Kashmir Day 74: Clashes, protests continue, 50 more injured

Day 74: Clashes, protests continue, 50 more injured

ABID BASHIR/KHALID GUL

Srinagar/ Anantnag, Publish Date: Sep 21 2016 12:31AM | Updated Date: Sep 21 2016 12:31AM

At least 50 people including some women were injured when forces foiled pro-freedom rallies and beat up inmates at various places in Kashmir on Tuesday, reports and witnesses said. A 20-year-old youth was hit by a bullet in north Kashmir’s Bandipora district during clashes, they said.
SOUTH KASHMIR

30 people were wounded when forces personnel allegedly barged into houses, beat up inmates and damaged property in Kulgam, Tral and Awantipora villages during nocturnal raids, witnesses said. All-women rallies were also held across South Kashmir. Locals in Bogam village of Kulgam alleged that forces raided the area during night and mercilessly thrashed people. “Dozens sustained injuries due to beating by forces,” they said.

The forces, according to locals, also ransacked household goods and damaged property worth crores of rupees and also allegedly took along cash and jewellery.

On Tuesday evening, 12 people had sustained pellet injuries—one in eye—in forces’ action on protesters. People had organized protests against the forces’ excesses in the village.

Reports of ransacking of houses and beating of inmates by forces during night also came in from Dogripora village of Awantipora and Madoora village of Tral in Pulwama district.
“Few people were wounded due to the assault,” they said.

A report said forces personnel ransacked the house of religious cleric and head of Tehreek-I-Fikro Aitiqad, Sarjan Barkati in Reban Yaripora.

Meanwhile, all-women rallies were organized in many South Kashmir areas. Hundreds of women shouting pro-freedom and anti-India slogans participated in a rally in Bogam village. A similar rally was reportedly held in Gadapora village where a 13-year-old girl Khusboo Jan died of cardiac arrest during clashes yesterday. In Tral, women carrying banners and placards marched from Daru-ul-Uloom to Khankahi Faiz Pana.

Meanwhile, the police crackdown on youth allegedly involved in protests continues across South Kashmir.

Protesters on Tuesday set ablaze the house of a woman Special Police Officer (SPO) at Vehil village in Shopian district, a police spokesman said. He said a motorcycle was also allegedly torched by youths at Batamaloo locality of Srinagar during a protest.

SRINAGAR
The police had imposed strict curbs in old Srinagar areas, witnesses said.

Residents of New Theed Harwan on Srinagar outskirts continued to allege vandalism by forces. “Forces broke windowpanes of dozens of houses besides hurling abuses at the inmates. The police also detained dozens of youth and also beat them to pulp,” they alleged. They said strict curbs were imposed in the area and heavy deployment was made.

Reports from old Srinagar areas said a peaceful rally was held at Nowhatta that passed through a few areas and culminated peacefully.  Reports of evening clashes came in from areas including Rainawari, Kathidarwaza, Khanyar, Sekidafar, Saraf Kadal, 90-feet Road at Soura and Hawal.

Clashes were witnessed at Lawaypora, HMT, Eidgah, Palpora, Qamarwari and Chattabal. A torch procession was taken out after Magrhib prayers at Nowgam. Reports of peaceful protests also came in from Soiteng, Lasjan, Hyderpora and Peerbagh. Reports of evening protests also came in from Baghat and Barzulla areas of Srinagar.

NORTH KASHMIR

Reports said women took out a pro-freedom protest march from Jamia Masjid in Old Town Baramulla. However, police from fired scores of teargas shells towards the peaceful protestors, triggering panic among the protesting women. The protesters later marched through different areas and ended the march at Azad Gunj.

Meanwhile, police continued to impose restrictions on bridges connecting Old Town with Civil Lines areas.

Reports from Sopore said forces raided a godown of a Tehreek-e-Hurriyat leader Abdul Gani Bhat and sealed empty fruit bags, triggering protests in the area.  Locals said the villagers also caught hold of a CRPF trooper who was giving information to police and CRPF higher ups about the protests taking place in the area.

Reports from Kupwara district said restrictions and complete shutdown was observed in entire district amid heavy deployment of forces.  Residents of Panzgam said Army soldiers damaged properties by smashing windowpanes of many residential houses.

Many vehicles were also damaged by Army allegedly during the night raids, reports said.
Meanwhile, locals from Lolab Valley urged the government to “save us from the wrath of men in uniform.” They alleged that forces not only abuse and arrest common people but also harass the female folk.

“Forces arrest youth and set them free only after interrogating them. They catch everyone and torture them,” the residents alleged

Reports from Bandipora district said a youth was hit by a bullet in forces’ firing while at least 12 protestors were injured at Hajin area of the district. The injured youth was identified as Aqib Ahmad Wani, a shopkeeper. He was hit by a bullet during clashes when he was trying to close the shutter of his shop. Aqib received bullet in his arm and was shifted to Hajin Primary Health Centre where doctors referred him to SKIMS Srinagar.  Clashes between protesters and forces continued in Hajin town at New Bridge till late evening. Pertinently, huge deployment of Army has been made on the streets of Hajin.

Meanwhile, a Kashmiri journalist was injured when he was travelling from Uri area of North Kashmir. Anees Zargar, who works with Zee Media, got a fracture in his arm. “Some boys threw stones on the car in which I was travelling with few other journalists who had come from New Delhi to cover the Sunday’s Uri attack. I got injured when a stone hit my arm, while I saved my head," Anees said. The incident took place in the HMT area of Srinagar on Srinagar-Baramulla highway, he said.

CENTRAL KASHMIR

Reports from Budgam district said Army has been deployed in many areas of Chadoora. They said forces removed all barricades put in place by protestors on main roads in Aripanthan, Narbal and Beerwah towns. Ganderbal district observed a complete shutdown as shops, private and government offices and business establishments remained closed.

Police fired dozens of teargas shells to disperse the protestors at Fatehora area. Protests broke out in the locality after police raided the residential house of Nazir Ahmed Ganai, a local youth and detained him in the afternoon. Police sources said Ganai was wanted in a stone-pelting case.
Reports said police also raided residential houses in Saloora and Badergund areas of the district, but nobody was detained.

CHENAB VALLEY TO OBSERVE SHUTDOWN TODAY

Following the call of Kashmir’s joint resistance leadership, the Chenab Valley in Jammu region will observe a complete shutdown on Wednesday. Reports said people of Chenab Valley and Pir Panjal in consultation with Anjuman-e-Islamia Bhadarwah and with other Muslim organizations of erstwhile district Doda have appealed to the people of Chenab Valley to follow the calendar of Hurriyat and observe a complete shutdown on 21st September.

