total lack of transparency by Israel regarding weapons exports prevents any public discussion of the topic and limits any research or public action intended to improve oversight.”

    One example is the presence of Israeli-made Galil Ace rifles in the South Sudanese army. “With no documentation of sales, one cannot know when they were sold, by which company, how many, and so on,” the report says.

    “All we can say with certainty is that the South Sudanese army currently has Israeli Galil rifles, at a time when there is an international arms embargo on South Sudan, imposed by the UN Security Council, due to ethnic cleansing, as well as crimes against humanity, using rape as a method of war, and due to war crimes the army is perpetrating against the country’s citizens.”

    According to Amnesty, the defense export control agency at the Defense Ministry approved the licenses awarded Israeli companies for selling weapons to these countries, even though it knew about the bad human rights situation there. It did this despite the risk that Israeli exports would be used to violate human rights and despite the embargo on arms sales imposed on some of these countries by the United States and the European Union, as well as other sanctions that were imposed by these countries or the United Nations.

    In response to letters written to the export control agency, its head, Rachel Chen, said: “We can’t divulge whether we’re exporting to one of these countries, but we carefully examine the state of human rights in each country before approving export licenses for selling them weapons.” According to Amnesty, this claim is false, as shown by the example of the eight countries mentioned in the report.

    Amnesty recommends steps for improving the monitoring of defense exports. It says Israel lags American legislation by 20 years, and European legislation by 10 years. “The lack of transparency has further negative implications, such as hiding information from the public,” Amnesty says.
    File photo: Personnel of the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF), assigned as South Sundan’s presidential guard, take part in a drill at their barracks in Rejaf, South Sudan, April 26, 2019.
    File photo: Personnel of the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF), assigned as South Sundan’s presidential guard, take part in a drill at their barracks in Rejaf, South Sudan, April 26, 2019.Alex McBride/AFP

    “The concept by which the Defense Ministry operates is that it is not in the public interest to know which countries buy weapons here, how much and under what conditions. This is an erroneous conception that stems from the wish to conceal, using the well-worn cloak of ‘issues of state security and foreign relations’ as an excuse,” it adds.

    “The veil of secrecy makes it hard to obtain data. In our humble opinion, the information we have gathered and presented in this report is the tip of the iceberg. Most of the evidence is based on official reports issued by the recipient states, such as the Facebook page of the chief of staff in Myanmar, or the site of the Philippine government’s spokesman.”

    The authors say attempts to maintain secrecy in an era of social media and global media coverage are absurd and doomed to fail.

    “Let the reasonable reader ask himself if the powers that sell weapons are concerned about harm to state security resulting from making the information accessible, or whether this is just an excuse, with the veil of secrecy protecting the interests of certain agencies in Israel.”

    Amnesty says Israel ranks eighth among the exporters of heavy weapons around the world. Between 2014 and 2018, Israel’s defense exports comprised 3.1 percent of global sales. Compared with the previous four years, this was a 60 percent increase. The three largest customers of heavy weapons sold by Israel are India, Azerbaijan and Vietnam.

    But the report says defense industries are not the largest or most lucrative contributors to Israeli exports. According to the Defense Ministry, defense exports comprise 10 percent of Israel’s industrial exports. “Defense-related companies in Israel export to 130 countries around the world,” the report says. “Of these, only a minority are countries designated by the UN and the international community as violators of human rights.”

    These are mostly poor countries and the scope of defense exports to them is small compared to the rest of Israel’s exports. According to Amnesty, banning exports to the eight countries would not sting Israel’s defense contractors or their profits, and would certainly not have a public impact. “There is no justification – economic, diplomatic, security-related or strategic – to export weapons to these countries,” the report says.

    Amnesty believes that “the situation is correctable. Israel’s government and the Defense Ministry must increase their monitoring and transparency, similar to what the vast majority of large weapons exporters around the world do except for Russia and China.”

    According to Amnesty, this should be done by amending the law regulating these exports, adding two main clauses. The first would prohibit the awarding of licenses to export to a country with a risk of serious human rights violations, based on international humanitarian law.

    The second would set up a committee to examine the human rights situation in any target state. The committee would include people from outside the defense establishment and the Foreign Ministry such as academics and human rights activists, as is customary in other countries.

    “Monitoring must not only be done, it must be seen, and the Israeli public has every right to know what is done in its name and with its resources, which belong to everyone,” the report says.

    A policy of obscurity

    A senior defense official who read the Amnesty report told Haaretz that many of its claims have been discussed in recent years in petitions to the High Court of Justice. The justices have heard petitions relating to South Sudan, Cameroon and Mexico. However, in all cases, the court accepted the state’s position that deliberations would be held with only one side present – the state, and that its rulings would remain classified.
    File photo: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to a military commander along the Gaza border, southern Israel, March 28, 2019.
    File photo: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks to a military commander along the Gaza border, southern Israel, March 28, 2019.Itay Beit On/GPO

    Monitoring of exports has substantially increased since the law was passed, the official said. The authority endowed to the Defense Ministry by this law, including imposing economic sanctions, prohibition of exports and taking legal action against companies, are more far-reaching than in other countries.

