• [UKRAINE / RUSSIE] Progressions russes V/S montée en puissance ukrainienne : ANALYSE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JvSTRv1OI0

    Tous les 15 jours environs Xavier   #Tytelman publie une vidéo bilan assez détaillée sur la guerre en #Ukraine, l’état des forces en jeu, des avancées / reculs, du matériel, des pertes, etc.

    Ces images sont déjà terribles en elles-même ; il y a cette impression que les humains jouent à un jeu vidéo du style Words of Tanks grandeur nature… On y comprend comment sont utilisés les #drones d’observation pour guider les artilleries, ou découvre que l’armée Russe ressort du placard des très vieilles bombes et missiles (pour certaines déclassées), peu précises (probablement parce qu’ils ont utilisé déjà toutes celles qu’ils avaient de récent)…

    Une bonne partie de ce travail provient de l’#OSINT (Open Source Intelligence) qui vise à analyser les photos, vidéos, ou toute donnée devenue publique sur les réseaux sociaux, en les vérifiant, recoupant, datant, etc...

    Note : Je vous conseille d’arrêter la vidéo à 32 minutes (avant le dernier chapitre « Crimes contre l’humanité et tortures russes ») car bien qu’il ne montre pas de vidéo, le contenu est profondément *fortement choquant*.

    Je suis complètement perturbé et interloqué par comment les humains peuvent se détruire les uns les autres jusqu’à commettre de tels actes barbares sur leurs congénères. Ça parait tellement invraisemblable. Ou comment en prétextant d’éliminer le nazisme, on commet des actes tout autant dégueulasses. Comment ces soldats peuvent se permettre autant d’atrocités ? C’est affreusement dingue.

    #humanité #guerre #barbarie #torture #crimes_de_guerre #russie

  • L’ONG allemande #Sea-Watch porte #plainte contre #Frontex

    L’agence européenne des #frontières de l’Union européenne est à nouveau dans la tourmente. Mi-avril, l’ONG Sea-Watch a porté plainte contre Frontex pour #non_divulgations_d'informations concernant une interception en Méditerranée, le 31 juillet 2021, d’un canot de migrants par les garde-côtes libyens. Le navire humanitaire Sea Watch 3, pourtant à proximité immédiate de l’embarcation en détresse, n’avait pas été informé par Frontex de la présence du canot.

    L’ONG allemande Sea-Watch a porté plainte mi-avril contre l’agence européenne des frontière de l’Union européenne (UE), Frontex, devant le tribunal de l’Union européenne (CGE) à Luxembourg. L’agence de l’UE est poursuivie pour avoir refusé de divulguer des documents détaillant la nature de ses relations qui les lie aux garde-côtes libyens.

    En clair, le préjudice remonte au 30 juillet 2021. Ce jour-là, le navire Sea Watch 3 (de l’ONG allemande éponyme) assiste à l’interception d’un canot en détresse, dans les eaux maltaises, par les garde-côtes libyens. Vingt personnes étaient à bord. Selon les déclarations de l’ONG, aucune autorité maritime n’avait informé Sea-Watch de la présence de ce canot, alors que le navire humanitaire en était le plus proche. L’ONG s’étonne aussi que les autorités maltaises ne soient pas intervenues.

    Juste avant l’intervention des Libyens, un #drone de Frontex survolait la zone. L’agence européenne aurait donc dû, selon le protocole maritime internationale, envoyé un message à tous les navires de la zone pour porter secours à l’embarcation.

    « Le Sea Watch 3 était le navire le plus proche doté d’une capacité de sauvetage mais n’a été informé par aucune autorité. Les autorités maltaises ont refusé de remplir leur devoir de coordonner les efforts de sauvetage et de veiller à ce que les personnes en détresse en mer soient emmenées en lieu sûr », écrit Sea-Watch dans un communiqué.

    L’ONG accuse Frontex d’ignorer délibérément les navires de sauvetage européens pour faire appel de préférence aux garde-côtes libyens.

    « Frontex fonctionne comme un service secret qui dissimule en permanence des informations »

    À la suite de cette interception et du retour des 20 exilés en Libye, Sea-Watch aidée par la plateforme de défense de la liberté d’information FragDenStaat ont demandé des explications à Frontex sur leur déroulé des opérations ce jour-là. En vain. Les avocats des deux plaignants disent pourtant avoir identifié 73 documents liés à ce sauvetage mais Frontex refuse de les rendre publics.

    « Après une demande [de Sea-Watch, ndlr] en vertu du règlement sur la #liberté_d'information concernant les opérations de Frontex le 30 juillet 2021, l’agence des frontières a refusé à plusieurs reprises de divulguer les informations demandées » peut-on encore lire sur le communiqué de l’ONG. « Parmi eux se trouvaient 36 documents sur l’échange de communications entre Frontex et les autorités libyennes, italiennes et maltaises ce seul jour précis. »

    « Frontex fonctionne comme un service secret qui dissimule en permanence des informations », a également écrit l’ONG sur Twitter.

    Ce n’est pas la première fois que Frontex se retrouve dans la tourmente, notamment pour des faits se déroulant en mer Égée. Au mois d’octobre 2021, un cabinet néerlandais d’avocats spécialisés dans la défense des droits de l’Homme a annoncé avoir intenté une action contre l’agence européenne pour le renvoi illégal d’une famille syrienne, demandeuse d’asile, depuis la Grèce vers la Turquie.

    Au mois de mai 2021, deux demandeurs d’asile, un mineur congolais et une Burundaise, ont porté plainte contre l’agence. Après avoir atteint l’île de Lesbos, toux deux affirment avoir été refoulés illégalement vers la Turquie.

    Depuis l’automne dernier, l’agence européenne de garde-frontières et de garde-côtes est également pointée du doigt dans des incidents de refoulements de bateaux de demandeurs d’asile de Grèce vers la Turquie.

    https://www.infomigrants.net/fr/post/40143/long-allemande-seawatch-porte-plainte-contre-frontex

    #sauvetage #migrations #réfugiés

  • Drone Terror from Turkey. Arms buildup and crimes under international law - with German participation

    In Kurdistan, Libya or Azerbaijan, Turkish “#Bayraktar_TB2” have already violated international law. Currently, the civilian population in Ethiopia is being bombed with combat drones. Support comes from Germany, among others.

    For almost two decades, companies from the USA and Israel were the undisputed market leaders for armed drones; today, China and Turkey can claim more and more exports for themselves. Turkey is best known for its “Bayraktar TB2,” which the military has been using since 2016 in the Turkish, Syrian and now also Iraqi parts of Kurdistan in violation of international law. In the four-month #Operation_Olive_Branch in Kurdish #Rojava alone, the “TB2” is said to have scored 449 direct hits four years ago and enabled fighter jets or helicopters to make such hits in 680 cases. It has a payload of 65 kilograms and can remain in the air for over 24 hours.

    The Turkish military also flies the “#Anka”, which is also capable of carrying weapons and is manufactured by #Turkish_Aerospace_Industries (#TAI). In a new version, it can be controlled via satellites and thus achieves a greater range than the “#TB2”. The “Anka” carries up to 200 kilograms, four times the payload of its competitors. The newest version of both drones can now stay in the air for longer than 24 hours.

    Drone industry is dependent on imports

    The “Anka” is also being exported, but the “TB2” is currently most widely used. The drone is manufactured by #Baykar, whose founder and namesake is #Selçuk_Bayraktar, a son-in-law of the Turkish president. The “TB2” also flew attacks on Armenian troops off #Nagorno-Karabakh, for the Tripoli government in Libya and for Azerbaijan; there it might have even - together with unmanned aerial vehicles of Israeli production - been decisive for the war, according to some observers.

    The aggressive operations prompted further orders; after Qatar, Ukraine, Morocco, Tunisia and Turkmenistan, Baykar is the first NATO country to sell the drone to Poland. About a dozen countries are said to have already received deliveries, and about as many are said to be considering procurement. Interest is reportedly coming from as far away as Lithuania and even the United Kingdom.

    The comparatively young Turkish drone industry is able to produce many of the components for its unmanned aerial vehicles itself or buy them from domestic suppliers, but manufacturers are still dependent on imports for key components. This applies to engines, for example, which are also produced in Turkey but are less powerful than competing products. For this reason, the “TB2” flew with Rotax engines from Austria, among others. Following Turkey’s support for the Azerbaijani war of aggression, the company stopped supplying Baykar.

    Canada imposes export ban

    According to the Kurdish news agency ANF, Baykar has also made purchases from Continental Motors, a U.S. corporation partly based in Germany that took over Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH eight years ago. A cruise control system made by the Bavarian company MT-Propeller was found in a crashed “TB2”. According to the Armenian National Committee of America, a radar altimeter manufactured by SMS Smart Microwave Sensors GmbH and a fuel filter made by Hengst were also installed in the drone.

    However, exports of these products are not subject to licensing, and sales may also have been made through intermediaries. Hengst, for example, also sells its products through automotive wholesalers; the company says it does not know how the filter came into Baykar’s possession.

    Originally, the “TB2” was also equipped with a sensor module from the Canadian manufacturer Wescam. This is effectively the eye of the drone, mounted in a hemispherical container on the fuselage. This so-called gimbal can be swiveled 360° and contains, among other things, optical and infrared-based cameras as well as various laser technologies. Wescam also finally ended its cooperation with Baykar after the government in Ottawa issued an export ban on the occasion of the war over Nagorno-Karabakh. The country had already imposed a temporary halt to deliveries following Turkish operations in the Kurdish region of Rojava in North Syria.

    “Eye” of the drone from Hensoldt

    Selçuk Bayraktar commented on the decision made by the Canadian Foreign Minister, saying that the required sensor technology could now also be produced in Turkey. In the meantime, the Turkish company Aselsan has also reported in newspapers close to the government that the sensor technology can now be produced completely domestically. Presumably, however, these devices are heavier than the imported products, so that the payload of small combat drones would be reduced.

    Hensoldt, a German company specializing in sensor technology, has been one of the suppliers. This was initially indicated by footage of a parade in the capital of Turkmenistan, where a freshly purchased “TB2” was also displayed to mark the 30th anniversary of the attainment of independence in Aşgabat last year. In this case, the drone was equipped with a gimbal from Hensoldt. It contains the ARGOS-II module, which, according to the product description, has a laser illuminator and a laser marker. This can be used, for example, to guide a missile into the target.

    Hensoldt was formed after a spinoff of several divisions of defense contractor Airbus, including its radar, optronics, avionics and electronic device jamming businesses. As a company of outstanding security importance, the German government has secured a blocking minority. The Italian defense group Leonardo is also a shareholder.

    Rocket technology from Germany

    The ARGOS module is manufactured by Hensoldt’s offshoot Optronics Pty in Pretoria, South Africa. When asked, a company spokesman confirmed the cooperation with Baykar. According to the company, the devices were delivered from South Africa to Turkey in an undisclosed quantity “as part of an order”. In the process, “all applicable national and international laws and export control regulations” were allegedly complied with.

    The arming of the “TB2” with laser-guided missiles was also carried out with German assistance. This is confirmed by answers to questions in the German Bundestag reported by the magazine “Monitor”. According to these reports, the German Foreign Ministry has issued several export licenses for warheads of an anti-tank missile since 2010. They originate from the company TDW Wirksysteme GmbH from the Bavarian town of Schrobenhausen, an offshoot of the European missile manufacturer MBDA.

    According to the report, the sales were presumably made to the state-owned Turkish company Roketsan. Equipment or parts for the production of the missiles are also said to have been exported to Turkey. The TDW guided missiles were of the “LRAT” and “MRAT” types, which are produced in Turkey under a different name. Based on the German exports, Roketsan is said to have developed the “MAM” missiles for drones; they are now part of the standard equipment of the “TB2”. These so-called micro-precision munitions are light warheads that can be used to destroy armored targets.

    Export licenses without end-use statement

    Roketsan sells the MAM guided missiles in three different versions, including a so-called vacuum bomb. Their development may have been carried out with the cooperation of the Bavarian company Numerics Software GmbH, according to ANF Deutsch. Numerics specializes in calculating the optimal explosive effect of armor-piercing weapons. According to the German Foreign Ministry, however, the company’s products, for which licenses have been issued for delivery to Turkey, are not suitable for the warheads in question.

    When the German government issues export licenses for military equipment, it can insist on a so-called end-use declaration. In the case of Turkey, the government would commit to obtaining German permission before reselling to a third country. The Foreign Ministry would not say whether such exchanges on missiles, sensors or other German technology have taken place. In total, export licenses for goods “for use or installation in military drones” with a total value of almost 13 million euros have been issued to Turkey, according to a response from last year.