POLICE VERSION

According to a spokesman of Zonal Police Headquarters Kashmir, situation in the Valley remained under control today. “There was no curfew in the valley except the areas under few police stations in Srinagar. Increased movement of people and vehicular traffic was observed across Kashmir during the day. During the past 24 hours, in its efforts to curb the activities of “miscreants/ hooligans”, police arrested 64 people involved in disturbing the situation by damaging civilian vehicles, stopping vehicular traffic and harassing people by placing obstructions on roads,” the spokesman said.  “Two incidents of arson were reported from Srinagar and Shopian. In Vehil, Shopian a residential house was set on fire while as in Srinagar at Batamaloo a bike was set on fire by miscreants. The overall situation across Jammu region remained normal and peaceful. Following the improvement in the situation curfew was relaxed from morning till evening hours in Rajouri town during which situation remained normal.”

(With inputs from Altaf Baba, Ghulam Muhammad, Sheikh Nazir) GK

U.S. Officials Say Russia Probably Attacked U.N. Humanitarian Convoy

U.S. Officials Say Russia Probably Attacked U.N. Humanitarian Convoy

By ERIC SCHMITT, MICHAEL R. GORDON and SOMINI SENGUPTASEPT. 20, 2016 New York Times

The bombed trucks: “Just when we think it cannot get any worse, the bar of depravity sinks lower.” Banki Moon 

Credit Ammar Abdullah/Reuters

Russia was probably responsible for the deadly bombing of a United Nations humanitarian aid convoy in Syria, American officials said Tuesday, further shredding what remained of a severely weakened agreement between the United States and Russia aimed at halting the war.

Aghast at the attack on Monday night, United Nations officials on Tuesday suspended all aid convoys in Syria, describing the bombing as a possible war crime and a cowardly act.

The suspension was announced as the United Nations was convening its annual General Assembly meetings in New York, where the five-year-old Syria war has become the organization’s most anguishing challenge.

“Just when we think it cannot get any worse, the bar of depravity sinks lower,” Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said in his opening remarks to the gathering, his last as leader of the United Nations after 10 years. Mr. Ban called the attack on the convoy “sickening, savage and apparently deliberate.”

Publicly, the Obama administration said it held Russia responsible, in its role as a sponsor of the partial cease-fire agreement that it reached last week with United States. But the Americans still held out the possibility of salvaging the agreement. Benjamin Rhodes, the deputy national security adviser, said Russia should have ensured a halt to air operations in an area where “humanitarian assistance is flowing.”

Privately, American officials said their intelligence information suggested Russian aircraft had actually carried out the attack.

The American officials said that the Obama administration wanted to allow Moscow the time and space to investigate and announce its own conclusions about the bombing, which destroyed 18 of 31 trucks authorized to travel to a rebel-held area in northern Syria.

The bombing was the second disaster in three days to subvert the agreement between Russia and the United States, which had called for a weeklong cease-fire, humanitarian aid deliveries, collaboration by the two powers on targeting militant extremists in Syria and a buildup of trust to eventually resume peace talks.

On Saturday, an errant American airstrike that was supposed to target Islamic State militants in Syria instead killed 60 people that Syria’s government and its Russian allies identified as Syrian soldiers; they suggested that the assault was deliberate, despite American apologies.

The United States has the ability to track warplanes and other aircraft in the region — through radar and other sensors — and the Pentagon has determined with “very high probability” that a Russian Su-24 attack plane was directly over the convoy less than a minute before the airstrike was reported, a senior American official said.

“We have a very good picture of the skies over Syria, as well as where there’s activity,” the official said. “We know the plane in question was Russian, not Syrian, and was directly overhead.”

American analysts are assessing photographs of the bomb damage that could be tied to the weapons the Su-24 carries. They are also checking for any intercepted communications from the Russian pilot to determine why the convoy was struck.

“We have no indication that anything other than Russian tactical aircraft were in the air at the time the convoy was struck, to include both strike and reconnaissance aircraft,” said another American official. “We have seen no indication that it was anything other than an airstrike.”

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified intelligence information.

Col. John J. Thomas, a spokesman for United States Central Command, told reporters at the Pentagon on Tuesday that warplanes of the American-led coalition that is fighting the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria had not carried out the attack. “We’ll look to the Syrians and the Russians to tell us what they know,” he said.

The strike on the trucks, which were carrying critically needed food and medical supplies bound for rebel-held areas of Syria’s western Aleppo Province, took place shortly after the Syrian military declared that it regarded the seven-day partial cease-fire as over.

The convoy, escorted by the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, was among the first to try to deliver humanitarian aid to rebel-held areas under the cease-fire agreement. Members of the group said its local chief, Omar Barakat, was among at least 12 people killed in the attack, though United Nations officials in Geneva said the death toll was uncertain.

The International Committee of the Red Cross said in a statement that about 20 civilians were killed and much of the aid destroyed. Peter Maurer, the organization’s president, called the attack a “flagrant violation” of international law.

While both Syria and Russia denied responsibility for the bombing, the Russian account evolved over 24 hours.

The ruins of the convoy on Tuesday. “We know the plane in question was Russian, not Syrian, and was directly overhead,” a United States official said. Credit Omar Haj Kadour/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Some Russian officials suggested that artillery fire from rebels had hit the convoy. Later, some officials suggested the trucks had been set on fire. On Tuesday afternoon, Russia’s Defense Ministry said a drone video had shown that a “terrorists’ pickup truck” armed with a mortar had accompanied the convoy, the Tass news agency reported. This appeared to raise the possibility that the intended target had been a vehicle of militants.

But the drone video shows the aid convoy stationary, at the side of the road, and what appears to be a truck towing a mortar passing by. The video does not appear to establish any further connection between the convoy and the mortar truck, nor anything that would make the convoy a legitimate target.

The head of the United Nations agency that coordinates aid, Stephen O’Brien, said the attack would amount to a war crime if it were found to have targeted humanitarian aid workers.

He called for an independent investigation.

“In terms of aid worker victims, this particular incident of an aerial bombing of an aid convoy is unprecedented in scale,” said Abby Stoddard, who studies attacks on aid workers for Humanitarian Outcomes, a research and advocacy group.

Witnesses said multiple strikes had hit the convoy as workers were unloading aid, and then hit rescue workers who arrived to help the injured.