    “The process of obtaining an export license in Israel is lengthy, difficult and imposes onerous regulations on exporters," he added. “When there is evidence of human rights violations in a country buying arms from Israel, we treat this with utmost seriousness in our considerations. The fact is that enlightened states respect the laws we have and are interested in the ways we conduct our monitoring.”

    He admitted that Israel does adopt a policy of obscurity with regard to its arms deals. “We don’t share information on whether or to which country we’ve sold arms,” he said. “We’ve provided all the information to the High Court. The plaintiffs do receive fixed laconic responses, but there are diplomatic and security-related circumstances that justify this.”

    “Other countries can be more transparent but we’re in a different place,” he argued. "We don’t dismiss out of hand discussion of these issues. The questions are legitimate but the decisions and polices are made after all the relevant considerations are taken into account.”

    The intense pace of events in recent months – rounds of violence along the Gaza border, Israel’s election, renewed tension between the U.S. and Iran – have left little time to deal with other issues that make the headlines less frequently.

    Israel is currently in the throes of an unprecedented constitutional and political crisis, the outcome of which will seriously impact its standing as a law-abiding state. If Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu succeeds in his plan to halt all legal proceedings against him, legislating an immunity law and restricting the jurisdiction of the High Court, all other issues would pale in comparison.

    There is some logic to the claim that Israel cannot be holier than thou when it comes to arms sales in the global market, and yet, the Amnesty report depicts a horrific image, backed by reliable data, but also makes suggestions for improvement that seem reasonable.

    Numerous reports over the last year show that the problem is not restricted to the sale of light weapons, but might be exacerbated by the spread of cyberwarfare tools developed by Israel and what dark regimes can do with these. Even if it happens through a twisted chain of sub-contractors, the state can’t play innocent. Therefore, it’s worthwhile listening to Amnesty’s criticism and suggestions for improvement.
    Amos Harel

  • Global Report on Internal Displacement #2019

    KEY FINDINGS

    Internal displacement is a global challenge, but it is also heavily concentrated in a few countries and triggered by few events. 28 million new internal displacements associated with conflict and disasters across 148 countries and territories were recorded in 2018, with nine countries each accounting for more than a million.

    41.3 million people were estimated to be living in internal displacement as a result of conflict and violence in 55 countries as of the end of the year, the highest figure ever recorded. Three-quarters, or 30.9 million people, were located in only ten countries.

    Protracted crises, communal violence and unresolved governance challenges were the main factors behind 10.8 million new displacements associated with conflict and violence. Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Syria accounted for more than half of the global figure.

    Newly emerging crises forced millions to flee, from Cameroon’s anglophone conflict to waves of violence in Nigeria’s Middle Belt region and unprecedented conflict in Ethiopia. Displacement also continued despite peace efforts in the Central African Republic, South Sudan and Colombia.

    Many IDPs remain unaccounted for. Figures for DRC, Myanmar, Pakistan, Sudan and Yemen are considered underestimates, and data is scarce for Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Russia, Turkey and Venezuela. This prevents an accurate assessment of the true scale of internal displacement in these countries. ||Estimating returns continues to be a major challenge.

    Large numbers of people reportedly returned to their areas of origin in Ethiopia, Iraq and Nigeria, to conditions which were not conducive to long-lasting reintegration. ||Urban conflict triggered large waves of displacement and has created obstacles to durable solutions. Airstrikes and shelling forced many thousands to flee in Hodeida in Yemen, Tripoli in Libya and Dara’a in Syria. In Mosul in Iraq and Marawi in the Philippines, widespread destruction and unexploded ordnance continued to prevent people from returning home.

    Heightened vulnerability and exposure to sudden-onset hazards, particularly storms, resulted in 17.2 million disaster displacements in 144 countries and territories. The number of people displaced by slow-onset disasters worldwide remains unknown as only drought-related displacement is captured in some countries, and only partially.

    The devastating power of extreme events highlighted again the impacts of climate change across the globe. Wildfires were a particularly visible expression of this in 2018, from the US and Australia to Greece and elsewhere in southern Europe, displacing hundreds of thousands of people, causing severe damage and preventing swift returns.

    Global risk of being displaced by floods is staggeringly high and concentrated in towns and cities: more than 17 million people are at risk of being displaced by floods each year. Of these, more than 80 per cent live in urban and peri-urban areas.

    An overlap of conflict and disasters repeatedly displaced people in a number of countries. Drought and conflict triggered similar numbers of displacements in Afghanistan, and extended rainy seasons displaced millions of people in areas of Nigeria and Somalia already affected by conflict. Most of the people displaced by disasters in Iraq and Syria were IDPs living in camps that were flooded.

