Showing posts with label "war on terror". Show all posts
Showing posts with label "war on terror". Show all posts

10/2/08

Watchdog wary of terror review role

THE senior public servant earmarked as the first independent reviewer of Australia's counter-terrorism laws does not want the job.

The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Ian Carnell, fears the new role could compromise the independence of his office.

"I'm not thrusting forward and saying, 'I'm the best model to take it'," Mr Carnell said.

In what is set to become amajor embarrassment for Attorney-General Robert McClelland, Mr Carnell told The Australian that given the highly contentious nature of the counter-terrorism laws, he was concerned his office could become overly politicised.

continues here

See Also

UN Observer says govts are using terror to instill fear in communities


9/23/08

Backing Up Globalisation with Military Might: Australia in the Pacific


“Clothed in benevolent, paternal words, greed and racism lie at the heart of the war on terrorism: pushing the West’s way of doing things onto the Pacific. Australia & New Zealand seek to gain access to markets in the Pacific and to rich natural resources through liberalised trade"





"In today's world, TNCs, and governments running interference for them, are pushing for an end to national sovereignty and democracy in order to achieve total unimpeded access for investments, cheap labor, and consumers in every nook and cranny of the globe. This is being accomplished, among other ways, through mechanisms like multilateral agreements on investment, free trade agreements like PACER-Plus , and the dictates of the European Union (EU) International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and World Trade Organization (WTO)."



"To achieve maximum profits, these transnationals will stop at nothing. After all, they are non-human institutions that must expand through ever-greater profits, or go out of business. In so doing they have shown willingness to violate human rights-particularly workers' rights-to throw millions out of work, destroy unions, use sweatshops and slave labor, destroy the environment, destabilize governments, and install and bolster tyrants who oppress, repress, torture and kill with impunity."







"Is it surprising, then, that wars and military intervention, including attacks on civilians, are waged on behalf of corporations? It has been an integral part of the history of imperialist powers. Why should we believe it is any different today?"







9/19/08

West Papua: Lawyer arrested by Anti-terrorist squad for sending a txt


Indonesian Military.jpg
On October 18th 2007 West Papuan human rights lawyer, Iwanggin Sabar Olif was arrested by members of Detachment 88, Indonesia's anti-terrorist squad. He was accused of forwarding a text message condemming the Indonesian military's treatment of West Papuan people. Ever since then he has been held in detention. A recent joint statement by several Papuan human rights organisations, calling for Sabar Olif's release, states that the anti-terrorist police have acted on the princple 'arrest him first, then get him to confess by whatever means necessary'. [Coalition of organisations demand the release of Sabar Olif Iwanggin]

Links: Indonesian Human Rights Committee Statement | January 2008 Court Hearings | The spectre of terrorism in Aotearoa - drawing the parallels

9/12/08

In the Aftermath of the Urewera Raids: Discussing colonisation, courts and contempt


Public Meeting:

6:30pm, Monday 22nd September 2008

St Johns in the City, cnr Willis and Dixon Sts, Wellington

Moana Jackson (Ngati Kahungunu, Ngati Porou)
Speaking about the context of the raids of October 15th last year

Steven Price (media lawyer, author of www.medialawjournal.co.nz)
Speaking about media law and contempt of court

Followed by question and answer session, then talk over tea, coffee and biscuits.

With the depositions hearing for eighteen of those arrested in the raids last year currently taking place in Auckland, and with Fairfax (the publisher of the Dominion Post) facing trial for contempt of court in Wellington 15th - 19th September, it is a timely opportunity to look at the broader political context. We hope you can join us at the meeting.

For more information, please email info@October15thSolidarity.info

All welcome


Related:

BACK IN THE MISTS OF FEAR

"I weep for what has just happened at Maungapohatu in Tuhoe. The Police raid seems to be about punishing Kenana for questioning the Crown and will only take us back in the mists of fear and doubt… I wonder if we will ever stop worrying when it might happen again". - Karaitiana Rarere, Ngati Kahungunu, 1916

9/8/08

Whaiaipo



A song By te Reo Takiwaa Dunn & Lee Morunga sung by majic & robbie (Ngati Whatua Ki Kaipara)

Dedicated to all our 18 defendants and the whanau at Te Tira Hou Marae


At the time of the raids the partner's of two of the defendants were pregnant. These women have now given birth to baby freedom fighters in the months since. The work of those women, and their whanau looking after babies in such a stressful time, needs special recognition

8/27/08

Raid Me! Global Day of Action Tickets Going Fast


RAID ME.jpg

Click on image for a larger version


Tickets to the global day of action to drop the charges against the 20 accused in the State Terror Raids are now available on Trade Me! There is a two-day auction that closes at the start of the demo on Saturday at 12 noon. The beautiful tickets are for freedom lovers, supporters of Tino Rangatiratanga, friends, and whanau. Tickets for police and other spy scumbags are $8 million – about the cost of the entire ‘Operation 8’ investigation (the name given to the State Terror Raids by the police).

Many of you will be aware that the police investigated thousands of TradeMe users as part of ‘Operation 8’. The accused received approximately 10,000 TradeMe usernames, passwords and buying histories revealing among other things, purchases of ‘my little pony’ items (undoubtedly for terrorist purposes). The Listener story, ‘Raid me’ focuses on the information given to the now 20 defendants in the case. But the issue isn’t the disclosure given to defendants as part of their legal right to access information about the investigation. The issue is about the extent of the police investigation and surveillance of people as part of ‘Operation 8’. (listener.co.nz/issue/null/features/11626/raid_me.html)

There were literally thousands of people under investigation as part of ‘Opeartion 8’. Almost everyone in this country will know someone affected by the State Terror Raids of October 15th 2007 – phones and cars were tapped, people were followed, bank accounts and internet traffic were monitored.

The powers of the police and the security intelligence service have grown exponentially since 9/11. They are the agencies who are carrying out George W Bush’s ‘war on terrorism’. They are getting millions of dollars as part of that war to find so-called ‘terrorists’ – in order to justify this money, they have targeted people seen to be supporting Tino Rangatiratanga.

Last year, that war came home – to the homes of Maori people around the country. It was a racist attack, and these are politically motivated charges. The global day of action is a call to drop the charges against the 20 accused. It is also a call to repeal the Terrorism Suppression Act, to support Tino Rangatiratanga and Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe, and to get justice for the people who were raided.

New Zealand the "War on Terror" & the Pacific




much appreciation and thanks to Val for this, an extract from her book :

Against Freedom: The war on terrorism in everyday NZ life

Clothed in benevolent, paternal words, greed and racism lie at the heart of the war on terrorism: pushing the West’s way of doing things onto the Pacific. New Zealand seeks to gain access to markets in the Pacific and to rich natural resources through liberalised trade


In 2003 Helen Clark hinted that New Zealand would be a willing agent to carry the war on terrorism to the Pacific. Answering the call of George W Bush, Clark endorsed a range of counter-terrorism initiatives for Pacific Island nations.1 New Zealand’s close links with many Pacific Island countries places it strategically to implement the war agenda.

Ostensibly, war and development are opposites. War is destructive while development is liberally conceived of as being constructive and beneficial. It would therefore appear contradictory that the war on terrorism is being sold to New Zealand’s Pacific Island neighbours
as a development opportunity. There is a different view of development in which it is a largely self-interested undertaking by the donor country for both material and ideological gain. The evidence supporting this view is that a considerable portion of development aid money is spent in the country giving the aid, rather than the country giving the aid, receiving it. Seen in this light, the New Zealand government’s actions are not contradictory.

Fighting a so-called ‘Pacific war on terror’ with development money, while spinning propaganda about high- minded development goals, makes perfect sense when you see it as an exercise in greedy self-interest. Our Pacific neighbours are being shortchanged while we are led to believe our government is generous and altrustic. This is not to say that development aid cannot have beneficial outcomes. It is more that any beneficial outcomes must be viewed with the understanding that they are secondary to New Zealand’s interests.

