>>> Follow Salam Plan- ‘journalism against hate’ on Twitter and Facebook<<<

Trump said the 1st amendment -which stands for freedom of belief and speech- makes clear “that our rights do not come from our government; they come from God”. He regretted “80% of the world’s population live in countries where religious liberty is threatened, restricted or even banned”.

The percentage he cites comes from a report from the Pew Research Center in 2016, where this independent think tank also mentions Muslims being targeted in the United States and directly links this to the current present president of the country:

“In the United States, Muslims were the targets of derogatory rhetoric and proposed discrimination. In July, Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump criticized the parents of a Muslim soldier who was killed in Iraq (…). Later in the year, President-elect Trump appeared to stand by plans for a temporary ban on Muslim immigration to the United States and a proposed requirement that U.S. Muslims register in a database”, the report summary reads.

>>> You may also read: Alicia and Aladdin, the beautiful love story of a Catholic and a Muslim<<<

But Donald Trump’s speech on religious freedom this Monday at the UN ignored his rethoric and measures against Muslims: “As we speak, Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Yazidis and many other people of faith are being jailed, sanctioned, tortured and even murdered, often at the hands of their own government, simply for expressing their deeply held religious beliefs. So hard to believe”.

He called upon all the countries of the world “to end religious persecution”, “repeal laws restricting freedom of religion and belief, protect the vulnerable, the defenceless and the oppressed”. The US president assured: “Protecting religious freedom is one of my highest priorities and always has been”.

“Repeal laws restricting freedom of religion and belief, protect the vulnerable, the defenceless and the oppressed”

What he did not mention was the “temporary ban” on Muslims he promised to implement if he became president and which finally has gotten a version of it for some Muslim majority countries plus Venezuela and North Korea after the judges declared his first travel ban illegal.

He recalled recent “evil attacks” against worshippers in sinagogues in the US, in mosques in New Zealand and churches in Sri Lanka and urged every nation “to increase the prosecution and punishment of crimes against religious communities”. “There cannot be greater crime than that”, he said.

>>> You may also read: Attacks against mosques are more usual than you might think: they are committed by anti-Muslim terrorists and also by groups like ISIS <<<

Trump announced a coalition of US businesses for the protection of “all faiths” in the workplace, although he did not go into detail. “True tolerance means respecting the right of all people to express their deeply held religious beliefs”, he pointed out before saying to the victims of religious persecution that the US “will always stay at your side”.

Last July Donald Trump held a short meeting with people who survived religious persecution worldwide. Sitting on his chair at the Oval Office and surrounded by them, he talked with them in front of the cameras (watch White House video).

The victims were grateful for the opportunity to be listened, like Farid Ahmed, a victim of the Christchurch attacks against Muslims who became known after publicly forgiving the terrorist. But there were also awkward moments during the meeting with Trump, such as when a Rohingya refugee asked him for solutions to go back home after being forced to flee to Bangladesh together with another 740,000 Muslims since 2017. “Where is that exactly?”, Trump asked. “Burma”, an official had to clarify (meaning the state nowadays known as Myanmar). Or like when he asked Nobel Peace Prize Nadia Murad why she obtained the award. She is a Yazidi woman survivor of ISIS genocide against this religious community who brought up attention worldwide about these mass killings, mainly in Iraq.

The law known as “Muslim ban” or “Travel ban” finally included countries which are not Muslim majority nations: North Korea and Venezuela. But it kept Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Iran among those with restrictions, including no travel at all for Syrians and North Korea people. Iraq and Sudan, which where among the countries in the first executive order, where finally dropped.

>>> Follow Salam Plan- ‘journalism against hate’ on Twitter and Facebook<<<

La entrada Trump in the UN: “Protecting religious freedom is one of my highest priorities” se publicó primero en Salam Plan.

