It seems like an unlikely new friendship has formed in Washington. On Thursday, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham apologized to Texas Senator Ted Cruz for joking in February that it would be okay to kill Cruz on the Senate floor. The two senators have not been seemingly on the friendliest terms since last year when they both ran for the Republican presidential nomination. But when they appeared side by side in a segment on MSNBC on Thursday, it was a remarkably amiable atmosphere and both men were even giggly. “Love is everywhere,” Graham said. “I want to apologize to Ted for saying he should be killed on the Senate floor.” At least we’re not on the Senate floor now,” replied Cruz.

Also, @SenTedCruz and I spoke with @MSNBCMorningJoe about our legislation to cut off funding to the UN. WATCH: https://t.co/HhcTZBHA2H

— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) January 13, 2017

But this new friendship is not just for fun. They joined forces because they are on the same page about a new bill that would halt American funding for the United Nations. This comes after the United Nations Security Council voted 14-0 on the proposal to condemn Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east part of Jerusalem. The U.S. abstained from voting, and immediately faced backlash from both Republicans and Democrats.

On MSNBC, Graham said that 22 percent of the money funding the UN comes from American taxpayers, and that it’s not a good idea for Americans to invest in an organization that works against the only democracy in the Middle East. “This was John Kerry and Obama taking a slap at Israel,” Graham said. He added that the UN has become increasingly anti-Semitic, and that they will stop any money from going to the organization until “this is fixed.” Cruz called Obama’s move “profoundly anti-Israel.”

Republicans filed the bill on Thursday, and if passed it will stop all U.S. funding to the U.N. unless or until the resolution is reversed. Ted Cruz said that this move was the only way to get the U.N.’s attention.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz Team Up to Take on the U.N. appeared first on Law Street.

It started as an agricultural commune, keen on equality, in the northwest jungles of Colombia. Government forces broke up the commune, and an armed struggle between Marxist guerrillas and government forces began. Fifty-two years later, the bloody, contentious, and disruptive conflict between the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the Colombian government will effectively come to an end on Monday, when leaders from both sides sign a peace agreement.

On Monday evening, Juan Manuel Santos, Colombia’s 65-year-old president, and Rodrigo Londoño, the top commander of the FARC, will sign off on the deal that emerged after four years of negotiations. A pen fashioned out of a recycled shell casing will be used to sign the 297-page deal, “to illustrate the transition of bullets into education and future,” according to Santos.

Two thousand five hundred guests will be present at the signing ceremony in the seaside city of Cartagena. Witnesses to the signing include presidents from 15 Latin American nations, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. Ban called the peace accord a “new destiny for the nation.”

For decades, Colombia’s destiny was impenetrably bleak. Before the FARC went from a communist peasant revolt to a gun-toting armed guerrilla force, Colombia was a place with rampant inequality fueled by a landowning elite and a power struggle for its prized cocaine fields. In 1964, that inequality sparked a resistance of poor farmers and land workers, who, inspired by the Cuban revolution in the 1950s, set up a farming commune that became known as the Marquetalia Republic. After run-ins with government forces, who felt threatened by the communist fervor bubbling within the Republic, the peaceful struggle turned violent, and the FARC was born.

Since the conflict began in 1964, 220,000 people have been killed, with eight million more displaced from their homes. Human rights groups accuse the FARC of extreme abuses: forcibly recruiting poor farmers and children, extortion, and kidnapping for ransom. Men and women of all ages, including children, comprise the FARC’s ranks, which at its peak in 2002 included 20,000 fighters. A decade-long, U.S.-backed government assault relinquished many of the top rebel commanders and pushed the group to the peripheries of the jungles where they base their operations. The FARC fighting force has dwindled to about 7,000.

Beginning with Monday’s signing ceremony, the country of 49 million people, with Latin America’s fourth largest economy, will likely choose a path toward peace. On October 2, Colombian citizens will vote in a referendum on whether to embrace or reject the accord. Early projections indicate it will easily pass.

The terms of the deal include:

• FARC fighters who submit their weapons and confess to their crimes will avoid jail-time. They will instead be sent to hard hit areas for development work.
• The rebels will be sent to 28 designated zones to turn in their weapons over a six-month period, overseen by U.N. observers.
• The FARC will transition from armed rebel force to a political party.

When the accord was formally reached in late August, both sides expressed hope for a brighter future for their country. “With this accord we will stop being viewed as a dangerous country, and more investment, more tourism, and more employment will come,” said President Santos at the formal announcement of the peace accord.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post After a 52 Year Struggle, Colombia May Finally Find Peace appeared first on Law Street.