    Promising policy developments in several regions show increased attention to displacement risk. Niger became the first country to domesticate the Kampala Convention by adopting a law on internal displacement, and Kosovo recognised the importance of supporting returning refugees and IDPs, updating its policy to that end. Vanuatu produced a policy on disaster and climate-related displacement, and Fiji showed foresight in adopting new guidelines on resettlement in the context of climate change impacts.

    https://reliefweb.int/report/world/global-report-internal-displacement-2019-grid-2019-0
    #IDPs #déplacés_internes #migrations #asile #statistiques #chiffres

    ping @reka @karine4

  • A Chypre, Monsieur Tout-le-Monde tuait des femmes étrangères, travailleuses invisibles
    http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/a-chypre-monsieur-tout-le-monde-tuait-des-femmes-etrangeres-travailleuses

    La mort leur a donné un nom. Arian Palanas Lozano, Maricar Valdez, Asmita Khadka Bista, Livia-Florentina Bunea et Mary Rose Tiburcio… Les deux dernières étaient les mamans d’Elena et Sierra, 8 et 6 ans. Cinq femmes et deux fillettes, des étrangères victimes de Nikos Metaxas, suspecté d’être le premier tueur en série de l’histoire de l’île de Chypre. Ces travailleuses invisibles sont devenues les symboles de milliers de migrantes que la société chypriote a longtemps ignorées.

    Au cœur de l’Union européenne, à quelques semaines d’élections continentales, des milliers de femmes sont ainsi « réduites à l’état de choses par des employeurs qui abusent de leur pauvreté », dénonce Ester Beatty. « Certaines bossent jusqu’à quinze heures par jour ! »

    #féminicide #exploitation #migrations

  • Malgré les menaces, la journaliste Maria Ressa « défie l’impunité » du président philippin
    https://www.mediapart.fr/journal/international/110519/malgre-les-menaces-la-journaliste-maria-ressa-defie-l-impunite-du-presiden

    Les Philippines élisent leurs parlementaires ce lundi 13 mai. Le président et autocrate Rodrigo Duterte pourrait en sortir renforcé. Fondatrice du média en ligne Rappler, la journaliste Maria Ressa, personnalité de l’année pour le magazine "Time", est harcelée par le pouvoir de Manille. « Nous continuerons à faire notre travail », assure-t-elle à Mediapart.""

    #Asie #Maria_Ressa,_Philippines,_Rodrigo_Duterte,_Rappler

  • One tiny bone, one big discovery. “Homo luzonensis” discovered in the Philippines
    https://massivesci.com/notes/one-tiny-bone-one-big-discovery-homo-luzonensis-discovered-in-the-philip

    Recently, a team of international researchers have discovered a new human species, Homo luzonensis , in the Philippines. Their first discovery was in 2007, when they...

  • Le modèle d’affaires toxique de Syngenta
    https://www.publiceye.ch/fr/thematiques/pesticides/syngenta

    #Syngenta est numéro un mondial sur le marché des #pesticides. Alors que le géant de l’#agro-industrie vante ses efforts en matière d’innovation et de durabilité, les recherches de Public Eye révèle que la commercialisation de pesticides extrêmement dangereux est au cœur de son modèle d’affaires. La multinationale profite de la faiblesse des #réglementations dans des pays en développement ou émergents pour y vendre des produits, dont bon nombre ont été interdits en Suisse.[...]

    Le Brésil est le principal marché du géant bâlois. L’Argentine, la Chine, le Paraguay, le Mexique, l’Inde, le Vietnam, les Philippines, le Kenya ou encore le Ghana sont aussi des destinations privilégiées de ses pesticides extrêmement dangereux.

    Syngenta gagne des milliards en vendant des pesticides extrêmement dangereux
    https://www.publiceye.ch/fr/coin-medias/communiques-de-presse/detail/syngenta-gagne-des-milliards-en-vendant-des-pesticides-extremement-dangere

  • « Homo luzonensis », un petit homme des Philippines qui vient de loin
    https://www.liberation.fr/sciences/2019/04/10/homo-luzonensis-un-petit-homme-des-philippines-qui-vient-de-loin_1720526

    Des fouilles dans une grotte de l’île de Luçon ont permis de mettre la main sur des os de pied et de main et des dents vieux d’au moins 50 000 ans, ayant appartenu à trois individus d’une espèce humaine de petite taille et contemporains d’« Homo sapiens ».

    Tous les os paraissent étranges. Les phalanges de pied sont très courbées et possèdent des zones d’insertion bien creusées, qui devaient accueillir des muscles assez développés pour fléchir le pied. Rien à voir, donc, avec un pied d’Homo sapiens bipède… Cet humain-là devait avoir une capacité de préhension par le pied et peut-être monter aux arbres, comme les vieux (2 à 3 millions d’années) Australopithèques d’Afrique.