How is New Zealand’s support for the war on terrorism specifically serving its own ends in the Pacific and beyond? First, it is necessary to understand both New Zealand’s aims and some of the responses from the Pacific. One part of this is an analysis of the cost of the war in the amount and type of development assistance New Zealand is giving to help carry out the goals of the agenda.

This includes what New Zealand is not doing in order to be able to continue the war. There are two poignant examples to illustrate this: the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands and the deployment of military engineers to Iraq. The invasion of the Solomon Islands in
2003 is part of the agenda of the war clothed in development rhetoric. Beyond the Pacific, the government has used the public perception of beneficial development aid to mask the deployment of New Zealand Defence Force troops to Iraq in support of the occupying armies. New Zealand is aggressively pursuing the war agenda for its own self-interested gain, at the expense not only of real Pacific needs, but of the very survival of these island states

Unlike the United States, New Zealand is not “an island unto its self.”2 Its written history is testament to the forces — both internal and external that have shaped and influenced its development as a player on the world stage.

New Zealand has a reputation for taking seriously its place in the Pacific region. At times, New Zealand has acted on imperial ambitions; at other times, it has seemingly given practical, albeit self-interested, patronage. For example, as a result of significant and sustained grassroots pressure on the issue of nuclear testing in the Pacific, the New Zealand government has favoured the creation of a nuclear-free region in the South Pacific. Similarly, the circumstances that lead to the 1987 declaration nuclear free were entirely as a result nuclear free were entirely as a result nuclear free of the work of people unafraid of confronting US military dominance in the region. Now, the United States is again demanding unwavering loyalty in its global war on terrorism. New Zealand is a part of the global community — the US is the only superpower. This New Zealand government is only too happy to acquiesce to its will and help export the war to the Pacific.

The government sees the Pacific as its sphere of influence, and it is keen to ensure that the US anti-terrorism agenda is being followed. From the first Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting after 9/11, George W Bush has sought to define the war on terrorism in economic terms. In Shanghai, he intoned “Terrorists did not just attack the United States on September 11… they attacked the world and free trade.”4 At the most recent forum in Santiago, Chile, Bush again challenged his colleagues in pursuit of APEC’s main goals — trade and prosperity — to “do more to combat global terrorism.”

Bush’s press secretary Scott McClellan observed: “The big priorities will focus on the security and economic side because they really go hand in hand. You need to make sure you have security so that you can move forward on the economic side.”5

Given New Zealand’s lust for trade agreements, coupled with the relentless pressure from the US, even the pretence of meeting traditional development goals has been subsumed by the war. At present, the goal of eliminating poverty through the promotion of sustainable development appears to have been annihilated by the war on terrorism. The war in the Pacific The war’s agenda in the Pacific is advancing in two stages.

The first aims to change the definition of development while retaining its good public image. Words such as ‘security’ and ‘good governance’ are part of the lexicon of the war. The second stage of the war advances fundamental economic and social changes which can broadly be described as neo-liberalism. This system advocates minimal state intervention in favour of market mechanisms in areas such as health, education and welfare. It includes the privatisation of public assets, unfettered foreign direct investment and capital flow, and strict rules-based trading. Neo-liberalism has been called ‘capitalism with the gloves off’ because business forces are stronger and more aggressive, and face less organised opposition than ever before.6

The war on terrorism is being linked intimately with development through the need for ‘security’ and ‘good governance’. In this discourse, ‘security’ is defined by the needs of Washington, Canberra and Wellington, not those of Pacific Island nations. This is not ‘security’ that seeks to ensure adequate food, clothing and shelter for the residents of these island nations. Nor is it about addressing urgent environmental issues such as global climate change, coral reef destruction or fish-stock depletion that threaten the livelihoods and survival of hundreds of thousands of people. This is an imported definition of ‘security’ as a war against some nebulous threat of terrorism.

This definition of security translates to mean more military, more police, more restrictions on movement, more intelligence gathering, and harsh counter-terrorism laws in order to deter activities that hinder the war. Not surprisingly, the expenditure for these counter-terrorism measures is subtracted from New Zealand aid dollars ostensibly intended for basic needs to eliminate poverty through the promotion of sustainable development.

The term ‘good governance’ as sold to the New Zealand public means a government that is financially accountable, has fair and transparent processes, consults with and is responsive to the populace, and makes information available to citizens. But this definition obscures the implicit directive to adopt a particular way of being — democracy defined by free markets. As George W Bush interpreted the 9/11 assault, it was an attack on “the world and free markets.”

This is the second phase of the war, one in which democracy becomes the New World Order’s euphemism for neo-liberalism.8 Beneath the language of development, the true agenda of the war on terrorism is exposed. Clothed in benevolent, paternal words, greed and racism lie at the heart of the war on terrorism: pushing the West’s way of doing things onto the Pacific. New Zealand seeks to gain access to markets in the Pacific and to rich natural resources through liberalised trade. NZAID endorses a strategy of trade for the promotion of sustainable democratic development. Despite the environmental and economic vulnerability of most Pacific Island states, NZAID is pursuing a so-called ‘development strategy’ that has the possibility of destabilising the entire economy of these nations. It is a development strategy designed to enhance the New Zealand economy, not the Pacifi c. It spends nearly $100 million on such
‘development’ in the Pacifi c while the government aggressively pursues a free-trade zone of six million Pacific peoples that would be a significant boost to New Zealand business.

Transparent rules-based trading is promoted as the great panacea for poverty in the Pacifi c. It belies the reality that most Pacific nations have a narrow and homogeneous range of products for export.

They are reliant on remittances from abroad for hard currency, and in most cases practise subsistence agriculture. “As one NZ government official confirmed with disarming frankness: when it comes to trade there is no ‘special relationship’ with the Pacific. International trade strategy takes priority over the views of Pacific governments and the needs of Pacific peoples.”9

8/26/08

AJA - Professional Forum - The impact of anti-terror laws on reporting

Australian Journalists Association
Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance

Cordially invites you to a forum exploring the impact of anti-terror laws on reporting.

The forum is hosted by the School of Applied Communication and RMIT University and will develop and discuss ideas and perspectives from journalists, lawyers and civil rights activists about the impact of Australia’s anti-terror legislation on reporting.

One high profile case under the new legislation has seen more than 20 suppression orders imposed. Under the anti-terror laws anyone revealing they have been interviewed by police face gaol. These are just some of the issues for civil rights and journalism under Australia’s anti-terrorism legislation.

The forum is organised in conjunction with Civil Rights Defence, a group concerned at how some of our most basic civil and human rights are being eroded, under the pretext of the ‘war on terror’.


Date: Thursday 28 August, 2008
Time: 6.00 - 7.30pm
Venue: RMIT University
Building 8. Lecture Theatre 81022. Entrance from Swanson St, Melbourne.

MC
Michael Bachelard
Senior Journalist - The Age

Speakers
Louise Connor
The Victorian Secretary of the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance will give a perspective from “The Right to Know Coalition” and what the impacts are for working journalists.

Brian Walters SC Barrister
A prominent Melbourne barrister and senior counsel, he is the immediate past president of Liberty Victoria (the Victorian Council of Civil Liberties).

Dr K.M. Oakham
Senior Lecturer in Journalism at the School of Applied Communication RMIT University

Feel free to invite you colleagues.

Palmy to Project Dissent against State Terror in support of Global Day of Action

PRESS RELEASE

WHERE: Palmerston North Courthouse (main street)
WHEN: Fri 29th August 6pm

Palmerston North will be meeting outside the Court House (Main St across from Downtown) on Friday nite 29th at 6pm in support of the
Global Day of Action against State Terror.