>>> Follow Salam Plan- ‘journalism against hate’ on Twitter and Facebook<<<

“Thousands of civilians were killed or injured in the US-led Coalition’s offensive to rid Raqqa of ISIS, whose snipers and mines had turned the city into a death trap,” said Donatella Rovera, Amnesty International (AI) adviser said in a statement. “Many of the air bombardments were inaccurate and tens of thousands of artillery strikes were indiscriminate, so it is no surprise they killed and injured many hundreds of civilians.” Rovera assures as well that, on the ground, she discovered that the coalition was providing “little or no protection to civilians trapped in the city.”

The United States, France and the United Kingdom supported the advance of Kurdish forces on the ground with an air offensive. The “unguided artillery” have a margin of error of more than 100 meters, which makes their use “indiscriminate” in an urban context with civilians present, according to Amnesty.

“Many of the aerial bombings were inaccurate, and tens of thousands of artillery attacks were indiscriminate”

– Donatella Rovera, AI

The Syrian city of Raqqa was governed for almost four years by the terrorists until in 2017 they were defeated by the military coalition led by the United States. “ISIS had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity and tortured and killed whoever dared to oppose them,” Amnesty International recalls. The NGO has previously documented how terrorists used “civilians as human shields, mined exit routes, set up checkpoints to restrict movement and fired at those who tried to flee.”

In their attempt to free the citizens of Raqqa from Daesh and undermine their territorial power in what was considered their “capital”, “thousands” of American, British and French air strikes and dozens of US artillery attacks were carried out between June and October 2017. Amnesty International says its data show that hundreds of civilians died as a “direct result”of that military operation.

The human rights organization research teams spent about two months in Raqqa when the battle was still ongoing. It visited more than 200 strike locations and interviewed more than 400 witnesses and survivors.

In addition, more than 3,000 activists from 124 different countries analyzed more than two million frames of satellite images. Amnesty notes that the organization’s digital verification body, based in six universities around the world, analyzed and authenticated the video images taken during the battle.

In collaboration with Airwars organization, they analyzed open source data in real time and after the battle – including “thousands” of social media and other materials – to create a database of more than 1,600 civilians who, according to the investigation, died due to the coalition attacks. Both organizations have compiled the names of more than a thousand victims; Amnesty International has verified 641 of these directly on the ground, in Raqqa, and claims to have “convincing information from multiple sources about the rest”.

“The coalition has to investigate what went wrong in Raqqa and learn the lesson so as to not inflict such tremendous suffering on civilians trapped in future military operations”

– Chris Woods, Airwars

The NGO regrets that the international coalition has only admitted to the deaths of 159 civilians for their attacks and claims that they do not investigate on the ground or talk to the victims.

“The Coalition needs to fully investigate what went wrong at Raqqa and learn from those lessons, to prevent inflicting such tremendous suffering on civilians caught in future military operations,” said Chris Woods, director of Airwars.

>>> Follow Salam Plan- ‘journalism against hate’ on Twitter and Facebook<<<

La entrada Amnesty International claims the US led coalition killed 1,600 civilians in Raqqa during the battle against ISIS se publicó primero en Salam Plan.

The country went through a long civil war which lasted from 1975 to 1990 and, although it still faces many challenges, it is often mentioned as an example where different religions have been coexisting for decades. In recent years, it has also become the country with the highest concentration per capita of refugees in the world, due to the war in neighbouring Syria.

Fadi Daou is a Maronite Catholic priest in Lebanon, where he chairs the Adyan Foundation, ‘adyan’ meaning ‘religions’. With a team of people from different faiths, the Foundation works to improve the interreligious understanding in the country and worldwide. Daou has contributed to international policymaking speaking at the United Nations, the European Parliament and to the Arab League. Salam Plan talked with him during his recent stay in Madrid this week to take part in a seminar on Lebanon at the cultural centre Casa Árabe.

Lebanon is many times mentioned as an example of coexistence of religions. Is there a real together living or does every community rather stay within the group they belong to?