    Deployment in Ethiopia

    As one of the current “hot spots”, the “Bayraktar TB2” is currently being deployed by Ethiopia in the civil war with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF). As recently as December, the Tigrinese rebels were on the verge of entering the capital Addis Ababa, but the tide has since turned. Many observers attribute this to the air force. The Ethiopian military has 22 Russian MiG-23 and Sukhoi-27 fighter jets, as well as several attack helicopters.

    But the decisive factor is said to have been armed drones, whose armament allows far more precise attacks. “There were suddenly ten drones in the sky”, the rebel general Tsadokan Gebretensae confirmed to the New York Times in an interview. In a swarm, these had attacked soldiers and convoys. The Reuters news agency quotes a foreign military who claims to have “clear indications” of a total of 20 drones in use. However, these also come from China and Iran.

    Evidence, meanwhile, shows that the Turkish combat drones are used as before in Kurdistan and other countries for crimes under international law. On several occasions, they have also flown attacks on civilians, including in convoys with refugees. Hundreds of people are reported to have died under Turkish-made bombs and missiles.

    After the “TB2” comes the significantly larger “Akıncı”

    In the future, the Turkish military could deploy a significantly larger drone with two engines, which Baykar has developed under the name “Akıncı”. This drone will be controlled via satellites, which will significantly increase its range compared to the “TB2”. Its payload is said to be nearly 1.5 tons, of which 900 kilograms can be carried under the wings as armament. According to Baykar, the “Akıncı” can also be used in aerial combat. Unarmed, it can be equipped with optical sensors, radar systems or electronic warfare technology.

    Baykar’s competitor TAI is also developing a long-range drone with two engines. The “#Aksungur” is said to have capabilities comparable to the “#Akıncı” and was first flown for tests in 2019.

    http://kurdistan-report.de/index.php/english/1282-drone-terror-from-turkey-arms-buildup-and-crimes-under-interna
    #Turquie #Kurdistan #Kurdistan_turque #drones #armes #Allemagne #drones_de_combat #drones_armés #industrie_militaire #Rotax #Continental_Motors #SMS_Smart_Microwave_Sensors #Hengst #Wescam #Aselsan #technologie #ARGOS-II #Airbus #Optronics_Pty

  • #Robo_Dogs and Refugees: The Future of the Global Border Industrial Complex

    The future is here, and it’s a nightmare for migrants. Robo-dogs are joining the global arsenal of border enforcement technologies. The consequences will be deadly.

    A painting of an eye shedding a single tear adorns the concrete rampart of the rusty wall bisecting the city of Nogales at the U.S.-Mexico border. Elsewhere, other kinds of eyes scan the Sonoran Desert—drones, artificial intelligence (AI) surveillance towers, and now military-grade “robo-dogs,” which, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in a February 1 article, might soon be deployed in this vast area of the Arizona-Mexico borderlands, a frequent crossing point for refugees and people on the move from Latin America, the Caribbean, and beyond.

    The robo-dogs, built by Ghost Robotics, are the latest border tech experiment. Originally designed for combat and tactical training operations, these quadruped autonomous machines are strong, fast, and sometimes armed. They can break down doors and right themselves when kicked over. Police departments are already using them, such as in Honolulu and New York (although the latter city cut short its use of them after a public outcry). On the border, DHS first tested what they call “programmable pooches” in El Paso, but officials didn’t give a clear indication of when nor where the machines would eventually be deployed.

    While these mechanical dogs may be a surprising addition to U.S. border enforcement, they join a technological infrastructure on the U.S.-Mexico border that has been developing for decades, often constructed by private companies and now championed by the Biden administration. The idea of mechanized Border Patrol agents is not exactly new either; in 2015, for example, the GuardBot company proposed that rolling, rubber spheres full of surveillance cameras (first designed for exploring Mars) “swarm” the borderlands in packs of 20 or 30. While that contract was never issued, it was a preamble to the robo-dogs. Here, now, is a glimpse into the future: an aggressive techno border fueled by a global industrial complex.

    The robo-dogs form part of a long process of border robotization on the U.S. Mexico border—from autonomous and integrated fixed towers (built by Anduril and Elbit Systems, respectively) to Predator B and medium-size drones (General Atomics), to university experiments to create miniature drones the size of locusts (as was done at the University of Arizona via a grant it received from the Department of Homeland Security for R&D).

    Petra, who was at the Arizona-Mexico border when DHS announced the robo-dogs, has been studying surveillance technologies and their effects on people crossing borders for years in Europe and globally, focusing on the real harms of automation, surveillance, and border tech experiments in spaces that have become testing grounds for innovation. The very real impacts these technologies will have is all the more stark, given the sheer number of people dying in the desert. In 2021, deaths at the U.S.-Mexico border were the highest ever recorded. Thus, although it is difficult to write about surveillance technologies—since they are hidden by design—the real-world impacts of “technosolutionism” are clear enough.

    On the rumbling roads of the West Arizona desert, Petra and colleagues traced the routes that people take after crossing the border, and this led them to various gravesites, like the modest orange cross that marks the arroyo where Elías Alvarado, a young husband and father, perished in 2020. His son was never able to see him again, only leaving a scratchy voice recording saying “I love you, papa,” which was played at Alvarado’s ceremony by a group called Battalion Search and Rescue, whose volunteers comb the desert for survivors and remains. It’s terrifying to imagine a not-so-distant future in which people like Alvarado will be pursued by high-speed, military-grade technology designed to kill. The future is not just more technology, it is more death.

    Virtual Fortress Europe

    The U.S.-Mexico frontier is by no means the only place where experimental border technology is being tested. For example, the European Union has been focusing on various surveillance and high-tech experiments in migration and border enforcement, including maritime and land drone surveillance; long-range acoustic devices (LRADs), or sound cannons; and AI-type technologies in newly built camps in Greece. The violence in many of these technologies is obvious: the sound cannons that were rolled out at the land border between Greece and Turkey emit a high-pitched sound that can hurt people’s eardrums in an attempt to deter them from getting close to the EU’s border, while AI “threat detection” surveillance monitors refugees in Greece’s new prisonlike refugee camps on the Aegean Islands. AI-driven surveillance using unpiloted drones and other types of technologies is also increasingly used along Europe’s maritime borders by actors such as Frontex, the EU’s border enforcement agency. As in the U.S.-Mexico desert, border surveillance makes the crossing more dangerous, since it forces them to take riskier routes to avoid detection.

    The increasing reliance on automation in border enforcement also brings with it a host of concerns, from privacy infringements when data is shared with repressive governments to discrimination and bias, particularly against groups that have historically borne the brunt of violent state action. For example, facial recognition has proved time and again to be biased against Brown and Black faces, as well as female faces, and yet it is increasingly used for migration control in the U.S., Canada, and soon various EU countries. These issues around discrimination and bias are not merely theoretical; they have had palpable impacts on people on the move such as Addisu, a young man from East Africa in his early 30s. He was living in an occupied building in Brussels when he told Petra, “We are Black, and border guards hate us. Their computers hate us too.”

    Tech pilot projects have also introduced AI-type lie detection into border enforcement, relying on emotion recognition and micro-expressions to apparently determine whether someone is telling the truth at the border. Yet what about differences in cross-cultural communication? Or the impact of trauma on memory, or the overreliance on Western norms of plausibility and lie detection grounded in biased and discriminatory determinations? Immigration and refugee decision-making by border enforcement officers is already replete with discretionary, opaque, and often biased reasoning that is difficult to challenge.

    Through the phenomenon of “border externalization,” the EU is also pushing its geographic borders further and further afield through biometric data collection and migration surveillance into North and sub-Saharan Africa. The United States is extending its border as well into southern Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean, among other places. As these sorts of technological systems extend all over the world, so does the global border industrial complex, which is worth billions of dollars. Each new place becomes a testing ground for the next one.

    A Regulatory Free-for-All: Border Tech Unchecked

    Border technologies are political; they are developed and deployed in an ecosystem of private and public partnerships that are largely unregulated and unchecked. Big Tech interests are given free rein to develop and deploy technologies at the border and set the agenda of what counts as innovation and whose perspectives really matter when conversations around borders happen in national, regional, and international policy circles.

    There is big money to be made in the sharpening of borders with draconian technologies. According to the market forecast company Market and Markets, the global homeland security market will grow more than 6 percent by 2026, reaching $904.6 billion. As border and immigration budgets only continue to rise in Europe, the United States, and places beyond, there will only be more armed “robo-dogs,” drones with tasers, and border AI-lie detectors filling border zones. This coincides with forecasts for more and more people on the move in the coming decades—for various reasons, including catastrophic climate change. The collision of aggressive tech borders with human mobility has the makings of a monumental human rights disaster.

    Participation in discussions around technologies at the border is still limited to a select few, often in the suffocating constraints of the public-private nexus. The viewpoints of those most affected are routinely excluded from the discussion, particularly regarding no-go zones and ethically fraught uses of technology. Much of the discussion, such as it is, lacks contextual analysis or consideration of the ethical, social, political, and personal harm that these new technologies will have. While border and immigrant rights groups such as Mijente, Just Futures Law, the Immigrant Defense Project and others have been fighting the use of high-risk surveillance along the U.S.-Mexico border, the lucrative political climate of exclusion and border enforcement at all costs is what animates the move toward a surveillance dragnet. This dragnet will only increase the suffering and death along the frontier. “It’s a slow-motion genocide,” James Holeman, founder of Battalion Search Rescue, recently told Petra Molnar in the Arizona desert.

    Borders are the perfect testing ground for technologies: unregulated, increasingly politicized, and impacting groups already struggling with adequate resources. Ultimately, Big Tech and quick fixes do not address the systemic causes of marginalization and migration—historical and present-day decisions that perpetuate vast inequalities in the world and that benefit the fortressed West while disenfranchising and displacing the rest. Whether it be armed agents, imposed walls, or robo-dogs, border militarization ensures that rich countries can keep looting, exploiting, and polluting the rest of the world.

    https://www.theborderchronicle.com/p/robo-dogs-and-refugees-the-future
    #robots_dogs #complexe_militaro-industriel #robots #robots_chiens #frontières #surveillance #technologie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #robo-dog #Ghost_Robotics #Nogales #Mexique #USA #Etats-Unis #désert_du_Sonora #DHS #El_Paso #programmable_pooches #GuardBot #Anduril #Elbit_Systems #Predator_B #general_atomics #drones #robo_dog

  • Status agreement with Senegal : #Frontex might operate in Africa for the first time

    The border agency in Warsaw could deploy drones, vessels and personnel. It would be the first mission in a country that does not directly border the EU. Mauretania might be next.

    As a „priority third state“ in West Africa, Senegal has long been a partner for migration-related security cooperation with the EU. The government in Dakar is one of the addressees of the „#North_Africa_Operational_Partnership“; it also receives technical equipment and advice for border police upgrading from EU development aid funds. Now Brussels is pushing for a Frontex mission in Senegal. To this end, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen travelled personally to the capital Dakar last week. She was accompanied by the Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson, who said that a contract with Senegal might be finalised until summer. For the matter, Johansson met with Senegal’s armed-forces minister and foreign minister.

    For operations outside the EU, Frontex needs a so-called status agreement with the country concerned. It regulates, for example, the use of coercive police measures, the deployment of weapons or immunity from criminal and civil prosecution. The Commission will be entrusted with the negotiations for such an agreement with Senegal after the Council has given the mandate. The basis would be a „model status agreement“ drafted by the Commission on the basis of Frontex missions in the Western Balkans. Frontex launched its first mission in a third country in 2019 in Albania, followed by Montenegro in 2020 and Serbia in 2021.

    New EU Steering Group on migration issues

    The deployment to Senegal would be the first time the Border Agency would be stationed outside Europe with operational competences. Johansson also offered „#surveillance equipment such as #drones and vessels“. This would take the already established cooperation to a new level.

    Frontex is already active in the country, but without uniformed and armed police personnel. Of the only four liaison officers Frontex has seconded to third countries, one is based at the premises of the EU delegation in #Dakar. His tasks include communicating with the authorities responsible for border management and assisting with deportations from EU member states. Since 2019, Senegal has been a member of Frontex’s so-called AFIC network. In this „Risk Analysis Cell“, the agency joins forces with African police forces and secret services for exchanges on imminent migration movements. For this purpose, Frontex has negotiated a working agreement with the Senegalese police and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

    The new talks with Senegal are coordinated in the recently created „Operational Coordination Mechanism for the External Dimension of Migration“ (MOCADEM). It is an initiative of EU member states to better manage their politics in countries of particular interest. These include Niger or Iraq, whose government recently organised return flights for its own nationals from Minsk after Belarus‘ „instrumentalisation of refugees“ at the EU’s insistence. If the countries continue to help with EU migration control, they will receive concessions for visa issuance or for labour migration.

