LONDON: A prominent British human rights lawyer is convening an independent tribunal in London to investigate whether the Chinese government’s alleged rights abuses against Uighur Muslims in the far western Xinjiang region constitute genocide or crimes against humanity.
The tribunal is expected to reveal new evidence and testimony over several days’ hearings next year. While the tribunal does not have government backing, it is the latest attempt to hold China accountable for its treatment of the Uighurs and ethnic Turkic minorities, who have been subject to an unprecedented crackdown since 2017.
Barrister Geoffrey Nice, who previously led the prosecution of ex-Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic over the Balkans war and worked with the International Criminal Court, was asked by the World Uighur Congress to investigate “ongoing atrocities and possible genocide” against the Uighur people.
Allegations against China about potential genocide are “questions that should be asked and answered” but such claims have never been legally scrutinized in public, Nice told The Associated Press on Wednesday.
Organizers are in the initial stages of gathering evidence, and expect to receive a substantial number of submissions from Uighurs exiled abroad over the next few months. New evidence that may emerge includes testimony from several former security guards who were involved in the Xinjiang detention camps.
“At the moment, the strongest evidence would appear to be evidence of incarceration and possibly evidence of enforced sterilization,” Nice said.
A recent investigation by the AP found that the Chinese government is systematically forcing birth control on Uighurs and other Muslims in an apparent effort to reduce their population. The report found that authorities regularly subject minority women to pregnancy checks and force intrauterine devices, sterilization and abortion on hundreds of thousands. While scores have been thrown in detention camps for alleged “religious extremism,” many others were sent to the camps simply for having too many children.
Such enforced sterilization practices could be found to breach the Genocide Convention, Nice said.
The Chinese Embassy in London did not respond to emailed requests for comment. Chinese officials have repeatedly derided allegations of rights abuses in Xinjiang as fabricated, and insist that all ethnicities are treated equally.
China has long suspected the Uighurs, who are mostly Muslim, of harboring separatist tendencies because of their distinct culture, language and religion. In a lengthy press conference in August, the Chinese ambassador to the UK played graphic videos of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang to show that the Chinese government’s measures there are “necessary and important.”
Ambassador Liu Xiaoming also called allegations about rights abuses in Xinjiang made in Western media “lies of the century,” and denied that nearly 1 million Uighurs have been detained in Xinjiang.
The London tribunal’s judgment is not binding on any government. However, Nice said that the process will nonetheless be one way to address the lack of action in tackling the alleged abuses by “filling the gap with reliable information.”
“There is no other way of bringing the leadership of the (Chinese) Communist Party collectively or individually to judgment,” Nice said.
In July, lawyers representing exiled Uighur activists filed a complaint with the International Criminal Court against China, asking the court in The Hague, Netherlands, to investigate the forced repatriation of thousands of Uighurs from Cambodia and Tajikistan and alleged genocide in Xinjiang.
However, Beijing does not recognize the international court’s jurisdiction, and Nice — who is not involved in that case — said it will likely focus more on the repatriating countries’ culpability and less on that of Chinese authorities.
The World Uighur Congress, an international organization representing Uighur exiles, has provided initial evidence and funding to the London tribunal. Organizers expect to hold two public hearings in London next year, each lasting several days.
The tribunal will comprise of at least seven members who will act as jury. They include British property businessman Nicholas Vetch, one of the organizers. A verdict is expected by the end of 2021.
Darren Byler, an academic studying Uighurs at the University of Colorado, said that, despite its limitations, the tribunal is an important step because it can provide a “detailed and legal accounting of what has transpired,” and add perspective to the prevailing US-centric reaction to the issue.
“So far the world response to what is happening to the Uighurs and Kazakhs in Northwest China has been largely confined to unilateral actions by the United States and been associated with President Trump’s more general anti-China position. An independent investigation conducted from outside of the US will be helpful in adding an additional perspective,” Byler said.
In July the Trump administration imposed sanctions on three senior Chinese Communist Party officials for alleged human rights abuses targeting Uighurs, ethnic Kazakhs and other minorities in Xinjiang, including mass detention and forced population control.
