Middle East Press On Academic Freedom In France, US Support Of Israel And Houthi: New Age Islam's Selection, 19 November 2020
By New Age Islam Edit
Desk
19 November
2020
• Is Academic Freedom Under Threat In France?
By Emile Chabal And Timothy Peace
• Women Are Equal Partners In Peace And Security
By Ruqayya Alblooshi
•Trump's Burden To Biden: US Support Of Israel's
Illegal Activities
By Najla M. Shahwan
• Biden Victory Breathes Life Back Into
Israeli-Palestinian Cooperation
By Daoud Kuttab
• Aid Groups In Yemen Say Houthi Terror Designation
Would Deepen Crisis
By Elizabeth Hagedorn
-----
Is Academic Freedom Under Threat In France?
By Emile Chabal And
Timothy Peace
17 Nov 2020
French President Emmanuel Macron looks on as he speaks to the media
during the visit to the scene of a knife attack at Notre Dame church in Nice,
France October 29, 2020. [Eric Gaillard/Reuters]
-------
The month
of October was a tumultuous one for France’s President Emmanuel Macron.
At the
beginning of the month, as he unveiled his government’s strategy to combat
radicalisation and religious separatism, he claimed that “Islam is a religion
that is in crisis all over the world today”. These comments, coupled with his
passionate defence of the publication of caricatures depicting Prophet
Muhammad, have led to widespread anti-France protests in countries all over the
Muslim world.
The twin
tragedies of the murder of school teacher Samuel Paty, and the subsequent fatal
stabbings in Nice, did nothing to dissipate the protests. In response to calls
for a boycott of French-made products, Macron was forced to give an interview
to Al Jazeera to explain his position.
Back home,
driven by a desire to appear tough on terrorism and cast himself as the
defender of the values of the French Republic, Macron and his government
responded to Paty’s murder with a flurry of announcements targeting Muslim
organisations. They promised to ban several Muslim NGOs deemed complicit in
supporting extremism, including the Collective Against Islamophobia in France
(CCIF), an organisation that monitors anti-Muslim hate crimes and has long been
the target of unsubstantiated political criticism
It is not
just Muslim organisations that are in the firing line. On October 22, Macron’s
education minister, Jean-Michel Blanquer, claimed that so-called
“islamo-gauchisme” (“Islamo-leftism”) was doing immense damage inside France’s
universities. The insinuation was that French academics and their students are
tacitly promoting a dangerous, “separatist”, anti-republican ideology and
justifying self-censorship in the name of political correctness. According to
Blanquer, French universities, and in particular their social sciences
departments, are “the breeding ground for a fragmentation of our society and a
vision of the world that converges with interests of the Islamists”.
This
unwelcome intervention in France’s intellectual life provoked a mixed response.
One group of intellectuals and academics enthusiastically supported Blanquer’s
comments by publishing an open letter that emphasised the pernicious spread of
“Islamism” and other “anti-Western ideologies” in French universities. Many
others, however, were shocked to be implicated in acts of terrorism through
“ideological complicity” and in another open letter denounced such claims as a
“witch hunt” and an attack on academic
freedom.
France’s
culture wars
Blanquer’s
condemnation of French universities did not come merely as a response to the
recent terror attacks. His critique goes back to at least the mid-2000s when
the country went through a polemical and multi-faceted debate about the
legacies of French colonialism. It was in this period that some intellectuals
and academics began to worry openly about the penetration of Anglo-American
“postcolonial” and “multicultural” ideas into university departments, as well
as expressing unease at the supposed denigration of white people and France’s
colonial “achievements”.
In recent
years, these criticisms have been amplified by transatlantic racial politics.
Back in June, when anti-racism protests were at their peak in France in the
wake of the police killing of George Floyd in the US, President Macron had
claimed French universities were responsible for the “ethnicisation of social
issues” which would lead to “splitting the Republic in two”. Such accusations
were levelled in the past at multicultural and post-colonial theories, both of
which were seen to challenge France’s colour-blind approach to issues of race
and diversity. Today, they are levelled at ideas that are said to be
“decolonial” or “Islamist”.
But the
structures of power have been shifting in French academia. Younger academics
are generally more outward-facing and ready to embrace ideas such as
post-colonialism, intersectionality and a critical approach to race and racism
in society, including Islamophobia. The shift explains why the letter condemning
Blanquer’s comments has garnered many more signatures than the one supporting
his stance. Among other things, the letter points to the deep contradiction
between the government’s claim to defend freedom of expression – most notably
in the case of Charlie Hebdo – and its attempt to censure certain intellectual
trends and approaches.