    Senegal also demands something in return for allowing a Frontex mission. The government wants financial support for the weakened economy after the COVID pandemic. Possibilities for legal migration to the EU were also on the agenda at the meetings with the Commission. Negotiations are also likely to take place on a deportation agreement; the Senegalese authorities are to „take back“ not only their own nationals but also those of other countries if they can prove that they have travelled through the country to the EU and have received an exit order there.

    Deployment in territorial waters

    Senegal is surrounded by more than 2,600 kilometres of external border; like the neighbouring countries of Mali, Gambia, Guinea and Guinea-Bissau, the government has joined the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Similar to the Schengen area, the agreement also regulates the free movement of people and goods in a total of 15 countries. Only at the border with Mauritania, which left ECOWAS in 2001, are border security measures being stepped up.

    It is therefore possible that a Frontex operation in Senegal will not focus on securing the land borders as in the Western Balkans, but on monitoring the maritime border. After the „Canary Islands crisis“ in 2006 with an increase in the number of refugee crossings, Frontex coordinated the Joint Operation „Hera“ off the islands in the Atlantic; it was the first border surveillance mission after Frontex was founded. Departures towards the Canary Islands are mostly from the coast north of Senegal’s capital Dakar, and many of the people in the boats come from neighbouring countries.

    The host country of „Hera“ has always been Spain, which itself has bilateral migration control agreements with Senegal. Authorities there participate in the communication network „Seahorse Atlantic“, with which the Spanish gendarmerie wants to improve surveillance in the Atlantic. Within the framework of „Seahorse“, the Guardia Civil is also allowed to conduct joint patrols in the territorial waters of Senegal, Mauritania and Cape Verde. The units in „Hera“ were also the only Frontex mission allowed to navigate the countries‘ twelve-mile zone with their vessels. Within the framework of „Hera“, however, it was not possible for Frontex ships to dock on the coasts of Senegal or to disembark intercepted refugees there.

    Spain wants to lead Frontex mission

    Two years ago, the government in Madrid terminated the joint maritime mission in the Atlantic. According to the daily newspaper „El Pais“, relations between Spain and Frontex were at a low point after the border agency demanded more control over the resources deployed in „Hera“. Spain was also said to be unhappy with Frontex’s role in the Canary Islands. The agency had seconded two dozen officers to the Canary Islands to fingerprint and check identity documents after a sharp increase in crossings from Senegal and Mauritania in 2020. According to the International Organization for Migration, at least 1,200 people died or went missing when the crossing in 2021. The news agency AFP quotes the Spanish NGO Caminando Fronteras which puts this number at over 4,400 people. Also the Commissioner Johansson said that 1,200 were likely underestimated.

    The new situation on the Canary Islands is said to have prompted Frontex and the government in Madrid to advocate the envisaged launch of the joint operation in Senegal. With a status agreement, Frontex would be able to hand over refugees taken on board to Senegalese authorities or bring them back to the country itself by ship. The Guardia Civil wants to take over the leadership of such an operation, writes El Pais with reference to Spanish government circles. The government in Dakar is also said to have already informed the EU of its readiness for such an effort.

    The idea for an operational Frontex deployment in Senegal is at least three years old. Every year, Frontex Director Fabrice Leggeri assesses in a report on the implementation of the EU’s External Maritime Borders Regulation whether refugees rescued in its missions could disembark in the respective eligible third countries. In the annual report for 2018, Leggeri attested to the government in Senegal’s compliance with basic fundamental and human rights. While Frontex did not even consider disembarking refugees in Libya, Tunisia or Morocco, the director believes this would be possible with Senegal – as well as Turkey.

    Currently, the EU and its agencies have no concrete plans to conclude status agreements with other African countries, but Mauritania is also under discussion. Frontex is furthermore planning working (not status) arrangements with other governments in North and East Africa. Libya is of particular interest; after such a contract, Frontex could also complete Libya’s long-planned connection to the surveillance network EUROSUR. With a working agreement, the border agency would be able to regularly pass on information from its aerial reconnaissance in the Mediterranean to the Libyan coast guard, even outside of measures to counter distress situations at sea.

    https://digit.site36.net/2022/02/11/status-agreement-with-senegal-frontex-wants-to-operate-in-africa-for-t

    #Sénégal #asile #migrations #réfugiés #externalisation #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #Afrique #Mauritanie #Afrique_de_l'Ouest #renvois #expulsions #AFIC #Risk_Analysis_Cell #services_secrets #police #coopération #accord #MOCADEM #Operational_Coordination_Mechanism_for_the_External_Dimension_of_Migration #accords_de_réadmission #accord_de_réadmission #frontières_maritimes #Atlantique #Seahorse_Atlantic #Hera

    –-
    ajouté à la métaliste sur l’externalisation des contrôles frontaliers :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/731749
    et plus précisément ici :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/731749#message765327

    ping @isskein @reka @karine4

    • L’Union européenne veut déployer Frontex au large des côtes sénégalaises

      À l’occasion de la visite au Sénégal de cinq commissaires européennes, l’UE propose au gouvernement le déploiement de Frontex, l’agence européenne de garde-côtes et de gardes-frontières. La Commission européenne envisagerait un déploiement d’ici à l’été en cas d’accord avec les autorités sénégalaises.

      C’est pour l’instant une proposition faite par Ylva Johansson. La commissaire chargée des Affaires intérieures a évoqué la question avec les ministres des Affaires étrangères, des forces armées et de l’Intérieur ce vendredi à Dakar.

      Pour l’Union européenne, l’intérêt immédiat est de contrôler le trafic d’êtres humains avec les embarcations qui partent des côtes sénégalaises vers l’archipel espagnol des Canaries. Mais le principe serait aussi de surveiller les mouvements migratoires vers l’Europe via la Mauritanie ou bien la route plus longue via l’Algérie et la Libye.

      L’idée est une collaboration opérationnelle des garde-côtes et gardes-frontières de l’agence Frontex avec la gendarmerie nationale sénégalaise et sous sa direction. L’UE envisage le déploiement de navires, de personnel et de matériel. La commissaire européenne aux Affaires intérieures a évoqué par exemple des drones.

      L’agence Frontex de surveillance des frontières extérieures de l’Union est en train de monter en puissance : son effectif devrait s’élever à 10 000 gardes-côtes et gardes-frontières dans quatre ans, soit dix fois plus qu’en 2018. Elle n’a jamais été déployée hors d’Europe et cette proposition faite au Sénégal illustre à l’avance la priorité que va mettre l’Europe sur les questions migratoires lors du sommet avec l’Union africaine dans une semaine.

      https://www.rfi.fr/fr/afrique/20220211-l-union-europ%C3%A9enne-veut-d%C3%A9ployer-frontex-au-large-des-c%C3%B4

    • EU seeks to deploy border agency to Senegal

      European Commissioner Ylva Johansson on Friday offered to deploy the EU’s border agency to Senegal to help combat migrant smuggling, following a surge in perilous crossings to Spain’s Canary Islands.

      At a news conference in the Senegalese capital Dakar, Johansson said the arrangement would mark the first time that the EU border agency Frontex would operate outside Europe.

      Should the Senegalese government agree, the commissioner added, the EU could send surveillance equipment such as drones and vessels, as well as Frontex personnel.

      Deployed alongside local forces, the agents would “work together to fight the smugglers,” she said.

      “This is my offer and I hope that Senegal’s government is interested in this unique opportunity,” said Johansson, the EU’s home affairs commissioner.

      The announcement comes amid a sharp jump in attempts to reach the Canary Islands — a gateway to the EU — as authorities have clamped down on crossings to Europe from Libya.

      The Spanish archipelago lies just over 100 kilometres (60 miles) from the coast of Africa at its closest point.

      But the conditions in the open Atlantic are often dangerous, and would-be migrants often brave the trip in rickety wooden canoes known as pirogues.

      About 1,200 people died or went missing attempting the crossing in 2021, according to the UN’s International Organization for Migration (IOM).

      Spanish NGO Caminando Fronteras last month put the figure at over 4,400 people.

      Johansson also said on Friday that the 1,200-person figure was likely an underestimate.

      She added that she had discussed her Frontex proposal with Senegal’s armed-forces minister and foreign minister, and was due to continue talks with the interior minister on Friday.

      An agreement that would see Frontex agents deployed in Senegal could be finalised by the summer, she said.

      EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who was also at the news conference, said a Frontex mission in Senegal could also help tackle illegal fishing.

      Several top European Commission officials, including President Ursula von der Leyen, arrived in Senegal this week to prepare for a summit between the EU and the African Union on February 17-18.

      https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220211-eu-seeks-to-deploy-border-agency-to-senegal

  • France: New surveillance cameras to stop migrant smuggling

    Dozens of new surveillance cameras are to be installed along the coast of northern France. The aim is to prevent migrant smuggling across the English Channel.

    Surveillance equipment will be installed in more than 20 locations on France’s northern coast to detect migrant smugglers, the broadcaster BFMTV reported on Thursday. The cameras will be installed on roads near the coast with the aim of filming smugglers’ vehicles and recording their license plates.

    Dubbed ’Terminus’, the operation is financed by the UK. The total cost is not yet known, according to the news agency dpa.

    About 50 cameras are to be installed between Montreuil and Calais by the middle of this year, the newspaper La Voix du Nord reported. The prefecture of Pas-de-Calais said more than 20 municipalities wished to register for the surveillance devices, according to the AFP news agency.

    Laurence Prouvot, the mayor of #Wissant, told AFP that the cameras will be more advanced than those already existing in the town. Wissant, about 20 km from Calais, will need 14 of the cameras, he said.

    British will not have access

    Local government authorities in France as well as French police will have access to the images, but they will not be shared with their British counterparts, dpa reports.

    Meanwhile some local authorities were critical of the surveillance project. The mayor of Merlimont, Mary Bonvoisin Alves Dos Santos, told BFMTV that the money would have been better spent on supporting those who rescue migrants in distress trying to cross the Channel.

    “I have the impression that we are the armed guard of British migration policy,” she said. At the same time, nothing is being done to provide the children, women and men with a decent place to live, she added.

    Record number of Channel crossings in 2021

    The UK and France have been discussing the issue of Channel crossings for years. In 2021 relations between the two countries became strained as the number of arrivals in the UK, compared to the previous year, tripled to around 28,000, and 27 people died in a shipwreck in November.

    A large amount of surveillance equipment has already been installed in an effort to prevent crossings. In November the French Interior Minister, Gérald Darmanin, announced the deployment of ultra-modern equipment.
    In December, Frontex, the European Border and Coastguard Agency, provided a plane to support border control in the Channel and the North Sea coast region which it said was “equipped with modern sensors and radars.” A surviellance drone was also deployed in January in #Pointe_aux_Oies, #Wimereux, according to the local prefecture.

    Migrants have continued to cross the Channel this year despite the increased surveillance measures. In January, more than 1,300 people reached the United Kingdom, five times as many as at the same time last year.

    https://gw.infomigrants.net/media/resize/my_image_big/a3fa3fa1d2c415ff168845f3f1578337a89d1e52.jpg

    https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/38473/france-new-surveillance-cameras-to-stop-migrant-smuggling

    #surveillance #caméras_de_surveillance #migrations #frontières #contrôles_frontaliers #asile #réfugiés #Calais #Manche #France #UK #Angleterre #drones

  • Les drones policiers autorisés par le Conseil constitutionnel
    21 janvier 2022 – La Quadrature du Net
    https://www.laquadrature.net/2022/01/21/les-drones-policiers-autorises-par-le-conseil-constitutionnel

    Le Conseil constitutionnel vient de rendre sa décision sur la loi « responsabilité pénale et sécurité intérieure ». Ce texte, adopté le 18 novembre 2021 par le Parlement, prévoyait notamment de ré-autoriser les drones policiers. Si les drones avaient été interdits à quatre reprises depuis 2020 (deux fois par le Conseil d’État, une fois par la CNIL et une fois par le Conseil constitutionnel), l’entêtement du gouvernement a porté ses fruits. Après deux années d’illégalité, les drones vont ré-occuper le ciel et restaurer la surveillance de masse.

    Cette mauvaise nouvelle ne vient pas seule : le Conseil constitutionnel valide aussi les caméras embarquées sur les véhicules de police (hélicoptères, voitures…) ainsi que la vidéosurveillance des cellules de garde-à-vue. À côté, le Conseil ne prend même pas la peine d’examiner les nombreuses autres dispositions de cette loi qui s’en prennent à d’autres libertés fondamentales (amendes forfaitaires, prise d’empreintes forcée, répression des mineurs isolés, modification du régime d’irresponsabilité pénale – voir notre analyse commune avec le SAF, le SM et la LDH). (...)

  • With drones and thermal cameras, Greek officials monitor refugees

    Athens says a new surveillance system will boost security, but critics raise alarm over its implications for privacy.

    “Let’s go see something that looks really nice,” says Anastasios Salis, head of information and communications technology at the Greek Migration and Asylum Ministry in Athens, before entering an airtight room sealed behind two interlocking doors, accessible only with an ID card and fingerprint scan.