    Des fouilles récentes, sur un site voisin, ont cependant révélé des outils de pierre âgés de 700 000 ans et des os de rhinocéros montrant des traces de boucherie, laissant présager une très vieille présence humaine à Luçon. Sûrement les ancêtres d’Homo luzonensis. « Mon hypothèse, c’est qu’une sorte d’Homo erectus peut-être venu de Chine a réussi à traverser la mer et s’est installé sur l’île de Luçon, où il a subi les effets de l’endémisme insulaire, et cela a donné Homo luzonensis, tente Florent Détroit. Mais c’est très spéculatif, je me trompe peut-être sur un ou plusieurs aspects de ce scénario simpliste. »

  • Une 5e espèce humaine découverte - Sciences et Avenir
    https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/archeo-paleo/paleontologie/une-5e-espece-humaine-decouverte_132890

    Place, faites place dans l’arbre des homininés à Homo luzonensis ! Ce cousin préhistorique vivait sur l’ile de Luzon, au nord des Philippines, il y a 50.000 ans, au moment où nos ancêtres Homo sapiens, mais aussi les néandertaliens, les Hommes de Denisova, et les Hommes de Florès vivaient, chassaient, dormaient... Ce qui signifie que pas moins de cinq espèces du genre Homo se partageaient la planète à l’époque.. dont ne subsiste que la nôtre aujourd’hui (Lire notre Hors série n°183, la grande histoire de l’Humanité). La nouvelle espèce a été décrite par une équipe internationale, dirigée par Florent Détroit, du Musée de l’Homme. (MNHN) à partir de quelques restes patiemment extirpés du sol de la grotte de Callao entre 2007 et 2015. En tout et pour tout, six dents, un morceau de fémur, deux phalanges de main, et trois os de pied.
    Des prémolaires très instructives

    C’est maigre, certes. Mais extraordinaire, pourtant. Car ces fossiles, datés de -50.000 ans à -67.000 ans, et dûment comparés, s’avèrent à nuls autres pareils. Prenez les dents d’Homo luzonensis : ses prémolaires ont trois racines, alors que chez l’homme moderne, il n’y en a qu’une, parfois deux. Elles ont beau être petites -un trait très sapiens- elles ressemblent plutôt à des dents d’australopithèques, (telle Lucy -4 millions d’années), ou d’Homo très anciens (comme Homo habilis, -2,5 millions d’années). « Un individu possédant ces caractéristiques combinées ne peut être classé dans aucune des espèces connues aujourd’hui », explique le paléontologue Florent Détroit, dont la découverte fait la Une du magazine Nature du 11 avril ! (Voir vidéos 1 à 5).

    En résumé, il y a eu plusieurs espèces d’hominidés sur la planète, mais ce sont les plus cons et les plus méchants qui ont niqué les autres. Et dans cette espèce, selon toute vraisemblance, nous appartenons à la civilisation des plus cons et des plus méchants…

  • Record High #Remittances Sent Globally in #2018

    Remittances to low- and middle-income countries reached a record high in 2018, according to the World Bank’s latest Migration and Development Brief.

    The Bank estimates that officially recorded annual remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries reached $529 billion in 2018, an increase of 9.6 percent over the previous record high of $483 billion in 2017. Global remittances, which include flows to high-income countries, reached $689 billion in 2018, up from $633 billion in 2017.

    Regionally, growth in remittance inflows ranged from almost 7 percent in East Asia and the Pacific to 12 percent in South Asia. The overall increase was driven by a stronger economy and employment situation in the United States and a rebound in outward flows from some Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and the Russian Federation. Excluding China, remittances to low- and middle-income countries ($462 billion) were significantly larger than foreign direct investment flows in 2018 ($344 billion).

    Among countries, the top remittance recipients were India with $79 billion, followed by China ($67 billion), Mexico ($36 billion), the Philippines ($34 billion), and Egypt ($29 billion).

    In 2019, remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries are expected to reach $550 billion, to become their largest source of external financing.

    The global average cost of sending $200 remained high, at around 7 percent in the first quarter of 2019, according to the World Bank’s Remittance Prices Worldwide database. Reducing remittance costs to 3 percent by 2030 is a global target under Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10.7. Remittance costs across many African corridors and small islands in the Pacific remain above 10 percent.

    Banks were the most expensive remittance channels, charging an average fee of 11 percent in the first quarter of 2019. Post offices were the next most expensive, at over 7 percent. Remittance fees tend to include a premium where national post offices have an exclusive partnership with a money transfer operator. This premium was on average 1.5 percent worldwide and as high as 4 percent in some countries in the last quarter of 2018.

    On ways to lower remittance costs, Dilip Ratha, lead author of the Brief and head of KNOMAD, said, “Remittances are on track to become the largest source of external financing in developing countries. The high costs of money transfers reduce the benefits of migration. Renegotiating exclusive partnerships and letting new players operate through national post offices, banks, and telecommunications companies will increase competition and lower remittance prices.”