United Nations officials said 18 trucks — clearly marked and carrying wheat flour, nine tons of medicine and clothing for about 78,000 people — were destroyed. Benoit Carpentier, a spokesman for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, said a hospital had also been destroyed.

Aid convoys have endured sniper fire and shelling during the five years of the Syrian conflict, but the attack on Monday is thought to be the first time one was hit by an airstrike.

John Kirby, a spokesman for the State Department, called the attack on the convoy an “egregious violation” of the agreement with Russia.

Mr. Kerry conferred with his Russian counterpart, Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov, and other diplomats representing the International Syria Support Group in New York on Tuesday morning as the United Nations General Assembly session got underway.

The support group, a 17-nation effort to halt the conflict that is led by Mr. Kerry and Mr. Lavrov, planned to hold additional meetings this week.

Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, Michael R. Gordon from New York, and Somini Sengupta from the United Nations. Reporting was contributed by Nick Cumming-Bruce from Geneva; Helene Cooper from Washington; Anne Barnard from Beirut, Lebanon; Sophia Kishkovsky from Moscow; and Rick Gladstone from New York.

A version of this article appears in print on September 21, 2016, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: U.S. Ties Russia to Strike on U.N. Convoy in Syria. Order 

European Leaders Discuss Plan for European Army

********************************************
European Leaders Discuss Plan for European Army

"We are going to move towards an EU army much faster than people believe."
by Soeren Kern
September 14, 2016 at 5:00 am
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8935/european-army

Critics say that the creation of a European army, a long-held goal of European federalists, would entail an unprecedented transfer of sovereignty from European nation states to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, the de facto capital of the EU.

Others say that efforts to move forward on European defense integration show that European leaders have learned little from Brexit, and are determined to continue their quest to build a European superstate regardless of opposition from large segments of the European public.

"Those of us who have always warned about Europe's defense ambitions have always been told not to worry... We're always told not to worry about the next integration and then it happens. We've been too often conned before and we must not be conned again." — Liam Fox, former British defense secretary.

"[C]reation of EU defense structures, separate from NATO, will only lead to division between transatlantic partners at a time when solidarity is needed in the face of many difficult and dangerous threats to the democracies." — Geoffrey Van Orden, UK Conservative Party defense spokesman.

European leaders are discussing "far-reaching proposals" to build a pan-European military, according to a French defense ministry document leaked to the German newspaper, the Süddeutsche Zeitung.

The efforts are part of plans to relaunch the European Union at celebrations in Rome next March marking the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, which established the European Community.

The document confirms rumors that European officials are rushing ahead with defense integration now that Britain — the leading military power in Europe — will be exiting the 28-member European Union.

British leaders have repeatedly blocked efforts to create a European army because of concerns that it would undermine the NATO alliance, the primary defense structure in Europe since 1949.

Proponents of European defense integration argue that it is needed to counter growing security threats and would save billions of euros in duplication between countries.

Critics say that the creation of a European army, a long-held goal (see Appendix below) of European federalists, would entail an unprecedented transfer of sovereignty from European nation states to unelected bureaucrats in Brussels, the de facto capital of the EU.

Others say that efforts to move forward on European defense integration show that European leaders have learned little from Brexit — the June 23 decision by British voters to leave the EU — and are determined to continue their quest to build a European superstate regardless of opposition from large segments of the European public.

The Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that it had obtained a copy of a six-page position paper, jointly written by French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian and his German counterpart, Ursula von der Leyen. The document calls for the establishment of a "common and permanent" European military headquarters, as well as the creation of EU military structures, including an EU Logistics Command and an EU Medical Command.

The document calls on EU member states to integrate logistics and procurement, coordinate military R&D and synchronize policies in matters of financing and military planning. EU intelligence gathering would be improved through the use of European satellites; a common EU military academy would "promote a common esprit de corps."

According to the newspaper, the document will be distributed to European leaders at an informal summit in Bratislava, Slovakia, on September 16. 

France and Germany will ask the leaders of the other EU member states not only to approve the measures, but also to "discuss a fast implementation."

Specifically, France and Germany will for the first time activate Article 44 of the Lisbon Treaty (also known as the European Constitution). This clause allows certain EU member states "which are willing and have the necessary capability" to proceed with the "task" of defense integration, even if other EU member states disapprove.

According to Süddeutsche Zeitung:

"In the wake of the British referendum to leave the European Union, Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President François Hollande have decided to demonstrate the EU's strength and to push the remaining member states to show more unity. Especially in defense policy, many projects were put on hold because Britain vetoed them. Without London, the two EU founding states, France and Germany, hope for swift decisions."

On September 8, Defense News reported that the creation of a European army was the central focus of an August 22 meeting between the leaders of France, Germany and Italy in Naples, where the three declared "the beginning of a new Europe." That meeting was followed by a meeting of defense ministers from the three countries in Paris on September 5.

According to Defense News, Italy is lobbying France and Germany to "back a plan for European tax breaks and financing for joint European defense procurement and development programs, as part of a bid to build a European army."

A confidential draft document circulated by Italy calls for "fiscal and financial incentives to support new EU cooperative programs for development and joint purchases of equipment and infrastructure supporting the EU's Common Security and Defense Policy."

In a September 8 interview with La Repubblica, the EU's foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, called for the establishment of a permanent EU military headquarters in Brussels that would manage all current and future EU military operations. "This could become the nucleus around which a common European defense structure could be built," she said.

Mogherini insisted that "we are not talking about a European army but about European defense: something we can really do, concretely, starting now." She also stressed that EU defense policy would remain under the control of European governments rather than the European Commission, the powerful executive arm of the EU.

On September 7, however, The Times reported that Mogherini will present EU leaders attending the summit in Bratislava with a "road map" and a "timetable" for creating EU military structures, which are "the foundation of a European army." According to newspaper, her plans for military structures able "to act autonomously" from NATO have led to fears that "the EU is seeking to rival the transatlantic alliance."

The Times quoted Mogherini as saying she was taking advantage of the "political space" opened by the Brexit vote:

"It might sound a bit dramatic but we are at this turning point. We could relaunch our European project and make it more functional and powerful for our citizens and the rest of the world. Or we could diminish its intensity and power. We have the political space today to do things that were not really doable in previous years."

On May 27, the Sunday Times reported that steps towards creating a European army were being kept secret from British voters until the day after the June 23 referendum:

"In an effort to avoid derailing the Prime Minister's 'Remain' campaign, the policy plans will not be sent to national governments until the day after Britons vote. Until then, only a small group of EU political and security committee ambassadors, who must leave their electronic devices outside a sealed room, can read the proposal."

