RSS
Turning Human Rights Upside Down
China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi attends the 14th EAST Asia Summit Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in the 57th ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting at the National Convention Center, in Vientiane, Laos July 27, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Chalinee Thirasupa/File Photo
JNS.org – Two recent developments suggest that a concerted effort is underway to reframe the international human-rights architecture that emerged from World War II, by shifting the focus away from freedom of conscience to “economic, social and cultural rights,” and by redefining what is meant by the term “genocide.” These shifts may well herald a new era that will see authoritarian states like China and Iran hauling liberal democratic nations before the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court with allegations of systemic human-rights abuse, with Israel especially—as a democratic state surrounded by foes seeking its elimination—serving as a convenient and frequent target.
The United Nations co-hosted a human-rights conference last week with the Chinese regime in the city of Huangzhou. The idea of China as a beacon of human rights is, of course, more worthy of a headline in a satirical magazine than as a serious proposition, but the very fact that a regime that received a 9/100 “Not Free” rating in the most recent Freedom House global survey can be taken at face value is a disturbing sign of how far international institutions have strayed from an agenda that stresses democratic, accountable institutions and individual freedom as the bedrock of any human-rights regimen.
In his speech to the conference, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi emphasized that China had made great strides in its pursuit of “economic, social and cultural rights,” effectively excluding from consideration those areas on which Beijing was criticized by Freedom House: the ubiquitous presence of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the daily lives of citizens, the absence of a free media and the expunging of civil society—those groups and associations that function free of state interference. Wang was enthusiastically backed up in this assertion by Volker Turk, the Austrian diplomat who heads the UN’s Human Rights Council, a body that has spearheaded some of the loudest and most outlandish accusations against Israel over the past year, and which still retains an annual agenda item focused on supposed abuses by Israel and no other state.
The underlying concept here is that human rights should be grounded in “state development,” realized through rising salaries, anti-poverty initiatives and state-provided housing. Theoretically, it’s perfectly possible for a state to make progress on these goals while denying its citizens basic civil and political rights. China has now elevated this approach into a state doctrine, leaning on other states, particularly in the developing world, to follow suit.
The eminent historian of ideas Isaiah Berlin proposed a critically important distinction between “negative liberty” and “positive liberty.” Negative liberty accents the right of individuals to live free from state interference in matters of conscience, assembly and life choices. Positive liberty subordinates the individual to the state, presenting freedom as the right of the state as an independent collectivity to set developmental goals whereby living standards rise—though there is no guarantee of that—in exchange for women and men submitting to its authority in those decisions that, in liberal democratic states, would be theirs alone.
One might reasonably argue that the ideal state fuses elements of both negative and positive liberty so that individuals can exercise freedom of religion while receiving a state-subsidized education. But that’s not what China has done. Instead, over the last couple of decades, China’s ruling Communists have lifted the great majority of the population out of poverty while becoming more repressive politically to the point of brutally punishing entire minorities, like the mainly Muslim Uyghurs in the northwest, with the goal of homogenizing what is an ethnically and religiously diverse population.
The US State Department, among others, has described China’s persecution of the Uyghurs as a “genocide,” but any mention of their plight, which includes more than 1 million Uyghurs interned in concentration camps, was absent from the U.N.-sponsored parley in Huangzhou. At the same time, the understanding of the term “genocide” that has prevailed since the Genocide Convention came into force in 1951 is now under threat, which potentially means that states like China, which commit this crime, will escape scrutiny, while those that do not, like Israel, will find themselves in the dock.
In its latest report on Israel and the Palestinians, which falsely depicted Israel’s war against the Hamas rapists and killers in the Gaza Strip as a war of extermination directed at all Palestinians, Amnesty International complained that the Genocide Convention was inadequate, claiming that it doesn’t account for the fact that states can invoke national security to mask their genocidal intentions. That argument has now been taken up by the Republic of Ireland, which has become a veritable cauldron of anti-Zionist antisemitism in the 14 months since the Hamas-led atrocities in southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
Announcing Dublin’s decision to support the specious case against Israel brought by South Africa to the International Court of Justice, Irish Foreign Minister Micheál Martin advocated for a revision of the legal understanding of genocide, arguing that “a very narrow interpretation of what constitutes genocide leads to a culture of impunity in which the protection of civilians is minimized.” Put another way, if your enemy is a terrorist organization that deliberately hides its weapons and its fighters among civilians, you risk being accused of genocide if you deploy your military in response to their attacks. Were the mass murderer Yahya Sinwar, who met his fate at the hands of the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza, still alive, there is little doubt that he would regard that evolution of understanding as among the greatest of his achievements.