    The Brief notes that banks’ ongoing de-risking practices, which have involved the closure of the bank accounts of some remittance service providers, are driving up remittance costs.

    The Brief also reports progress toward the SDG target of reducing the recruitment costs paid by migrant workers, which tend to be high, especially for lower-skilled migrants.

    “Millions of low-skilled migrant workers are vulnerable to recruitment malpractices, including exorbitant recruitment costs. We need to boost efforts to create jobs in developing countries and to monitor and reduce recruitment costs paid by these workers,” said Michal Rutkowski, Senior Director of the Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice at the World Bank. The World Bank and the International Labour Organization are collaborating to develop indicators for worker-paid recruitment costs, to support the SDG of promoting safe, orderly, and regular migration.

    Regional Remittance Trends

    Remittances to the East Asia and Pacific region grew almost 7 percent to $143 billion in 2018, faster than the 5 percent growth in 2017. Remittances to the Philippines rose to $34 billion, but growth in remittances was slower due to a drop in private transfers from the GCC countries. Flows to Indonesia increased by 25 percent in 2018, after a muted performance in 2017.

    After posting 22 percent growth in 2017, remittances to Europe and Central Asia grew an estimated 11 percent to $59 billion in 2018. Continued growth in economic activity increased outbound remittances from Poland, Russia, Spain, and the United States, major sources of remittances to the region. Smaller remittance-dependent countries in the region, such as the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, benefited from the sustained rebound of economic activity in Russia. Ukraine, the region’s largest remittance recipient, received a new record of more than $14 billion in 2018, up about 19 percent over 2017. This surge in Ukraine also reflects a revised methodology for estimating incoming remittances, as well as growth in neighboring countries’ demand for migrant workers.

    Remittances flows into Latin America and the Caribbean grew 10 percent to $88 billion in 2018, supported by the strong U.S. economy. Mexico continued to receive the most remittances in the region, posting about $36 billion in 2018, up 11 percent over the previous year. Colombia and Ecuador, which have migrants in Spain, posted 16 percent and 8 percent growth, respectively. Three other countries in the region posted double-digit growth: Guatemala (13 percent) as well as Dominican Republic and Honduras (both 10 percent), reflecting robust outbound remittances from the United States.

    Remittances to the Middle East and North Africa grew 9 percent to $62 billion in 2018. The growth was driven by Egypt’s rapid remittance growth of around 17 percent. Beyond 2018, the growth of remittances to the region is expected to continue, albeit at a slower pace of around 3 percent in 2019 due to moderating growth in the Euro Area.

    Remittances to South Asia grew 12 percent to $131 billion in 2018, outpacing the 6 percent growth in 2017. The upsurge was driven by stronger economic conditions in the United States and a pick-up in oil prices, which had a positive impact on outward remittances from some GCC countries. Remittances grew by more than 14 percent in India, where a flooding disaster in Kerala likely boosted the financial help that migrants sent to families. In Pakistan, remittance growth was moderate (7 percent), due to significant declines in inflows from Saudi Arabia, its largest remittance source. In Bangladesh, remittances showed a brisk uptick in 2018 (15 percent).

    Remittances to Sub-Saharan Africa grew almost 10 percent to $46 billion in 2018, supported by strong economic conditions in high-income economies. Looking at remittances as a share of GDP, Comoros has the largest share, followed by the Gambia , Lesotho, Cabo Verde, Liberia, Zimbabwe, Senegal, Togo, Ghana, and Nigeria.

    The Migration and Development Brief and the latest migration and remittances data are available at www.knomad.org. Interact with migration experts at http://blogs.worldbank.org/peoplemove

    http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2019/04/08/record-high-remittances-sent-globally-in-2018?cid=ECR_TT_worldbank_EN_EXT
    #remittances #statistiques #chiffres #migrations #diaspora

    #Rapport ici :


    https://www.knomad.org/sites/default/files/2019-04/MigrationandDevelopmentBrief_31_0.pdf

    ping @reka

    • Immigrati, boom di rimesse: più di 6 miliardi all’estero. Lo strano caso dei cinesi «spariti»

      Bangladesh, Romania, Filippine: ecco il podio delle rimesse degli immigrati che vivono e lavorano in Italia. Il trend è in forte aumento: nel 2018 sono stati inviati all’estero 6,2 miliardi di euro, con una crescita annua del 20, 7 per cento.
      A registrarlo è uno studio della Fondazione Leone Moressa su dati Banca d’Italia, dopo il crollo del 2013 e alcuni anni di sostanziale stabilizzazione, oggi il volume di rimesse rappresenta lo 0,35% del Pil.