On June 28, just days after the British referendum, Mogherini presented European leaders attending an EU summit in Brussels with the "EU Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy." The document explicitly calls for European defense integration, and implicitly calls for the creation of a European army.

According to the document, the EU strategy "nurtures the ambition of strategic autonomy for the European Union." It adds: "Gradual synchronization and mutual adaptation of national defense planning cycles and capability development can enhance strategic convergence between member states."

In an interview with The Telegraph, Liam Fox, a former defense secretary who served under former Prime Minister David Cameron, said:

"Those of us who have always warned about Europe's defense ambitions have always been told not to worry, but step-by-step that ever closer union is becoming a reality. We cannot afford to be conned in this referendum as we were conned in 1975.

"The best way to protect ourselves is to stay close to the US. The US defense budget is bigger than the next 11 countries in the world put together. Europe's defense intentions are a dangerous fantasy and risk cutting us off from our closest and most powerful ally.

"We're always told not to worry about the next integration and then it happens. We've been too often conned before and we must not be conned again."

The Conservative Party's defense spokesman, Geoffrey Van Orden, said the implications of the EU's defense ambitions are worrying:

"We can all see that the EU might play a useful role in conflict prevention and in some civil aspects of crisis management. But its ambitions go beyond that. The EU motive is not to create additional military capability but to achieve defense integration as a key step on the road to a federal EU state.

"The US and indeed the UK are being misled if they imagine that such moves will enhance NATO — the key guarantor of our collective defense. On the contrary, creation of EU defense structures, separate from NATO, will only lead to division between transatlantic partners at a time when solidarity is needed in the face of many difficult and dangerous threats to the democracies."

Mike Hookem, the defense spokesman of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), said his party had been warning about the dangers posed by the EU army concept for years:

"I'm pleased to see people are finally waking up. An EU army is not some Eurosceptic fantasy, there are many in Brussels hell-bent on making it happen."

European federalists have been calling for the creation of a European army in one form or another since 1950. Although a European army is still a long way away from becoming reality, the ultimate goal of European federalists is full defense integration leading to a European military under supranational control.

Since the Lisbon Treaty, which forms the constitutional basis of the European Union, entered into force in December 2009, the political momentum toward European defense integration has picked up steam. The drive toward European defense integration has accelerated during the Obama administration, which has often appeared indifferent to Europe and transatlantic relations. Another important obstacle to European defense integration was removed when Britons voted in June 2016 to exit the European Union.

What follows is a collection of quotes from senior European officials regarding a European army and integrated defense.

September 9. 
The EU's foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, said:

"I believe a window of opportunity has been opened to give life to a European defense. I wanted to send the message that, despite the British exit, Europe can and must move forward with the process of integration. The prospect of Brexit offered an opportunity not to be slowed by the country that was always most determinedly opposed to the idea of pooling the instruments of defense."

August 26. 
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a staunch critic of the EU's migration policies, said: 

A joint European army was needed to keep migrants out. At a news conference after a meeting between Central European member states and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Warsaw, Orbán said: "We should list the issue of security as a priority, and we should start setting up a common European army."

August 22. 
Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka called for greater European military integration:

"Our experiences with the last migration wave have shown the importance of Europe's internal borders. In the face of uncontrolled mass migration, even states in the center of Europe have realized that internal borders must be better controlled. Aside from better coordinated foreign and security policy, I also believe that in the long term, we will be unable to do without a joint European army."

July 23. 
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said:

"The withdrawal of the British from the EU has led to a significant reduction in the continent's military strength, and from a military policy perspective we must not remain in this defenseless position... A European army must protect the continent from two sides, from the East and from the South, in terms of protecting against terrorism and migration. Europe cannot even continue to exist without an alliance — a joint EU army."

July 13. 
The German Defense Ministry released a white paper 

Outlining the country's future defense and security policies. The document calls for steps leading to the creation of an EU army, such as the integration of military capabilities and defense industries. "We are aiming to establish a permanent European civil-military operational headquarters in the medium term," it says. The white paper also says that citizens of other EU countries could be allowed to serve in the German army. Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said:

"Britain has paralyzed the European Union on the issues of foreign and security policy. This cannot mean that the rest of Europe remain inactive, but rather we need to move forward on these big issues."

June 28. 
French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier released a joint document titled "A Strong Europe in a World of Uncertainties." It states:

"The security of EU member states is deeply interconnected, as these threats now affect the continent as a whole: any threat to one member state is also a threat to others. We therefore regard our security as one and indivisible. We consider the European Union and the European security order to be part of our core interests and will safeguard them in any circumstances.

"In this context, France and Germany recommit to a shared vision of Europe as a security union, based on solidarity and mutual assistance between member states in support of common security and defense policy. Providing security for Europe as well as contributing to peace and stability globally is at the heart of the European project.

"France and Germany will promote the EU as an independent and global actor able to leverage its unique array of expertise and tools, civilian and military, in order to defend and promote the interests of its citizens. France and Germany will promote integrated EU foreign and security policy bringing together all EU policy instruments.

"The EU should be able to plan and conduct civil and military operations more effectively, with the support of a permanent civil-military chain of command. The EU should be able to rely on employable high-readiness forces and provide common financing for its operations. Within the framework of the EU, member states willing to establish permanent structured cooperation in the field of defense or to push ahead to launch operations should be able to do so in a flexible manner. If needed, EU member states should consider establishing standing maritime forces or acquiring EU-owned capabilities in other key areas."

June 26. 
In an interview with Welt am Sonntag, the Chairman of the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee, Elmar Brok, called for the immediate creation of a joint military headquarters and for the eventual establishment of an EU army:

"We need a common military headquarters and a coalition of the willing in accordance with the permanent structural cooperation of the EU Treaty. An EU army could eventually arise from such a group. This could help to strengthen the role of Europeans in the security and defense policy, together better fulfill the responsibility of Europe in the world and also to achieve more synergies in defense spending."

June 24. 
French President François Hollande said:

"Europe needs to be a sovereign power deciding its own future and promoting its model. France will therefore be leading efforts to ensure Europe focuses on the most important issues: the security and defense of our continent, to protect our borders and preserve peace in the face of threats."

May 29. 
British Armed Forces Minister Penny Mordaunt said: 

"A centrally controlled army would be a massive step to the EU's goal of full political integration, but it would be a very dangerous move."

February 4. 

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen confirmed: 

An agreement to integrate some 800 German soldiers into the Dutch navy. While in Amsterdam, where she met with the Dutch Defense Minister, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, von der Leyen called the plan a "prime example for the building of a European defense union."