Spokesperson Kathleen Anderson said " We will be projecting our dissent against State Terror onto the courthouse with images and sound aimed at informing the Palmy masses - in this way we reaffirm our tautoko for the families whose houses were raided here in Palmerston North and around the country - and in particular the kaumatua who was incarcerated for 3 days during the raids last year without access to medical care resulting in hospitalisation"

It is also an opportunity for us to remind people that the case is on-going and demand that the charges be dropped."

"Attempts by the Police to lay charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act (TSA) failed but people are still facing politically motivated charges under the Arms Act. The day of action immediately precedes the start of the deposition hearing in Auckland on 1 September"

"Police used the Terrorism Suppression Act and over $8 million to harass and punish political activists who they saw as supporting Tino Rangatiratanga and Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe"

"You don't need to look very far back into the history of New Zealand to see the brutality used by the State to silence Maori calls for sovereignty and self-determination. Parihaka, Maungapohatu, Takaparawhau (Bastion Point), Pakaitore (Moutoa Gardens), are familiar names in this nation's history of State violence to Māori resistance."

"The 20 defendants have suffered considerable and sustained emotional, physical and financial punishment by the crown in the 10 months since their initial arrests. This punishment must end and the charges must be dropped."

There are demonstrations and actions being planned around the globe including Australia, the US, Germany and of course here in Palmy North

Listings for protests in other cities can be found at
www.October15thSolidarity.info

CONTACT
Kathleen Anderson 0274578326

panther power.jpg

8/22/08

How the Haneef affair became carry on coppers

Richard Ackland
August 22, 2008

More than a year ago, there was strong evidence that the terror case against Mohamed Haneef was a farce. Yet grimly the federal police and the top copper Mick Keelty held firm to the belief that this Indian doctor posed a threat.

Based on the word of the Australian Federal Police, Haneef was stripped of his visa. The then minister for immigration, Kevin Andrews, repeatedly said he was in possession of secret information from the police that he relied on to make that decision. It was so powerful and secret that this information could not be publicly revealed.

It has now emerged that there was no evidence of criminal behaviour in the document at all.

.....

At the moment, Mick Keelty is looking like one of the most wretched and plod-like public servants in Australia.

It's about time the Government put its foot on his neck. To allow him to continue to run a complex and massively resourced anti-terrorism agency is unthinkable.

continues here

7/26/08

AFP accused of secrecy over Haneef


Mohamed Haneef

The Australian Federal Police has been accused of denying Gold Coast doctor Mohamed Haneef a lawyer and the chance to protest his innocence before a magistrate when he was arrested last year.

- New transcripts surface
- Claims AFP may have broken law

Continues here


See Also:

In addition to providing Dr Mohamed Haneef with a significant victory over the Australian government, Justice Jeffrey Spender’s judgment is a powerful rebuke to those politicians and conservative commentators who argue that our courts ought to defer to government when it comes to matters involving national security. And we must guard against governments who believe in guilt by association, says Justice Spendder. Greg Barns: a victory over guilt by association

AFP admission astounds Haneef lawyer

Should He Stay or Should He Go?

Keetley Expired?

Cyber bandit sabotages top cop



anti terror law protest bankstown

7/14/08

SOUL FIRE - a night of dancing in solidarity with those affected by the police "terror raids"

Join Yardwise and friends on Friday 1 August at Vintage Bar (25 Taranaki St) for an evening of true-skool hip hop, soul, reggae, ragga, dancehall, dubstep and extra special surprises! All proceeds from the show will go to support those arrested in the police "terror raids" last October, and their whanau.
YWgigpost.jpg
SOUL FIRE
an evening of soul, hip hop, reggae, ragga, dancehall, dubstep and more

featuring
Yardwise crew: Misteek, Spin Zero and Sistah Jhan
Jailhouse Jen
DJ Cannonbomb
and very special guests

Friday 1stAugust, 9pm-late
at Vintage Bar, 25 Taranaki St (Through the archway next to Swan Barbers)
$5 entry

Join Yardwise and friends at Vintage Bar (25 Taranaki St) for an evening of true-skool hip hop, soul, reggae, ragga, dancehall, dubstep and extra special surprises!

Jailhouse Jen will get the party started with her secret stash of illict beats, then in keeping with the Yardwise tradition of heavyweight selections, Misteek, and Spin Zero will lay down the freshies, the classics and their own exclusive dubplates. Finally DJ Cannonbomb will move it up a notch dubstep style, for the folks who want to cut loose on the dancefloor through to the wee hours...
Joined by crucial vocalist Sistah Jhan and some extra special guests, this show promises to blaze hotter than ever.

Only $5 on the door - Don't miss it!

All proceeds from the show will go to support those arrested in the police "terror raids" last October, and their whanau. Saturday 30 August will be a global day of action in solidarity with those affected by the raids. For more info see: www.october15thsolidarity.info

For more about the Yardwise crew see: www.myspace.com/yardwise

Related


License

public domainThis work is in the public domain.

6/18/08

Public Meeting: Putting the terror laws on trial

Crudds recent speech in Jakarta reaffirmed Australia's commitment to the bullshit "war on terror & neo liberalism in our region through Apec. As ever why do Settler grubbyments think they have any moral, legal high ground when it comes to terrorism. The Indigenous genocide that their States are based on are founded and perpetuated by state sanctioned terrorism. I have attended the Barwon "13" trial in Melbourne, and if you wonder why the galleries aren't packed maybe the id check & metal detector and police presence over kill have something to do with it? Disgusting really when 'justice' is meant to be seen to be delivered in public. The Barwon trial is the showcase trail for Victorian anti terror legislation , much like the botched raids and prosecution of those in Aotearoa last year. Where were we and where was the outrage for what has happened to the Barwon defendants, anti Muslim racism seems entrenched totally. 

The Australian Muslim Civil Rights Advocacy Network (AMCRAN)
is dedicated to preventing the erosion of the civil rights of all Australians, and, by drawing on the rich civil rights heritage of the Islamic faith, provides a Muslim perspective in the civil rights arena. It does this through political lobbying, contributions to legislative reform through submissions to government bodies, grassroots community education, and communication with and through the media. It actively collaborates with both Muslim and non-Muslim organisations to achieve its goals.

To find out more about AMCRAN and its activities, download an AMCRAN pamphlet.




University of Technology Sydney Monday 23 June, 7pm

Room CB 01.04.06 University of Technology, Sydney, Broadway, near the corner of Harris Street.

The anti-terror laws are again in the news with the decision to re-try Jack Thomas. One of the many concerning aspects of these laws is the persistence of the security organisations in pursuing people almost regardless of the decisions of the courts, egged on by the right-wing commentariat. Dr Mohamed Haneef is still under investigation by the Australian Federal Police. Peter Russo the lawyer who found himself in the spotlight when he defended Dr Haneef, is speaking in Sydney of the way this case changed his view of the laws and the politicisation of law enforcement.

Come along to hear from him and others including family members who are caught up in the "terror" cases in Melbourne and Sydney. There will be also be a speaker from the campaign to defend those arrested following the protest at the Group of 20 meeting in Melbourne in November 2006.

In the past five years Australia's anti-terrorism laws have been revealed as unjust, unnecessary, expensive and open to abuse. The laws were the lynchpin of the Howard government's anti-Muslim racism and war mongering, designed to pro duce a "terror threat" in Australia to justify the government's involvement in the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Alongside the use of the anti-terror laws there has been a consistent attack on basic civil liberties. Unprecedented charges have been laid against protestors at the Group of 20 meeting in Melbourne in November 2006 and we all witnessed extraordinary levels of policing at the APEC protests in September 2007.