When we say coexistence it’s about managing the plural identity of the Lebanese society in a positive way: on the cultural, legal level and political levels.

Lebanon has officially 12 Christian communities, 5 Muslim and one Jewish community that are officially recognized by the Constitution. Of course, there is also the freedom of religion and the existence of other religions, but these are the historical ones in Lebanon.

So when we speak about coexistence, definitely we are speaking about an inclusive way of living together without the domination of one party over others. This is a very delicate balance, which Lebanon kept searching throughout its history and it ended up in the civil war. Today Lebanon is looking again to redefine this balance.

“When we speak about coexistence, we are speaking about an inclusive way of living together without the domination of one party over others”

Would you say this balance is currently working?

This balance is never working 100%, no. It’s always somewhere between 50% and 100%. Today we have some major challenges. One of them comes from the consequences of the civil war, where we had direct conflict from people of different communities. Now the communities are more segregated than before , so we are fighting stereotypes, healing wounds and also building knowledge through education to ensure that the Lebanese society is attached to its shared values before the conflict.

Another challenge is the huge number of refugees living in Lebanon. We see today how much the refugee and immigration issue is challenging Europe, although the proportion of refugees is really non-significant in comparison to what is happening in Lebanon. You have less than 1% of refugees compared to the European population, whereas in Lebanon we have more than 30%. It’s challenging, but at least we are avoiding that it generates conflict, although it is being sometimes used in populist political discourse. But, globally, the Lebanese society demonstrated a huge capacity of hospitality and solidarity.

Other type of challenges are more on the legal level, where we are trying to enhance this situation based on real equality and respect of human dignity and human rights for all citizens.

Lebanon hosts around 1.5 million refugees in a country of 4.5 million Lebanese people. The majority of refugees are Syrians and there are also Palestinians. What lessons can Europe learn from Lebanon about hosting refugees?

I would say, first it is to fight and refuse all political manipulation, because the refugee situation is always a humanitarian and humanistic situation and not at all an ideological and political one. Sometimes politicians in Europe are raising the fear among the population, saying for example that “we are being invaded” by people from outside Europe or by Muslims… All these discourses are definitely against the fundamentals of human rights, which make Europe what it is. The richness of Europe is because it is a space where, we believe, it respects human rights and dignity.

“Europe should not be afraid from the changes which are already happening and its new plural identity. Today all societies are diverse and it should be dealt with in a very realistic way”

The second lesson, is our responsibility of solidarity between each other. We don’t know when we will have to leave. Thirdly and finally, Europe should not be afraid from the changes which are already happening and its new plural identity. Many European societies were used to think themselves as one cultural identity, but today all societies are diverse and they will become more and more diverse. It should be dealt with in a very realistic way.

Diversity is a resource of richness. My Foundation uses the slogan “Diversity builds unity”. The challenge is not to try to stop diversity or the fear of otherness, the challenge is how to make of this diversity a resource of richness and unity in society.

The arguments you are giving don’t seem to convince any of the voters of the European politicians you were talking about, so I was hoping you could tell me something really practical which you would apply for diversity to work.

The first example would be to make people need each other and work with each other and collaborate to face their common problems. We are working to avoid segregation.

On an educational level, [you need] to know each other, because ignorance is a source of fear.

There is another aspect related to Islam. It is important to promote the discourse of Muslim thinkers, scholars and public figures who totally endorse human rights standards and an inclusive approach of living together. Give them a voice. It also can help Europeans to see Islam is also diverse. It has its own challenges and problems, but there are many Muslims who are working on this and they deserve support.

“The laicism of France is not at all my model. I advocate for an inclusive model based on a secular political system, respecting diversity as well as the freedom and richness of each community”

You advocate for the separation of religion from politics. Would the laicism of France be your model?

Not at all. In fact, I don’t advocate for a separation, I advocate for an inclusive citizenship, which means that religion should not be the framework of living together. We need to establish a citizenship system that can recognize the diversity of religions but prevent religious authorities from interfering in politics.