    Beyond these doors is the ministry’s newly-installed centralised surveillance room.

    The front wall is covered by a vast screen. More than a dozen rectangles and squares display footage from three refugee camps already connected to the system.

    Some show a basketball court in a refugee camp on the island of Samos. Another screen shows the playground and another the inside of one of the containers where people socialise.

    Overhead, lights suddenly flash red. A potential threat has been detected in one of the camps. This “threat” has been flagged by Centaur, a high-tech security system the Greek Migration Ministry is piloting and rolling out at all of the nearly 40 refugee camps in the country.

    Centaur includes cameras and motion sensors. It uses algorithms to automatically predict and flag threats such as the presence of guns, unauthorised vehicles, or unusual visits into restricted areas.

    The system subsequently alerts the appropriate authorities, such as the police, fire brigade, and private security working in the camps.

    From the control room, operators deploy camera-equipped drones and instruct officers stationed at the camp to rush to the location of the reported threat.

    Officers carry smartphones loaded with software that allows them to communicate with the control centre.

    Once they determine the nature and severity of the threat, the control room guides them on the ground to resolve the incident.

    Video footage and other data collected as part of the operation can then be stored under an “incident card” in the system.

    This particular incident is merely a simulation, presented to Al Jazeera during an exclusive tour and preview of the Centaur system.

    The aim of the programme, according to Greek officials, is to ensure the safety of those who live inside the camps and in surrounding communities.

    “We use technology to prevent violence, to prevent events like we had in Moria – the arson of the camp. Because safety is critical for everyone,” Greek Migration Minister Notis Mitarachi told Al Jazeera at the November inauguration of a new, EU-funded “closed-controlled” refugee camp on Kos island, one of the first facilities to be connected to the Centaur system.

    ‘Dystopian’ surveillance project

    Nearly 40 cameras are being installed in each camp, which can be operated from the control room.

    There will also be thermal cameras, drones, and other technology – including augmented reality glasses, which will be distributed to police and private security personnel.

    “This was not to monitor and invade the privacy of the people [in the camps],” said Salis, one of the architects of Centaur. “You’re not monitoring them. You’re trying to prevent bad things from happening.”

    Greek authorities headline this new surveillance as a form of security but civil society groups and European lawmakers have criticised the move.

    “This fits a broader trend of the EU pouring public money into dystopian and experimental surveillance projects, which treat human beings as lab rats,” Ella Jakubowska, policy and campaigns officer at European Digital Rights (EDRi), told Al Jazeera. “Money which could be used to help people is instead used to punish them, all while the surveillance industry makes vast profits selling false promises of magical technology that claims to fix complex structural issues.”

    Recent reporting, which revealed Centaur will be partly financed by the EU COVID Recovery fund, has led a group of European lawmakers to write to the European Commission with their concerns about its implementation.

    Homo Digitalis, a Greek digital rights advocacy group, and EDRi said they made several requests for information on what data protection assessments were carried out before the development and deployment of Centaur.

    Such analysis is required under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). They have also asked what data will be collected and how long it will be held by authorities. Those requests, they said, have gone unanswered.

    The Greek Migration Ministry did not respond to Al Jazeera’s query on whether an impact assessment was completed, and on policies regarding data retention and the processing of data related to children.

    In Samos, mixed feelings

    Advocates in Samos told Al Jazeera they raised concerns about camp residents being adequately notified about the presence of these technologies.

    But Salis, at the control centre, said this has been achieved through “signs – a lot of signs”, in the camps.

    The system does not currently incorporate facial recognition technology, at least “not yet”, according to Leonidas Petavrakis, a digital software specialist with ESA Security Solutions S.A., one of the companies contracted for the Centaur project.

    The potential use of facial recognition in this context is “a big concern”, said Konstantinos Kakavoulis of Homo Digitalis.

    Facial recognition systems often misidentify people of colour and can lead to wrongful arrests and convictions, according to studies. Human rights organisations globally have called for their use to be limited or banned.

    An EU proposal on regulating artificial intelligence, unveiled by the European Commission in April, does not go far enough to prevent the misuse of AI systems, critics claim.

    For some of those living under the glare of this EU-funded surveillance system, the feeling is mixed.

    Mohammed, a 25-year-old refugee from Palestine living in the new Samos camp, said that he did not always mind the cameras as he thought they might prevent fights, which broke out frequently at the former Samos camp.

    “Sometimes it’s [a] good feeling because it makes you feel safe, sometimes not,” he said but added that the sense of security came at a price.

    “There’s not a lot of difference between this camp and a prison.”

    https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/12/24/greece-pilots-high-tech-surveillance-system-in-refugee-camps
    #Grèce #réfugiés #asile #migrations #surveillance #complexe_militaro-industriel #drones #caméras_thérmiques #Samos #îles #camps_de_réfugiés #Centaur #algorythme #salle_de_contrôle #menace #technologie #EU_COVID_Recovery_fund #reconnaissance_faciale #intelligence_artificielle #AI #IA

    –—

    sur ces nouveaux camps de réfugiés fermés (et surveillés) dans les #îles grecques notamment :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/917173

    ping @etraces

  • Attaque au drone en août | Pas de sanctions après la mort de civils dans une frappe à Kaboul | La Presse
    https://www.lapresse.ca/international/etats-unis/2021-12-13/attaque-au-drone-en-aout/pas-de-sanctions-apres-la-mort-de-civils-dans-une-frappe-a-kaboul.php

    Parce que, dit le porte-parole du Pentagone :

    « Ce qu’il s’est passé, c’est un dysfonctionnement du processus de décision et d’exécution, et ce n’est le résultat ni d’une négligence, ni d’une faute, ni d’un mauvais commandement »

    #langage

  • Etats-Unis : Des ingénieurs conçoivent un robot capable d’agir comme un oiseau
    https://www.20minutes.fr/sciences/3187443-20211202-etats-unis-ingenieurs-concoivent-robot-capable-agir-comme

    Au final, l’oiseau robot est parvenu à attraper des objets qu’on lui lançait, comme des balles de tennis, et de se poser en conditions réelles dans des forêts du nord-ouest des Etats-Unis.

    #drones

  • L’industrie de la #sécurité tire profit de la crise climatique

    Les pays riches, pires contributeurs au #changement_climatique, dépensent bien plus d’argent à renforcer leurs #frontières qu’à contribuer au #développement des pays pauvres : c’est ce qu’a étudié un rapport du Transnational Institute. Les habitants de ces pays sont pourtant les premières victimes de l’alliance occidentale entre business du #pétrole et de la sécurité.

    Le changement climatique est bon pour le #business. Du moins celui de la sécurité. C’est ce que démontre un #rapport publié ce lundi 25 octobre par l’organisation de recherche et de plaidoyer Transnational Institute. Intitulé « un mur contre le climat », il démontre que les pays les plus riches dépensent bien plus pour renforcer leurs frontières contre les migrants que pour aider les pays pauvres, d’où ils viennent, à affronter la crise climatique.

    Il décortique les #dépenses, dans ces deux domaines, des sept pays riches historiquement les plus émetteurs de gaz à effet de serre que sont les États-Unis, l’Allemagne, la France, le Japon, l’Australie, le Royaume-Uni et le Canada. Ils sont à eux sept responsables de 48 % des émissions de gaz à effet de serre dans le monde. Le Brésil, la Chine et la Russie, qui font partie des dix plus gros émetteurs aujourd’hui, ne sont pas inclus car, s’étant enrichis beaucoup plus récemment, ils ne sont pas considérés comme des responsables historiques.

    2,3 fois plus de dollars pour repousser les migrants que pour le climat

    Pour les États étudiés, les auteurs ont regardé leur contribution au « #financement_climatique » : prévu par les négociations internationales sur le climat, il s’agit de fonds que les pays riches s’engagent à verser aux pays dits en développement pour les aider à faire face à la crise climatique. Ils ont ensuite traqué les sommes allouées par chaque pays aux contrôles frontaliers et migratoires. Résultat : entre 2013 et 2018, ces sept pays ont en moyenne dépensé chaque année au moins 2,3 fois plus pour repousser les migrants (33,1 milliards de dollars) que pour contribuer au financement climatique (14,4 milliards de dollars). Et encore, les auteurs du rapport signalent que les pays riches ont tendance à surestimer les sommes allouées au financement climatique.

    Une disproportion encore plus criante quand on regarde en détail. Le Canada a dépensé 15 fois plus, l’Australie 13,5 fois plus, les États-Unis 10,9 fois plus. À noter que ces derniers sont en valeur absolue les plus dépensiers, ils ont à eux seuls mis 19,6 milliards dans la sécurité de leurs frontières sur la période, soit 59 % de la somme totale allouée par les sept pays réunis.

    Le cas des pays européens est moins explicite. La France pourrait avoir l’air de bon élève. A priori, elle dépense moins dans les contrôles aux frontières (1 milliard) que dans le financement climatique (1,6 milliard). Idem pour l’Allemagne (3,4 milliards dans la militarisation des frontières contre 4,4 milliards dans le financement climatique). Mais ce serait oublier qu’une grande partie des dépenses sécuritaires est déportée au niveau de l’Union européenne et de l’agence de contrôle des frontières Frontex. Celle-ci a vu son budget exploser, avec une augmentation de 2 763 % entre 2006 et 2021.

    Cet argent est très concrètement dépensé dans diverses #technologies#caméras, #drones, systèmes d’#identification_biométriques, et dans l’embauche de #gardes-frontières et de #gardes-côtes. « Il y a aussi une #externalisation, avec par exemple l’Union européenne qui conclue des accords avec les pays d’Afrique du Nord et des régimes totalitaires, pour qu’ils empêchent les migrants d’arriver jusqu’à leurs frontières », décrit Nick Buxton, un des auteurs du rapport interrogé par Reporterre. Ces partenariats contribuent à la multiplication des murs anti-migrants partout dans le monde. « La plupart des grands constructeurs de murs du monde ont reçu une aide des programmes d’externalisation de l’Union européenne ou des États-Unis (ou des deux, dans le cas de la Jordanie, du Maroc et de la Turquie) », pointe le rapport.

    L’édification de ces murs empêche-t-elle les pays riches de voir le drame qui se déroule derrière ? À travers divers exemples, les auteurs tentent de montrer l’injustice de la situation : en Somalie, à la suite d’une catastrophe climatique en 2020, un million de personnes ont dû se déplacer. Pourtant, le pays n’est responsable que « de 0,00027 % du total des émissions depuis 1850. » Au Guatemala, l’ouragan Eta ainsi que les inondations fin 2020 ont provoqué le déplacement de 339 000 personnes. Le pays « a été responsable de seulement 0,026 % des émissions de gaz à effet de serre ». Nombre de ces migrants Guatémaltèques tentent désormais d’atteindre les États-Unis, responsables à eux seuls de 30,1 % des émissions depuis 1850.

    Pourtant, parmi les pays riches, « les stratégies nationales de #sécurité_climatique, depuis le début des années 2000, ont massivement présenté les migrants comme des « menaces » et non comme les victimes d’une injustice », indique la synthèse du rapport. Le 11 septembre 2001, en particulier, a accéléré la tendance. Qui s’est maintenue : les budgets de militarisation des frontières ont augmenté de 29 % entre 2013 et 2018. Une orientation politique mais aussi financière, donc, saluée par l’industrie de la sécurité et des frontières.
    Taux de croissance annuel : 5,8 %

    « Des prévisions de 2019 de ResearchAndMarkets.com annonçaient que le marché de la sécurité intérieure des États allait passer de 431 milliards de dollars en 2018 à 606 milliards en 2024, avec un taux de croissance annuel de 5,8 % », indique le rapport. Une des raisons majeures invoquée étant « l’augmentation des catastrophes naturelles liées au changement climatique ». Il cite également la sixième entreprise mondiale en termes de vente de matériel militaire, Raytheon. Pour elle, l’augmentation de la demande pour ses « produits et services militaires […] est le résultat du changement climatique ».

    Transnational Institute, qui travaille sur cette industrie depuis un certain temps, a ainsi calculé qu’aux États-Unis, entre 2008 et 2020, les administrations de l’immigration et des frontières « ont passé plus de 105 000 contrats d’une valeur de 55 milliards de dollars avec des entreprises privées. » Si le mur de Trump a défrayé la chronique, « Biden n’est pas mieux », avertit Nick Buxton. « Pour financer sa campagne, il a reçu plus d’argent de l’industrie de la sécurité des frontières que Trump. »

    L’Union européenne aussi a droit à son lobbying. « Ces entreprises sont présentes dans des groupes de travail de haut niveau, avec des officiels de l’UE. Ils se rencontrent aussi dans les salons comme celui de Milipol », décrit Nick Buxton.