UK public tribunal to probe Uighur ‘genocide’ claims
https://arab.news/4ab6v
UK public tribunal to probe Uighur ‘genocide’ claims
- The tribunal is expected to reveal new evidence and testimony over several days’ hearings next year
- While the tribunal does not have government backing, it is the latest attempt to hold China accountable
Transcript of Trump’s speech on US strikes on Iran
- ‘There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days’
Thank you very much.
A short time ago, the US military carried out massive, precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime. Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan. Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise.
Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror.
Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not. Future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.
For 40 years, Iran has been saying. Death to America, death to Israel. They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs, with roadside bombs. That was their specialty. We lost over 1,000 people and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East, and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular. So many were killed by their general, Qassim Soleimani. I decided a long time ago that I would not let this happen. It will not continue.
I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we’ve gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel. I want to thank the Israeli military for the wonderful job they’ve done. And most importantly, I want to congratulate the great American patriots who flew those magnificent machines tonight, and all of the United States military on an operation the likes of which the world has not seen in many, many decades.
Hopefully, we will no longer need their services in this capacity. I hope that’s so. I also want to congratulate the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan ‘Razin’ Caine, spectacular general, and all of the brilliant military minds involved in this attack.
With all of that being said, this cannot continue. There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight’s was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There’s no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight. Not even close. There has never been a military that could do what took place just a little while ago.
Tomorrow, General Caine, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth will have a press conference at 8 a.m. at the Pentagon. And I want to just thank everybody. And, in particular, God. I want to just say, we love you, God, and we love our great military. Protect them. God bless the Middle East. God bless Israel and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you.
UN chief says US attacks on Iran nuclear sites a ‘direct threat to international peace and security’
UN chief says US attacks on Iran nuclear sites a ‘direct threat to international peace and security’
- Israeli PM Netanyahu praises Trump, saying his “bold decision” will “change history”
- Trump wins immediate praise from Republicans in Congress after announcing strikes on Iran
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Sunday slammed UPresident Donald Trump’s decision to order US military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities as a “dangerous escalation.”
“I am gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today. This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security,” he said in a statement.
“There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,” he said.
Guterres called on member states to de-escalate and to uphold their obligations under the UN Charter and other rules of international law.
“At this perilous hour, it is critical to avoid a spiral of chaos. There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy. The only hope is peace,” he said.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was predictably all praises for Trump’s decision.
“Your bold decision to target Iran’s nuclear facilities, with the awesome and righteous might of the United States, will change history,” he said in a video message directed at the American president.
Netanyahu said the US “has done what no other country on earth could do.”
Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon also thanked Trump for his “historic decision to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Today, President Trump proved that ‘Never Again’ is not just a slogan — it’s a policy.”
In Washington, Congressional Republicans — and at least one Democrat — immediately praised Trump after he announced his fateful attack order.
“Well done, President Trump,” Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina posted on X. Texas Sen. John Cornyn called it a “courageous and correct decision.” Alabama Sen. Katie Britt called the bombings “strong and surgical.”
Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin posted: “America first, always.”
The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Trump “has made a deliberate — and correct — decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime.”
Wicker posted on X that “we now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies.”
The quick endorsements of stepped up US involvement in Iran came after Trump had publicly mulled the strikes for days and many congressional Republicans had cautiously said they thought he would make the right decision. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Saturday evening that “as we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm’s way.”
Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, were briefed ahead of the strikes on Saturday, according to people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it.
Johnson said in a statement that the military operations “should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says.”
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Arkansas, said he had also been in touch with the White House and “I am grateful to the US servicemembers who carried out these precise and successful strikes.”
Breaking from many of his Democratic colleagues, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, an outspoken supporter of Israel, also praised the attacks on Iran. “As I’ve long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,” he posted. “Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.”
Both parties have seen splits in recent days over the prospect of striking Iran. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican and a longtime opponent of US involvement in foreign wars, posted on X after Trump announced the attacks that “This is not Constitutional.”
Many Democrats have maintained that Congress should have a say. The Senate was scheduled to vote as soon as this week on a resolution by Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine requiring congressional approval before the US declared war on Iran or took specific military action.
Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House intelligence panel, posted on X after Trump’s announcement: “According to the Constitution we are both sworn to defend, my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall. Full stop.”
Early humans survived in a range of extreme environments before global migration, study says
- This adaptability is a skill that long predates the modern age
WASHINGTON: Humans are the only animal that lives in virtually every possible environment, from rainforests to deserts to tundra.
This adaptability is a skill that long predates the modern age. According to a new study published Wednesday in Nature, ancient Homo sapiens developed the flexibility to survive by finding food and other resources in a wide variety of difficult habitats before they dispersed from Africa about 50,000 years ago.
“Our superpower is that we are ecosystem generalists,” said Eleanor Scerri, an evolutionary archaeologist at the Max Planck Institute of Geoanthropology in Jena, Germany.
Our species first evolved in Africa around 300,000 years ago. While prior fossil finds show some groups made early forays outside the continent, lasting human settlements in other parts of the world didn’t happen until a series of migrations around 50,000 years ago.
“What was different about the circumstance of the migrations that succeeded — why were humans ready this time?” said study co-author Emily Hallett, an archaeologist at Loyola University Chicago.
Earlier theories held that Stone Age humans might have made a single important technological advance or developed a new way of sharing information, but researchers haven’t found evidence to back that up.
This study took a different approach by looking at the trait of flexibility itself.
The scientists assembled a database of archaeological sites showing human presence across Africa from 120,000 to 14,000 years ago. For each site, researchers modeled what the local climate would have been like during the time periods that ancient humans lived there.
“There was a really sharp change in the range of habitats that humans were using starting around 70,000 years ago,” Hallett said. “We saw a really clear signal that humans were living in more challenging and more extreme environments.”
While humans had long survived in savanna and forests, they shifted into everything from from dense rainforests to arid deserts in the period leading up to 50,000 years ago, developing what Hallett called an “ecological flexibility that let them succeed.”
While this leap in abilities is impressive, it’s important not to assume that only Homo sapiens did it, said University of Bordeaux archaeologist William Banks, who was not involved in the research.
Other groups of early human ancestors also left Africa and established long-term settlements elsewhere, including those that evolved into Europe’s Neanderthals, he said.
The new research helps explain why humans were ready to expand across the world way back when, he said, but it doesn’t answer the lasting question of why only our species remains today.
NASA spacecraft around the moon photographs the crash site of a Japanese company’s lunar lander
- The crash was the second failure in two years for Tokyo-based ispace
CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida: A NASA spacecraft around the moon has photographed the crash site of a Japanese company’s lunar lander.
NASA released the pictures Friday, two weeks after ispace’s lander slammed into the moon.
The images show a dark smudge where the lander, named Resilience, and its mini rover crashed into Mare Frigoris or Sea of Cold, a volcanic region in the moon’s far north. A faint halo around the area was formed by the lunar dirt kicked up by the impact.
NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter captured the scene last week.
The crash was the second failure in two years for Tokyo-based ispace. Company officials plan to hold a news conference next week to explain what doomed the latest mission, launched from Cape Canaveral in January.
Democrats are at odds over the Israel-Iran war as Trump considers intervening
- Many prominent Democrats with 2028 presidential aspirations are staying silent, so far, on the Israel-Iran war
After nearly two years of stark divisions over the war in Gaza and support for Israel, Democrats are now finding themselves at odds over US policy toward Iran as progressives demand unified opposition to President Donald Trump’s consideration of a strike against Tehran’s nuclear program while party leaders tread more cautiously.
US leaders of all stripes have found common ground for two decades on the position that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. The longtime US foe has supported groups that have killed Americans across the Mideast and threatens to destroy Israel. But Trump’s public flirtation with joining Israel’s offensive against Iran may become the Democratic Party’s latest schism, just as it is sharply dividing Trump’s isolationist “Make America Great Again” base from more hawkish conservatives.
While progressives have staked out clear opposition to Trump’s potential actions, the party leadership is playing the safer ground of demanding a role for Congress before Trump could use force against Iran. Many prominent Democrats with 2028 presidential aspirations are staying silent, so far, on the Israel-Iran war.