A battle
for academic freedom
In the wake
of Blanquer’s statement, the French Senate voted on October 28 to approve an
amendment to a law on university research that would make academic freedom in
France conditional on “respecting the values of the Republic”.
This has
raised the stakes by moving the discussion from a specific set of ideas and
theories to academic freedom more generally. Not surprisingly, this has alarmed
many inside French academia, including several scholarly associations, who have
since launched a “solemn appeal” to protect academic freedoms and the right to
study. The outcry has now led to the amendment itself being modified,
representing a victory of sorts for researchers, although the battle is far
from over.
The irony
of these recent debates is that the very same people who once railed against
the influence of Anglo-American ideas are the same ones who look set on
importing an Anglo-American culture war onto French campuses. The real lesson
is that France is no longer an intellectual exception, but simply another site
for an international battle of ideas that will have serious long-term
consequences.
----
Emile Chabal is a Reader in history at the
University of Edinburgh.
Timothy
Peace is a Research Fellow in the School of Social and Political Sciences at
the University of Glasgow.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/11/17/the-battle-for-french-universities/
----
Women Are Equal Partners In Peace And Security
By Ruqayya Alblooshi
November
18, 2020
Women’s roles are a crucial part of trust-building and starting
dialogues necessary to connect and assist communities in need
------
When we
think about armed conflicts, what comes to mind are military men, defence
weapons, and destruction. Similarly, when we think of conflict and peacekeeping
missions, we envision men shaking hands and men in blue helmets, ceasefire, and
the protection of civilians.
Despite
comprising half the world’s population, women, as well as their contributions,
have historically been left out of the peace and security process. Looking at
the period between 1992-2011, the World Economic Forum documents that women
represented only 4% of signatories to peace agreements and only 9% of negotiators.
When
peacekeeping missions take place in post-conflict-torn countries, women and
girls suffer the most from displacement, a lack of medicine and food, and
life-threatening situations. Therefore, the inclusion of women in peacekeeping
missions is vital to establish communication with the local community of women
and girls, especially in environments where women cannot speak to men due to
conservatism or a fear of foreign troops.
Therefore,
women’s roles are a crucial part of trust-building and starting the dialogues
necessary to connect and assist communities in need. One of the men in a
displaced area once said, “We speak to women as we know that they are here to
make peace, not war.”
This year,
the United Nations Security Council celebrates 20 years since the historic
Resolution 1325 adaptation, which advocated for a cohesive approach toward the
gender perspective in Peace and Security. Resolution 1325 is considered an
“inspirational milestone” for the Security Council and the manifestation of the
United Nations’ priorities.
The
resolution is also considered one of the most celebrated achievements
architectured by civil society, policymakers, and diplomats. Former UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan was one of the primary advocates for women’s inclusion
in peace and security. He famously noted, “Resolution 1325 holds out a promise
to women across the globe that their rights will be protected and that barriers
to their equal participation and full involvement in the maintenance and
promotion of sustainable peace will be removed. We must uphold this promise.”
Ensuring a
lasting peace
Resolution
1325 urges the member states to increase women’s participation across the
Security Council, focusing on three main pillars: prevention, protection, and
participation of conflicts. It also urged parties in armed conflicts to protect
women and girls from violence during war and also engage them in negotiations
to ensure a lasting peace.
As per the
United Nations, it is 20% more likely to achieve peace post-conflict for over
two years when women participate in peace negotiations. Thus, engaging women in
the process is strategic to the construction of long-lasting peace. This
resolution resulted from high-level advocacy, driven by NGOs and civil society,
and resulted in a two-day debate at the security council which was for the
first time dedicated to women.
Since
October 2000, when the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1325,
countries have increasingly incorporated Women, Peace, and Security agendas. From
1998 to 2000, less than 5% of resolutions mentioned women, girls, or gender.
However, from 2000 to 2010, over 45% of monitored resolutions referenced women
and gender.
In light of
Resolution 1325, in 2019, the United Arab Emirates government took the lead in
supporting its progress by launching a training program sponsored by Khawla
bint Al Azwar Military School in Abu Dhabi to build women’s capacity in the
military and peacekeeping sectors.