    #Pétrole et sécurité partagent « le même intérêt à ne pas lutter contre le changement climatique »

    Le rapport souligne également les liens de cette industrie de la sécurité avec celle du pétrole. En résumé, il décrit comment les majors du pétrole sécurisent leurs installations en faisant appel aux géants de la sécurité. Mais il souligne aussi que les conseils d’administration des entreprises des deux secteurs ont beaucoup de membres en commun. Des liens concrets qui illustrent, selon Nick Buxton, le fait que « ces deux secteurs ont le même intérêt à ne pas lutter contre le changement climatique. L’industrie pétrolière car cela va à l’encontre de son business model. L’industrie de la sécurité car l’instabilité provoquée par la crise climatique lui apporte des bénéfices. »

    Autant d’argent dépensé à protéger les énergies fossiles et à refouler les migrants, qui « ne fait que maintenir et générer d’immenses souffrances inutiles » dénonce le rapport. Les pays riches avaient promis d’atteindre 100 milliards de financements climatiques annuels pour les pays en développement d’ici 2020. En 2019, ils n’en étaient qu’à 79,6 milliards selon l’OCDE. Et encore, ce chiffre est très surévalué, estime l’ONG Oxfam, qui en déduisant les prêts et les surévaluations aboutit à environ trois fois moins. C’est cette estimation que les experts du Transnational Institute ont adoptée.

    « Il est évident que les pays les plus riches n’assument pas du tout leur responsabilité dans la crise climatique », conclut donc le rapport. Il prône des investissements dans la lutte contre le changement climatique, et des aides pour que les pays les plus pauvres puissent gérer dignement les populations contraintes de se déplacer. À l’inverse, le choix de la militarisation est « une stratégie vouée à l’échec, même du point de vue de l’intérêt personnel des pays les plus riches, car elle accélère les processus d’instabilité et de migration induite par le climat dont ils s’alarment. »

    https://reporterre.net/L-industrie-de-la-securite-tire-profit-de-la-crise-climatique

    #complexe_militaro-industriel #climat

    –-

    déjà signalé ici par @kassem
    https://seenthis.net/messages/934692

    • Global Climate Wall. How the world’s wealthiest nations prioritise borders over climate action

      This report finds that the world’s biggest emitters of green house gases are spending, on average, 2.3 times as much on arming their borders as they are on climate finance. This figure is as high as 15 times as much for the worst offenders. This “Global Climate Wall” aims to seal off powerful countries from migrants, rather than addressing the causes of displacement.

      Executive summary

      The world’s wealthiest countries have chosen how they approach global climate action – by militarising their borders. As this report clearly shows, these countries – which are historically the most responsible for the climate crisis – spend more on arming their borders to keep migrants out than on tackling the crisis that forces people from their homes in the first place.

      This is a global trend, but seven countries in particular – responsible for 48% of the world’s historic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions – collectively spent at least twice as much on border and immigration enforcement (more than $33.1 billion) as on climate finance ($14.4 billion) between 2013 and 2018.

      These countries have built a ‘Climate Wall’ to keep out the consequences of climate change, in which the bricks come from two distinct but related dynamics: first, a failure to provide the promised climate finance that could help countries mitigate and adapt to climate change; and second, a militarised response to migration that expands border and surveillance infrastructure. This provides booming profits for a border security industry but untold suffering for refugees and migrants who make increasingly dangerous – and frequently deadly – journeys to seek safety in a climate-changed world.
      Key findings:

      Climate-induced migration is now a reality

      - Climate change is increasingly a factor behind displacement and migration. This may be because of a particular catastrophic event, such as a hurricane or a flash flood, but also when the cumulative impacts of drought or sea-level rise, for example, gradually make an area uninhabitable and force entire communities to relocate.
      – The majority of people who become displaced, whether climate-induced or not, remain in their own country, but a number will cross international borders and this is likely to increase as climate-change impacts on entire regions and ecosystems.
      – Climate-induced migration takes place disproportionately in low-income countries and intersects with and accelerates with many other causes for displacement. It is shaped by the systemic injustice that creates the situations of vulnerability, violence, precarity and weak social structures that force people to leave their homes.

      Rich countries spend more on militarising their borders than on providing climate finance to enable the poorest countries to help migrants

      – Seven of the biggest emitters of GHGs – the United States, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada, France and Australia – collectively spent at least twice as much on border and immigration enforcement (more than $33.1 billion) as on climate finance ($14.4 billion) between 2013 and 2018.1
      - Canada spent 15 times more ($1.5 billion compared to around $100 million); Australia 13 times more ($2.7 billion compared to $200 million); the US almost 11 times more ($19.6 billion compared to $1.8 billion); and the UK nearly two times more ($2.7 billion compared to $1.4 billion).
      - Border spending by the seven biggest GHG emitters rose by 29% between 2013 and 2018. In the US, spending on border and immigration enforcement tripled between 2003 and 2021. In Europe, the budget for the European Union (EU) border agency, Frontex, has increased by a whopping 2763% since its founding in 2006 up to 2021.
      - This militarisation of borders is partly rooted in national climate security strategies that since the early 2000s have overwhelmingly painted migrants as ‘threats’ rather than victims of injustice. The border security industry has helped promote this process through well-oiled political lobbying, leading to ever more contracts for the border industry and increasingly hostile environments for refugees and migrants.
      - Climate finance could help mitigate the impacts of climate change and help countries adapt to this reality, including supporting people who need to relocate or to migrate abroad. Yet the richest countries have failed even to keep their pledges of meagre $100 billion a year in climate finance. The latest figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reported $79.6 billion in total climate finance in 2019, but according to research published by Oxfam International, once over-reporting, and loans rather than grants are taken into account, the true volume of climate finance may be less than half of what is reported by developed countries.
      – Countries with the highest historic emissions are fortifying their borders, while those with lowest are the hardest hit by population displacement. Somalia, for example, is responsible for 0.00027% of total emissions since 1850 but had more than one million people (6% of the population) displaced by a climate-related disaster in 2020.

      The border security industry is profiteering from climate change

      - The border security industry is already profiting from the increased spending on border and immigration enforcement and expects even more profits from anticipated instability due to climate change. A 2019 forecast by ResearchAndMarkets.com predicted that the Global Homeland Security and Public Safety Market would grow from $431 billion in 2018 to $606 billion in 2024, and a 5.8% annual growth rate. According to the report, one factor driving this is ‘climate warming-related natural disasters growth’.
      – Top border contractors boast of the potential to increase their revenue from climate change. Raytheon says ‘demand for its military products and services as security concerns may arise as results of droughts, floods, and storm events occur as a result of climate change’. Cobham, a British company that markets surveillance systems and is one of the main contractors for Australia’s border security, says that ‘changes to countries [sic] resources and habitability could increase the need for border surveillance due to population migration’.
      – As TNI has detailed in many other reports in its Border Wars series,2 the border security industry lobbies and advocates for border militarisation and profits from its expansion.

      The border security industry also provides security to the oil industry that is one of main contributors to the climate crisis and even sit on each other’s executive boards

      - The world’s 10 largest fossil fuel firms also contract the services of the same firms that dominate border security contracts. Chevron (ranked the world’s number 2) contracts with Cobham, G4S, Indra, Leonardo, Thales; Exxon Mobil (ranking 4) with Airbus, Damen, General Dynamics, L3Harris, Leonardo, Lockheed Martin; BP (6) with Airbus, G4S, Indra, Lockheed Martin, Palantir, Thales; and Royal Dutch Shell (7) with Airbus, Boeing, Damen, Leonardo, Lockheed Martin, Thales, G4S.
      – Exxon Mobil, for example, contracted L3Harris (one of the top 14 US border contractors) to provide ‘maritime domain awareness’ of its drilling in the Niger delta in Nigeria, a region which has suffered tremendous population displacement due to environmental contamination. BP has contracted with Palantir, a company that controversially provides surveillance software to agencies like the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), to develop a ‘repository of all operated wells historical and real time drilling data’. Border contractor G4S has a relatively long history of protecting oil pipelines, including the Dakota Access pipeline in the US.
      - The synergy between fossil fuel companies and top border security contractors is also seen by the fact that executives from each sector sit on each other’s boards. At Chevron, for example, the former CEO and Chairman of Northrop Grumman, Ronald D. Sugar and Lockheed Martin’s former CEO Marilyn Hewson are on its board. The Italian oil and gas company ENI has Nathalie Tocci on its board, previously a Special Advisor to EU High Representative Mogherini from 2015 to 2019, who helped draft the EU Global Strategy that led to expanding the externalisation of EU borders to third countries.

      This nexus of power, wealth and collusion between fossil fuel firms and the border security industry shows how climate inaction and militarised responses to its consequences increasingly work hand in hand. Both industries profit as ever more resources are diverted towards dealing with the consequences of climate change rather than tackling its root causes. This comes at a terrible human cost. It can be seen in the rising death toll of refugees, deplorable conditions in many refugee camps and detention centres, violent pushbacks from European countries, particularly those bordering the Mediterranean, and from the US, in countless cases of unnecessary suffering and brutality. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) calculates that 41,000 migrants died between 2014 and 2020, although this is widely accepted to be a significant underestimate given that many lives are lost at sea and in remote deserts as migrants and refugees take increasingly dangerous routes to safety.

      The prioritisation of militarised borders over climate finance ultimately threatens to worsen the climate crisis for humanity. Without sufficient investment to help countries mitigate and adapt to climate change, the crisis will wreak even more human devastation and uproot more lives. But, as this report concludes, government spending is a political choice, meaning that different choices are possible. Investing in climate mitigation in the poorest and most vulnerable countries can support a transition to clean energy – and, alongside deep emission cuts by the biggest polluting nations – give the world a chance to keep temperatures below 1.5°C increase since 1850, or pre-industrial levels. Supporting people forced to leave their homes with the resources and infrastructure to rebuild their lives in new locations can help them adapt to climate change and to live in dignity. Migration, if adequately supported, can be an important means of climate adaptation.

      Treating migration positively requires a change of direction and greatly increased climate finance, good public policy and international cooperation, but most importantly it is the only morally just path to support those suffering a crisis they played no part in creating.

      https://www.tni.org/en/publication/global-climate-wall

  • Perquisitions dans le milieu de la drogue, 64 arrestations : « Nous estimons la production à une tonne de cocaïne par semaine à Bruxelles »
    https://www.rtbf.be/info/societe/detail_perquisitions-dans-le-milieu-de-la-drogue-64-arrestations-nous-estimons-

    Une soixantaine de personnes ont été arrêtées au cours de 114 perquisitions visant un important réseau d’importation de #cocaïne qui ont été effectuées mardi matin, dès 5h00, principalement en région bruxelloise mais également, et notamment, dans la région d’Anvers, en Brabant wallon et en quelques lieux de Flandre et de Wallonie, a annoncé mardi en fin de journée Frédéric Van Leeuw, procureur fédéral lors d’une conférence de presse. De plus, 6 laboratoires d’extraction de cocaïne ont été découverts, principalement à #Bruxelles et dans sa périphérie.


    Il s’agit de la plus importante série de perquisitions depuis celle de mars dernier réalisée à la suite du décryptage de messages cryptés via le logiciel SKY ECC, installé sur des cryptophones employés pour communiquer dans le milieu criminel.

    C’est de plus la 3e vague d’arrestations en une semaine, actions auxquelles s’ajoutent des actions des parquets locaux comme celui d’Anvers lundi.

    Des pièces d’or
    « Le dossier d’aujourd’hui porte sur une organisation criminelle soupçonnée d’être active dans le trafic de cocaïne, entre l’Amérique du Sud et l’#Europe », a précisé Eric Jacobs, directeur de la police judiciaire fédérale (PJF) de Bruxelles. « Un groupe de criminels situés en Belgique, principalement à Bruxelles, organise la réception de la cocaïne, son extraction et son reconditionnement dans des laboratoires belges. Nous estimons la production à une tonne de cocaïne par semaine à Bruxelles et en périphérie. Après ce reconditionnement, des courriers assurent la distribution vers le reste de l’Europe ».

    Les policiers ont confisqué plus d’un million en liquide et une importante quantité de pièces d’or. Des voitures et objets de luxe, notamment des #montres - qui constituent un nouveau moyen d’écoulement d’importantes sommes d’argent - ont été saisis, de même que des tonnes de produits imprégnés de cocaïne, 300 m3 de tabac et du matériel technique comme des #drones, des moteurs de propulsion de sous-marin pour la plongée. Il n’y a pas eu d’incidents.

    Avant l’opération de ce jour, plus de 350 kg de cocaïne via l’arrestation de courriers, 9 tonnes de cannabis, 32 tonnes d’engrais imprimés de cocaïne et plus de 2000 litres de #déchets_chimiques ont été saisis.