“They are sort of hedging their bets,” said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state who served under Democratic President Barack Obama and is now a strategist on foreign policy. “The beasts of the Democratic Party’s constituencies right now are so hostile to Israel’s war in Gaza that it’s really difficult to come out looking like one would corroborate an unauthorized war that supports Israel without blowback.”
Progressive Democrats use Trump’s ideas and words
Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., has called Trump’s consideration of an attack “a defining moment for our party” and has introduced legislation with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, that calls on the Republican president to “terminate” the use of US armed forces against Iran unless “explicitly authorized” by a declaration of war from Congress.
Khanna used Trump’s own campaign arguments of putting American interests first when the congressman spoke to Theo Von, a comedian who has been supportive of the president and is popular in the “manosphere.”
“That’s going to cost this country a lot of money that should be being spent here at home,” said Khanna, who is said to be among the many Democrats eyeing the party’s 2028 primary.
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who twice sought the Democratic presidential nomination, pointed to Trump’s stated goal during his inaugural speech of being known as “a peacemaker and a unifier.”
“Very fine words. Trump should remember them today. Supporting Netanyahu’s war against Iran would be a catastrophic mistake,” Sanders said about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Sanders has reintroduced legislation prohibiting the use of federal money for force against Iran, insisted that US military intervention would be unwise and illegal and accused Israel of striking unprovoked. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York signed on to a similar bill from Sanders in 2020, but he is so far holding off this time.
Some believe the party should stake out a clear anti-war stance as Trump weighs whether to launch a military offensive that is seemingly counter to the anti-interventionism he promised during his 2024 campaign.
“The leaders of the Democratic Party need to step up and loudly oppose war with Iran and demand a vote in Congress,” said Tommy Vietor, a former Obama aide, on X.
Mainstream Democrats are cautious, while critical
The staunch support from the Democratic administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for Israel’s war against Hamas loomed over the party’s White House ticket in 2024, even with the criticism of Israel’s handling of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Trump exploited the divisions to make inroads with Arab American voters and Orthodox Jews on his way back to the White House.
Today, the Israel-Iran war is the latest test for a party struggling to repair its coalition before next year’s midterm elections and the quick-to-follow kickoff to the 2028 presidential race. Bridging the divide between an activist base that is skeptical of foreign interventions and already critical of US support for Israel and more traditional Democrats and independents who make up a sizable, if not always vocal, voting bloc.
In a statement after Israel’s first strikes, Schumer said Israel has a right to defend itself and “the United States’ commitment to Israel’s security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran’s response.”
Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nevada, was also cautious in responding to the Israeli action and said “the US must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment.”
“It really seems like the Trump and Iran war track is kind of going along like a Formula 1 racetrack, and then the Democrats are in some sort of tricycle or something trying to keep up,” said Ryan Costello, a policy director for the Washington-based National Iranian American Council, which advocates for diplomatic engagement between US and Iran.
Other Democrats have condemned Israel’s strikes and accused Netanyahu of sabotaging nuclear talks with Iran. They are reminding the public that Trump withdrew in 2018 from a nuclear agreement that limited Tehran’s enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions negotiated during the Obama administration.
“Trump created the problem,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, on X. “The single reason Iran was so close to obtaining a nuclear weapon is that Trump destroyed the diplomatic agreement that put major, verifiable constraints on their nuclear program.”
The progressives’ pushback
A Pearson Institute/Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from September 2024 found that about half of Democrats said the US was being “too supportive” of Israel and about 4 in 10 said their level support was “about right.” Democrats were more likely than independents and Republicans to say the Israeli government had “a lot” of responsibility for the continuation of the war between Israel and Hamas.
About 6 in 10 Democrats and half of Republicans felt Iran was an adversary with whom the US was in conflict.
Democratic Rep. Yassamin Ansari, an Iranian American from Arizona, said Iranians are unwitting victims in the conflict because there aren’t shelters or infrastructure to protect civilians from targeted missiles as there are in Israel.
“The Iranian people are not the regime, and they should not be punished for its actions,” Ansari posted on X, while criticizing Trump for fomenting fear among the Iranian population. “The Iranian people deserve freedom from the barbaric regime, and Israelis deserve security.”
