Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK

POLITICS

‘Let’s condemn occupation and aggression, by anyone, anywhere’

IN MY VOICE: The world stands behind Ukraine now as sanctions against Russia are put in place. NFGL student Adventino Banjwa says Russia must be held accountable for its actions - but what about the transgressions of other nations, nations such as the US?

Published: 7 January 2015 15:01 CET
'Let’s condemn occupation and aggression, by anyone, anywhere'

Developments in Europe emerging from actions of Russia in Ukraine have fueled the decades-long debate on occupation, colonialism and imperialism.

With world powers forming a grand coalition against Russia, East-West sentiments have been pushed to record levels since the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall. This article is not intended to challenge the move by the United States and its European allies against Russia’s actions, but rather to unveil the underlying hypocrisy of these allies on the subject of occupation. It is an effort to underscore the often-neglected cases where these allies are highly culpable on the same charges as Russia.

That said, the question I will pose to anyone reading this piece is who will hold these allies responsible for their actions, the way Russia has been hold responsible for its methods.

Russia’s annexation of Crimea following the crisis in Ukraine was a very unfortunate act. Apart from President Putin breaching the very agreement signed by his predecessor on security assurances to Ukraine after the nation gave up its nuclear stockpiles, there is no justification whatsoever for any country to invade another country and seize territory.

This move by Russia attracted immense criticism from major powers across the world, with President Obama ranking Russian aggression as global issue #2 after Ebola while addressing the 69th UN general assembly. Crippling sanctions from the US and the EU have seen the Russian economy shrink to record levels, accompanied by global isolation which even saw Russia being suspended from the G8 league.

But much as I feel that Russia deserves this, I also believe that many more deserve what Russia is going through today. As we rightly condemn Russia for aggression and bullying a weak neighbour, we should not forget that a number of other countries have either gone through or are undergoing what Ukraine is going through at Russia’s hands. We should stand with all these countries and peoples who are suffering the effects of occupation and aggression across the planet.

The families of over 2,500 people murdered by the United States in its infamous and illegal drone campaigns in Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia and many other countries, we should stand with them against this sophisticated and unpredictable US aggression. We should stand with the people of Iraq whose country was vandalized in an illegal invasion led by the United States in 2003 after bombing Afghanistan.

Yes, we should stand with the people of Libya whose country, a former glory of Africa, is now a failed state and a breeding ground for extremists and terrorists as a result of the US, France and allies’ bombs that violated UN resolution 1973.

More so, the whole world should stand with Palestine whose people, for nearly half a century, have lived under US-backed Israel occupation. Efforts from countries like Sweden to recognize the State of Palestine should be followed by serious condemnation and possibly sanctions against Israel and all those backing this illegal occupation project.

So, much as Russia’s actions are regrettable, those of the US and allies in the aforementioned cases and more are deplorable as well and must be condemned. All these actions constitute what today Russia is accused of – aggression and occupation. These and more are simple truths, but there is a sustained campaign to turn the message upside down.

We should debunk the idea that there is ‘bad and good aggression or occupation’, just as we refuse to accept the often used notion of ‘good and bad dictators’. Like dictatorship, all forms of aggression/occupation are bad and must be condemned and punished altogether.

That said, the fundamental question that lies before us relates to who will hold the US and its allies responsible for their transgressions?

Adventino Banjwa
MSc in Development Studies
Lund University

This article is part of the In My Voice series, which allows NFGL students to share their opinions, reflections, and reactions Sweden and the world's events. These views are not necessarily those of SI or the SI News Service, but are intended to stimulate discussion about issues facing the world today.

Please feel free to share your thoughts below – and contact us at the SI News Service if you are interested in contributing. 

Member comments

  1. I agree with the sentiments of the author with a caveat. We have a free press and a vibrant opposition movement to expose malfeasance inside an outside of the US. Unlike Russia, reporters and opposition politicians are not assassinated here. Millions of people every year desperately want to emigrate to the US for political freedom and economic advancement. Russia is a dictatorship, and we must fight the alure of fascism in Europe and the US by condemning Russia (Putin) for attacking a neighboring nation with a Democratically elected government, because Putin fears an economically successful Ukraine, allied with the EU, influencing Russian citizens, many of whose lives are mired in poverty, questioning Putin’s and the Oligarchs stranglehold on their nation.

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

POLITICS

‘Very little debate’ on consequences of Sweden’s crime and migration clampdown

Sweden’s political leaders are putting the population’s well-being at risk by moving the country in a more authoritarian direction, according to a recent report.

Published: 29 April 2024 08:56 CEST
'Very little debate' on consequences of Sweden's crime and migration clampdown

The Liberties Rule of Law report shows Sweden backsliding across more areas than any other of the 19 European Union member states monitored, fuelling concerns that the country risks breaching its international human rights obligations, the report says.

“We’ve seen this regression in other countries for a number of years, such as Poland and Hungary, but now we see it also in countries like Sweden,” says John Stauffer, legal director of the human rights organisation Civil Rights Defenders, which co-authored the Swedish section of the report.

The report, compiled by independent civil liberties groups, examines six common challenges facing European Union member states.

Sweden is shown to be regressing in five of these areas: the justice system, media environment, checks and balances, enabling framework for civil society and systemic human rights issues.

The only area where Sweden has not regressed since 2022 is in its anti-corruption framework, where there has been no movement in either a positive or negative direction.

Source: Liberties Rule of Law report

As politicians scramble to combat an escalation in gang crime, laws are being rushed through with too little consideration for basic rights, according to Civil Rights Defenders.

Stauffer cites Sweden’s new stop-and-search zones as a case in point. From April 25th, police in Sweden can temporarily declare any area a “security zone” if there is deemed to be a risk of shootings or explosive attacks stemming from gang conflicts.

Once an area has received this designation, police will be able to search people and cars in the area without any concrete suspicion.

“This is definitely a piece of legislation where we see that it’s problematic from a human rights perspective,” says Stauffer, adding that it “will result in ethnic profiling and discrimination”.

Civil Rights Defenders sought to prevent the new law and will try to challenge it in the courts once it comes into force, Stauffer tells The Local in an interview for the Sweden in Focus Extra podcast. 

He also notes that victims of racial discrimination at the hands of the Swedish authorities had very little chance of getting a fair hearing as actions by the police or judiciary are “not even covered by the Discrimination Act”.

READ ALSO: ‘Civil rights groups in Sweden can fight this government’s repressive proposals’

Stauffer also expresses concerns that an ongoing migration clampdown risks splitting Sweden into a sort of A and B team, where “the government limits access to rights based on your legal basis for being in the country”.

The report says the government’s migration policies take a “divisive ‘us vs them’ approach, which threatens to increase rather than reduce existing social inequalities and exclude certain groups from becoming part of society”.

Proposals such as the introduction of a requirement for civil servants to report undocumented migrants to the authorities would increase societal mistrust and ultimately weaken the rule of law in Sweden, the report says.

The lack of opposition to the kind of surveillance measures that might previously have sparked an outcry is a major concern, says Stauffer.

Politicians’ consistent depiction of Sweden as a country in crisis “affects the public and creates support for these harsh measures”, says Stauffer. “And there is very little talk and debate about the negative consequences.”

Hear John Stauffer from Civil Rights Defender discuss the Liberties Rule of Law report in the The Local’s Sweden in Focus Extra podcast for Membership+ subscribers.

SHOW COMMENTS