    Au total, 455 arrestations et près de 2000 personnes ont été identifiées en lien avec le dossier SKY ECC. 77 tonnes de cocaïne ont été saisies cette année. 

    Une filière de blanchiment est organisée, notamment à destination des #paradis_fiscaux .

    « La criminalité organisée internationale voire mondiale est manifestement très implantée en Belgique », a souligné Eric Snoeck, directeur général à la police judiciaire fédérale. « Nous savions déjà que le port d’#Anvers est le premier port européen d’importation de la cocaïne ». La région de Bruxelles apparait aujourd’hui comme le deuxième lieu d’activité de ce réseau.

    #criminalité_organisée #criminalité_internationale #criminalité

  • Contre les migrants, toujours plus de #technologie

    Reporterre s’est rendu au salon #Milipol pour découvrir les innovations technologiques sécuritaires. Elles sont de plus en plus déployées pour repousser les migrants.

    « Viens ici pépère ! » lance un homme élancé en costume-cravate en direction d’un chien-robot en mouvement, faisant mine de lui proposer à manger. Derrière les regards amusés autour du robot développé par l’entreprise étasunienne #Ghost_Robotics, son « maître » le guide avec sa télécommande d’un œil malicieux. Ce chien-robot au look Black Mirror répond au nom de #Q-UGV et sa mission consiste à surveiller des sites ultrasensibles comme les centrales nucléaires.

    Ce surveillant atypique, capable de courir, grimper et nager dans des environnements extrêmes, était l’une des nombreuses innovations présentées sur le salon Milipol de la sécurité intérieure au parc des expositions de Villepinte (Seine-Saint-Denis). Près de 1 000 exposants, dont deux tiers d’entreprises internationales, y ont élu domicile du mardi 19 au vendredi 22 octobre. Plus de 30 000 professionnels de la sécurité publique et privée de 150 pays déambulaient dans les allées. Entre une coupe de champagne et des petits fours, ils s’informaient pour en faire commerce sur les dernières grenades lacrymogènes, les dispositifs de reconnaissance faciale ou les fusils d’assaut.

    L’heure est à la reprise pour le secteur de la #sécurité. « La première des libertés », comme l’a assuré le ministre de l’Intérieur, Gérald Darmanin, lors de sa visite du salon le premier jour. Après avoir subi la crise sanitaire à l’instar d’une large partie de l’économie mondiale, le marché mondial de la #sécurité_intérieure devrait rebondir. Sa prévision de croissance est de 8 % en 2021 et de 6 % en 2022, après une baisse de 3 % en 2020. En France, il n’a pas été épargné non plus et les dépenses étatiques consacrées à la sécurité ont baissé de 8,6 %, pour atteindre 3,6 milliards d’euros. Mais certains domaines, comme celui des #drones_de_surveillance, ont tiré leur épingle du jeu avec une progression de 5,8 %. Alors que l’Union européenne peine toujours à s’accorder sur une politique commune de gestion des #frontières, chaque État membre est tenté de renforcer la #surveillance des siennes grâce à des technologies toujours plus sophistiquées.

    Mille et une façons de traquer les migrants

    Déjà déployés, en passe d’être expérimentés ou pas encore autorisés, les dispositifs de #détection de migrants sont présentés aux quatre coins de l’immense salle d’exposition. Nichés entre deux stands de drones, les représentants de la société française #HGH, spécialisée dans les #systèmes_électro-optiques, sont ainsi très sollicités. La série de #caméras_thermiques #Spynel, qui promet une « #surveillance_panoramique 360 degrés, #jour et #nuit, jusqu’à l’horizon » sur les frontières des pays intéressés, a du succès. À l’occasion du salon, l’entreprise vient de finaliser un contrat d’un million d’euros avec un pays de l’#Otan (Organisation du traité de l’Atlantique Nord) — dont elle tait le nom — pour sécuriser et surveiller sur près de 1 000 kilomètres de côte et empêcher les passages des migrants et des trafiquants de drogues. « C’est impossible d’échapper à la #vigilance de cette caméra, et à l’inverse des drones, on ne peut pas brouiller son signal, car elle n’émet aucune onde », se félicite le responsable marketing. « Si un groupe de personnes ou un zodiac s’approche de nuit d’un littoral dans la zone surveillée, l’#intelligence_artificielle détectera automatiquement le #mouvement et une alerte sera envoyée aux forces de sécurité », poursuit-il.

    De l’autre côté du salon, un groupe de gendarmes écoute attentivement les explications du représentant de l’entreprise néerlandaise #UVI-Scan. Sur la brochure commerciale, une page est consacrée à un #scanner capable de détecter les passagers clandestins sous les camions. Le visuel est explicite : accrochés sous un véhicule, deux migrants sont pris en flagrant délit. « Ce sont de vraies photos ! » assume le consultant technique. « C’est un système intégré à la chaussée qui détecte les #intrus et prend automatiquement une photo à l’approche des postes frontières et des ferrys », explique-t-il. « Nous en avons déployés un peu partout en Europe, notamment à #Dieppe, en France ». Là où de nombreux exilés tentent leur chance pour gagner les côtes anglaises par le ferry ou des embarcations de fortune.

    Entre deux stands de fusils d’assaut et des tenues de camouflages, un drone blanc aux allures d’avion miniature surplombe le stand de #German_Drones. L’entreprise allemande propose un « service personnalisé » à ses clients en fonction des usages ». Pour la détection de passages de migrants à la frontière, Anis Fellahi, le chef de projet international du groupe, recommande « le modèle 150, le plus performant, qui peut voler une heure et demie, couvrir une centaine de kilomètres, et transmet une vidéo de meilleure qualité ». Le dit #Songbird est d’ores et déjà déployé aux frontières allemandes et belges, et cherche à étendre son empreinte.

    Les industriels ne s’arrêtent pas là et proposent aux autorités des outils de #surveillance_aérienne toujours plus développées et intrusifs. L’entreprise française #T-ops intègre des #IMSI-Catcher directement embarqués sur les drones. Ce dispositif de #surveillance_de_masse est capable d’intercepter le trafic des communications téléphoniques, de récupérer et recouper ces informations à distance et de suivre les mouvements des utilisateurs. « Là nous proposons un produit avec une #efficacité au-delà du réel ! » s’exclame le représentant de la société. Cette technologie peut-elle être déployée pour repérer les migrants ? « C’est possible, oui. Mais nous ne fournissons qu’un service, le responsable de son utilisation est l’État », répond-il sobrement.

    Certains produits attendent des évolutions législatives pour être pleinement déployés. C’est le cas du drone de surveillance très longue distance présenté par le groupe belge #John_Cockerill, traditionnel acteur de la défense, lancé depuis peu dans la sécurité intérieure. « Ce type d’appareil peut voir jusqu’à 30 kilomètres et il est en capacité d’identifier très clairement des personnes », explique #Jean-Marc_Tyberg, le président du conseil d’administration du groupe. « À ce stade, nous devons intégrer un logiciel qui floute automatiquement le visage de la personne pour ne pas la reconnaître ». Mais selon lui, « se priver de ces outils de reconnaissance revient à fermer les yeux en conduisant. Il faut que l’on rattrape notre retard législatif pour que ces solutions puissent être pleinement utilisées. » Jean-Marc Tyberg fait référence aux longs débats autour de la controversée #loi_Sécurité_globale. Le Conseil constitutionnel avait fini par censurer le dispositif d’encadrement de l’utilisation des images des drones utilisés les forces de l’ordre, jugée trop dangereux au regard du #droit_à_la_vie_privée. Mais le gouvernement est revenu à la charge à la rentrée avec une disposition remaniée dans le projet de loi relatif à la sécurité intérieure, actuellement débattu au Parlement.

    Si la France n’est pas le terrain de jeu technologique idéal des industriels, d’autres États comme la #Grèce accueillent de nombreuses expérimentations plus poussées. Le pays frontalier de la Turquie est un passage obligé dans le parcours des migrants. Et il reçoit le soutien de l’agence de gardes-côtes européens #Frontex, accusée par des ONG et des médias d’opérer des refoulements illégaux à l’extérieur de l’UE. Si le gestionnaire des frontières européennes n’a pas de stand dédié ici, ses fournisseurs sont disséminés sur le salon. La société française #Cnim_Air_Space est l’un d’eux. « Notre modèle de #ballon_captif #Eagle_Owl gonflé à l’Hélium peut voler jusqu’à 600 mètres de haut, et possède une autonomie de 7 jours », expose fièrement le représentant de l’entreprise. Il est actuellement utilisé par les autorités grecques et l’agence Frontex. Un modèle plus petit a également été expérimenté autour de #Calais par la gendarmerie. Avec sa caméra embarquée, il renvoie en continu les #images vers une station positionnée au sol. « En cas d’alerte, si un zodiac débarque, les autorités grecques sont en capacité de les repérer à des kilomètres avant d’intervenir », précise-t-il. « Il mesure 22 mètres de long, donc le fait de le voir peut aussi avoir un effet dissuasif… ».

    La Grèce accueille également l’expérimentation du projet #Roborder, contraction de #robot et de border (frontière en anglais), lancé en 2017, qui prévoit un #système_de_surveillance des frontières par un essaim de #drones_autonomes, capables par l’intelligence artificielle de déterminer les franchissements. Le projet #iborder_control ambitionne quant à lui de développer un #algorithme capable de détecter les #mensonges des migrants lors de leur passage à l’aéroport.

    Mais sur le terrain, les associations d’aide aux personnes exilées observent que le renforcement de la surveillance des frontières ne décourage pas les candidats à l’asile, mais rend simplement leur parcours plus dangereux. Alors que la surveillance se renforce d’année en année, l’Organisation internationale des migrations a comptabilisé 1 146 décès de migrants sur les routes maritimes vers l’Europe au premier semestre 2021, contre 513 en 2020 et 674 en 2019 à la même période. Mais au salon Milipol, le rêve d’une Europe forteresse a de belles années devant lui.

    https://reporterre.net/Contre-les-migrants-toujours-plus-de-technologie

    ping @isskein @karine4

  • They’re putting guns on robot dogs now - The Verge
    https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/14/22726111/robot-dogs-with-guns-sword-international-ghost-robotics

    Quadrupedal robots are one of the most interesting developments in robotics in recent years. They’re small, nimble, and able to traverse environments that frustrate wheeled machines. So, of course, it was only a matter of time until someone put a gun on one.

    The image above shows a quadrupedal robot — a Vision 60 unit built by US firm Ghost Robotics — that’s been equipped with a custom gun by small-arms specialists Sword International. It seems the gun itself (dubbed the SPUR or “special purpose unmanned rifle”) is designed to be fitted onto a variety of robotic platforms. It has a 30x optical zoom, thermal camera for targeting in the dark, and an effective range of 1,200 meters.

    What’s not clear is whether or not Sword International or Ghost Robotics are currently selling this combination of gun and robot. But if they’re not, it seems they will be soon. As the marketing copy on Sword’s website boasts: “The SWORD Defense Systems SPUR is the future of unmanned weapon systems, and that future is now.”

  • Inside new refugee camp like a ‘prison’: Greece and other countries prioritize surveillance over human rights

    On the Greek island of Samos you can swim in the same sea where refugees are drowning. The sandy beaches and rolling hills, coloured by an Aegean sunset hide a humanitarian emergency that is symptomatic of a global turn against migration.

    #Greece is just one of the many locations across the world where technological experimentation at the #border is given free reign. Our ongoing work at the #Refugee Law Lab attempts to weave together the tapestry of the increasingly powerful and global border industrial complex which legitimizes technosolutionism at the expense of human rights and dignity.

    These technological experiments don’t occur in a vacuum. Powerful state interests and the private sector increasingly set the stage for what technology is developed and deployed, while communities experiencing the sharp edges of these innovations are consistently left out of the discussion.

    Policy makers are increasingly choosing #drones over humanitarian policies, with states prioritizing #security and #surveillance over human rights.

    #refugees #borders #samos #camp #Europe #pushbacks #migration #human_rights

    https://theconversation.com/inside-new-refugee-camp-like-a-prison-greece-and-other-countries-pr

  • La loi Drones 2 est docilement adoptée par l’Assemblée
    https://www.laquadrature.net/2021/09/23/la-loi-drones-2-est-docilement-adoptee-par-lassemblee

    L’Assemblée nationale vient d’adopter une nouvelle loi pour légaliser l’usage de drones de #Surveillance par la police. Alors que le texte est quasiment identique à celui censuré par le Conseil constitutionnel en début d’année, les…

    • (...) le texte est quasiment identique à celui censuré par le Conseil constitutionnel en début d’année, les parlementaires n’ont pas hésité à le voter une nouvelle fois. C’est une énième preuve qu’il n’y a rien à attendre du Parlement pour nous protéger des dérives sécuritaires du gouvernement. La lutte contre la Technopolice ne se fera pas sur les bancs de l’Assemblée.