We are concerned that six months into the Rudd government's term there are no moves to scrap the terror laws or reverse Howard's crackdown on dissent. The Clarke in quiry, set up to investigate the widely acknowledged mistreatment of Dr Haneef, has limited power to investigate those responsible. The problems run much deeper than the individual case of Dr Haneef and the terms of the inquiry —the laws themselves are geared to the kind of racist, unjust treatment that he received. Everyone who opposes to any policies of government has an interest in defending the right to protest from criminalisation and we all have a stake in seeing off racist laws.

Peter Russo speaks at University of Technology Sydney Monday 23 June, 7pm - follow the posters.


5pm the following day at Town Hall—bring placards, candles, banners

For more info call: Alex 0413 976 638, Jean 0410 772 110, Anna 0401 900 690

5/6/08

Huka ~ Hakaaro & Hakatupato i Waitangi 08



Huka's 'Hakaaro & 'Hakatupato i Waitangi 2008
Huka,s thoughts and warnings on issues of sovereignty & Mana-motuhaketanga @
Waitangi 2008

5/2/08

Tame Iti wins major bail victory!




Tame Iti’s lawyer Annette Sykes announced that they have successfully secured Tame’s passport so that he can travel overseas. Tame is due to appear in a production of TEMPEST II in Italy and may travel to other European cities and Japan to do further performances. This is a major victory for the case as Tame can now continue his work in educating people worldwide about the struggle of Tuhoe.

About the performance: TEMPEST II is the second chapter of the performance series Tempest.

Tempest is the performance of a staged hearing, within conditions of detention and loss of sovereign rights. The language of Tempest is dance and its oratory signals the rebirth of an indigenous voice in the telling of the shifting conditions of political right, from the scientific journey to witness the transit of Venus that coincided with colonial conquest, to the current geopolitics of the Pacific reflecting the wider post 9/11 global community.

Tempest inflects towards the Shakespeare work, though draws away from being either a staging or an adaptation of it. Rather, Tempest is the collision of the island geography of the play and the political writings of the contemporary philosopher Giorgio Agamben, concerned with our contemporary crisis of the destitution of rights, whereby any citizen may be constituted as a detainee and any urban condition may become that of the camp.
TEMPEST II features the veteran Maori activist Tame Iti. On the 15th of October 2007, police carried out anti-terror raids, focussing in his community in Ruatoki. Tame Iti was arrested and is currently on bail. TEMPEST II also features the recently freed Algerian refugee Ahmed Zaoui who was detained for four years without trial in a New Zealand prison.

For more information on the performance, visit www.mau.co.nz/

4/30/08

Ploughshares Penetrate Waihopai Base Deflate Satellite Dome


by Ploughshares

916fa768b6dc9aa11a90.jpeg
Statement Of The Waihopai ANZAC Ploughshares

They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift sword against nation; and there shall be no more training for war. Isaiah 2/4

This morning, 30 April 2008, we entered the Waihopai Spy Base near Blenheim. Our group, including a Dominican Priest, temporarily closed the base by padlocking the gates and proceeded to deflate one of the large domes covering two satellite dishes.

At 6am we cut through three security fences surrounding the domes - these are armed with razor wire, infrared motion sensors and a high voltage electrified fence. Once inside we used sickles to cut one of the two 30-metre white domes, built a shrine and knelt in prayer to remember the people killed by United States military activity.

We have financed our activities through personal savings, additional part-time employment and a small interest-free loan from one of our supporters.

We are responding to the Bush administration’s admission that intelligence gathering is the most important tool in the so-called War on Terror. This war will have no end until citizens of the world refuse to let it continue. The ECHELON spy network including Waihopai, is an important part of the US government’s global spy network and we have come in the name of the Prince of Peace to close it down.

The base is funded by New Zealand tax payers and located on New Zealand soil which makes New Zealand a target through our association with the UKUSA intelligence cooperation agreement.

Five years ago the Clark government opposed the US-led invasion of Iraq. Yet at the same time the Bush administration was using the National Security Agency’s ECHELON system, of which Waihopai is an integral component, to spy on UN Security Council members so it could more easily swing them in favour of an invasion.

There have been over 100 Ploughshares actions over the last twenty years around the world. Ploughshares direct actions are linked through the common factors of: entry to locations connected to military activity, Christian prayers and most involve some form of property destruction.

Links: Photos | Anti-Bases Campaign | GPJA Congratulations

About Waihopai and ECHELON

Green MP Keith Locke is quoted as saying that the base has cost New Zealand up to NZ$500million since 1989. The base intercepts electronic communications throughout the Pacific region including New Zealand and is often staffed by personnel from US agencies.

In 1996 researcher Nicky Hager published an expose on Waihopai and New Zealand’s strong links to the USA-led ECHELON network of six similar spy stations around the world. The United Nations launched an investigation in 2003 to claims that ECHELON had been used by the US government to eavesdrop on UN diplomats and Security Council members. A report published in 2000 showed that ECHELON had also been used by the US to gain commercial advantage for US corporations.

Information gathered at Waihopai is transferred to the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) in Wellington and fed unseen directly to Washington DC.

4/12/08

Labour party humiliated by protest at election congress

The Labour Party and its cabal of ministers including Cullen, Maharey, King, Laban, Goff and Horomia were humiliated at a protest today outside of their election year congress by people holding them responsible for a range of issues. Helen Clark’s speech was interrupted and ministers were forced outside when a fire alarm went off at approximately 2:20pm. Cullen sought refugee behind his mummy as he walked outside, but that didn’t stop him being confronted by people who had been arrested on October 15th.

Members of the Labour Party assaulted people in an attempt to protect their ‘co-leader’ from being targeted. The October 15th Solidarity crew along with whanau from Te Urewera organised a march that went through town in advance of their arrival at the Labour Party Conference. Around 100 protestors gathered at 12noon at Te Aro Park and marched to the Town Hall. For approximately an hour, there was noisy demonstration with a sit-in blockade at one entrance.

1 | 2 | Protest Report | Raids on 15th October 2007 | Links | Aoteaoa Indymedia Features
Protest Report

The Labour Party and its cabal of ministers including Cullen, Maharey, King, Laban, Goff and Horomia were humiliated at a protest today outside of their election year congress by people holding them responsible for a range of issues. Helen Clark’s speech was interrupted and ministers were forced outside when a fire alarm went off at approximately 2:20pm. Cullen sought refugee behind his mummy as he walked outside, but that didn’t stop him being confronted by people who had been arrested on October 15th. Members of the Labour Party assaulted people in an attempt to protect their ‘co-leader’ from being targeted. The October 15th Solidarity crew along with whanau from Te Urewera organised a march that went through town in advance of their arrival at the Labour Party Conference. Around 100 protestors gathered at 12noon at Te Aro Park and marched through Cuba Mall, Manners and Willis Street. “Ka whawhai tonu matou, ake ake ake!”, “One solution – Revolution!”, “1, 2, 3, 4 – Labour Party out the door” and “When Tuhoe/128/Workers’ Rights are under attack – stand up, fight back” were chanted on the march. Upon arrival, the march was met with a large police presence and a metal barricade. For approximately an hour, there was noisy demonstration with a sit-in blockade at one entrance.

Ministers and members of the Labour Party were forced to walk along the barricaded area while being heckled and shamed for their actions as they walked into the Town Hall. Helen Clark’s speech was supposed to start at 2pm. However, shortly afterwards, we heard news that the fire alarm went off and the Labour Party delegates started streaming out of the building (with Clark nowhere to be seen). Again, they were yelled at by the protest outside.

The Labour party, and Helen Clark in particular, bear primary responsibility for the nation-wide police raids of October 15th 2007, the invasion and lock-down of the township of Ruatoki and the passage of a raft of so-called ‘terrorism laws’. These laws, almost all of which have been directly imported from George W Bush’s ‘war on terrorism’ in the US, demonstrate Labour’s complicity in the oppression of people both in Aotearoa and around the world.