      Il primato del Bangladesh
      Per la prima volta, nel 2018 il Bangladesh è il primo Paese di destinazione delle rimesse, con oltre 730 milioni di euro complessivi (11,8% delle rimesse totali).
      Il Bangladesh nell’ultimo anno ha registrato un +35,7%, mentre negli ultimi sei anni ha più che triplicato il volume.

      Il secondo Paese di destinazione è la Romania, con un andamento stabile: +0,3% nell’ultimo anno e -14,3% negli ultimi sei.
      Da notare come tra i primi sei Paesi ben quattro siano asiatici: oltre al Bangladesh, anche Filippine, Pakistan e India. Proprio i Paesi dell’Asia meridionale sono quelli che negli ultimi anni hanno registrato il maggiore incremento di rimesse inviate. Il Pakistan ha registrato un aumento del +73,9% nell’ultimo anno. Anche India e Sri Lanka sono in forte espansione.

      Praticamente scomparsa la Cina, che fino a pochi anni fa rappresentava il primo Paese di destinazione e oggi non è nemmeno tra i primi 15 Paesi per destinazione delle rimesse.
      Mediamente, ciascun immigrato in Italia ha inviato in patria poco più di 1.200 euro nel corso del 2018 (circa 100 euro al mese). Valore che scende sotto la media per le due nazionalità più numerose: Romania (50,29 euro mensili) e Marocco (66,14 euro). Tra le comunità più numerose il valore più alto è quello del Bangladesh: ciascun cittadino ha inviato oltre 460 euro al mese. Anche i senegalesi hanno inviato mediamente oltre 300 euro mensili.

      https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/notizie/2019-04-17/immigrati-boom-rimesse-piu-6-miliardi-all-estero-strano-caso-cinesi-spa
      #Italie #Chine #Bangladesh #Roumanie #Philippines

  • Philippines becomes second country to quit ICC

    The Philippines on Sunday has withdrawn from the International Criminal Court, becoming the second country to leave the Hague-based tribunal meant to prosecute the world’s worst atrocities.

    The move comes a year after Manila officially notified the United Nations that it was quitting the ICC—the only permanent international judicial body to try individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

    Read more at https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/03/17/1901757/philippines-becomes-second-country-quit-icc#Cpd5wLjUQPUbf3U6.99

    https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/03/17/1901757/philippines-becomes-second-country-quit-icc

    #CPI #cour_pénale_internationale #Philippines #it_has_begun #Burundi #justice

    v. aussi
    https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/03/16/1797330/philippines-formally-informs-un-icc-withdrawal

    ping @reka

  • Paris-luttes.info, déjà 5 ans ! Et maintenant ?
    (quand l’équipe de Paris-luttes.info explique où en est le site, les choix politiques et en quoi consiste son rôle...)
    L’automne dernier, le site Paris-luttes.info (PLI) a soufflé ses 5 bougies. Le moment pour le collectif d’animation du site de tirer un bilan de ces 5 premières années et d’ouvrir quelques perspectives pour la suite du projet.
    https://paris-luttes.info/paris-luttes-info-deja-5-ans-et-11528

    On ne le rappellera jamais assez, Paris Luttes Info est un site coopératif, local, appartenant avant tout à ses lecteurs-rices et contributeurs-rices. En effet, contrairement à d’autres sites du paysage révolutionnaire français, il n y a pas de comité de rédaction sur Paris-Luttes.info. Le site a été conçu pour permettre la plus large expression des personnes en lutte en Ile-de-France ainsi que la diffusion des idées anticapitalistes, anti-autoritaires et révolutionnaires. Les articles publiés reflètent donc les propositions d’articles des militant.e.s locaux ou des contributeurs et contributrices ponctuel.le.s et les thématiques qui les traversent. Ces positions sont par définitions variées, parfois antagonistes.

    ...

    Ces derniers chiffres concernant la présence de PLI sur les réseaux sociaux méritent une importante précision : si cette présence permet d’augmenter l’audience du site, le projet de Paris-luttes est en revanche à l’exact opposé d’une simple page ou compte twitter militant.
    Le site est en effet hébergé sur un serveur autonome permettant de relativement bien préserver l’anonymat des personnes venant publier. Aucune donnée personnelle n’est demandée ni conservée, encore moins monétisée. Au sein du réseau Mutu, l’infrastructure technique tout comme l’animation des sites repose uniquement sur l’action militante.
    Si jamais facebook pour une raison ou pour une autre venait à supprimer notre page, le site continuerait toujours d’exister, les articles resteraient en ligne et les contributeurs-rices pourraient toujours venir publier.