December 15, 2015. 

The European Commission proposed creating a European Border and Coast Guard. 

The proposal, which was put forward in response to the ongoing European migrant crisis, called for a rapid reaction force of 1,500 officers who would be able to deploy even if a member state did not ask for its help.

October 15, 2015. 

The president of the European People's Party (EPP), Joseph Daul, said:

 "We are going to move towards an EU army much faster than people believe."

September 12, 2015. 

An unpublished position paper drawn up by Europe and Defence policy committees of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Party (CDU) was leaked to The Telegraph. The document sets out a detailed :

10-point plan for military co-operation in Europe. It calls for "a permanent structured and coordinated cooperation of national armed forces in the medium term." It adds:

"In the long run, this process should according to the present German coalition agreement lead also to a European Army subject to Parliamentarian control.

"In the framework of NATO, a uniform European pillar will be more valuable and efficient for the USA than with the present rag-rug characterized by a lack of joint European planning, procurement, and interoperability."

June 15, 2015. 

Michel Barnier, Special Adviser on European Defence and Security Policy to European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, wrote:

"Member States are slow to accept that they need to go beyond a model where defense is a matter of strict national sovereignty.... It is time for a reckoning: traditional methods of cooperation have reached their limits and proved insufficient. European defense needs a paradigm change in line with the exponential increase in global threats and the volatility of our neighborhood. The past has shown that European defense does move ahead if and when there is political will."

March 9, 2015. 

In an interview with Die Welt, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said the EU should establish its own army to show Russia it is serious about defending European values:

"Europe has lost a huge amount of respect. In foreign policy too, we are not taken seriously. A common European army would show the world that there will never again be war between EU countries. Such an army would help us to build a common foreign and security policy and allow Europe to meet its responsibilities in the world. With its own army, Europe could respond credibly to a threat to peace in a member country or in a neighboring country of the European Union."

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said they support Juncker's proposal for a European army. In an interview with Tagesspiegel, Steinmeier added:

"The long-term goal of a European army is a major policy objective and has been part of the Social Democratic Party's (SPD) party program for many years. Given the new risks and threats to peace in Europe we now need, as a first step, a rapid adaptation and updating of the common European security strategy."

March 8, 2015. 

In an interview with Deutschlandfunk radio, German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said:

"I think that the German army is ready, under certain circumstances, to be subordinated to the control of another nation. That is the goal, that in the European Union we step by step more firmly establish our cooperation, especially in security policy. This intertwining of armies with a view to having a European army is the future."

May 15, 2014. 

Jean-Claude Juncker, the European People's Party lead candidate for president of the next European Commission, wrote:

"I believe that we need to work on a stronger Europe when it comes to security and defense matters. Yes, Europe is chiefly a 'soft power.' But even the strongest soft powers cannot make do in the long run without at least some integrated defense capacities. The Treaty of Lisbon provides for the possibility, for those Member States who want to do so, to pool their defense capabilities in the form of a permanent structured cooperation."

December 19, 2013. 

The speaker of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, called for the creation of a European army: 

"If we wish to defend our values and interests, if we wish to maintain the security of our citizens, then a majority of MEPs consider that we need a headquarters for civil and military missions in Brussels and deployable troops."

November 15, 2009. 

In an interview with The Times, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said:

It is a "necessary objective to have a European army." He added:

"Every country duplicates its forces, each of us puts armored cars, men, tanks, planes, into Afghanistan. If there were a European army, Italy could send planes, France could send tanks, Britain could send armored cars, and in this way we would optimize the use of our resources. Perhaps we won't get there immediately, but that is the idea of a European army."

May 6, 2008. 

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier called 

For the establishment of the European army "as soon as possible." He said he had been in talks with his French counterpart to discuss "future structures" of a European army.

December 10-11, 1999. 

European officials meeting in Helsinki agreed 

To develop a European Rapid Reaction Force. Also known as the Helsinki Headline Goal, EU member states pledged that by 2003 they would be able to deploy a European military force of 60,000 troops within 60 days and for a period of potentially one year. This goal has never been met.

December 3-4, 1988. 

British Prime Minister Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac met at the French port city of Saint-Malo to discuss future EU defense integration. The summit declaration, which laid the political foundation for a common European defense policy, stated:

"The European Union needs to be in a position to play its full role on the international stage... The Union must have the capacity for autonomous action, backed up by credible military forces, the means to decide to use them, and a readiness to do so, in order to respond to international crises."

October 24, 1950. 

The Pleven Plan, named after French Prime Minister René Pleven, was the first plan to create a unified European army. 

It proposed the "immediate creation of a European army tied to the political institutions of a united Europe." It stated:

"A European army cannot be created simply by placing national military units side by side, since, in practice, this would merely mask a coalition of the old sort. Tasks that can be tackled only in common must be matched by common institutions. A united European army, made up of forces from the various European nations must, as far as possible, pool all of its human and material components under a single political and military European authority."

The Pleven Plan was rejected by the French Parliament because it infringed on France's national sovereignty.

Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook © 2016 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. 

The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.
So do ENB

இனப்பிரச்சினைக்குத் தீர்வு-13ஆவது திருத்தச்சட்டம் ரணில்

இந்திய இலங்கை ஒப்பந்தம் ராஜீவுக்கு வரவேற்பு

13ஆவது திருத்தச்சட்டமே இனப்பிரச்சனைத் தீர்வுக்கான  அடிப்படை - ரணில்

யாழ்ப்பாணத்தில் ரணில்

SEP 18, 2016 | 2:19by யாழ்ப்பாணச் செய்தியாளர்

13 ஆவது அரசியலமைப்பு திருத்தச் சட்டத்தை அடிப்படையாகக் கொண்டு இனப்பிரச்சினைக்குத் தீர்வு காண்பதற்கு அனைவரும் ஒன்றிணைந்து செயற்பட வேண்டும் என்று சிறிலங்கா பிரதமர் ரணில் விக்கிரமசிங்க தெரிவித்துள்ளார்.

யாழ்.மாவட்டச் செயலகத்திற்கான புதிய கட்டடம் ஒன்றை நேற்று திறந்துவைத்து உரையாற்றியபோதே அவர் இவ்வாறு கூறியுள்ளார்.

“முன்னாள் அதிபர் ஜே.ஆர்.ஜெயவர்த்தன பலரது எதிர்ப்புக்கு மத்தியில் கொண்டு வந்த 13 ஆவது அரசியலமைப்பு திருத்தச் சட்டமே நாட்டில் அதிகாரங்களைப் பகிர்ந்திருக்கிறது.