The number of suspected drug criminals that have been killed by police in the Philippines since President Rodrigo Duterte took office seven weeks ago is believed to be as high as 1,800 people, according to Philippine National Police Chief Ronald Dela Rosa. Local politicians, the United States, and the U.N. have started voicing concern about human rights violations as the country ramps up its fight against drugs. In response to recent criticism, Duterte lashed out at his critics and even suggested that the Philippines may leave the U.N. in the future.

At a Senate hearing on Monday, Dela Rosa said that police had killed 712 drug dealers and users since July 1. He also mentioned that they are investigating 1,067 other drug-related killings, but did not elaborate further. According to Reuters, two U.N. human rights experts recently urged the Philippines to stop the extrajudicial killings of suspected drug dealers that have escalated dramatically lately.

Late Sunday night, President Duterte held a press conference, in which he threatened to fire everyone in the government who had been appointed to his or her position by a previous president. At the press conference, he said the police did not carry out the extrajudicial killings. He also said, responding to critics at the U.N., “I will prove to the world that you are a very stupid expert.” In his speech, he asked people to not only think about how many drug dealers were killed but to also take into account how many innocent lives that are lost to drugs.

President Duterte even threatened to pull out of the U.N. saying, “I do not want to insult you. But maybe we’ll just have to decide to separate from the United Nations.” He went on to say that the Philippines might instead start a new international organization with China and several African nations.

Duterte continued to criticize the U.N. for not stopping the war in Syria:

You know, United Nations, if you can say one bad thing about me, I can give you 10 [about you]. I tell you, you are an inutile [useless]. Because if you are really true to your mandate, you could have stopped all these wars and killing.

The United States is normally a close ally to the Philippines but has expressed concerns similar to the United Nations in light of the recent deaths. The Philippines’ foreign minister, Perfecto Yasay, said on Monday that the President’s words had been no more than an expression of a strong disappointment with the U.N. “We are committed to the U.N. despite our numerous frustrations and disappointments with the international agency,” Yasay said. He added that Duterte has promised to respect human rights and that it is irresponsible for the U.N. to “jump to conclusions.”

But Senator Leila de Lima, a fierce critic of Duterte, is also concerned; she began a two-day inquiry on Monday, questioning police about the many killings. “I am disturbed that we have killings left and right as breakfast every morning,” she said. She also expressed her fear that the president’s war on drugs could be an excuse for law enforcement to kill with impunity.

On Sunday night, Duterte did not seem to worry about effects of his statements. When asked about his comments he said, “What is… repercussions? I don’t give a shit to them.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Philippine President Duterte Threatens to Leave U.N., Calling it Useless appeared first on Law Street.

For years, the United Nations has denied any wrongdoing in the cholera outbreak in Haiti that hit the island in October 2010. But after an independent report concluded the U.N. was responsible for the outbreak, the international aid organization on Thursday admitted, at least partially, to its role in bringing cholera to the small Caribbean nation, and promised a “significant new set of U.N. actions.”

The U.N. deployed 454 Nepalese troops to Haiti in 2004 as part of a peacekeeping mission. The troops were stationed at a base near the Meille River. Waste from the base was dumped into the river, and in October 2010, the first cases of cholera were detected. Nearly 10,000 people have since died, with close to 800,000 more, or seven percent of Haiti’s entire population, sickened.

Cholera “would not have broken out but for the actions of the United Nations,” Philip Alston, an NYU law professor, concluded in his independent report sent to the U.N. on August 8. His report pegged the reparations the U.N. owes to the Haitians who were affected by the outbreak at $40 billion. Alston’s report was one of a couple dozen from experts, whose conclusions must be accepted or rejected by the U.N. by the end of the week. The reports will be officially presented in September at the U.N. headquarters in New York.

And while the international aid body hasn’t explicitly accepted or rejected any of the special rapporteurs’–as the independent experts are called–findings, the U.N. secretary general’s deputy spokesman indicated positive steps are being taken. “Over the past year, the U.N. has become convinced that it needs to do much more regarding its own involvement in the initial outbreak and the suffering of those affected by cholera.” the spokesman wrote in an email to The New York Times.

In 2011, the families of 5,000 cholera victims petitioned the U.N. to remedy the cholera situation. The organization’s Office of Legal Affairs said the petitions were “not receivable.” The families decided to sue. But because the U.N. enjoys diplomatic immunity, virtually granting it impunity from potential legal action, it did not send any representatives to court. The case is currently pending in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.