    #medialibre #medias_libres #automedia #Mutu #moderation #administration #gestion

    • Sur le sujet de la #modération / #administration et politique de #gestion aussi, ce billet de Olivier Ertzscheid : Le professeur et le processeur. La modération est une ponctuation.
      https://www.affordance.info/mon_weblog/2019/02/la-moderation-est-une-ponctuation.html

      Une enquête édifiante de The Verge vient une nouvelle fois pointer les conditions de travail d’extrême violence psychologique de ces modérateurs qui bossent (notamment) pour Facebook sur le territoire américain. Elle s’ajoute aux travaux universitaires dénonçant l’exploitation des travailleurs du clic qu’ils soient ou non liés à des questions de modération (dont ceux pionniers d’Antonio Casilli), ainsi qu’au documentaire là encore édifiant sur les conditions de travail de modérateurs aux Philippines : « The Cleaners ».

      Dans le Financial Times on apprend que #Facebook rejoint #Amazon et #Google dans un programme ayant pour vocation de doper encore davantage la capacité des processeurs informatiques associés à de l’intelligence artificielle, notamment pour répondre aux immenses ressources que nécessite la modération en temps-réel de contenus vidéos.

      #GAFA #GAFAM

  • Aux Philippines, les défenseurs des droits humains sont victimes d’une hécatombe
    https://www.bastamag.net/Aux-Philippines-les-defenseurs-des-droits-humains-sont-victimes-d-une-heca

    Un rapport de la Fédération international des droits humains (FIDH) publié ce 28 février documente les attaques grandissantes à l’encontre des défenseurs des #Droits_fondamentaux, de l’environnement et des journalistes, aux Philippines depuis l’arrivée au pouvoir du président Rodrigo Duterte. Depuis son élection en juin 2016, le président philippin a déclaré une « guerre à la drogue » qui est vite devenue un prétexte à l’impunité de la violence, entre autre exercée à l’encontre des défenseurs des droits (...)

    En bref

    / #Droites_extrêmes, #Asie_et_Pacifique, Droits fondamentaux, #Droit_à_la_terre

  • Les rats et les pigeons remplacent peu à peu les espèces endémiques
    https://www.nationalgeographic.fr/animaux/les-rats-et-les-pigeons-remplacent-peu-peu-les-especes-endemiques
    https://www.nationalgeographic.fr/sites/france/files/styles/desktop/public/iStock-465987200.jpg?itok=dEu7aKpi

    Le phénomène de l’« #uniformisation_des_espèces » n’est pas qu’une simple théorie : dans les zones où l’intervention humaine est la plus forte, certaines espèces rares et endémiques disparaissent, comme le gekko gigante, uniquement localisé aux Philippines. Elle favorise cependant des espèces dominantes : le #pigeon, le #rat ou le #moineau par exemple, qui s’adaptent parfaitement aux environnements modifiés par l’être humain en termes d’exploitation, d’agriculture ou encore d’urbanisation. Ces milieux les font au contraire se multiplier et prospérer.

    L’étude menée par des chercheurs de l’University College London concerne la faune et la flore mondiale. Les scientifiques ont corolé et analysé plus d’1 million de données portant sur 19 334 espèces différentes réparties dans plus de 80 pays. On y retrouve 7 048 animaux invertébrés et 5 175 animaux vertébrés... et plus de 7 000 plantes. Les résultats sont limpides : la biodiversité baisse de façon alarmante et le phénomène d’uniformisation touche surtout les milieux urbains. En clair, l’Homme détruit par ses actions (et dans le habitats qu’il contrôle) les espèces rares, ce qui a pour effet de favoriser des animaux plus communs comme le pigeon ou le rat.

    (sans parler des animaux domestiques) #grand_remplacement
    #urbanisation #agriculture #it_has_begun

    https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.2006841

  • China Military Threat: Seeking New Islands to Conquer - James Stavridis - Bloomberg
    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-02-21/china-military-threat-seeking-new-islands-to-conquer

    The constant refrain was simple: The West is becoming a less reliable partner. These allies are dismayed by a U.S. administration that has repeatedly criticized its closest partners and accused them of freeloading on defense. They are also worried about weakness and distraction of a Europe facing Brexit. This is compounded as they watch China increase pressure on Taiwan to accept a “one nation, two systems” deal a la Hong Kong and militarize the #South_China_Sea by constructing artificial islands.
    […]
    There is also a less-noticed but extremely worrisome aspect to China’s increasing boldness: It seems to be building its naval capability to dominate farther into the Pacific — as far as what Western analysts call the “second island chain.

    When thinking in a geo-strategic sense about China, the island-chain formulation is helpful. Since the 1950s, U.S. planners have delineated a first island chain, running from the Japanese islands through the Philippines, and down to the tip of Southeast Asia. Dominating inside that line has been the goal of China’s recent buildup in naval and missile capabilities. But U.S. officials warn that Chinese strategists are becoming more ambitious, set on gaining influence running to the second island chain — running from Japan through the Micronesian islands to the tip of Indonesia. As with its initial forays into the South China Sea, Beijing is using “scientific” missions and hydrographic surveying ships as the tip of the spear.