13ஆவது திருத்தத்திற்கு அப்பால் சென்று இனப்பிரச்சினைக்குத் தீர்வு காணப்போவதாகக் கூறிய முன்னாள் அதிபர் மகிந்த ராஜபக்சவும் இனப்பிரச்சினைக்குத் தீர்வு காணவில்லை.

இப்போது நாங்கள் இந்தப் பிரச்சினைக்குத் தீர்வு கண்டு, பொருளாதாரத்தில் முன்னேற வேண்டியிருக்கிறது.

இந்து சமுத்திரம் பொருளாதாரத்தில் முக்கிய பிரதேசமாக இப்போது மாறி வருகின்றது. அதன் மத்தியில் இருக்கின்ற நாங்கள், அதன் மூலம் நன்மைகளைப் பெற்று முன்னேறுவதற்கு முயற்சிக்க வேண்டும்.

அதன் ஊடாகத்தான் நாங்கள் ஒரு சக்தி மிக்க நாடாக உருவாக முடியும். இதற்கு அனைவரும் ஒத்துழைக்க வேண்டும்.

சிறிலங்கா அரசாங்கம் அமைக்கவுள்ள காணாமல் போனோருக்கான பணியகம் எவரையும் துரத்திச் சென்று பழி வாங்குவதற்காக அமைக்கப்படவில்லை. காணாமல் போனவர்கள் பற்றிய பிரச்சினைக்குத் தீர்வு கண்டு, பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களுடைய மனங்களில் உள்ள துன்பங்களைப் போக்கி அவர்களுக்கு அமைதியை ஏற்படுத்துவதற்காகவே அது அமைக்கப்படவுள்ளது.

அது மட்டுமல்ல. பிரச்சினைகளுக்குத் தீரவு காண்பதற்காக உண்மையைக் கண்டறிந்து நல்லிணக்கத்தை ஏற்படுத்துவதற்கான பொறிமுறையொன்றையும் உருவாக்கவுள்ளதாகவும் அவர் மேலும் தெரிவித்தார்.

சிங்களம் ஏவிய GTF இன் ஐ.நா.பயணம்

US to stay neutral as India, Pak prepare for UN showdown

US to stay neutral as India, Pak prepare for UN showdown

“What we have said — nothing is changed about our view that we want to see India and Pakistan work this out bilaterally,” said State Department spokesman John Kirby when asked to define the US policy on Kashmir.

GKNN
Washington, Publish Date: Sep 18 2016 11:55PM | Updated Date: Sep 18 2016 11:55PM

As Pakistan prepares to highlight the current situation in India-held Kashmir at the UN General Assembly and India plans to counter it by raising the Baloch issue, the United States has made it clear that it will not back either side.

“What we have said — nothing is changed about our view that we want to see India and Pakistan work this out bilaterally,” said State Department spokesman John Kirby when asked to define the US policy on Kashmir.

The US was one of the co-sponsors of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 47 that calls for “a free and impartial plebiscite” in Jammu and Kashmir on the question of its accession to India or Pakistan. But since then, it has slightly changed its position and for the past several decades calls for bilateral talks between the two countries for resolving this dispute. Belgium, Canada, China,

Colombia and Britain were the other sponsors of the resolution that the UN Security Council adopted at its 286th meeting on April 21, 1948.

When asked how he viewed Pakistan’s efforts to raise the issue at international forums, Kirby said: “That’s for them to speak to.”

A popular uprising in the Kashmir valley this summer has once again highlighted the issue as about 100 people have already been killed and almost 10,000 injured in clashes with Indian security forces.

The killings forced UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid Ra’ad Zeid Al Hussein to declare that an international probe into Kashmir killings was imperative now.

Amnesty International also asked India to let its representatives visit the valley to assess the situation but instead of allowing it to do so, an Indian court registered a sedition case against the rights group.
In Islamabad, a spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told reporters that Pakistan would ‘forcefully’ raise the Kashmir issue at the UN General Assembly in New York this week.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has also said that he would raise the Kashmir issue in his address, urging the international community to live up to their promise of the right to self-determination to the people of Kashmir.

Sharif, who arrives in New York on Sunday, has appointed 20 special envoys to travel across the globe for drawing attention to the situation in Kashmir.

Two senior envoys — Senator Mushahid Hussain and AJK President Masood Khan — are coming to Washington early next month to raise the issue with US leaders and at American think-tanks.

India plans to counter Pakistan’s efforts by raising the Baloch issue at the UN and other world forums, arguing that the Baloch are also seeking independence from Pakistan and deserve international support.

India is also backing efforts of some Baloch activists to hold a demonstration outside the UN headquarters during the prime minister’s speech.

Both Pakistan and India are trying to persuade the US to support their positions. The US, however, appears to have decided not to take sides.

Kirby’s stance that the Kashmir dispute should be settled bilaterally between Pakistan and India is apparently a damper for Pakistan’s efforts to persuade other nations to condemn Indian atrocities in the Kashmir valley.

But his statement on Balochistan, at an earlier briefing, was equally, if not more, disappointing for India. He declared unequivocally that “the US government respects the unity and territorial integrity of Pakistan and we do not support independence for Balochistan”.

At Friday’s briefing, the State Department spokesman also ignored efforts to make him condemn the ongoing paramilitary operations in Karachi, but did convey US concern over the situation.

 “We’re monitoring those events very closely,” said Kirby when asked what the US assessment was of the Karachi situation.

 “We’re aware that Pakistani security forces have arrested some MQM members allegedly involved in violent protests and that these operations have included the closure and demolition of offices deemed to have been illegally constructed,” he said. “But I’m going to refer you to the government of Pakistan for the latest information about these events.”

Asked if the Muttahida Qaumi Movement had shared its assessment of the situation in Karachi with the State Department, Kirby said: “I’m not aware that there had been specific concerns relayed to us by members of the MQM.”

“But have you spoken to the Pakistani officials on this?” asked the reporter. “We routinely communicate with our Pakistani counterparts about issues like this,” the US official replied.