Mario Joseph, the Haitian human rights attorney who is representing the plaintiffs in that case, called the report, and the U.N.’s response, a “major victory for the thousands of Haitians who have been marching for justice.” Its response so far, besides denying any responsibility for unwittingly initiating the outbreak, is drafting a 10-year, $2.27 billion plan to support the cholera-affected communities, but the plan is severely underfunded at the moment. The U.N. seems on its way to acknowledging its responsibility to ease the epidemic, which is still sweeping through the tiny country. As of March, an average of 37 people perish from cholera each month in Haiti.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Independent Report Finds U.N. at Fault for 2010 Cholera Outbreak in Haiti appeared first on Law Street.

On Monday, the Associated Press revealed that South Sudanese troops went on a nearly four-hour violent rampage, where they raped foreign aid workers and killed a local journalist near the country’s capital of Juba. The worse part is, the nearby U.N. compound and the U.S. Embassy knew, but did nothing.

For three long years, Juba has been the center of a civil war between President Salva Kiir and the opposition forces led by Riek Machar. During the course of the war, both sides have often targeted civilians. But on July 11, soldiers celebrating a battle win in the capital attacked the Terrain hotel complex, which is a temporary home to many foreign aid workers, expats, and members of the Sudanese elite.

Residents of Terrain heard shouts and gunfire, while  between 80 and 100 men armed, drunk, and wearing the symbol of the President’s army broke into the hotel complex. Security guards at the hotel armed only with handguns didn’t stand a chance.

The soldiers began their rampage inside the complex by stealing phones, computers, and wallets. Then they beat up foreigners with their rifles–seemingly singling out Americans–and fired bullets close to people’s heads.

A man from the Philippines said the soldiers definitely had hatred for America, recalling one soldier saying: “You messed up this country. You’re helping the rebels. The people in the U.N., they’re helping the rebels.”

Three women interviewed by the AP said they were raped–one of them by 15 men. One of the women said security advisers from an aid organization had told them they would never be the target of an attack since they were foreigners. She claimed this exchange happened half an hour before they were assaulted.

Local journalist John Gatluak was killed for having the same tribal markings as Machar. A soldier shot him twice in the head and four more times in other parts of his body.

Many sent texts, emails and Facebook messages to people on the outside, pleading for help.

“All of us were contacting whoever we could contact. The U.N., the U.S. embassy, contacting the specific battalions in the U.N., contacting specific departments,” said the woman raped by 15 men.

But why didn’t the U.N. or the U.S. Embassy do anything to stop the attack? According to an internal timeline compiled by the U.N. that was obtained by the AP, a member of the U.N.’s Joint Operations Center in Juba first received word of the attack at 3:37 p.m, minutes after the breach of the compound.

Then over the course of the next hour, the timeline noted more U.N. staff members began receiving messages from inside Terrain. At 4:33 p.m., a Quick Reaction Force was informed; however it wasn’t until 6:52 p.m.–more than two hours after first the first message–that the U.N. Department of Safety and Security (DSS) declared it would not be sending a team.

Ethiopians from the U.N. mission were asked to send a Quick Reaction Force instead, but the emergency team took too long and the mission was abandoned. The U.N.’s Department of Safety and Security also asked Quick Reaction Forces from China and Nepal to intervene, but no one did.

“Everyone refused to go. Ethiopia, China, and Nepal. All refused to go,” said an American man who alerted U.N. staff of the attack after being released early from the compound.

According to the U.N. timeline, a patrol was supposed to go the following morning instead, but it “was cancelled due to priority.” When asked why no one responded, the U.N. said that it is investigating the matter.

But the U.N. isn’t the only organization facing blame. The U.S. Embassy was also asked for help, and reportedly never answered the American citizens trapped inside the hotel. The Embassy also did not respond to repeated requests for comment from AP.

The foreign aid workers in the field are there to help local civilians, but when they themselves become targets of attacks, the U.N. and their embassies should be the first ones to assist them. Instead, they were ignored when they begged for help.

Human Rights Watch is now calling for increased sanctions and an arms embargo on South Sudan.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post South Sudanese Soldiers Raped Foreigners, While the U.N. Did Nothing appeared first on Law Street.