It’s not the French model, it’s more an inclusive model based on a secular political system, but a system that is also inclusive to all diversity, respecting the freedom but also respecting the richness of each community and what it brings to societies.

Some people argue Islam cannot be democratic. What do you think?

Those people lack a historic perspective of democracy, because in the 19^th century Christianity and Catholicism were against democracy too. Any stigmatisation saying that Islam is not compatible with democracy is completely unrealistic, it’s not true. There are very good Muslims democrats in Lebanon and there are also Muslims who are against democracy.

“Any stigmatisation saying that Islam is not compatible with democracy is completely untrue. Some populist parties in Europe are against the values of democracy”

But I think some [non-Muslim] extremists here and even Europe, some populist parties are themselves against the values of democracy. It is true in many Muslim societies today that democracy is a challenge, but it is not about Islam, it is about interests and politics. The young generations are striving to build democracy in their countries.

So, I don’t think there is a religion which is more democratic than others; it’s about culture, about people, about the value system.

Do you think the rise of policies against Muslims in Europe and the United States are announcing a new form of Nazism?

I hope not. I think these waves of populism and extreme right parties are too serious not to be taken into consideration. It can one day lead to totalitarianism. We should remember that Hitler arrived to power democratically. The Western countries have to be very careful about this.

>>> Follow Salam Plan- ‘journalism against hate’ on Twitter and Facebook<<<

La entrada Fadi Daou, Lebanese priest: “There is no religion which is more democratic than others” se publicó primero en Salam Plan.

Of the nearly 30,000 people who left their country -the so-called ‘foreign fighters’, at least 5,600 citizens or residents of 33 countries have returned home; 1,700 of them, to Europe. These are data of the new report Beyond the Caliphate; Foreign fighters and the threat of returnees published by the The Soufan Center, an organization devoted to the analysis of global security and emerging threats based in New York.

Most of the foreign fighters of ISIS or Daesh are originally from the former Soviet republics (more than 8,700), followed by people from the Middle East (more than 7,000) and in the third place, from Western Europe (more than 5,700). At present there are at least 15 European countries – including the Balkans – that have recorded the return of these suspected terrorists to their countries.

Although the United Kingdom is the third European state in number of foreign fighters, it is the one that more returnees has registered: 425, according to data of February of 2017. That is 25% of a total of 1,700.

On the other hand, France is the European country which produced more foreign fighters: it estimates that 1,900 citizens or residents in their country travelled to Iraq and Syria to join Daesh on the ground of their supposed caliphate; at least 271 of them have returned, according to data from last August. Germany is the second country most affected by this phenomenon, with approximately 915 foreign fighters and a large number of returnees in Europe: approximately 300, according to March figures.

It is important to note that not all those who are counted as foreign fighters managed to arrive at their destination, as on many occasions the Turkish, Moroccan or other authorities prevented them from doing so thanks to the cooperation with their countries of origin.

France is the European country that has frustrated more attempts of this emigration: more than 2,600. Behind it are Belgium (over 1,500), UK (about 1,200) and Germany (over 650).

The returnees pose a “huge challenge” for security and law enforcement but most of the attacks claimed by Daesh both on European soil and in the rest of the world were not carried out by returnees

Richard Barrett, author of the report and former director of global counter-terrorism at MI6, says that returnees pose a “huge challenge for security and law enforcement entities”. But at the same time he acknowledges that the facts show that in most of the attacks claimed by Daesh both on European soil and in the rest of the world were not carried out by returnees, the same argument Raffaello Pantucci, counterterrorism expert of RUSI think tank, recently pointed out on Salam Plan.

“They generally appear to have had a stronger desire to join something new rather than destroy something old. As a result, returnees have, so far, proved a more manageable problem than initially anticipated,” Barrett says. And reminds that last September, the French authorities spoke of a decrease in the ratio of returnees.