      Nous en parlions ici : après s’être vu à quatre reprises refuser le droit de surveiller la population avec des #drones, le gouvernement est revenu une cinquième fois à l’attaque. Deux arrêts du Conseil d’État, une décision de la CNIL et une décision du Conseil constitutionnel n’auront pas suffit : le gouvernement est prêt à tout pour déployer des drones avec caméra dans l’espace public. Les caméras fixes, les caméras « nomades », les caméras-piétons, tout cela ne lui suffit pas : il faut surveiller, toujours plus, et retransmettre les flux en temps-réel à des centres de supervision – et derrière analyser et disséquer les images, transformer nos rues et nos déambulations en données exploitables par la #police

      #surveillance

  • Accordo Italia-Slovenia sui controlli al confine : “guai” a essere trasparenti

    Il ministero dell’Interno si rifiuta di fornire i dettagli della cooperazione tra le forze di polizia di Roma e Lubiana sui pattugliamenti lungo il confine ripresi a fine luglio. Il vero scopo dell’attività resta così poco chiaro. Intanto il governo sloveno acquista 55 droni per sorvegliare le frontiere

    Il “delicato momento nella gestione delle frontiere interne all’Unione europea” giustifica la mancanza di trasparenza. Resta così opaco il mandato dei pattugliamenti misti lungo il confine italo-sloveni, ripresi il 30 luglio 2021, rispetto a cui non è possibile conoscere né il #protocollo_di_intesa su cui si basano né le indicazioni operative date alle forze di polizia italiana. La Direzione centrale dell’immigrazione e della polizia delle frontiere, braccio operativo del ministero dell’Interno, non ha infatti dato seguito alla richiesta, avanzata tramite accesso civico, con cui Altreconomia aveva chiesto conto dello stato dell’arte della cooperazione tra le autorità di Roma e Lubjana. Un buio preoccupante soprattutto in vista delle ripercussioni sui diritti delle persone in transito sulla rotta balcanica che presumibilmente aumenteranno in relazione alla drammatica situazione afghana.

    La risposta della Direzione non aggiunge molto a quanto già annunciato. “Dopo un lungo periodo di sospensione dovuto alla pandemia da Covid-19 per la ripresa dei servizi misti è stato stipulato un apposito protocollo d’intesa che è stato sottoscritto dai direttori dei Servizi di Polizia di frontiera italiano e Sloveno” si legge. L’accordo, sottoscritto il 15 luglio a Roma e il 21 luglio a Lubjana, prevede pattuglie miste composte da “personale del Paese ospitante e personale della forza di Polizia dell’altro Paese” che coprono il territorio “lungo la comune fascia confinaria tra i due Paesi” con lo scopo di potenziare l’attività di vigilanza al fine “di contrastare in maniera più efficace la criminalità transfrontaliera, con particolare riferimento all’attività di favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione irregolare”. Come detto, la Direzione non ha fornito copia del protocollo di intesa sottolineando che non è possibile renderlo noto in quanto minerebbe la tutela della sicurezza, dell’ordine pubblico e alle relazioni internazionali che l’Italia intrattiene con i Paesi terzi. Aggiungendo poi che “l’attuale delicato momento nella gestione delle frontiere interne all’Unione europea non consente la divulgazione di accordi di cooperazione che disciplinano i controlli che vengono effettuati alle frontiere terrestri e i controlli di ‘#retrovalico’ concordati con i Paesi confinanti senza ledere la riservatezza che deve caratterizzare tutte le attività bilaterali internazionali dello Stato italiano nei settori amministrativi interessanti e soprattutto nel settore involgente attività di ‘ordine e sicurezza pubblica”.

    Viene sottolineato come il “contenuto dei documenti richiesti contiene informazioni che attengono ad interlocuzioni intercorsi tra l’autorità politica nazionale e l’omologo sloveno dettagliando informazioni concernenti l’organizzazione e il funzionamento dei servizi di polizia finalizzati al contrasto dell’immigrazione illegale nonché relative ai contingenti delle forze armate a disposizione delle autorità provinciali di pubblica sicurezza per i controlli nelle zone confinarie”. Merita attenzione la definizione di “contrasto dell’immigrazione illegale”. “Il pattugliamento congiunto ha una efficacia non solo minima ma persino risibile rispetto all’obiettivo annunciato di contrasto alle organizzazioni criminali –ha scritto a inizio agosto Gianfranco Schiavone, membro dell’Associazione per gli studi giuridici sull’immigrazione (asgi.it)-. Sui sassosi sentieri del Carso non si incontrano i vertici ma neppure i quadri intermedi e neppure quelli bassi e persino bassissimi di tali organizzazioni ma solo persone disperate con i piedi piagati in cammino da settimane nei boschi di Croazia e Slovenia, tuttalpiù accompagnate da alcuni passeur la cui posizione nelle rispettive organizzazioni criminali è così infima da essere assimilabile a carne da macello”.

    In altri termini, il vero mandato delle operazioni di polizia “rischia” di diventare il controllo capillare del territorio per impedire alle persone in transito, migranti e richiedenti asilo, di raggiungere il territorio.

    La Direzione centrale è stata di poche parole anche rispetto alla nostra richiesta relativa al numero di persone identificate e, tra queste, del numero di coloro che hanno manifestato volontà di richiedere asilo. Viene fornito invece un numero sui risultati di polizia dei pattugliamenti: “nel corso del 2021 sono state arrestate 58 persone di cui 31 per favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione irregolare.

    Il muro di silenzio si alza anche con riferimento ai mezzi utilizzati sul confine e al numero di forze di polizia utilizzati. Le poche informazioni che si conoscono provengono dalla nota stampa del ministero dell’Interno che annunciava con enfasi l’utilizzo di droni e visori notturni, ben visibili, con tanto di foto, anche nella nota stampa slovena. Il 15 luglio 2021 -giorno della firma a Roma dell’accordo (l’incontro preliminare tra i rispetti ministri e capi di polizia è datato 4 giugno)- sul sito del ministero dell’Interno sloveno veniva però aperta una gara pubblica “per l’acquisto di veicoli aerei senza pilota e accessori” per un valore totale che si aggira intorno ai 400mila euro. Il bando (https://www.enarocanje.si/Obrazci/?id_obrazec=407420), chiuso il 5 agosto, richiedeva ai partecipanti di garantire la fornitura di un totale di 55 droni. La maggior parte, 29, sono veicoli di piccole dimensioni con un’autonomia di volo minima di 25 minuti e una distanza di gestione di quattro chilometri. L’amministrazione slovena richiede, inoltre, una formazione specifica per il “volo di notte e in condizioni di volo fuori dalla visibilità”. Non viene indicato il luogo di utilizzo specifico dei droni, si sa però che il 75% del bando è finanziato attraverso i fondi europei di sicurezza dell’Unione europea, ovvero lo strumento di sostegno finanziario a beneficio degli Stati Ue proprio per la gestione delle frontiere.

    L’accordo tra Roma e Lubjana incide potenzialmente anche sul tema delle riammissioni di persone in transito e richiedenti asilo della polizia italiana verso la Slovenia. La trasparenza è così necessaria per poter monitorare ciò che avviene in questa tappa della rotta balcanica anche in vista di un possibile aumento dei flussi legati alla situazione afghana. Le premesse non sono positive. Il governo di Lubjana, di turno alla presidenza del Consiglio dell’Unione europea dal luglio al dicembre 2021, ha chiaro il modello da perseguire nella gestione del fenomeno migratorio.

    Durante la presentazione dell’agenda politica della presidenza slovena alla Commissione per le libertà civili, la giustizia e gli affari interni (Libe) del Parlamento europeo, il ministro dell’Interno Aleš Hojs ha sottolineato come da una riunione informale di fine luglio tra ministri degli interni dei Paesi membri sia emersa la volontà politica di compiere progressi graduali nella “definizione della politica migratoria comune dell’Unione europea”. “Stiamo seguendo la situazione in Afghanistan -ha aggiunto- come emerso dal comunicato congiunto dei ministri della sessione straordinaria di due giorni fa, risponderemo anche ai possibili effetti della situazione sull’Ue”. La politica migratoria da “sposare” per Hojs è quella contenuta in un documento, dai toni e contenuti molto duri in cui si legge che gli Stati membri, con il supporto di Frontex, restano determinati “nel proteggere efficacemente i confini esterni dell’Unione europea e prevenire gli ingressi illegali”.

    https://altreconomia.it/accordo-italia-slovenia-sui-controlli-al-confine-guai-a-essere-traspare

    #frontières #frontière_sud-alpine #Italie #Slovénie #asile #migrations #réfugiés #coopération_bilatérale #gardes-frontière #militarisation_des_frontières #patrouilles_mixtes #drones #business #complexe_militaro-industriel #réadmssions

    –-

    ajouté à le fil de discussion autour des patrouilles mixtes à la frontière italo-slovène :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/791706
    Et plus précisément ici :
    https://seenthis.net/messages/791706#message928650

    • Rotta balcanica: riprendono i pattugliamenti tra Italia e Slovenia. Un mandato “opaco”

      Il 30 luglio sono ripartiti i controlli congiunti italo-sloveni lungo il confine per contrastare i “flussi migratori irregolari”. L’Italia nuovamente alla prova del rispetto della legalità alla frontiera orientale dopo la sospensione delle riammissioni illegali. L’analisi di Gianfranco Schiavone

      Il 30 luglio 2021 sono ripartiti “nelle province di Trieste/Koper e Gorizia/Nova Gorica i pattugliamenti congiunti italo sloveni lungo la comune fascia confinaria al fine di rafforzare i rispettivi dispositivi di contrasto ai flussi migratori irregolari provenienti dalla rotta balcanica”. Così recita il comunicato stampa della questura di Trieste pubblicato il giorno stesso. I pattugliamenti, vi si legge, sono frutto di un accordo “sottoscritto nei giorni scorsi dalle competenti autorità di polizia di Roma e di Lubiana” (appare curioso che si ometta la data dell’accordo).

      La decisione politica di attivare i pattugliamenti congiunti con forze di polizia italiane e slovene era stato resa pubblica dal ministero dell’Interno con nota stampa del 14 giugno 2021 a seguito dell’incontro tra la ministra Luciana Lamorgese e il suo omologo sloveno Hojs avvenuto a Lubiana. Nella nota ministeriale si poteva leggere come fosse “previsto un piano comune di vigilanza per i valichi di frontiera anche con l’impiego di droni e visori notturni per contrastare efficacemente le organizzazioni criminali che sfruttano il traffico dei migranti”. Le finalità del pattugliamento vengono dunque descritte in modo alquanto ambiguo: nella nota della questura triestina si fa riferimento in maniera più esplicita al contrasto dei flussi migratori irregolari, ovvero l’obiettivo dichiarato appare quello di bloccare i migranti; nella nota stampa del ministero, che usa un linguaggio più ovattato, si dichiara che l’obiettivo che si intende perseguire è invece il contrasto alle organizzazioni criminali che organizzano il traffico. Si potrebbe ritenere in modo superficiale che in fondo si tratta di accenti diversi della medesima finalità, ma non è così.

      Se assumiamo infatti la lettura in base alla quale l’attività delle cosiddette pattuglie miste italo-slovene è finalizzata al contrasto delle organizzazioni criminali che organizzano il traffico degli esseri umani, è ben difficile non vedere come tale motivazione appare alquanto poco credibile in quanto il contrasto al traffico internazionale di esseri umani per essere efficace richiede un’attività di intelligence e semmai inchieste coordinate tra le diverse autorità giudiziarie, cioè un complesso di attività che veramente assai poco ha a che fare con un pattugliamento fisico dell’area di frontiera vicino al confine.

      Il pattugliamento congiunto della fascia di confine tra Italia e Slovenia attuato con uso di uomini, droni (e cani, come non annunciato nei comunicati per non ferire la sensibilità di chi legge ma ampiamente riferito dalle testimonianze raccolte su quanto accade in Slovenia) ha una efficacia non solo minima ma persino risibile rispetto all’obiettivo annunciato di contrasto alle organizzazioni criminali giacché sui sassosi sentieri del Carso non si incontrano i vertici ma neppure i quadri intermedi e neppure quelli bassi e persino bassissimi di tali organizzazioni ma solo persone disperate con i piedi piagati in cammino da settimane nei boschi di Croazia e Slovenia, tuttalpiù accompagnate da alcuni passeur la cui posizione nelle rispettive organizzazioni criminali è così infima da essere assimilabile a carne da macello.