 (The DAWN)

Kashmir: 17 Indian soldiers killed, 19 injured

17 soldiers killed, 19 injured after ‘fidayeen’ storm army headquarter in Uri

4 militants also gunned down; Army says identity of attackers being ascertained

ABID BASHIR

Uri (Baramulla), Publish Date: Sep 18 2016 11:28PM | Updated Date: Sep 19 2016 12:59AM
17 soldiers killed, 19 injured after ‘fidayeen’ storm army headquarter in Uri
Photo: Firdous Hassan/GK

In one of the deadliest militant strikes on forces in Kashmir in the recent past, four heavily-armed ‘fidayeen’ (suicide attackers) stormed an Army’s brigade headquarters in Uri town of north Kashmir’s Baramulla district in an audacious pre-dawn strike on Sunday, killing at least 17 soldiers while leaving 20 others injured, four of them critically, officials and reports said. Four militants were also killed in over three-hour-long gunfight.

Sources in the Army said four of the injured soldiers were critical and one of them was airlifted to New Delhi for specialized treatment. The rest of the injured are being treated at Army’s 92-base hospital in Srinagar.

The Uri attack comes barely eight days after four militants took shelter at a mini-secretariat near Army’s 93 Brigade headquarters in Poonch area of Jammu province and started heavy firing, killing a policeman and injuring two others. All the four militants were killed in the gunfight that had lasted for two days.

The Uri fidayeen attack has taken place at a time when Kashmir is witnessing an anti-India uprising amid complete shutdown that entered its 72nd day on Sunday. At least 86 people have been killed so far in the uprising triggered by the killing of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani on July 8.
The Uri attack, according to a senior Army officer, took place at 5:25 am as the militants, armed with automatic rifles and grenades, stormed the Army’s battalion headquarters of 10 Dogra regiment in Uri town—over 100 kms north of summer capital Srinagar.

“The militants attacked with the first light of the day. Four Army barracks got gutted in the encounter while many makeshift barracks were also destroyed,” Army officials in Srinagar said.

According to a statement issued by the Army’s Northern Command, which is based in Udhampur district in Jammu region, a group of heavily-armed militants targeted the rear administrative base of a unit in Uri early in the morning.  “In the counter action, four militants have been eliminated and combing operations are in progress,” the statement read. “The administrative base had large strength of troops of units turning over after their tour of duty, who were stationed in tents/temporary shelters which caught fire, and resulted in heavy casualties. We salute the sacrifice of 17 soldiers killed in the operation."

Another statement from Army’s Srinagar-based 15 Corps headquarters said three of the four militants were killed in the first 15 minutes of the attack while the fourth one was killed later.

“At least 13 soldiers died after they were trapped in the tents due to the blaze caused by the explosives used by the militants,” the statement said.

A senior army official posted in Baramulla said the militants, who were four, seemed to have infiltrated on the very morning “with the sole motive of inflicting heavy causalities.”

“We are ascertaining the route used by the militants while they sneaked in. They were highly-trained and right away targeted the tents in which soldiers were sleeping,” he said. “By 8:30 am, we were able to kill all the four militants.”

Army sources said four barracks and many tents in which soldiers were sleeping were burnt as militants fired indiscriminately at these accommodations. “The fire later engulfed the nearby barracks, destroying at least four of them. Later, they (militants) took positions and continued throwing grenades and fired from automatic rifles,” they said. “13 soldiers died due to the fire in tents in which they were sleeping. Four others succumbed later.”

Army said four AK riffles, grenade launchers and “war-like stores” have been recovered from the slain militants.

“Some important documents, maps and GPS equipment have also been recovered from the slain militants, who seem to be foreigners. We will analyze and conduct a thorough inspection of the items recovered from their possession,” the Army officials said.

They said preliminary reports suggest that militants had sneaked in from an area near Salamabad stream in Uri. “It is believed that the four militants had cut the fence before making their way into this side,” they said.

The Army admitted that the Uri attack is first of its kind in recent years wherein they have suffered huge loss of soldiers. In January this year, seven forces personnel were killed when six militants attacked Pathankot air-base in Punjab.

Today’s attack comes two years after militants carried out a similar attack at Mohra in Uri sector. 10 security personnel were killed in the attack that took place on December 5, 2014.

‘MOPPING OPERATION ON’

Army sources said mopping operation was going on in the area to ensure it is completely sanitized. “This is a routine procedure to ensure the affected area is free and safe. Helicopters are also being pressed into service to ensure complete sensitization of the area. The Army is professionally conducting the combing operation of the entire area, including the military complex in Uri,” a source said. “Combing operation is an essential part of every operation. It may continue for a day or more. There may be some scattered unexploded shells or grenades thrown by the militants. The area has to be cleared in a very professional way.”

‘INQUIRY LIKELY INTO LAPSES’

A top Army official disclosed to Greater Kashmir that a high-level inquiry would be ordered into the Uri attack soon after bodies of all the soldiers would reach their native places for the last rites. “Yes there will be an inquiry to check the loopholes, if any, before, during or after the attack,” he said. “Every incident leaves lessons behind. We will surely go for a detailed inquiry as to how the militants managed to sneak in and what were there plans, and also whether there were any lapses from our side.”

RESIDENTS ‘FRIGHTENED’

Locals in Uri woke up to a frightening morning on Sunday. They said they heard heavy firing at 5 am. “Since firing is nothing new for us, we thought it is some ceasefire violation or routine drill going on. The firing didn’t stop for at least 45 to 50 minutes. We also heard big sounds of explosions,” said Abdul Aziz Khan, who resides in Uri town.

Abdul Jabbar, a nomad from Jabla village of Uri, said the firing reminded him of the initial days of heavy exchange of fire between Indian and Pakistani army. “We thought a war has started as firing and explosions were not stopping. The entire Uri town woke up to a very frightening morning. I remember firing stopped at 8:20 am,” he said.

SLAIN SOLDIERS

Suebedar Karnail Singh; Havaldar Ravi Paul; Sepoy Rakesh Singh; Sepoy Javra Nunda; Naiman Kujur; Sepoy Upjan Rao; Havaldar (Chef) N S Rawat; Sepoy (Painter) Ganesh Shankar; N K SK Vidharti; Sepoy (Chef) Ghorai; Lance Naik G Shanker; Sepoy (chef) G Dalai; Lance Naik R K Yadav. Sources said the identity of four slain soldiers was yet to be done.

“The slain soldiers belonged to 10 Dogra and 6 Bihar regiments,” sources said.

Leaked: Source Reveals Coordination between US, ISIS in Attacking Syrian Army

Leaked: Source Reveals Coordination between US, ISIS in Attacking Syrian Army

By Alalam
Global Research, September 18, 2016
Al-Alama 18 September 2016

The ISIS launched attacks on the Syrian army positions in Deir Ezzor only 7 minutes after the US-led coalition’s airstrikes on Saturday, a military source said, adding that the air and ground assault were highly coordinated, According to FNA report.