Starting
with 134 Arab women in 2019, the program expanded to include 223 women from
Africa, Asia and Arab countries in January 2020. The efforts demonstrated
strong commitment and support by the UAE government, which resulted in renaming
the Women Peace and Security Training Programme the “Sheikha Fatima bint Mubarak
Women Peace and Security Initiative”.
Countries
and regional actors must reduce the gap between the ambitions of the resolution
and on ground implementation. Women are vital actors and contributors in the
decision-making process across all levels of conflict prevention, resolution,
and peacebuilding. Further, they are instrumental to the completion of war and
the attainment of lasting peace and security.
----
Ruqayya Alblooshi is an Emirati columnist and
researcher in the field International Relations
https://gulfnews.com/opinion/op-eds/women-are-equal-partners-in-peace-and-security-1.75352150
-----
Trump's Burden To Biden: US Support Of Israel's
Illegal Activities
By Najla M. Shahwan
November
18, 2020
The United
States' unlimited support for Israel has been viewed for decades as an obstacle
in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Washington's acceptance of
Tel Aviv's repression of occupied territories has also been a controversial
issue among the international community for many years.
From shared
strategic goals in the Middle East to the political influence of American Jews
and evangelical Christians, there are many factors behind the strong
U.S.-Israel friendship. For example, Americans believe that Israel is the only
democratic country in the Middle East although Tel Aviv has strayed from those
shared values, especially in its occupation of Palestine.
Israel is a
leading recipient of U.S. foreign aid and a frequent purchaser of American
weapons. By law, U.S. arms sales cannot adversely affect Israel's
"qualitative military edge" over other countries in its region.
Israel
receives on average about $3.1 billion in foreign aid from the U.S. each year
and is the only recipient of U.S. economic aid that does not have to account
for how it is spent.
In
September 2016, the U.S. approved a record military aid package to Israel worth
$38 billion over a 10-year period. According to the U.S. Congress' public
policy research institute Congressional Research Service, "U.S. military
aid has helped transform Israel's armed forces into one of the most
technologically sophisticated militaries in the world."
After Tel
Aviv occupied the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the U.S.'
unwavering support for Israel grew while the latter's subsequent aggression toward
Palestinians living in what came to be known as the occupied territories
systematically became more violent.
Not behind
the curtain
Washington
has shown a bias toward Tel Aviv in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in its
policies, in preferential arms sales and its voting record in the United
Nations.
More
specifically, the U.S. has not demonstrated significant support in the U.N. for
Palestinians affected by Israel's human rights abuses.
America's
support for Israel has added harm to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as it
has encouraged Israel to take more aggressive measures against the
Palestinians, including demolishing homes and annexing more lands.
The special
relationship transcends any specific American administration or Israeli
government and thus ensures continuity and stability. Yet, several U.S.
presidents have adopted fundamentally different approaches to Tel Aviv. Ronald
Reagan, Bill Clinton and Donald Trump each had a sentimental connection to
Israel and were considered very pro-Israel, while Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter
did not possess such sentiments and were thought of as unfriendly.
During
Trump's presidency, U.S.-Israel relations were arguably closer than at any
point in history.
In terms of
diplomatic support for Israel, the U.S. has vetoed 44 U.N. Security Council
resolutions critical of Israel since 1972. Much of the international
community's displeasure with Washington's support for Tel Aviv stems from the
U.S. routinely backing Israel whenever the U.N. General Assembly passes one of
the many resolutions condemning Israeli behavior or calling for action on
behalf of the Palestinians.
According
to the General Assembly, the Israelis have committed human rights abuses
against Palestinians in the occupied territories following the Six-Day War in
1967.
On the
other hand, Tel Aviv has built several illegal settlements in the occupied West
Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967. Currently, approximately 215,000 Israeli
settlers are living in East Jerusalem, while their population in Area C of the
occupied West Bank has some 413,000 more. This brings the Israeli settler
population in the West Bank to approximately 630,000 in 143 settlement
locations in the West Bank (132) including East Jerusalem (11) and another 113
outposts.
The Trump
effect
As most of
the international community considers both territories to be occupied and the
settlements to be illegal, the Trump administration, in a break from its
predecessors and much of the rest of the world, has taken a much friendlier
approach and, in November 2019, Trump declared he does not consider the
settlements illegal.