      Non deve stupire che le stesse inchieste giudiziarie che si sono basate finora su questo tipo di attività di polizia non abbiano mai portato a pressoché nulla di rilevante. Le organizzazioni di trafficanti non modificheranno la loro strategia sul confine italo-sloveno a seguito dei pattugliamento bensì alzeranno il prezzo dei loro servigi in ragione del più difficoltoso tratto da percorrere aumentando così i loro guadagni e lasciando indietro solo coloro che non possono pagare. Ancora una volta, come già avviene in altri contesti, operazioni di polizia presentate come finalizzate a contrastare il traffico internazionale di esseri umani, non solo sono irrilevanti in relazione a tale obiettivo bensì divengono di fatto fattori che vanno a potenziare l’operato e il giro d’affari delle organizzazioni che si afferma di volere combattere.

      Appare dunque evidente come i pattugliamenti sembrano rispondere all’altra, malcelata finalità, ovvero quella di intercettare nelle immediate vicinanze della frontiera interna italo-slovena da parte slovena, un certo numero di rifugiati, probabilmente i più disgraziati tra loro, al fine di impedirne a forza l’ingresso in Italia. I pattugliamenti congiunti, da quanto è dato sapere si svolgeranno infatti in assoluta prevalenza nell’area a ridosso del confine dal lato della Slovenia. Quando invece le operazioni verranno attuate sul lato italiano esse potrebbero prestarsi a far riprendere in forme ancor più nascoste quelle riammissioni informali attuate nel corso del 2020 e la cui radicale illegittimità è stata più volte messa in luce fin dall’inizio (Altreconomia ne ha scritto a più riprese, ad esempio qui e qui).

      Se fosse, come appare, quella di ostacolare/respingere i migranti che cercano asilo la effettiva finalità dei pattugliamenti, ciò, oltre a sollevare non pochi interrogativi etici (è questa l’attività alla quale si deve dedicare la polizia in una società democratica?) fa comunque emergere in capo alle autorità italiane precise responsabilità giuridiche. È noto infatti che la situazione dell’effettivo rispetto del diritto di asilo in Slovenia è quanto mai critica e che le disfunzioni sulla procedura di asilo in quel Paese sono profonde come emerge in modo in equivoco in tutti i rapporti internazionali: tra tutti si veda l’autorevole rapporto AIDA 2020 Update: Slovenia, a cura dell’Ecre (European council on refugees and exiles). Soprattutto è ampiamente noto che la Slovenia attua da tempo riammissioni sistematiche verso la Croazia impedendo ai migranti, compresi quelli “riammessi” dall’Italia, di presentare la domanda di asilo e rinviandoli in Croazia, Paese che a sua volta, con un meccanismo a catena e con l’uso di inaudite violenze, li deporta in Bosnia ed Erzegovina dove vengono sottoposti a trattamenti inumani e degradanti. Si tratta di riammissioni, o più propriamente si dovrebbero chiamare respingimenti a catena, documentati da un enorme numero di autorevoli rapporti internazionali e la cui illegalità è stata già dichiarata anche dalla stessa giurisprudenza slovena (vedasi sentenza I U 1490/2019-92 del 16 luglio 2020 del Tribunale amministrativo della Slovenia) e recentemente anche dai tribunali austriaci.

      Le autorità italiane non possono fingere di ignorare il quadro fattuale sopra descritto pena il loro coinvolgimento in fatti che configurano gravi violazioni delle norme interne ed internazionali. Richiamo in particolare l’attenzione su quanto disposto dal Testo unico sull’immigrazione (art. 19 comma 1, novellato dalla legge 173/2020) che dispone che “Non sono ammessi il respingimento o l’espulsione o l’estradizione di una persona verso uno Stato qualora esistano fondati motivi di ritenere che essa rischi di essere sottoposta a tortura o a trattamenti inumani o degradanti. Nella valutazione di tali motivi si tiene conto anche dell’esistenza, in tale Stato, di violazioni sistematiche e gravi di diritti umani”. Il citato articolo, insieme ad altre disposizioni, attua nel nostro ordinamento, dandone un’applicazione estensiva, il fondamentale divieto di non refoulement tutelato in via indiretta dalla Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo (Cedu), la quale prevede, all’art. 2 e art. 3, rispettivamente, il diritto alla vita ed il divieto di tortura e di trattamenti inumani o degradanti.

      Secondo la costante interpretazione della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo, il rispetto di tali obblighi comporta il tassativo divieto di respingere o estradare una persona verso luoghi ove i citati diritti correrebbero il rischio di essere violati. Appare persino superfluo approfondire in questa sede il complesso tema della applicabilità della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo ad atti riconducibili agli Stati firmatari che siano posti in essere o abbiano effetto nel territorio di uno Stato che non è parte del Consiglio d’Europa (sul tema evidenzio solo che la giurisprudenza della Corte EDU ha progressivamente ampliato le ipotesi di applicazione extraterritoriale della Cedu) dal momento che è pacifico che l’Italia è responsabile della violazione del divieto di non refoulement nel caso in cui sia pienamente a conoscenza di fatti e prassi illegittime e non provveda, per ciò che di sua competenza, ad impedirne la violazione da parte di un altro Stato dell’Unione europea, soggetto, come l’Italia, ai medesimi obblighi; una co-responsabilità nella violazione dell’art. 3 della Cedu che diventa addirittura eclatante nel caso di collaborazioni delle nostre forze di polizia nello Stato in cui le citate violazioni sono commesse. Questo è dunque il gravissimo scenario che sembra profilarsi nel mandato “opaco” che allo stato attuale delle conoscenze sembra assegnato alle pattuglie miste italo-slovene.

      È inderogabile ed urgente che siano subito resi noti i contenuti dell’accordo di polizia sottoscritto tra Roma e Lubiana (nonché le concrete indicazioni operative date alle forze di polizia italiane) senza che vengano posti artificiosi ostacoli alla sua piena conoscenza. Parimenti è necessario che senza indugio il Parlamento si avvalga dei poteri che l’ordinamento giuridico gli conferisce per monitorare una situazione che può configurarsi di eccezionale gravità per il possibile coinvolgimento di istituzioni della Repubblica in azioni contrarie a norme e a principi fondanti l’ordinamento costituzionale.

      https://altreconomia.it/rotta-balcanica-riprendono-i-pattugliamenti-tra-italia-e-slovenia-un-ma

    • The flow of arrivals from the Balkan Route into North East Italy has significantly increased during the month of August. Associations and groups of volunteers supporting people in Trieste said that they have provided direct help to 659 people during this month, including 103 minors. It is thought very likely that the actual number of arrivals and transits is much higher, with many people not stopping long in the immediate border area. During the last weeks, there have been several reports of smugglers being arrested while transporting people-on-the-move into Italian territory. At the same time, the intensity of control practices along the borders has also increased: in just one day 150 people were found and transferred to quarantine facilities in the Friuli-Venezia Giulia (FVG) region.

      This has once again pushed public and official discourse towards the need to reintroduce informal readmissions to Slovenia, touted to recommence in July of this year. Yet there remains no official confirmation about reintroduction of “informal readmissions” (pushbacks) by witnesses on the ground, though rumors have begun to circulate about groups rejected from the Italian territory. The Ministry of the Interior refused to provide details of the cooperation between the police forces of Rome and Ljubljana on border patrols. But in the absence of official statements, the installation of 55 #drones by Slovenian authorities sits in line with the growing surveillance of transit across this border.

      Volunteers in Piazza della Libertà in Trieste also witnessed a serious episode of institutional racism in August. An ambulance was called in order to provide medical assistance to an underage boy newly arrived via Slovenia. The health operators initially refused to assist the person, treating him aggressively and disrespectfully. The boy was only given medical assistance after several attempts to seek help and a strong insistence on the part of the volunteers present. Further barriers to health care are also having wider impacts for peoples mobility beyond Trieste, seen most overtly in the lack of access to vaccinations. Without the “green pass”, which marks proof of vaccination, people-on-themove in FVG are unable to access longdistance travel in order to continue their journey.

      Source : Border Violence Monitoring Network, August 2021, pp. 16-17
      https://www.borderviolence.eu/balkan-region-report-august-2021

    • Ripartono oggi le pattuglie miste al confine italo-sloveno nelle province di Trieste/#Koper e Gorizia/Nova Gorica

      Da oggi, 30 luglio, ripartono, nelle provincie di Trieste/Koper e Gorizia/Nova-Gorica, i pattugliamenti congiunti italo sloveni lungo la comune fascia confinaria, al fine di rafforzare i rispettivi dispositivi di contrasto ai flussi migratori irregolari provenienti dalla rotta balcanica.

      L’accordo per la ripresa delle pattuglie miste italo-slovene, intervenuto a più di un anno dalla sospensione dei servizi congiunti interrotti a causa della pandemia in corso, è stato sottoscritto nei giorni scorsi dalle competenti autorità di Polizia di Roma e di Lubiana.

      Le pattuglie miste, che opereranno lungo gli itinerari congiuntamente individuati attraverso una sinergica analisi del rischio dai competenti Uffici territoriali, potranno utilizzare anche strumenti tecnologici, quali i droni.

      Scopo principale dei servizi sarà il contrasto al favoreggiamento dell’immigrazione irregolare, ma da questi deriverà, più in generale, anche il potenziamento dell’attività di vigilanza lungo la comune fascia confinaria, in funzione di contrasto alla criminalità transfrontaliera.

      Detta iniziativa, che rafforza la collaborazione già esistente tra i due Paesi, segna la ripresa delle attività congiunte nell’ambito della cooperazione di Polizia, momentaneamente interrotte dalla pandemia.

      https://questure.poliziadistato.it/it/Trieste/articolo/131861024ad65e1a0407758053

  • Per sorvegliare i migranti l’Ue fa affari con i #contractor

    - È un’area grigia nel cuore del Mediterraneo, una zona d’ombra dove la parola “sovranità” è soprattutto #business. Produttori di armi e munizioni, mediatori specializzati in sicurezza e fornitura di #contractors, navi cariche di fucili automatici che funzionano come vere e proprie Santa barbara fluttuanti.
    – In questa terra di mezzo dove si incontrano trafficanti e governi, i migranti sono prima di tutto un lucroso affare.
    - Nel progetto #Rapsody di #Esa, che dovrebbe controllare il Mediterraneo con droni, compare #Sovereign_Global_Uk azienda riconducibile all’imprenditore #Fenech, arrestato per aver violato l’embargo sulla vendita di armi ai libici.

    (#paywall)

    https://www.editorialedomani.it/politica/mondo/per-sorvegliare-i-migranti-lue-fa-affari-con-i-contractor-pe98utxb

    #frontières #UE #migrations #réfugiés #armes #armement #commerce_d'armes #complexe_militaro-industriel #Libye #Méditerranée #drones

  • Pour la première fois, des drones auraient attaqué des humains de leur propre initiative
    https://www.courrierinternational.com/article/guerre-pour-la-premiere-fois-des-drones-auraient-attaque-des-

    D’après un rapport des Nations unies publié en mars dernier, des #attaques de #drones sans aucune intervention humaine ont été recensées en #Libye. On ne sait pas s’il y a eu des victimes, mais cet événement prouverait que les tentatives de réguler les #robots_tueurs ont déjà un train de retard.

    #défaillance_technique

  • After Slamming Trump, Lawmakers Silent on Biden Drone Export Policy
    https://theintercept.com/2021/05/13/drone-export-sales-mtcr

    The door is open for drone sales to authoritarian countries like the United Arab Emirates. When the Trump administration announced last July it was loosening decades-old restrictions on military drone exports, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee came out swinging. Progressive Democrats pounced and introduced legislation to reverse the decision. The new policy, they correctly warned, opened the door for sales to authoritarian countries like the United Arab Emirates (...)

    #drone #arme #lobbying

  • Border Police Wants Bite of Burgeoning Anti-Drone Industry
    https://theintercept.com/2021/05/03/cbp-border-drones-military

    Citing threats from drug cartels to migrants, CBP’s interest dovetails with a $487 million effort by the U.S. government to counter small drones. In April, U.S. Army officers met with representatives from Aurora Flight Sciences, a Virginia-based subsidiary of Boeing, to test whether the company’s technology could intercept and bring down an enemy drone. Aurora was one of three companies that took part in the test at the army’s Yuma Proving Ground, just 50 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border in (...)

    #DHS #drone #migration #arme #frontières #surveillance #ACLU #USArmy #criminalité

    ##criminalité

  • Tunisian police are using drones and Facebook to doxx LGBTQ protesters
    https://www.codastory.com/authoritarian-tech/anti-lgbt-crackdown-in-tunisia

    Law enforcement unions have leveraged technology to harass minorities and discredit demonstrations demanding economic and social reform The worst attacks against Rania Amdouni began in February. The 26-year-old human rights activist and artist had been on the front lines of a new wave of protests in Tunisia for months — fist raised, often wearing the Gay Pride flag or a brightly-colored wig, shouting until her voice went hoarse. Sparked by unemployment rates that had worsened during the (...)

    #Facebook #drone #manipulation #police #violence #harcèlement #LGBT #HumanRightsWatch