In July, Israel’s security agency, the Shin Bet, arrested an employee of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) on charges of assisting Hamas, the Gaza Strip’s governing body recognized by the U.S. as a terrorist organization. On Tuesday, that employee, 38-year-old Wahid Abd Allah Borsh, a Palestinian, was officially indicted. It marks the third time this week Israel accused an employee of an international aid organization with aiding Hamas.

“These are not independent incidents, but a worrying trend of Hamas terrorists systematically taking advantage of U.N. groups,” Israel’s ambassador to the U.N., Danny Danon, said.

Since the 1970s, the UNDP has worked to repair homes and other structures in Gaza and the West Bank that have been damaged by fire exchanged between Israel and Hamas. Borsh worked as an engineer on rehabilitation projects in Gaza since 2014. In conversations with Shin Bet officials, Borsh said Hamas directed him to attain status within UNDP so he could help finagle projects that would benefit the group.

According to Shin Bet, Borsh also tipped off Hamas whenever UNDP would come across  caches of weapons or the entrances to tunnels that the terrorists would use to smuggle into Israel. Doing so allowed Hamas to come in and commandeer the site before UNDP could make a move. Borsh–from the Jabaliya refugee camp in Gaza, a 140 square mile area on the Mediterranean Sea–is also accused of helping build a marina for Hamas operatives in 2015.

Shin Bet also said Borsh told them that Hamas directed him in 2014 to “focus on his work in the UNDP in a way that would allow Hamas to extract the greatest possible benefit from him.” In their rebuttal statement, Hamas called the claims of planting agents in aid organizations “false and baseless,” adding that if Israel continues to make such accusations, it will face “dangerous consequences.”

Israel’s accusations began last Monday when the Shin Bet asked Save the Children, a charity that supports programs in Gaza, to investigate one of its employees, who Israel claims has been recruited by Hamas’s armed wing. And last Thursday, Israel accused an employee of the Christian aid organization World Vision of diverting millions of dollars in donations to Hamas.

UNDP has yet to respond to Israel’s claims. Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely called on the development agency to initiate an investigation “in order to ensure that an organization that is supposed to work toward peace and calm is not supporting a murderous terrorist group.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is a U.N. Aid Employee an Agent of Hamas? appeared first on Law Street.

The annual joint military exercises between the United States and South Korea usually elicit ominous threats of retaliation from North Korea. But in an interview on Thursday with the Associated Press, Han Song Ryol, the North’s only diplomatic tether to the United States, effectively declared war, referencing sanctions targeting Kim Jong Un as crossing “the red line.”

In early July, after a United Nations Human Rights Commission report detailed a host of human rights abuses in the isolated nation, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Kim Jong Un and 22 other high-ranking government officials. It marked the first time sanctions targeted Un, though the West has routinely sanctioned the country as a whole.

“The Obama administration went so far to have the impudence to challenge the supreme dignity of the DPRK in order to get rid of its unfavorable position during the political and military showdown with the DPRK,” said Han, using acronym for his country’s official title–Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. In response to the sanctions, the North cut off its only line of communication with the U.S., known as the New York channel, which was essentially a diplomatic post in Manhattan. Han has held that post for nearly two decades, as the director-general of the U.S. Affairs Department for the North’s Foreign Ministry.

A senior Obama administration official told Politico a few weeks ago that the sanction against Kim Jong Un and others in his government was meant to send a message: “if you become involved in abuses like running concentration camps or hunting down defectors we will know who you are.”

Joint military exercises–the Ulchi Freedom Guardian–are conducted by the U.S. and South Korea every August, and Han warned that if this year’s display goes as planned, then the North has a “self-defensive right and justifiable action to respond in a very hard way.” The U.S., he added, “has already declared war against the DPRK.” Last year’s Ulchi, which included 50,000 South Korean soldiers and 30,000 U.S. soldiers, nearly resulted in clashes between the two Korean nations, with tensions higher than ever before.

North Korea’s nuclear program has been maligned by the rest of the world and historically, the main target of U.S. and U.N. sanctions. But Han insisted it is indeed the U.S. who is irresponsible with nuclear weapons and other advanced military tools, saying:

It is not us, it is the United States that first developed nuclear weapons, who first deployed them and who first used them against humankind. And on the issue of missiles and rockets, which are to deliver nuclear warheads and conventional weapons warheads, it is none other than the United States who first developed it and who first used it.

Whether or not the U.S. “red line” crossing will indeed lead to war with North Korea is foggy, but with its citizenry impoverished and its global reputation sinking, anything is possible.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Did North Korea Just Declare War on the U.S.? appeared first on Law Street.