After a
slowdown in settlement activity during the final years of the Obama
administration, Israel has stepped up its plans for construction since Trump
took office. Both settlers and their supporters call this the "Trump
effect" and they have planned for a jump in construction as long as he is
in office.
According
to the watchdog group Peace Now, Israel in 2019 pushed forward plans to build
9,413 settlement homes, roughly the same levels as 2017 and 2018. The figures
are more than triple the level of settlement planning during the final two
years of the Obama administration.
While world
leaders speak with one voice in condemning the expansion of Israeli
settlements, illegal under international law, Tel Aviv continues to defy the
international community, creating ever greater difficulties for the Palestinian
population. It threatens a just and durable solution to the conflict and, on
its behalf, the U.S. has failed to put meaningful pressure on Israel to stop
its settlement expansion.
Trump also
rejected Obama's claim that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal
and he was upset by a Security Council resolution the former president
initiated in December 2016, when Trump was already president-elect.
The U.N.
resolution (2334) stated that Israel's settlement activity constituted a
"flagrant violation" of international law and had "no legal
validity."
On Nov. 18,
2019, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared that "the establishment
of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent
with international law."
The best
friend ever
In August
2019, Trump declared himself "history's most pro-Israel U.S.
president." In January 2020, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
described Trump as "the best friend Israel has ever had in the White
House."
Trump
reversed long-standing U.S. policies on several critical security, diplomatic
and political issues in Tel Aviv's favor, especially in the context of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict.
In December
2017, before finishing his first year in office, Trump signed a proclamation
saying the U.S. sees Jerusalem as Israel's capital, directing the U.S. State
Department to start planning an embassy in the city.
Fast forward
to March 2019, just two weeks before a critical Israeli election, Trump took a
similar step by signing a proclamation that made the U.S. the first country to
recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights, the strategic plateau it
captured from Syria in 1967 and annexed in 1981.
Trump has
taken other actions that specifically deprived Palestinian programs and
governmental institutions of funding and resources.
In 2017,
the administration closed the Palestine Liberalization Organization (PLO) office
in Washington and closed its own diplomatic mission to the Palestinians in
Jerusalem in 2019, folding that office's functions into the new Jerusalem
embassy.
In 2018,
Trump reduced and eliminated a range of ways in which it gave financial
assistance to the Palestinians. He stopped funding to the United Nations Relief
and Works Agency (UNRWA) that handles Palestinian refugees and their
descendants and cut an additional $200 million from foreign aid to
Palestinians. His government also eliminated $10 million in funding for
Israeli-Palestinian coexistence programs.
On Jan. 28,
Trump released his administration's Israeli-Palestinian peace plan. Several
presidents before Trump had attempted to achieve peace in the region, but his
efforts differed from earlier plans in two ways: It did not endorse a fully
independent Palestinian state and was released in coordination with Israel
only, without any backing from the Palestinian National Authority (PNA).
Like
previous Trump actions, the plan was seen as a boon for Tel Aviv's right-wing
government as it did not require the dismantling of any Israeli settlements in
the West Bank and envisioned full Israeli security control over the entire
territory, meaning that the Israel Defense Forces would still have the freedom to
move within all Palestinian areas as they pleased.
The
Palestinian state it envisioned was a patchwork of areas comprising some 80% of
the West Bank and it was vehemently rejected by the Palestinian leadership.
The
announcement of the plan, at a news conference with Netanyahu, came a couple of
months after the Trump administration said it would no longer view West Bank
settlements as illegal.
In the wake
of the plan's release, Netanyahu said he would continue to annex areas of the
West Bank but would delay doing so, saying he would prefer to wait for a green
light from Washington. Settlement construction in the West Bank, however, never
stopped.
What about
Biden?
Now that
Democrat Joe Biden has won the U.S. presidential election, American diplomatic
leadership is expected to take different steps.
In an
interview with the bilingual, U.S.-based Arab American News three days before
the election, Vice President-elect Kamala Harris signaled that their team will
repair ties with Palestinians and back the two-state solution.
Harris said
the Biden administration would take immediate steps to restore economic and
humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians and that, if elected, they would
attempt to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and reopen the U.S. consulate
in East Jerusalem and the PLO mission in Washington.
"Joe
and I also believe in the worth and value of every Palestinian and every
Israeli, and we will work to ensure that Palestinians and Israelis enjoy equal
measures of freedom, security, prosperity and democracy," Harris had
highlighted.