Barrett, who also was UN coordinator of its al-Qaida/Taliban monitoring team from 2004 to 2013, points out as well that among those who return there are also repentant or disenchanted people, because they did not find what they were looking for when they followed the promise of the alleged caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

“Returnees have, so far, proved a more manageable problem than initially anticipated (but) states have not found a way to address the problem of returnees. Most are imprisoned, or disappear from view”

Nevertheless, Barret warns that the defeats on the ground and loss of terrain- especially now, following the recent fall of Raqqa, the ‘capital’ of the terrorists – will lead its leaders to put more emphasis on supporting terrorist attacks outside Syria and Iraq, also profiting from the returnees. There are also women and children among them, by the way.

In his report, the analyst warns: “States have not found a way to address the problem of returnees. Most are imprisoned, or disappear from view. There will be a need for more research and information sharing to develop effective strategies to assess and address the threat.”

La entrada 1,700 ISIS members have returned to their home in Europe after migrating to the ‘caliphate’ se publicó primero en Salam Plan.

Can we speak of a real takeover of Raqqa (Syria), which ISIS considers its capital? Colonel Ryan Dillon, a spokesman for the US-led coalition against the terrorist group, acknowledged on Tuesday that 10% of the city was yet to be “cleared”. Something similar happened in the case of the other main stronghold Daesh had in Mosul (Iraq): weeks passed since the Iraqi forces announced it had been “freed” until it was effectively cleared of the terrorists’ partial control.

In the present case, however, there are three important elements that make the difference in what the defeat of Daesh there will mean: the forces which have taken the control of the city, its geographic conditions and the cumulative effect of the strategic military losses of the group.

It is Kurdish militias -supported by the US- who have taken control of Raqqa in the middle of a Syrian war with many more open battle fields, while in the Iraqi Mosul it was the government forces that recovered the territory with the aim of rebuilding the country, as RUSI’s UK counter-terrorism expert, Raffaello Pantucci, points out.

“They (the terrorists) are completeley surrounded, so there is an inevitability that the group will eventually loose the territory. The problem is in Syria you’ve got a different array of groups: from Syrian Defence Forces [opposing Bashar al-Assad] to Kurdish forces to Syrian Government forces… a lot of people who’re fighting against ISIS, non of whom really work with each other and some of them are even fighting against each other. So the real question is who’s gonna step in and fill the space to rebuild the city?”, he tells Salam Plan.

The security and defense senior analyst at the Spanish Elcano Royal Institute, Félix Arteaga, agrees with the diagnosis and adds an essential difference in the practical and military aspect for the future of Raqqa and Daesh: the city is much smaller than Mosul in terms of size and population. In the case of Mosul, it was initially said that the number of besieged people were one million, but then it turned out to be less, he recalls. In Raqqa, initially the estimated inhabitants were initially 60,000, but the current number has been reduced to between 2,000 and 3,000 inhabitants, taking into account those who fled and those who died.

“Raqqa is smaller than Mosul (…). It will take some time not only to recognize that it is controlled, but also that it is open, which is the important thing: to remove at least all the landmines in the main entrances (to the city) and check every single house out. That will take a lot less (than in Mosul),”says Arteaga to this website. “ISIS has already strategically lost the city, (although) there are always sympathizers who might come back. It’s a city where they had quite a number of supporters”. Pantucci also warns of the difficulty of completely eradicating the presence of the Daesh in the city: “At the end of the day, it’s quite a confusing battlefield: you’re dealing with urban warfare, there’s people there who are melting back into the population and you’ve got lots of groups fighting over it”.

ISIS has already strategically lost the city, (although) there are always sympathizers who might come back. It’s a city where they had quite a number of supporters.