The Jewish experience of antisemitism has been described as a pattern that progresses from “you have no right to live among us as Jews” to “you have no right to live among us,” and ultimately, to “you have no right to live.” That same pattern can, more or less, be applied to the cases of genocide since World War II. In Rwanda in 1994, for example, the largely defenseless Tutsis were the subjects of all sorts of demonic conspiracy theories depicting them as “cockroaches” as the period of mass killing during the summer months of that year approached.
Were such a genocide to repeat itself now, its practitioners would be well advised to depict themselves as a state authority pursuing the laudable goal of collective social development, criticizing the existing Genocide Convention as a product of Western imperialist thinking about human rights that allows countries like Israel—and, by extension, the United States and other nations with democratic constitutions that limit the various powers of the state—to escape the charge. And yet, as we hurtle towards this outcome, our own leaders remain excruciatingly silent on the fundamental threat this approach poses to our liberties and our values.
The post Turning Human Rights Upside Down first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Immigration Judge Rules Palestinian Columbia Student Khalil Can Be Deported
Mahmoud Khalil speaks to members of media about the Revolt for Rafah encampment at Columbia University during the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza, in New York City, US, June 1, 2024. Photo: Jeenah Moon via Reuters Connect
A US immigration judge ruled on Friday that Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil can be deported, allowing President Donald Trump’s administration to proceed with its effort to remove the Columbia University student from the United States a month after his arrest in New York City.
The ruling by Judge Jamee Comans of the LaSalle Immigration Court in Louisiana was not a final determination of Khalil’s fate. But it represented a significant victory for the Republican president in his efforts to deport foreign pro-Palestinian students who are in the United States legally and, like Khalil, have not been charged with any crime.
Citing the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, Trump-appointed US Secretary of State Marco Rubio determined last month that Khalil could harm American foreign policy interests and should be deported for his “otherwise lawful” speech and activism.
Comans said that she did not have the authority to overrule a secretary of state. The judge denied a motion by Khalil’s lawyers to subpoena Rubio and question him about the “reasonable grounds” he had for his determination under the 1952 law.
The judge’s decision came after a combative 90-minute hearing held in a court located inside a jail complex for immigrants surrounded by double-fenced razor wire run by private government contractors in rural Louisiana.
Khalil, a prominent figure in the anti-Israel student protest movement that has roiled Columbia’s New York City campus, was born in a Palestinian refugee camp in Syria, holds Algerian citizenship and became a US lawful permanent resident last year. Khalil’s wife is a US citizen.
For now, Khalil remains in the Louisiana jail where federal authorities transferred him after his March 8 arrest at his Columbia University apartment building some 1,200 miles (1,930 km) away. Comans gave Khalil’s lawyers until April 23 to apply for relief before she considers whether to issue a deportation order. An immigration judge can rule that a migrant cannot be deported because of possible persecution in a home country, among other limited grounds.
In a separate case in New Jersey, US District Judge Michael Farbiarz has blocked deportation while he considers Khalil’s claim that his arrest was made in violation of the US Constitution’s First Amendment protections for freedom of speech.
KHALIL ADDRESSES THE JUDGE
As Comans adjourned, Khalil leaned forward, asking to address the court. Comans hesitated, then agreed.
Khalil quoted her remarks at his hearing on Tuesday that nothing was more important to the court than “due process rights and fundamental fairness.”
“Clearly what we witnessed today, neither of these principles were present today or in this whole process,” Khalil said. “This is exactly why the Trump administration has sent me to this court, a thousand miles away from my family.”
The judge said her ruling turned on an undated, two-page letter signed by Rubio and submitted to the court and to Khalil’s counsel.
Khalil’s lawyers, appearing via a video link, complained they were given less than 48 hours to review Rubio’s letter and evidence submitted by the Trump administration to Comans this week. Marc Van Der Hout, Khalil’s lead immigration attorney, repeatedly asked for the hearing to be delayed. Comans reprimanded him for what the judge said was straying from the hearing’s purpose, twice saying he had “an agenda.”
Comans said that the 1952 immigration law gave the secretary of state “unilateral judgment” to make his determination about Khalil.
Khalil should be removed, Rubio wrote, for his role in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities, which fosters a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States.”
Rubio’s letter did not accuse Khalil of breaking any laws, but said the State Department can revoke the legal status of immigrants who could harm US foreign policy interests even when their beliefs, associations or statements are “otherwise lawful.”