Operation 8 was motivated by the Labour government’s fear about tino rangatiratanga, about Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe and about real sovereignty for the indigenous people of Aotearoa. The government is scared of losing power, and of losing access to resources such as freshwater, minerals and oil and gas. It used its violent, coercive wing, the Armed Offenders Squad, to reinforce its power in Te Urewera on 15 October last year. The Labour government wills stop at nothing to retain power this year, including more acts of state violence and brutality against Maori people.

The people of Aotearoa are under attack, its time we stand up and fight back.

Police raids on 15th October 2007

On Monday, October 15th 2007, more than 300 police carried out dawn raids on dozens of houses all over Aotearoa / New Zealand. Police claim the raids were in response to 'concrete terrorist threats' from indigenous activists. The reality, however, included heavily armed police terrorising an entire township. To date, no evidence of the so-called terrorist plot has been revealed.

Police arrested 17 indigenous, anarchist, environmental and anti-war activists, including people from Tūhoe, Te Atiawa, Maniapoto and Pakeha. Police wanted to charge 12 people under the Terrorism Suppression Act (TSA), however the Solicitor-General denied the police permission to proceed. After four weeks in jail everyone was released on bail. On Tuesday, February 19th 2007, police raided further properties, arresting 3 more men. All were released on bail with strict conditions that same day.

19 people are facing charges under the Arms Act, in a trial that could take several years. Although out of jail, they have very strict bail conditions that deny them freedom of movement and association. On this site you can find out how to get involved in local support groups, dates and locations of solidarity events are happening and how to make a donation.

Links: October 15th Solidarity | Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe | AoCafe | Civil Rights Defence | Te Kotahi a Tuhoe | Tūhoe: History of resistance | Tu Kotahi - Freedom Fighting Anthems

Aotearoa IMC Features: Police raid houses across Aotearoa under anti-terrorism legislation, at least a dozen arrests (15 Oct. 07) | 17 activists arrested, denied bail. 300+ Police raid houses across the country (15 Oct. 07) | Solidarity with the Urewera 17! Free them now! (17 Oct. 07) | Stop the Terror Laws! Free our Friends! (19 Oct. 07) | "Raise your voice before you lose your soul" - protests across Aotearoa (20 Oct. 07) | Urewera 17 Update: Bail Denied, Another Police Raid, Another Activist Named, Wellington Activists Moved (26 Oct. 07) | Across the world, people demand freedom for political prisoners! (27 Oct. 07) | Urewera 16 in court - 2 more bailed (2 Nov. 07) | 150 People Protest Labour Conference in Tamaki Makaurau (3 Nov. 07) | Two more prisoners lose name supression (7 Nov. 07) | No terrorism charges for the Urewera 16! (8 Nov. 07) | Tuhoe Hikoi Arrives at Parliament (14 Nov. 07) | The struggle continues… (19 Nov. 07) | Thousands gather in solidarity with October 15th arrestees and against the Terrorism Supression Act (1 Dec. 07) | Tame Iti back in jail for one night (11 Dec. 07) | UN to investigate New Zealand Government over conduct of the Oct 15 raids (26 Jan. 08) | Waitangi Day protests across Aotearoa (6 Feb. 08) | More Raids, 3 More Arrests in Tuhoe (19 Feb. 08) | La Lucha Sigue… Protests against raids and arrests (23 Feb. 08) | 'Operation 8' defendants back in court on March 5th (3 Mar. 2008) | Labour Party conference to be held responsible for Operation 8

Click on image for a larger version

bannerfront.jpg

3/11/08

Land of the Long White Lie

The New Zealand Terror Raids

By VALERIE MORSE


On October 15 2007, the New Zealand police carried out unprecedented nation-wide raids arresting 17 indigenous rights activists and anarchists and raiding some 60 different locations. The arrests were based on surveillance and interception warrants obtained under the Terrorism Suppression Act. This was the first time that the police used this Act, a law passed immediately after 9/11 and a direct result of it.

The raids were staged on a Monday morning starting at approximately 5am. At 5:45 am, the Police knocked on my door. Then they nearly broke it down. When I opened it, 15 officers swarmed in, waving an 80-page search warrant in my face. When I said, 'this isn't signed,' the detective responded 'here, here's the signed copy.' Then they ransacked my room, pulling my plants out of their containers, removing the back of my refrigerator and collecting a raft of documents, photographs, electronic gear and clothing. Finally, they arrested me and told me that I was going to be charged with participating in a terrorist group.

The raids came as a huge shock to me, to most of the country and to the world that follow such events. New Zealand, also known as Aotearoa-the 'land of the long white cloud' in the indigenous language of the Maori people-has a reputation for amicable race relations, a progressive government and an enviable settlement process for indigenous claims against breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi, the founding treaty between Maori and the British Crown, signed in 1840 by some 500 chiefs.

What is actually happening in Aotearoa beneath the government's clever 'clean, green, 100 per cent pure' marketing campaign is not at all what they would lead you to believe.
On day one of the raids, there was a media frenzy as the police carefully leaked tantalizing nuggets of evidence including reports of napalm bombs, assassination plots against Prime Minister Helen Clark and President George W Bush, and an 'IRA-style war plan.' The 17 arrestees were brought before District Court judges in four different cities to respond to the charges. One was dealt with immediately by the courts and dismissed, the remaining 16 all went to prison that night, remanded in custody as bail was vigorously opposed by the Crown prosecution.

We were deemed a threat to 'national security.' In the cloud of terrorism hysteria and secret evidence, our lawyers would not even attempt an application for bail.

The New Zealand Government has signed up for all of Bush's post-9/11 terrorism requirements. At the same time, it imported the US Government's brutal tactics of repression, surveillance technologies and police hyper-paranoia about political activity, particularly when it comes from indigenous activists who dare to speak of aspirations of sovereignty.

Of the 17 arrested on 15 October, 12 were Maori, many from the Tuhoe iwi (tribe). Tuhoe is known for its long history of resistance to colonization. They never signed the Treaty of Waitangi. There is a story that the Crown agent was advised that he would be eaten if he attempted to come into Tuhoe land in order to get the Treaty signed. Today, Tuhoe have the one of the highest ratios of native speakers of the Maori language (called 'te reo') among tribal groups and have a strong cultural identity that is intimately linked to the land in an area that they call 'Te Urewera,' land of the mist. There are about 20,000 people who claim Tuhoe ancestry, many of whom are still living in relatively isolated communities within Te Urewera.

The raids and arrests were the culmination of an $8 million dollar, two-year long operation dubbed 'Operation Eight'. On the day of the raids, some 300 police were involved. Most had little knowledge of the investigation or the suspects; none it seems had any knowledge of the history of the Crown's scorched earth policy, murder, and land theft which prompted fierce resistance by Tuhoe more than 100 years ago.

The forces of the state have a convenient way of forgetting things that don't suit the current narrative. Such was the case on October 15. In a spectacular display of force, armed, balaclava-clad police known as the 'armed offenders squad' quite literally invaded the small Tuhoe town of Ruatoki and blockaded the entire community. On an elaborate quest for terrorists and evidence, they stopped all vehicles coming in or out of the community and photographed the drivers and occupants. In the process of conducting house raids, they severely traumatized many people, including locking a woman and five children in a shed for six hours while the man of the family was questioned, taking a woman's underwear as evidence, and boarding a local school bus.

In one South Auckland raid, the police held an entire family, including a 12 year old girl, on their knees with hands behind their heads for some 5 hours, asking the young woman if she was a terrorist. This was the pattern for raids in the Maori communities.