Arteaga believes that Assad, who has the support of Russia, Iran and more and more of Turkey, will eventually take control of Raqqa. Pantucci explains that the Kurdish militias have no interest in ruling the city, because it is neither Kurdish nor those groups have governing experience. The Western forces are also not likely to be in charge of rebuilding the Raqqa, since they intervene in Syria only from the air or by supporting third parties such as the Kurds. “It remains a very dangerous site”, RUSI expert sums up.

At the same time, Daesh’s terrorists and their chiefs continue their retreat towards the south of the once-called “capital” of their self-proclaimed caliphate. They are settling near the Iraqi border in sparsely populated areas, where other actors in the Syrian war have no special interest. Arteaga explains there they still have access to some oil, but their main source of funding – the tax system imposed on the inhabitants of the areas they dominate – no longer gives the income they were used to.

“Their main source of funding – the tax system imposed on the inhabitants of the areas they dominate – no longer gives the income they were used to”

He recognizes that the control of territories once meant a “qualitative leap” for the terrorists and estimates that the actions Daesh has taken openly since 2014 in the region, now will have to go “underground, with low profile, (because) they are very marked in areas where they’ve lost material means, etc. Living at the expense of the population as they have done (until now) will be very complicated. ”

For this analyst, the loss of Raqqa hardly means changes for the Daesh when it comes to a practical point of view. In fact, he considers that the relevance of this defeat for the terrorist group would barely reach 5 on a scale of 1 to 10. “The importance is not the same now than what it would have meant a few years ago. It is already one loss after another (and) the organization is already in a dynamic to contain damages and restructure itself. They have known for some time that the fall of Raqqa is inevitable. They’ve been pulling troops to the southern border. Its loss has more a symbolic, moral meaning.” (Take a look at the map of the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and Syria Direct).

Pantucci agrees: “Losing the ‘capital’ in Syria is embarrassing and definitely a demonstration that you’re losing the territory. But it’s not the end of the group, (which) will continue to evolve in a new direction”. He reminds that the terrorist group “has been around since the late 1990’s. I think what we’re going to see now is them going back to be a much smaller organization, rather than a ‘state-controlled’ entity”.

Losing the ‘capital’ in Syria is embarrassing and definitely a demonstration that you’re losing the territory. What we’re going to see now is them going back to be a much smaller organization, rather than a ‘state-controlled’ entity

Meanwhile, in ISIS affiliated groups in Egypt are also trying to impose their radical vision of jihad through laws in some places, according to some reports. Their particular presence in Libya, Afghanistan or scattered throughout Africa and Europe is not to be ignored either.

Is there more danger of attacks on European soil and other parts of the world after taking over Raqqa? Neither Pantucci nor Arteaga believe so. “It is always possible, but even if they win, too. When they were winning (on the battlefield), people went there (to join them). Now [since some time ago] the diaspora has reversed and increased risk in all scenarios,” says the Elcano expert. “They have a real basic (battlefield knowledge) wherever they go, which comes from the experience in Syria,” he adds. But the RUSI analyst recalls that most of the attacks committed so far on European soil by Daesh or sympathisers were perpetrated by terrorists who had not moved to the territory then controlled by the self-styled “Islamic State” Prior to their attack.

The chief of MI5 has said in an interview with the BBC that there are 3,000 extremists in the United Kingdom; “a number of whom” are former foreign fighters who returned from Syria and Iraq*. It is an example of the situation accross several European countries. But this does not mean that each one of them is ready or willing to kill, according to MI5 and Pantucci as well.

The end of Raqqa is an important step in Daesh’s accumulation of military and moral defeats, but more and more the voices of experts and governments agree that reducing the fight against terrorism to a security and military issue would be a mistake.

*Correction: Initially this report said “about 700” of the extremists in UK are returnees, but that is the approximate number of more than 800 British foreign fighters who went to join ISIS in Syria or Iraq and remain alive. We apologize for any inconvenience this error might have cause the reader.

La entrada ISIS’ defeat in Raqqa stronghold is not as <br>game-changing as you might think se publicó primero en Salam Plan.