After Comans ended the hearing, several of Khalil’s supporters wept as they left the courtroom. Khalil stood and smiled at them, making a heart shape with his hands.
Khalil has said criticism of the US government’s support of Israel is being wrongly conflated with antisemitism. His lawyers told the court they were submitting into evidence Khalil’s interviews last year with CNN and other news outlets in which he denounces antisemitism and other prejudice.
His lawyers have said the Trump administration was targeting him for protected speech including the right to criticize American foreign policy.
“Mahmoud was subject to a charade of due process, a flagrant violation of his right to a fair hearing and a weaponization of immigration law to suppress dissent,” Van Der Hout said in a statement after the hearing.
The American immigration court system is run and its judges are appointed by the US Justice Department, separate from the government’s judicial branch.
The post US Immigration Judge Rules Palestinian Columbia Student Khalil Can Be Deported first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hamas Releases Video of Israeli-American Hostage Held in Gaza
FILE PHOTO: Yael, Adi and Mika Alexander, the family of Edan Alexander, the American-Israeli and Israel Defense Forces soldier taken hostage during the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, pose for a photograph during an interview with Reuters at the Alexander’s home in Tenafly, New Jersey, U.S., December 14, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Stephani Spindel/File Photo
Hamas on Saturday released a video purportedly of Israeli-American hostage Edan Alexander, who has been held in Gaza since he was captured by Palestinian terrorists on October 7, 2023.
In the undated video, the man who introduces himself as Edan Alexander states he has been held in Gaza for 551 days. The man questions why he is still being held and pleads for his release.
Alexander is a soldier serving in the Israeli military.
The edited video was released as Jews began to mark Passover, a weeklong holiday that celebrates freedom. Alexander’s family released a statement acknowledging the video that said the holiday would not be one of freedom as long as Edan and the 58 other hostages in Gaza remained in captivity.
Hamas has released several videos over the course of the war of hostages begging to be released. Israeli officials have dismissed past videos as propaganda that is designed to put pressure on the government. The war is in its eighteenth month.
Hamas released 38 hostages under a ceasefire that began on January 19. In March, Israel’s military resumed its ground and aerial campaign on Gaza, abandoning the ceasefire after Hamas rejected proposals to extend the truce without ending the war.
Israeli officials say that campaign will continue until the remaining 59 hostages are freed and Gaza is demilitarized. Hamas insists it will free hostages only as part of a deal to end the war and has rejected demands to lay down its arms.
The US, Qatar and Egypt are mediating between Hamas and Israel.
The post Hamas Releases Video of Israeli-American Hostage Held in Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Some Progress in Hostage Talks But Major Issues Remain, Source tells i24NEWS
Demonstrators hold signs and pictures of hostages, as relatives and supporters of Israeli hostages kidnapped during the Oct. 7, 2023 attack by Hamas protest demanding the release of all hostages in Tel Aviv, Israel, Feb. 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Itai Ron
i24 News – A source familiar with the ongoing negotiations for a hostage deal confirmed to i24NEWS on Friday that some progress has been made in talks, currently taking place with Egypt, including the exchange of draft proposals. However, it remains unclear whether Hamas will ultimately accept the emerging framework. According to the source, discussions are presently focused on reaching a cohesive outline with Cairo.
A delegation of senior Hamas officials is expected to arrive in Cairo tomorrow. While there is still no finalized draft, even Arab sources acknowledge revisions to Egypt’s original proposal, reportedly including a degree of flexibility in the number of hostages Hamas is willing to release.
The source noted that Hamas’ latest proposal to release five living hostages is unacceptable to Israel, which continues to adhere to the “Witkoff framework.” At the core of this framework is the release of a significant number of hostages, alongside a prolonged ceasefire period—Israel insists on 40 days, while Hamas is demanding more. The plan avoids intermittent pauses or distractions, aiming instead for uninterrupted discussions on post-war arrangements.
As previously reported, Israel is also demanding comprehensive medical and nutritional reports on all living hostages as an early condition of the deal.
“For now,” the source told i24NEWS, “Hamas is still putting up obstacles. We are not at the point of a done deal.” Israeli officials emphasize that sustained military and logistical pressure on Hamas is yielding results, pointing to Hamas’ shift from offering one hostage to five in its most recent agreement.
Negotiators also assert that Israel’s demands are fully backed by the United States. Ultimately, Israeli officials are adamant: no negotiations on the “day after” will take place until the hostage issue is resolved—a message directed not only at Hamas, but also at mediators.
The post Some Progress in Hostage Talks But Major Issues Remain, Source tells i24NEWS first appeared on Algemeiner.com.