All of
Palestine is now watching Biden and his team. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict
and America's ties with the warring sides will be a great challenge for the
next president but the Palestinians' sole demand of him is to support democracy
and freedom, and not to back Israel's illegal behaviors in the region.
-------
Najla M. Shahwan is a Palestinian
author, researcher and freelance journalist; recipient of two prizes from the
Palestinian Union of Writers
https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/op-ed/trumps-burden-to-biden-us-support-of-israels-illegal-activities
-----
Biden Victory Breathes Life Back Into
Israeli-Palestinian Cooperation
By Daoud Kuttab
Nov 18,
2020
The
Palestinian-Israeli Declaration of Principles, commonly referred to as the Oslo
Accords, is alive and well. That much was clear in a letter dated Nov. 17,
Kamil Abu Rukun, the Israeli coordinator of government activities in the
territories, to Hussein Sheikh, the Palestinian minister of civil affairs. Israel
army officer Abu Rukun wrote, “The bilateral Israeli Palestinian agreements
continue to form the applicable legal framework governing the conduct of the
parties on financial and other matters.” The official also noted that Israel
will continue to collect taxes on behalf of Palestinians, as stipulated in the
Paris Economic Protocol of 1994.
The letter
produced a surprise decision by the Palestinian leadership. Sheikh tweeted, “In
light of the calls made by President [Mahmoud] Abbas regarding Israel's commitment
to the bilateral signed agreements, & based on the official written and
[verbal assurances] we received, confirming Israel's commitment to them … the
relationship with #Israel will return to how it was.”
Hussein
later said on Palestinian TV that Palestinians had been steadfast in their
principles and as a result “defeated the deal of the century,” in a reference
to US President Donald Trump’s vision for peace in the Middle East that
includes the annexation of 30% of Palestinian territories.
The threat
of annexation was stated as the main reason the Palestinian government had
unilaterally ended security coordination last May and refusal to accept the
portion of the revenues Israel is not withholding. Earlier, the Palestinian
government had protested Israel's keeping of money equal to what the
Palestinians spend to support the families of prisoners and those killed in
resistance activities.
Already the
decision has brought a sigh of relief from many Palestinians who depend on
their government. Civil servants who have been receiving portions of their
salaries for months were promised their full wages. With the occupied
Palestinian territories suffering extra due to the coronavirus pandemic, the
money will certainly be a boost not only to the nearly bankrupt Palestinian
government but to the overall Palestinian economy.
The
decision will resolve a potential humanitarian problem that has been brewing
due to the break in coordination with Israel involving the registration of
newborn Palestinian babies. Tens of thousands have not been registered since
last May’s decision to suspend all coordination with Israel.
While the
return to the status quo comes as a relief to many, some fear that it might
blow up sensitive reconciliation talks ongoing in Cairo. Palestinian
delegations from Fatah and Hamas had signaled they were nearing a resolution to
their differences with the blessing and the guarantees of the Egyptian
government. But the renewal of security coordination appears to have put a halt
to these talks. Hamas has strongly denounced the return of cooperation with the
“criminal Zionist occupiers.” Hamas said that the decision goes against all
promises and agreements reached in the Sept. 3 summit of senior Palestinian
leaders that took place in Ramallah and Beirut. The leftist Popular Front for
the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) also issued a strong statement against the
move.
It is
highly unlikely that either Hamas or the PFLP will quit the reconciliation
talks entirely. Qatar recently stated that it will no longer provide cash to
support Hamas in Gaza and the PFLP is dependent on Abbas for its stipends.
The sudden
moves by the Palestinian leadership come at a moment when the US presidential
elections have all but ended the most difficult four years of Palestinian
political life during the Trump administration.
Although
Palestinians are not naive enough to expect that President-elect Joe Biden will
move quickly to pressure Israel, they are confident that the threat of
annexation of Palestinian lands is no longer on the table and that when Biden
takes office it will be difficult for Israel to continue its settlement
expansion in direct violation of UNSC Resolution 2334, which was passed in the
last days of the Barack Obama government.
If the
return to the status quo does not interrupt the reconciliation talks and a
general agreement that could lead to elections is reached, Abbas' defiance of
the world’s only superpower will have paid off.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/11/palestine-oslo-accords-security-coordinate-israel-druze.html
-----
Aid Groups In Yemen Say Houthi Terror
Designation Would Deepen Crisis
By Elizabeth Hagedorn
Nov 18,
2020
Should the
Trump administration formally designate Yemen’s Houthi rebels as a terrorist
organization, aid groups say it would greatly undermine their ability to
deliver life-saving assistance to millions of civilians and worsen what the
United Nations calls the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe.