For the non-indigenous arrestees (referred to herein as 'pakeha' a word that means white New Zealander), the situation was starkly different. In my case, I was not even handcuffed as I was walked to the car. No white neighborhoods were blockaded, nor were white bystanders stopped and photographed as they went about their daily business that cool Monday morning in October. It was only Maori.

The institutional racism of the police and justice system came as no surprise to Maori people and particularly to Tuhoe who have been subject to its arbitrary acts for some 160 years. For pakeha throughout the country, it was a wake-up call. Unfortunately, it was less a wake-up call about racism than it was about the growing power of the state against political dissidents. I say it was unfortunate because it is clear from the nearly 10,000 pages of evidence I have now seen, that it is Maori sovereignty that they fear. It is the political force of unified indigeneity that scares the ruling class of New Zealand.

For Maori in Aotearoa New Zealand, the 'war on terrorism' and these raids are part of a long history of colonization in Aotearoa New Zealand, and they have not been forgotten.

In the 1860s, the Suppression of Rebellion Act was passed with strikingly similar language to the Terrorism Suppression Act of 2002. This earlier Act was used by the fledgling New Zealand State to launch a series of vicious attacks on Maori communities in order to appropriate their land for settlement. People and whole tribes were defined as 'in rebellion' in order that the State could then exercise a range of repressive and exploitative measures against them.

I was arrested, I believe, to provide a cloak for the racist nature of the operation.

By arresting some pakeha activists, the government could deflect criticism that this was an operation against Maori. I was also arrested because I am associates with the Maori accused in the case, and because as an anarchist I have caused enough problems and embarrassments for the state that they would like to put me out of their misery. In June of last year, I published a book detailing the New Zealand government's involvement in the 'war on terrorism.' In it, I suggested that both dissidents and Maori were targets of the war, along with refugees and migrants. It was not without a sense of bizarre irony and a certain grim satisfaction that I sat in my prison cell and congratulated myself on being right.


Needless to say, in a country of 4 million people, there are not six degrees of separation, but usually only one or two. There most certainly is a connection between anarchists, environmentalists, anti-war and indigenous rights activists: most of them know each other and work together regularly. One would have to exist in a state of utter delusion not to make the connections between these issues, particularly in New Zealand where the effects of the self-imposed neo-liberal structural adjustment of the 1980s is being felt more acutely everyday.

The New Zealand Parliament is Westminster-style with mixed-member proportional representation. At present, the governing Labor party maintains power through a delicate balance of negotiated agreements, some formal, some informal, with other smaller parties that give support on vital confidence and supply votes.

As with the British Labor Party, the New Zealand Labor party long ago shed any resemblance to a working-class based party and has wholeheartedly embraced neo-liberal economics. This has had major implications for Maori who in the main reject its ubiquitous commodification, particularly with regard to flora, fauna, land and intellectual property. Nevertheless, up until very recently Maori had continued to support Labor generally, and all of the Maori electorate seats in Parliament were held by the Labour Party.

In 2004, the Government passed the Foreshore and Seabed Act, which had the effect of extinguishing Maori rights to claim customary ownership of the land between the high tide and low tide marks, and to the seabed. In contravention of international law and despite condemnation by the UN, the Government pressed ahead with the law, with near unanimous support in parliament. The following year the Treasury began to include a line-item in the annual financial accounts for these newly acquired Crown assets. This grotesque confiscation was considered a declaration of war by some Maori. It ruptured the Labor Party and brought about the formation of the Maori Party. This now presents a significant threat to Labor's hold on the Maori vote, and more importantly, to their hold on power.

Politically, this is one of the primary factors behind the raids. In the lead up to the 2008 election, it is crucial that Labour cast radical Maori as a dangerous threat to the stability of New Zealand. This was a gamble by Prime Minister Helen Clark and her cabal to secure a third term through a tactic of divide and conquer. In the media Clark repeatedly stated that the raids were 'an operational matter for the police,' but behind the scenes in Wellington, every politico knows that nothing of consequence happens without her direct and explicit nod.

Another significant political factor prompting the raids is the government's relationship with the US and its other close defense partners. As a member of the exclusive five-nation UKUSA intelligence network (along with the US, UK, Canada and Australia), New Zealand's security and police are intimately tied to a distinctive post-War relationship with the US. This relationship, and the resultant organizational links, has played a significant role in New Zealand's response to US terrorism hysteria. Further, the New Zealand government has separate, internal reasons for adopting much of the new terrorism legislation.

Prior to 9/11, the Terrorism Suppression Bill was before the Select Committee and was simply intended to ratify two existing UN conventions against terrorism. After 9/11, the law was radically re-written, kept secret from the public, while the Government and the opposition rushed to appear resolute in support of the US.

Fortunately, the changes were leaked and there was significant public opposition that eventually mitigated the worst aspects of the Act. Unfortunately, there were many more Acts that followed. These Acts mirror changes to US law and include the Border Security Act, the Maritime Security Act, the Telecommunications (Interception Capability) Act, the Identity (Citizenship and Passports) Act, the Security Intelligence Act and amendments to both the Immigration Act and the Crimes Act.

Along with these legislative changes, the state's security and surveillance services received massive funding injections and personnel increases ­ all in the name of fighting terrorism. Given this environment with all their new toys, eventually, the police and spooks had to find a terrorist. They tried desperately to pin that label on exiled Algerian politician Ahmed Zaoui who came to New Zealand at the end of 2001 on a false passport. When that failed, as it did in 2006 when the security risk certificate against him was revoked, they set to work finding others to fill the 'terrorist' role. The culture of these agencies is such that they view ex-parliamentary political activity as dangerous; they view Maori politically activity as particularly dangerous.
So the stage was set and the roles cast when some 300 police mounted the first ever 'terror raids' late last year.

The Terrorism Suppression Act was the tool to obtain extensive interception warrants for bugging cell phones and cars, but the people who were arrested were initially charged only for joint possession of firearms and restricted weapons under the Arms Act. In order for the Terrorism charges to be laid, the police first had to get the approval of the Attorney General.

In the first week following the raids, I sat in solitary confinement with no access to news or information. I was in shock. I have been arrested several times in the past for political activity, but have never been to prison. I was scared. I was also lucky because one of my dearest friends had been arrested that morning and was there with me. We had adjoining cells and could communicate by yelling over a 25 foot concrete wall in the yard outside between our cells. After the third day, I got a book to read: Kurt Vonnegut's Jailbird. It made me laugh so hard I had tears in my eyes.
When they finally moved us to the general population at the end of the first week, it felt like a glorious place - which just goes to demonstrate how quickly and easily solitary confinement breaks down your resistance and your tether on reality. It was beautiful to hear voices, to hear music, to go outside and to be able to see the hills and sky.


By the end of that first week, our lawyers managed to put forward an application for bail. We arrived at the Wellington District Court to a mass of supporters and media. Within minutes of the start of the hearing, everyone except the media was excluded from the courtroom. It was an ominous beginning to one of the most disturbing and difficult days of my life.

In the hours that followed, the Crown prosecutor painted a picture of us as a group of people who had been training to commit terrorist acts. We were accused of attending camps in the Urewera area where we used guns, Molotov cocktails and napalm. The fact that my three immediate co-accused had no convictions of any kind, and I had very minor ones, was used to prove our ill intention to get out of prison and carry out that which we had been planning. Once the terror label was used, no judge in the country, or indeed the world, would bail us. We went back to prison that Friday evening and I felt very, very dark.

On Monday 29 October, the police finally put their evidence to the Solicitor General in order that the charge of 'participating in a terrorist group' could be brought against us. That night, I was interned in my new cell with no one to talk to or to question about what might happen next. I had been moved 500 miles north to the Auckland women's correctional facility in a secretive mission worthy of bin Laden or at least his best mate.