The source said after the coalition’s pounding of the Syrian army near Deir Ezzor airbase, the ISIS could take full control of al-Tharda mountain and then Deir Ezzor military base, adding that the army and national defense forces deployed near the airbase immediately won it back from the terrorists by launching a counterattack.

Noting that Deir Ezzor is now almost in tranquility and no change has occurred in the military map of the region, the source said by attacking the Syrian army positions, the US seeks to prevent military operations to break the terrorists’ siege on the city.

Leaked Document: Source Reveals Coordination between US, ISIS in Attacking Syrian Army

The source said the simultaneous raid of the ISIL terrorists immediately after the coalition airstrikes is the best evidence of the high coordination done between the US and the terrorists.

Russian Defense Ministry said on Saturday that four strikes against Syrian positions had been delivered by US-led coalition aircraft, including two F-16 jet fighters and two A-10 support aircraft.

The Syrian military called the bombing a “serious and blatant aggression” against Syrian forces, and said it was “conclusive evidence” that the US and its allies support ISIL militants.

Also on Sunday, the Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman blasted Washington over the recent airstrikes near Deir Ezzor, and said such moves serves the interests of the ISIS terror group.

“If previously we had suspicions that Fatah al-Sham Front (formerly known as al-Nusra Front) is protected this way, now, after Saturday airstrikes on the Syrian army we come to a really terrifying conclusion for the entire world: The White House is defending the ISIL,” Maria Zakharova said.

“We demand a full and detailed explanation from Washington. That explanation must be given at the UN Security Council,” she added.

Russia has demanded full and detailed explanation from Washington over the incident in Deir Ezzor, in which 62 Syrian troops were killed and over 100 injured.

The original source of this article is Al-Alama
Copyright © Alalam, Al-Alama, 2016

Kilinochchi market complex gone in blazing inferno

Kilinochchi market complex gone in blazing inferno

Kilinochchi market complex

The Kilinochchi market complex with some 120 shops was razed to the ground in a massive fire which erupted on Friday night, police said. Kilinochchi region’s Deputy Inspector General W.M.R.M. Welikanna said special police teams were deployed for investigations. Ceylon Electricity Board officials were also carrying out on-the-spot investigations as initial reports seem to suggest that faulty wiring may have caused the fire, he said.

District Secretary S. Arumainayagam said damages so far were estimated at a massive Rs. 400 million. Initially, the area’s people had tried to douse the fire and later some 100 Army personnel had also joined with some three water bowsers, but were not successful. They then summoned the fire brigade from Jaffna but it took about two hours for firefighters to arrive and by that time, the whole market complex was gone in the inferno.

Shop owners, dazed by shock and horror, were pleading that the Government should give them compensation.

Source: Sunday Times

Zeid lets Sri Lanka off the hook

Zeid lets Sri Lanka off the hook in his address to the 33rd session of the UNHRC
By P.K.Balachandran Published: 14th September 2016

Prince Zeid | EPS

Colombo, September 14: The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid, did not mention Sri Lanka in his opening address at the 33 rd. session of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva on Tuesday.

 This was because the theme of his speech was the problem of countries not giving access to UN rights investigative teams and the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government in Sri Lanka, which came to power in January 2015, has been giving access to UN rights teams. The new government has also been making some progress in implementing the October 2015 UNHRC resolution on war time rights violations.  

Among the countries which have not given the UN rights investigators are: the US, India, Pakistan, Nepal, China, Israel, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Turkey, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Gambia, and Crimea.

India denied access to a UN team meant to investigate the violence in Kashmir saying that it has mechanisms to deal with the crisis democratically and that much of the trouble in Kashmir is due to terrorism exported by Pakistan to India.  Pakistan said that it can allow a UN team to visit its portion of Kashmir if India also gives similar access.    

About the United States not giving access, Zeid said: “I have repeatedly expressed my dismay at the failure of the Government to accept the Special Rapporteur on Torture's request to enter the Guantanamo Bay detention centre and conduct confidential interviews, as is the agreed practice for all the Council’s experts. Guantanamo has long been a space of reported serious violations. The evasive tactics of the US authorities with respect to requests by international human rights mandates are deeply regrettable.”

No Invasion Of Sovereignty

Denying that UN’s missions can compromise national sovereignties, Zeid said: I am told repeatedly by members of Government and Permanent Missions that human rights are being misused as a pretext for interference in the affairs of sovereign nations. It is suggested the struggle against discrimination violates cultural values. Officials have protested that human rights officers observing a public street demonstration are "interfering" in the State's internal affairs.”

“Statements by my Office regarding credible allegations of violations – including excessively broad and violent security sweeps; prosecutions that appear politically motivated; and the massive use of capital punishment for crimes not consistent with the norms laid out by the ICCPR – are deemed "biased", "irresponsible", "misleading" or based on "false" premises.”

“ Monitoring activities, and advocacy intended to help better protect the people of your countries, are refuted as somehow violating the principle of State sovereignty – or even the UN Charter.”

It may be useful to recall the many attempts made by the apartheid régime of South Africa to claim that the General Assembly’s resolutions opposing apartheid constituted a prohibited "intervention" in its domestic jurisdiction. These efforts to shield serious human rights violations from outside scrutiny were conclusively and repeatedly rejected by the General Assembly.”

“Under international law, wrongful intervention – as prohibited in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter – is by nature coercive. And it should be obvious that my Office has no coercive power. No activity that we undertake can possibly be considered constitutive of a prohibited "intervention".

“We seek to strengthen national protection systems, not violate them. We do not threaten invasion, nor do we finance or organize sedition; we request access, in order to establish a neutral clarity about the facts on the ground. And access only becomes possible when the State extends an invitation to us; it cannot be forced open by OHCHR.”

“We request access so we can better work to help bring your laws and practices in line with international agreements which you, the States drafted and ratified – and to assist you to comply with recommendations which you have publicly, and often fulsomely, accepted.

Human Rights A Transnational Issue

Human rights are not exclusively a national issue, Zeid said.

“Governments have the responsibility to uphold their human rights obligations and to respect the standards. But the human rights of all people, in all countries, also require – unquestionably ­– our collective attention. The Vienna Declaration, adopted unanimously 23 years ago, confirmed this: "the promotion and protection of all human rights is a legitimate concern of the international community."

“This language was also echoed by GA Resolution 48/141, which calls on the High Commissioner to "play an active role in removing current obstacles... to the full realization of all human rights and in preventing the continuation of human rights violations throughout the world,” the Human Rights High Commissioner said.