    Japan and Singapore are essentially anchors at the north and south ends the island chains. They have been integrating their defense capabilities with the U.S. through training, exercises and arms purchases. They are exploring better relations with India as the Pacific and Indian Oceans are increasingly viewed as a single strategic entity. This is a crucial element in the U.S. strategy for the region. But there are changes coming.

    First, there are expectations that China will eye the third island chain, encompassing Hawaii and the Alaskan coast before dropping south down to New Zealand. This has long been regarded as the final line of strategic demarcation between the U.S. and China. Second, some analysts are beginning to talk about a fourth and even fifth island chain, both in the Indian Ocean, an increasingly crucial zone of competition between the U.S. and China.

    Two obvious Indian Ocean chains exist. The first would run from southern Pakistan (where China has created a deep-water port at Gwador) down past Diego Garcia, the lonely atoll controlled by the U.K. from which the U.S. runs enormous logistical movements into Central Asia. As a junior officer on a Navy cruiser in the 1980s, I visited Diego Garcia when it was essentially a fuel stop with a quaint palm-thatched bar. The base has expanded enormously, becoming critical to supporting U.S. and British combat efforts in the Horn of Africa and Middle East.

    The fifth and final island chain could be considered to run from the Horn of Africa – where the U.S. and China now maintain significant military bases – down to the coast of South Africa. Little wonder the U.S. military has renamed its former Pacific Command as the Indo-Pacific Command.

    #Mer_de_Chine_méridionale

  • The World Might Actually Run Out of People — John Ibbitson & Darrell Bricker (WIRED)
    https://www.wired.com/story/the-world-might-actually-run-out-of-people

    the UN forecasting model inputs three things: fertility rates, migration rates, and death rates. It doesn’t take into account the expansion of education for females or the speed of urbanization

    (…) adding one new variable to the forecast: the level of improvement in female education. (…) if you change how someone thinks about reproduction, you change everything.

    (…) We polled 26 countries asking women how many kids they want, and no matter where you go the answer tends to be around two. The external forces that used to dictate people having bigger families are disappearing everywhere. And that’s happening fastest in developing countries. In the Philippines, for example, fertility rates dropped from 3.7 percent to 2.7 percent from 2003 to 2018.

    intriguant… #démographie #futurologie #reproduction #femmes #éducation

  • #Art, #vérité et #politique, par #Harold_Pinter
    https://www.lemonde.fr/disparitions/article/2005/12/08/art-verite-et-politique-par-harold-pinter_718764_3382.html

    Discours lu par Harold Pinter à Stockholm, mercredi 7 décembre 2005, au nom du Prix Nobel de #littérature 2005

    L’invasion directe d’un état souverain n’a jamais été, de fait, la méthode privilégiée de l’Amérique. Dans l’ensemble, elle préférait ce qu’elle a qualifié de « conflit de faible intensité ». « Conflit de faible intensité », cela veut dire que des milliers de gens meurent, mais plus lentement que si vous lâchiez une bombe sur eux d’un seul coup. Cela veut dire que vous contaminez le cœur du pays, que vous y implantez une tumeur maligne et que vous observez s’étendre la gangrène. Une fois que le peuple a été soumis - ou battu à mort - ça revient au même - et que vos amis, les militaires et les grandes sociétés commerciales, sont confortablement installés au pouvoir, vous allez devant les caméras et vous déclarez que la #démocratie l’a emporté.

    #Etats-unis

    • Les États-Unis ont soutenu, et dans bien des cas engendré, toutes les #dictatures militaires droitières apparues dans le monde à l’issue de la seconde guerre mondiale. Je veux parler de l’Indonésie, de la Grèce, de l’Uruguay, du Brésil, du Paraguay, d’Haïti, de la Turquie, des Philippines, du Guatemala, du Salvador, et, bien sûr, du Chili. L’#horreur que les États-Unis ont infligée au Chili en 1973 ne pourra jamais être expiée et ne pourra jamais être oubliée.

      Des centaines de milliers de morts ont eu lieu dans tous ces pays. Ont-elles eu lieu ? Et sont-elles dans tous les cas imputables à la politique étrangère des États-Unis ? La réponse est oui, elles ont eu lieu et elles sont imputables à la politique étrangère américaine. Mais vous n’en savez rien.

      Ça ne s’est jamais passé. Rien ne s est jamais passé. Même pendant que cela se passait, ça ne se passait pas. Ça n’avait aucune importance. Ça n’avait aucun intérêt. Les #crimes commis par les États-Unis ont été systématiques, constants, violents, impitoyables, mais très peu de gens en ont réellement parlé.

      Rendons cette justice à l’Amérique : elle s’est livrée, partout dans le monde, à une #manipulation tout à fait clinique du #pouvoir tout en se faisant passer pour une force qui agissait dans l’intérêt du #bien universel. Un cas d’#hypnose génial, pour ne pas dire spirituel, et terriblement efficace.