In an
effort to financially squeeze the Houthi group and pressure its regional
backer, Iran, the State Department is considering naming the entire Houthi
movement a foreign terrorist organization, as reported by Foreign Policy
earlier this week. Saudi Arabia has lobbied hard for the terrorism designation,
which would criminalize material support for the Houthis, trigger an asset
freeze and impose a travel ban to the United States. The Trump administration
might instead designate individual Houthi leaders as specially designated
global terrorists, said a source familiar with the matter, in a mostly symbolic
action that carries similar financial sanctions.
The
Iran-aligned group has waged a nearly six-year war in Yemen against a Saudi-led
military coalition that intervened in early 2015 to restore the internationally
recognized government. The fighting killed more than 100,000 people, devastated
Yemen’s health infrastructure and pushed the impoverished country to the brink
of famine.
Relief
organizations operating in Yemen warn that slapping a terror label on the Houthis
could hamper aid work in a country where an estimated 80% of the population —
more than 24 million people — is reliant on humanitarian assistance to survive,
a majority of whom live in Houthi-controlled areas in the country’s mountainous
north.
“For millions
of Yemenis living in areas under Ansar Allah [Houthi] control, aid is a matter
of life or death. We don’t want to think about what will happen if that
lifeline is cut,” Sultana Begum, the Norweigen Refugee Council’s advocacy
manager in Yemen, told Al-Monitor.
A terror
designation would further complicate Yemen’s humanitarian response, with aid
workers forced to spend more time and resources ensuring they’re in compliance
with a confusing web of financial sanctions. The Treasury Department could issue
exemptions known as general licenses to authorize specific humanitarian
activities, but the application process is time-consuming and could delay the
delivery of aid.
“Even if a
humanitarian exemption is permitted, this designation will likely make reaching
children and families more difficult and could also heighten security risks for
our staff,” Janti Soeripto, president and CEO of Save the Children, told
Al-Monitor.
Soeripto
said lessons can be drawn from Somalia, where the Barack Obama administration’s
foreign terrorist designation of Islamist militant group Al-Shabaab deterred
risk-averse banks from transferring money into the country and slowed the work
of relief agencies amid a deadly famine that killed an estimated 250,000 people
in 2011.
“We must
learn from history and not condemn Yemeni children and their families to the
same fate,” Soeripto said, adding that current evidence suggests a worsening
malnutrition crisis for Yemeni children.
Relief
groups say a Houthi designation could also put off international donors at a
time when an existing funding shortage is crippling aid operations in the Arab
world’s poorest country. This year, the United Nations has received less than
half of the $3.4 billion it requested from donor countries, forcing many UN aid
agencies to scale back or eliminate services entirely.
The Donald
Trump administration, which has accused the rebels of interfering with the food
deliveries, suspended millions in humanitarian funding to Houthi-held areas in
March. The US development agency USAID has set aside carve-outs for life-saving
assistance, but aid workers say they are far too narrow to be effective.
Six of the
largest humanitarian responders in Yemen wrote to acting USAID administrator
John Barsa in August and urged him to restore US assistance, warning that
civilians were increasingly paying the price for aid cuts. President-elect Joe
Biden, who has pledged to end US support for Riyadh's campaign in Yemen, is
expected to return funding to previous levels.
The
fighting, meanwhile, has dragged on in Yemen's oil-rich Marib province as the
Houthis try to wrest control of the Saudi-backed government’s last stronghold.
Prospects for reaching a political settlement look dim and critics of
designating the Houthis as a terror group say doing so could hinder the UN’s
work to secure a lasting cease-fire.
“The
reality is that the Houthis must be part of any final negotiated settlement to
the conflict in Yemen, and designating them a foreign terrorist organization
could be taken by the Houthis as a signal that they cannot achieve their goals
at the negotiating table,” said Kate Kizer, the policy director for the
advocacy group Win Without War.
“That's a
recipe for more war and suffering for the Yemeni people, not peace,” she said.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/11/yemen-houthis-trump-terrorist-designation-aid-delivery-fto.html
-----
URl: https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-press-academic-freedom/d/123507
New
Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism