٢٨ اسد، روزیادبود ازیک حماسه ویک جنبش

19 اگست 2011

اعلامیه

ازخاطرۀ پرافتخاراستقلال افغانستان بمثابۀ آغارپرطنین جنبش امانی نودودو سال میگذرد. فدراسیون سازمانهای پناهندگان افغان در اروپا ٢٨ اسد را هرسال بعنوان روزپر افتخارتاریخ معاصر افغانستان وبه یادبود شاه وطن دوست وترقیخواه کشور، امان الله خان ونیاکان وطندوست ما که با ارادۀ آهنین امپراطوری استعمارگربریتانیا رامجبور به برسمیت شناختن استقلال سیاسی کشور شان نمودند، تجلیل میکند.

 

قهرمانان گم نام استقلال آن رادمردانی اند که با دستان خالی ولی عزم استواراعلان جنگ توسط شاه امان الله را با خوشی لبیک گفتندوبا ایثار خون خویش استقلال سیاسی کشور خود را بدست آوردند. بیجهت نیست که ٢٨ اسد را همه ملت بحیث یک روز پر افتخارمیپذیرد واز ٱن بقدرتوان خویش تجلیل میکند. تجلیل همزمان ٢٨ اسد ازطرف هردو قطب داخلی جنگ کنونی( طالبان وحکومت کرزی) حقانیت این ادعای ما را تثبیت میکند. واما هیچیک ازطرفین جنگ کنونی حق مقایسۀ خویش با ٱن شاه وٱن مجاهدین را ندارد. دولت امانی به مردم خویش متکی بودنه به بیگانگان.. امان الله خان آبروی افغانستان را به هیچ همسایه وبیگانه در برابرپول نفروخت بلکه با بزرگترین دول اروپایی روابط برمبنای تساوی حقوق واحترام متقابل داشت. امان الله در رأس یک جنبش مستقل قرارداشت. جنبشی که مجاهدین خویش را با پول بیگانه معاش نمیدادوتصمیم صلح وجنگ را خود اتخاذمیکرد. جنبش امانی وشاه امان الله پیشرو ومتمدن بودند، جزمنافع وطن ومردم افغانستان تعهد دیگری نداشتند وهدف غایی شان تعمیرافغانستان بودنه تخریب ٱن.

استقلال افغانستان وگام های اصلاح طلبانۀ متعاقب آن مردم منطقه را الهام داد تا برای استقلال کشور خویش بجنبند. رژیم امانی به خارچشم استعمارگران انگلیس مبدل شد.. انگلیسها شیپوراغتشاش راازشرق توسط بخش اجیر روحانیت نواختند و توانستند قسمتی ازمردم را علیۀ رژیم امانی بشورانند. دورۀ که با حماسه شروع شده بود، با تراژیدی پایان یافت.

یاد اسقلال ٢٨ اسد وجنبش امانی گرامی باد!

کمیته حقوق بشرفارو

“Kill teams” and jihadist victories

 

ROBBINS

Left has a history of using aberrations to besmirch America’s military
The Washington Times By and James S. Robbins Friday, March 25, 2011
Jeremy Morlock, an American soldier who confessed to murdering three Afghan civilians in 2009 and 2010, was sentenced Wednesday to 24 years in prison by a military judge. Four more soldiers face murder charges, and an additional seven are being held for lesser crimes. Some say the actions of Morlock and other members of his so-called “kill team” stand as a moral indictment of the war effort, but they have it backward. The U.S. government recognizes wanton killing of civilians as a war crime and responds accordingly. Had Morlock been working for the jihadists, he would be hailed as a hero.

Last week, the German news weekly Der Spiegel released a series of grisly images taken by “kill team” members of soldiers posing with corpses of their victims. Morlock is seen in one of the photos holding one of the corpses by the hair, smiling broadly. The accompanying story gives details of the killings, in which the team systematically murdered civilians then tried to make the deaths look like the result of legitimate operations. Der Spiegel claims to have 40,000 more “kill team” images left to publish.

The usual crowd of anti-war critics has been remarkably silent about the “kill team” pictures, perhaps because they are unwilling to subject President Obama to the same degree of condemnation that they heaped upon George W. Bush. When the Abu Ghraib prisoner-abuse scandal broke in 2004, former Vice President Al Gore said that “what happened at that prison, it is now clear, is not the result of random acts of a few bad apples. It was the natural consequence of the Bush administration policy.” Democratic leaders such as Sen. John Kerry and Rep. Nancy Pelosi called on Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld to resign, as did the New York Times and Boston Globe. Then-Sen. Joseph R. Biden also was part of that chorus, but Vice President Biden has been uncharacteristically mute on the broader ramifications of the actions of the “kill team.”

Seymour Hersh, writing online in the New Yorker, said that he believed that “these soldiers had come to accept the killing of civilians – recklessly, as payback, or just at random – as a facet of modern unconventional warfare. In other words, killing itself, whether in a firefight with the Taliban or in sport with innocent bystanders in a strange land with a strange language and strange customs, has become ordinary.” He concludes, “This is part of the toll wars take on the young people we send to fight them for us.”

It may be true that the 12 men facing trial had been dehumanized to the point where hunting down innocent Afghans became a form of sport. But it is wrong to generalize from their aberrant behavior and indict the entire U.S. military or the Afghan war effort. These are not typical soldiers, and their actions were beyond the pale. Most troops serving overseas are not marauding killers but highly trained, competent and professional. This does not lend itself to splashy headlines or blistering commentary, but the “kill team” stands out precisely because of its uniqueness.

Since the Vietnam War, there has been a cottage industry of war-crimes reporting, sometimes true, other times exaggerated, often simply false. The 1968 My Lai massacre, which made Mr. Hersh’s career, was an earlier example of American soldiers committing war crimes and being punished for them. But anti-war activists and politicians exploited the tragedy for political gain and left the impression that randomly killing civilians was the norm for U.S. troops in South Vietnam. The expression “baby killers” entered the contemporary lexicon, and radicals spit on returning troops. It was one of the low points in American history.

But while the illegal actions of a few soldiers were used to discredit the entire war effort, the same critics ignored the systematic, policy-driven slaughter of innocents perpetrated by America’s enemies. In the South Vietnamese city of Hue, more than 5,000 civilians and prisoners of war were slaughtered intentionally by communist forces during the Tet Offensive. But the tragedy at Hue became merely a footnote to the war. The anti-war left set about denying the event took place, and the mainstream media, so fixated on My Lai, gave the Hue massacre barely a mention.

Like the North Vietnamese communists, the Taliban, al Qaeda and other terror groups have no problem killing innocents. Murdering civilians is central to their rules of engagement; it is their standard operating procedure. To them, it is a matter of pride; they will behead a helpless captive and upload a video of the killing to YouTube. What we call an atrocity they call a job well done.

James S. Robbins is author of “This Time We Win: Revisiting the Tet Offensive,” (Encounter Books, 2010) executive director of the American Security Council Foundation and senior editorial writer for foreign affairs at The Washington Times.

 

 

Norway To Asylum Seekers: Go Home

Norway deported 102 people to Russia in the first two months of 2011, including Madina Salamova, who became famous in Norway after writing a book about her flight from North Ossetia as a child.

By Courtney Brooks, Amina Umarova

Magomed was recently rounded up in the middle of the night and deported from Norway without warning.
The 40-year-old Chechen asylum seeker says he was not even informed that his request had been rejected after seven years living in the country.

 

By The Numbers: Norway’s Asylum Seekers

“They brought us to Moscow and left us completely alone,” he says. “Many of us did not have proper documents and therefore they kept us at the border for a long time. [The Norwegians] told us that their duty was to hand us over to the Russian authorities.”
Magomed, who declined to give his full name out of fears for his safety, is now living in Chechnya with his parents. He has been left without a job or any money and doesn’t know who to turn to for help.
And his is far from an isolated case.

Asylum Numbers Drop
Members of 50 other families living in Norway were deported the same night he was. The number of asylum seekers who have been deported or who have had their applications denied has increased dramatically in Norway as the result of the government’s push to drive out illegal immigrants. The rise came even as the number of asylum seekers dropped in 2010, putting the spotlight on the toughening of an asylum process once seen as one of the more welcoming in Europe.
A look at the numbers provided by the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration for January 2009 through February 2011 shows that asylum seekers from Muslim-majority states or regions are disproportionally affected, with citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the North Caucasus regions of Russia accounting for a large percentage of the rejected claims. Considering the instability or authoritarian regimes seen in many of the asylum seekers’ home regions or states, fears for their well-being are being raised.
Norway has noted that asylum seekers are entitled to protection if they are in danger of being killed, tortured, or “exposed to other forms of grave abuse” upon being returned to their home country.


Thomas Hammarberg: Only voluntary returns to Chechnya

European Union Human Rights Commissioner Thomas Hammarberg has denounced Norway specifically for sending Iraqi immigrants back to five provinces in Iraq — including Baghdad — that the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHCR) considers too unsafe for the return of asylum seekers.
Irfan Qaiser, a policy adviser at the refugee advocacy group Norwegian People’s Aid, says the general attitude toward immigrants, and Muslims in particular, has deteriorated in recent years.
“I think in general the tendency [in Europe] has been — I mean, we see that here in Norway as well — that the political debate has definitely been going towards more control, more restrictions, and also linked into general integration debates,” he says.
“You know, the debate we see in Europe now about the death of multiculturalism, etc., etc. — that people need to follow, we need to have clear demands on people who come here, and we need to know what they’re doing, what they’re up to, even into a debate where they have less rights than the rest of the population.”

Debate Erupts
In recent years, debate over asylum laws has erupted across the Nordic countries. Incidents linked to the 2005 cartoon controversy in Denmark — including the burning of Danish embassies in Syria, Lebanon, and Iran, and a suicide blast carried out by an Iraqi-born bomber in Stockholm in December — have caused antipathy toward Muslim asylum seekers.
Last year, 1,444 asylum seekers and illegal immigrants returned voluntarily to their home countries with support from the Norwegian authorities, a 30 percent increase over the previous year, according to the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration’s website. One in three was Iraqi.
But there has also been a significant rise in the number of asylum seekers, like Magomed, who are being forcibly deported from the country.
Seventy-one Iraqis were deported in the first two months of this year alone, higher than for all of 2009, according to data from the Norwegian Police Immigration Service.
The number of asylum seekers forcibly sent to Russia, a large proportion of which are from North Caucasus republics like Chechnya and North Ossetia, has skyrocketed.

There were 102 people deported to Russia in the first two months of this year, equal to the entirety of 2010. The most prominent was 25-year-old Madina Salamova, better known by her pseudonym Maria Amelie. She wrote a book about her experience fleeing from North Ossetia to Norway as a child. In 2010, Salamova was named “Norwegian of the Year” by a weekly news magazine, and her deportation prompted protests across the country.
EU rights commissioner Hammarberg tells RFE/RL that, considering Chechnya’s current political situation, only voluntary returns should be made to that republic.

Dangers At Home
There is evidence that other returnees also face danger after being sent home.
According to the NGO Iran Human Rights, a 19-year-old Iranian Kurd named Rahim Rostami, who was denied asylum by Norwegian authorities and deported in February, now finds himself in prison in Iran. The group reports that he is in danger of torture, ill treatment, or death at Tehran’s notorious Evin prison.

Data from the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration shows that between January 2009 and February 28 of this year, 8,289 people from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Russia applied for asylum in Norway.
During the same period of time, 6,111 asylum seekers from these countries had their applications rejected and were left with either appealing the decision or returning to their country of origin within three weeks.

Many more were found to be applying for asylum after having their applications rejected in another country in the Schengen area and were returned to be dealt with by the country originally responsible for their application.
Last year, appeals were upheld in 6.8 percent of cases.
According to the UNHCR, there was a 42 percent decrease in the number of asylum claims in Norway in 2010 compared to 2009. The number of claims rejected rose, however — from 6,196 in 2009 to 7,673 in 2010.
A spokesperson for the Directorate of Norwegian Immigration, Kirsten Myhre, says the number of asylum seekers has decreased because the country has been so strict over the last two years. She explained how the department weeds out those it doesn’t think are in need of protection.
“They are very often not credible,” she says. “They are interviewed for more or less one day, and often they don’t give information…that they are persecuted at all. They say they have been to prison and released after one hour. Well, if the government really wants them they would have been watched more.”

Preserving The System
Hanne Mathisen, a spokeswoman for the UNHCR’s office for Baltic and Nordic countries, says the Norwegian government has stepped up its efforts to remove illegal immigrants in order to ensure the system is not abused.
“There is a renewed emphasis on the part of the Norwegian government to ensure that persons that are rejected in the asylum procedure return voluntarily, and if they don’t, then that return will happen by force,” she says.
“The argument they’re making is that it is necessary in order to deter persons that abuse the asylum system, that are actually not in need of international protection. It’s also important in order to uphold the integrity of and support for the asylum system.”
Qaiser of Norwegian People’s Aid says there have not been many cases of the Norwegian immigration procedures breaking international conventions — with the notable exception of a report showing that asylum seekers in some detention centers were woken up every half hour to “prevent them from committing suicide,” a form of sleep deprivation Qaiser says is internationally acknowledged as torture.
Rather, immigration authorities, he says, push to the outer limits of what is considered acceptable by international standards. The lack of transparency in the system is what is most worrying to human rights activists.
“The whole deportation regime is so closed, it’s hard to know what goes on, what kind of procedures,” he says. “But from time to time we see that police go in the middle of the night picking up families, placing families and children, sending them to these deportation centers. And…we have gotten reports that what goes on in those deportation centers from time to time may be defined as harsh and degrading treatment.”
Asylum seekers, meanwhile, just want a place to call home.
Letchi, a Chechen who was a neighbor of Magomed, says his brother was part of the group deported to Russia.
“If they send people back to Chechnya, then they should not keep them for such a long time here [in Norway],” he says. “While they are living here, their children are attending schools. And what should they do back at home [in Chechnya]? Study all over again? The children are suffering. They are neither here nor there.
“My brother and his family were sent back in that way. My brother and Magomed were waiting for the court’s decision regarding their status. But they came to him in the night, handcuffed them, and sent them out despite their lawyers’ protests. The police say they just follow orders.”
Alisher Sidikov and Zamira Eshanova of RFE/RL’s Uzbek Service and Merkhat Sharipzhanov of RFE/RL’s Central Newsroom contributed to this report

 

 

Legal position of FAROE

FAROE is a registered association. Members of FAROE are organizations. FAROE has also honorary individual members. These are individuals given such a status by the general assembly of members on the basis of their social status or great services for the nation.

The focus area’s for FAROE in relation to Afghanistan?  Human rights, good governance, democratization are the focus points of FAROE in relation to Afghanistan.

Social background of FAROE

FAROE works in close cooperation with more than 200.000 Afghans in Europe, European civil-society organizations such as Amnesty International, the EU parliament, some Universities and other entities working for refugees. FAROE tries to place Afghanistan in the political agenda of the European governments in order to attract more attention for the issues such as reconstruction and democratization of Afghanistan. In the same area’s takes FAROE contact with the current Afghan government as well. For this purpose organizes FAROE annual conferences over the most challenging issues for Afghanistan.

Characteristics of FAROE

FAROE is a non-profit, independent social-cultural organization. FAROE is not associated with Afghan or foreign political parties. The basic principal for our evaluation and judgement is the national interests of Afghanistan and its people and the cause of democracy. FAROE works together with all Afghans without distinction of their ethnicity, language or religion. The only exception for the FAROE is persons who have been involved in the war-crimes, gross violations of Human rights and crimes against humanity.

What is FAROE?

FAROE stands for “Federation of Afghan Refugee Organizations in Europe”. FAROE is the coordinating body of 53 social-cultural organizations of Afghan Diaspora in Europe. In addition to the organizations, tens of prominent Afghan intellectuals support the work of FAROE as individuals. FAROE is the biggest and the most important coordinating body Afghans have ever had in Europe. The organization was founded in 1999, when Afghanistan suffered under theocratic dictator of the Taliban. The objectives of FAROE are limited to advocacy of the common interests of Afghan community in Europe, helping the community to preserve the Afghan cultural values and trying to keep them aware of the developments in Afghanistan and stimulating them to be constructively involved with the issues such as human rights, good governance, democratization and peace-building in Afghanistan.

International Conference on ”How to involve people in rebuilding Afghanistan”

Ede, 21 December 2008

Resolution

Following a series of annual conferences, in December 2008, the Federation of Afghan Refugee Organisation in Europe (FAROE) held a conference on participation of Afghan people in reconstruction of the country.

 

In this year’s conference that lasted from 19th to 21st of December 2008, more than 50 representatives of cultural, political and social organization, Sewish Committee for Afghanistan and tens of prominent Afghan personalities living in Europe participated.

Following the assessment of the current situation of the country, the conference expresses its deep concern over the serious status of security, political affairs, poverty and particularly, the growing number of civilian deaths by NATO and Anti Terrorist International Collation.

The conference also condemns the killings of civilians by suicide attackers, bermbombs and beheading of civil servants by the insurgents. .

The conference decisively supports the demonstration by mothers of the victims of three decades of war and violence which was held in front of United Nations office in Kabul.

Participants stressed on the following articles as urgent needs of Afghan society and ways of making the rebuilding efforts sensible for the people. Recommendations of this resolution are adressed to all parties, including Afghan diaspora:

1- Insist on and help with creating economic infrastructure and give full attention to creating job opportunities. Diaspora can assist this process through forming expertise groups of Afghans living abroad;

2- Gain trust of people through provision of fundamental public services on local and national level such as access to electricity, drink and irrigation water. Diaspora can contribute to this process through setting up health clinics etc

3- . Pay attention to spiritual reconstruction of Afghanistan through mass media to heal emotional injuries;

4- Media, including diaspora media should make sincere efforts to increase political awareness of people in order to attain national unity;

5- Campaign for implementation of transitional justice, removing from powerful positions and bringing to justice the war criminals and perpetrators of human rights abuses in Afghanistan;

6- Take part in campaign against corruption;

7- Inisist on basic social reforms to give women the chance of real participation in development of the country..

8- Forming Inter- Afghans Peace Jirga’s among Afghans living outside the country in order to put coordinated pressure on policy makers of the countries and organisations which are involved in development aid in Afghanistan;

9- Diaspora should provide facilities for making contact and sharing information between Afghan youth, teenagers and children who are living outside the country and those living inside Afghanistan.

10- Creating a diaspora information bank through a website by the help of FAROE to set database of capacities and talents;

 

The ten articles in the above resolution were agreed on unanimously.