By Wednesday, Prime Minister Helen Clark could no longer hold her tongue and waded into the debate. She arrogantly breached the sub judice standard ­ the term used for the right to a fair trial ­ commenting that those arrested 'at the very least had been training with firearms and napalm'. The media circus continued.
Throughout the country, protests, rallies, fundraising and awareness raising gigs were organized and what remains of the political left in New Zealand rallied around the arrestees. The political analysis ranged from debate about indigenous sovereignty to civil rights and surveillance. The mainstream media continued its tradition of sensationalist reporting, ill-informed conclusions and downright fabrications. The media concentration in Aotearoa New Zealand is one of the highest in the world, with nearly all the major dailies owned by two multinational corporations. Everyone was singing from the same song sheet, so to speak.

The day before I was due to have another bail hearing, after now nearly a month in jail, I had a long conversation with my lawyer. We discussed his strategy going into the hearing and the possible Crown arguments. At the end of that conversation, he said, 'Oh, there was something else I was meaning to tell youoh, that's right, the Solicitor-General is about to announce his decision. Valerie, they are going to lay the terrorism charges against you.'
I hung up the phone and I found Emily, my co-accused and dear friend. I told her that, 'we must prepare ourselves for this because it is going to happen'. I was manic, frantic, deeply disturbed and shaken. We sat for a little while before I went to my cell and tuned in National Radio. The four o'clock news immediately went to a live broadcast of the Solicitor-General's press conference. I sat on my bed rigid with fear. He announced, 'I cannot authorize the laying of charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act.' I ran out of my cell, screaming and running around the prison wing, 'they're not going to do it; they're not going to do it.' I yelled up to Emily who had retreated to her cell. I could hardly get the words out.

Her immediate response, 'for all of us?' and I thought, 'oh no, I don't know.' In my excitement I hadn't listened to his whole speech. I ran back to my cell where she joined me.

We tuned back in to hear him say that there was 'insufficient evidence' that none of us would be charged, and that the terrorism law was 'complex, incoherent and unworkable'. I was ecstatic. Moments later I got a call from the lawyer saying that the Crown was no longer opposing our bail. We would be out tomorrow.

It was surreal. I have never in my life felt the kind of joyous relief that I felt that night. I couldn't sleep. I couldn't concentrate. I just sat there in wonder at the events of the previous month.

On Friday, November 9, we were bailed from the High Court in Auckland. We are not free, however. Sixteen of us still face charges under the Arms Act. We continue to have onerous bail conditions including curfews, reporting conditions and non-association orders. They are the State's tactics for control and punishment.

As I have suggested, the evidence indicates that the raids were politically motivated by the long-standing fear of indigenous assertions of power. In this election year, it suits the Labor Government to find 'bad Maori' in order to fulfill the old colonial divide and rule strategy. They will assimilate those they can through propaganda and persuasion; those that resist will be brutalized and criminalized as they have been for more than a century. Maori political activists are under State surveillance because they are Maori.

It comes as little surprise that the United Nations has now accepted a complaint from indigenous lawyers and will investigate the New Zealand Government's conduct over the raids, although it is the first time that a complaint by a group against a state (rather than vice versa) has been investigated. While this is unlikely to have any substantive effect either on the situation for Maori or on the arrestees, it is another blow to the idealized utopia of the South Seas.

In the coming months, the case of the 'Urewera 16' will be heard in the District Court in Auckland. My great hope for this trial and for the future of Aotearoa New Zealand is that the raids will contribute to disrupting the false peace of this colonial state and radicalize people to struggle for justice and freedom.

*For more information about the Crown's invasion of Tuhoe lands, please see:
Tuhoe: A history of resistance at http://october15thsolidarity.info/node/221

3/6/08

UN Observer says govts are using terror

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/print.html?path=HL0803/S00054.htm

UN Observer says govts are using terror to instill fear in communities


Prof. Hans Koechler
******
Transcript by
Syed Akbar Kamal

Prof. Hans Koechler paid a visit to Auckland recently to deliver lecture on ‘The Global War on Terror - Contradictions of an Imperial Strategy'. He is President of the International Progress Organisation (IPO) and a renowned international jurist, activist expert on international law, injustice, and power politics, academic and much-published progressive author:

Dr Koechler's clear perceptions on the subject assume greater relevance here now, following the terror raids, arrests, and mass intimidation of Tuhoe last October; and the subsequent Law Commission review now underway of NZ's criminal and terrorist legislation.

Since 1972, UN Secretaries-General in their statements subsequently acknowledged Professor Köchler’s contributions to international peace. In April 2000, Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Professor Koechler as international observer at the Scottish Court in the Netherlands (Lockerbie Trial) which to this day remains unresolved largely due to the non-compliance of the British government in releasing the supposedly secret information to the court.


Darpan-The Mirror: Dr. Hans Koechler, welcome, welcome to Aotearoa. Thank you for being willing on your holiday to spend some time sharing your knowledge with us. You have talked tonight about the global war on terror-what is it new about terror and terrorism in the current context?


Prof. Koechler: The new feature is that a kind of universal threat is now being connected to the term terrorism and fear is being instilled into the people because they are make believe that there is a threat to our western civilization even to the very survival of the western community and to the preservation of the identity that is emanating from this kind of illusive enemy which is called international terrorism. That I think is the new feature because in earlier decades, in earlier eras, terrorists acts were specified and people identified certain-the interests coming from certain specific groups but now apparently this danger is somehow general and vague and entire civilizations are presented as a threat to our own civilization.

Darpan-The Mirror: So who is promoting this and why?

Prof. Koechler: As far as I can see it is promoted by the establishment, powerful political and economic establishment, media establishment in the leading countries of the western world. On top of them first and foremost is the United States of America and in addition for instance the United Kingdom of Great Britain and the Northern Island and some other Western allies.

Darpan-The Mirror: And what do they have to gain from this?

Prof. Koechler: Well, frankly speaking, it is about the global power in a situation in which there is no challenge to the Western supremacy and particularly in which there is no real threat to the security of the Western world. I mean after the demise of communists, after the collapse of the Soviet block; apparently one feels the need to create another enemy stereotype which will allow to somehow justify certain measures of control over the rest of the world. Usually a government needs an enemy; people have to be rallied around the government in defence against an enemy from outside and this threat or the other which is now supposedly threatening the west is presented as terror- or as terrorism or as the terrorists.

Darpan-The Mirror: You described it as self-defeating; why do you think it is self defeating?

Prof. Koechler: It is finally doomed to fail because it necessitates a constant a kind of perpetual mobilisation of the people and of the resources of a country. When you present the threat as universal and when there is no possibility to identify specifically certain groups from which the threat emerges, you have to engage in a total of strategy of prevention and you have to exclude even the slightest possibility of attack from whichever direction and that means you have to be prepared 24 hours seven days a week hundred percent. And for that reason somehow the …somehow the…strength or the capacities of the countries that engage in such an undertaking will be exhausted and the other reason why I think this is in the medium and long term is a self-defeating exercise.

And the other reason is this kind of strategy antagonizes entire nations and even peoples and civilizations in such a way that they will not feel any loyalty towards those countries that engage in that struggle and they may challenge the supremacy of those countries and they may be more determined in their resistance than they otherwise would be, if there would be a kind of rational relationship on the basis of the definition of mutual interest, as also could be the case.

Darpan-The Mirror: Why have politicians, political leaders, intellectual leaders in so much of the west not challenged? You gave the example of the Japanese member of the senate who had raised issues and those issues had not appeared in the mainstream media. What- Why do you think that is occurring?

Prof. Koechler: I personally feel on the basis of my own experience now over several decades having dealt with issues particularly of the Middle East of the Muslim world that most of the people in the media and in the academic community are just afraid for their own position. They do not want to somehow be marginalized or that they do not want to be sidelined which would be the case if they speak out critically against this entire strategy. So it is a kind of opportunism or the kind of fear which people are not able to overcome because very often if one really speaks out, one is confronted with quiet strong media campaigns and the careers of some people might suffer if they do speak out.

Darpan-The Mirror: But if we contrast that to the civil rights campaigns and the challenges that there were to the suppression of rights during the 1960’s, 1970’s in the West- we are now seeing a revisiting of the normalization, militarization, of suppression of fundamental rights. What’s different? Why are we seeing those voices of dissent now?

Prof. Koechler: I think that as far as Europe is concerned, then I am only an expert on these matters; in Europe as far as Europe is concerned the entire social climate if one may use that term, is different compared to the 1960’s and also our students in universities nowadays are much less outspoken and are much more obedient so to speak as far as the politically correct opinions are concerned. But maybe the situation now has to do with a kind of overall opinion control or fear that has been instilled into the people and no one dares to be or doesn’t want to be disloyal towards his community or wants to speak out against the supplementary soft state.

Darpan-The Mirror: So how would you relate this to that of Palestine? We have seen the stories of killings and maiming everyday; we have seen the depravation of basic necessities of life- of access to electricity and to water and food? How do you interpret or analyze the situation in Palestine and the responses to it within the framework of your thinking?

Prof. Koechler: As far as I understand that I have followed the developments in Palestine since 1970’s and that means it’s now more than three decades, as far as I see it, most of what you refer to now, most of the events are not adequately presented to the wider public; most of the people would just not know what is really going on, the news’ are filtered through the corporate media, if people would really be aware of the situation…people live…under which people live in for instance the Gaza strip, there would be some stronger and critical position against the policies for instance of the western countries. But as far as I see it, there is a lack of…lack of comprehensive information and the other problem as far as Palestine is concerned is that is this linkage with Islam as a threat and particularly terrorism-the linkage of Islam and terrorism.

Darpan-The Mirror: So when you are looking at the way the western states respond to the use of force to suppress resistance movements, freedom fighters, terrorists however they are defined by one side or the other. What are the factors that you think drive the decisions of states now can I put that in the local context…

Prof. Koechler: Yeah.

Darpan-The Mirror: Our government here for example had no problem with recognizing the General who lead the coup in Thailand. The military government there and the government here was perfectly happy to deal with, had no problem in dealing with Musharraf in Pakistan; Bainimarama the leader of the military coup in Fiji is ostracized, there are sanctions against anyone in the military including one who wanted to come here in January whose family members were part of the military, what are the kinds of considerations do you think that drive the differential responses of the western leaders to regimes that are actually very similar in their particular style and in the suppression of rights attached to it?

Prof. Koechler: I would use the term of “the policy of double standards”. A government applies certain principles of legality or certain criteria of the rule of law selectively according to the specific constellation of interest. And so it is no surprise to me, of course I am not aware of the specific policies of the government here, but it is of no surprise to me to see that the government applies certain principles or insists on the implementation of certain principles in one case and totally overlooks them. Of course in the neighbourhood there may be different interests…and different from which your country may have…that explains…why one insists on certain rules in this case and does not insists on certain rules in other cases. Of course, that creates a credibility problem but I do not know...frankly speaking upto the present moment I do not know of any government which really would be consistent in the application of principles and which would avoid in its foreign policy the so-called policy of double standards.

Darpan-The Mirror: The New Zealand government has also made great play out of the fact that it did not join the coalition of the willing in the invasion of Iraq but it’s there in Afghanistan; Does that sound a convincing clean hands kind of principled approach to you or do you have problems with that kind of differentiation?

Prof. Koechler: In terms of legal doctrines, I would say I would have problems with this kind of differentiation but one could say first of all the government of New Zealand made a good decision in not sending troops to Iraq may of the government that joined the coalition of the willing regret this by now and some have already withdrawn their troops. So the government here was lucky in having not fallen into that trap but as far as new principles are concerned in my view the interventions in both countries Iraq and as well as in Afghanistan are a violation of sovereignity of those countries and both interventions are not duly justified or legitimized by international law; even in the case of Afghanistan there is no authorization of the intervention by American and NATO forces in that country.

Darpan-The Mirror: So do you think International law has become so devalued that it is no longer actually defendable in many of those instances or do you think it is a recoverable concept that might still have some value if it can be removed from the grip of the Security Council?

Prof. Koechler: I don’t know. Eventually it may already be beyond repair so to speak. The big problem I see it that in a situation in a global constellation in which there is no balance of power there is absolutely no incentive for the hegemonial country to abide...to abide by the rule of law or to obey the law.

There is no incentive for instance for that country to respect Security Council resolutions, on other way because of the veto this country like for others can block any decisions by that Council at any moment. But as far as Afghanistan is concerned the situation went even that far that for instance my own country the Republic of Austria which according to its constitution is permanently neutral according to the Swiss model.

Even my country has sent forces though in a very small number but sent forces to Afghanistan. Of course people say that this is not compatible with the statutes of permanent neutrality. Can be? It never can be compatible but these things happen now and one is just reinterpreting terms according to the constellation, political constellation of interest at a given moment.

Darpan-The Mirror: So what’s your sense of what might happen in Iran? What are your fears what might happen?

Prof. Koechler: I did fear that the United States together with their ally in the Middle East plus one or two European countries might militarily intervene in Iran and that was according to my knowledge… also the plan of the United States administration two years ago...one year ago.

What I see now is the inter-actions services of that very country have expressed an opinion that is contradicting the strategy of the President of the United States. So now my hope is that the US is reconsidering its war plans against Iran and that it will not attack Iran because it will totally destabilize not only the situation in the Middle East but the situation far beyond that region.

Darpan-The Mirror: You stressed a lot on the foreign policy in ideological and the economic interests are also integral to this not only in the Middle East but in the way many economies are now becoming almost dependent on perpetual certainly many aspects of the economy are; Fiji where you are going to go tomorrow the Fiji economy is dependent on remittances; almost 90% of remittances are coming from the security workers that are operating in Iraq; you have an economy that becomes dependent on war and when people come back and bringing the militarization back into the country itself, do you see any similar kinds of militarization of economy within Europe and America that might want to keep perpetuating this process?

Prof. Koechler: As far as Europe is concerned I do not yet see that tendency firmly established. In United States it appears obvious to me that there is a kind of self-perpetuating situation and that’s the economic interests that lead to the involvement of the country into military adventures. As far as our countries in the European Union are concerned I think we are not yet reached that stage…the military industry in most of the European countries is much less strong and much less developed than it is in the United States.

Darpan-The Mirror: Just one last question…we become aware that terrorism has become a domestic issue in this country with the arrests that were in part under the Terrorism Suppression Act with most of those arrested being Maori Sovereignity activists. Do you think the global war on terror is actually having an internal dimension that legitimizes the use of state power against its own dissident internal factions as much as against the other in the global context? And how in that sense do you think we might connect the domestic realities to the international experiences?

Prof. Koechler: I am in this country only since very short time so I am not so familiar with the internal political situation however I do hope that a distinction will be made between tensions that may exist domestically and the international issues related to the so-called global war on terror. As of the present moment I do not see any connection between what is going on here between the government and the representatives of the native population of New Zealand and the war on terror. And just hope that no one will exploits this extremely emotional climate surrounding the global war on terror for internal domestic politics or for internal security measures. One thing…the one situation is to be totally kept separate from the other.

Darpan-The Mirror: Thank you very much for your time. We wish you safe travel and we look forward to having you back here again before July. Thanks!

Prof. Koechler: You are welcome!


*****

Syed Akbar Kamal is Producer/Director for nationwide current affairs programme Darpan-The Mirror on satellite feed Stratos & Triangle TV.
www.teamworkproductions.co.nz

www.teamworkproductions.co.nz