| Kyrgyzstan election aims to bring democracy to central Asian nation Polls open as country strives to become most open society in region largely ruled over by authoritarian regimesKyrgyzstan was today holding a landmark election that is likely to establish the country as the first parliamentary democracy in authoritarian central Asia. Thousands of Kyrgyz voters went to the polls to elect a new parliament following a violent year that saw a street revolution in April and savage ethnic riots in the south of the country in June.International observers today described the election as largely free and fair – a remarkable feat in a region run by democracy-averse super-presidents all apparently in the job for life.In an address to the nation yesterday, Kyrgyzstan's interim president, Rosa Otunbayeva, called it a "new page" in Kyrgyzstan's 20-year history. "We are not just choosing a new parliament. We're ushering in a new system of government – a parliamentary republic," she said.Today's historic vote follows a referendum in June.Otunbayeva said the disastrous misrule of her two predecessors – who presided over inefficient and corrupt presidential regimes stuffed with their relatives – had necessitated the change in the constitution. After casting her ballot in the capital, Bishkek, she praised the "whole election process" as "transparent and open".It remains to be seen, however, if the election will bring about the stability that has so far eluded Kyrgyzstan, an impoverished, landlocked nation of 5.4 million, or instead set off another bout of political feuding and vicious inter-ethnic violence. Some 29 parties were taking part, with 3,000 candidates competing for 120 mandates. The election has been a genuinely vibrant contest, with streets plastered with rival campaign posters and endearingly amateurish party political statements — some with leaders kissing babies — broadcast on Kyrgyz TV.In Osh, Kyrgyzstan's second city, voting was lively with almost a third of voters turning out by early afternoon. Some, however, said they found the country's new political pluralism bewildering, and were clueless which party to back. Many Uzbeks — the overwhelming victims of June's ethnic violence in which 2,000 people died – said they wouldn't bother to vote at all. Asked whether the election would be fair, one Social Democratic candidate joked: "We don't have money to bribe anybody. And nobody is financing us from abroad."Despite some minor infringements, western diplomats said the vote "had a lot of positives". "It's been peaceful. It's been lively. People have been engaged," one said. He went on: "Kyrgyzstan is trucking along OK. It's not left the rails."Speaking in Osh, Janez Lenarcic, who heads the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe's election monitoring arm, said he was encouraged by the peaceful conduct of the election, but added that there was a risk that losing parties may refuse to address their electoral grievances through legal channels, but instead take to the streets."It is important that [the voter's] will is reflected in the results and, ultimately, it is extremely important that everybody accepts such results," Lenarcic told the Associated Press.The election is certain to result in a new coalition. Four parties are likely to win seats. They include Ar-Namys, headed by the ex-prime minister Felix Kulov, who is backed by Russia, and supports a strong presidential model; the liberal-orientated Ata-Meken, led by former speaker Omurbek Tekebayev; the Social Democrats; and the Kyrgyz nationalist Ata-Dzhurt or fatherland party.Hammering out a new coalition government could be tricky, one analyst said. "The problem in Kyrgyzstan is that there are many charismatic leaders with gigantic aspirations, compared with Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan. It's a huge cauldron of ambition," Andrei Grozin, a professor at Moscow's Centre for the Study of Post-Soviet Countries, said.Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan were all unhappy at the prospect of a genuine democracy taking root next door, he added. "They are all authoritarian regimes. For them it is a threat. At the moment Kyrgyzstan is the most free country in post-Soviet central Asia."Russia's president, Dmitry Medvedev, warned in June that the move to a popularly elected parliament could see Kyrgyzstan "broken up" or being "run by extremists".The country is of strategic importance to Russia and the US, who both have an airbase in the country near Bishkek. Its most influential, and often overlooked neighbour, however, is China.KyrgyzstanLuke Hardingguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Paxman goes Gaga in opera apology Jeremy Paxman's attempt to pay tribute to opera legend Dame Joan Sutherland on Newsnight becomes a long running saga. news.bbc.co.uk |
So why do we need another religion website? | Jeremy Lott Because we can present the big picture well. And because religion is vital – serious and silly, scandalous and sublimeThis week, after some effort, the Real Clear family of websites births two new offspring: Real Clear Religion (RCR) and Real Clear Science. I am the editor of the first and associate editor of the latter. The Guardian was kind enough to ask me to write a few words on the pressing subject of: why another religion website?There are two ways of answering that question. The first, and easiest, answer is technical. Real Clear websites offer what we call intelligent aggregation. We are both high- and low-tech. Some parts of our websites are automated, but the main product that we offer readers is our judgment. We read many, probably far too many, emails and scour countless websites to give a growing audience what we believe to be the best information and analysis on a timely, manageable schedule.It's a tall order but I'd like to think we pull it off. Our flagship website, Real Clear Politics, is the daily cheat sheet for American politicos and political junkies of every party, as well as interested observers around the world. It does a reasonable job of corralling the whole of American debate into one place. No site really does that for religion, so it seemed like a good area to expand Real Clear.The other answer is a bit more philosophical, and uncomfortable. Narrow the question to: why religion?, and one is forced to drop any pretence and admit to being an interested party. That's me. I'm the son of a Baptist minister and a Catholic convert. While RealClearReligion.org is not a Catholic website or a Protestant website, or a Scientologist website for that matter, it does have a point of view.In my inaugural post on the website's blog, Casting Lots, I took a shot at explaining this to readers. I closed by poaching the final lines from the theatrical adaptation of Crime and Punishment, thus casting RCR in the roles of interrogator and judge:RCR: Do you believe a man can be resurrected?Raskolnikov: I don't know anymore.RCR: And do you believe in God?Raskolnikov: Does it matter?RCR: It might.The intro also complained about the flatness of much religion writing today. Religion, I maintain in my stubbornly alliterative way, is serious and silly, scandalous and sublime. RCR aims to point readers to journalism that adds depth, laughs, and insight.The site existed for a few months in beta. Readers can click back through the archives and see the variety of publications where we have found that insight. These sites include some of the usual suspects (the Catholic Herald, First Things), conservative publications (The American Spectator, Commentary), liberal ones (Salon and, of course, the Guardian), established names (Christianity Today), and newer, quirkier ventures (the Catholic Thing, Religion Dispatches).If readers are surprised by some of what they find when they read the site, that's only to the good. And they aren't the only ones. I've found that religion has a tendency to surprise because it touches our lives at so many intersection points: politics, history, culture, commerce.Bonus observation: this can be as true for unbelievers as it is for believers, and especially true for militant atheists. Just try to imagine a Christopher Hitchens without a deity to deny and damn all at once, or a Richard Dawkins without a Mt Improbable to climb. In their own way, they need God as much as the pope does. That makes them an interesting addendum to the story of religion, don't you think?ChristianityReligionUnited StatesInternetJeremy Lottguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Secret files: US ignored Iraq torture • Demand follows massive leak of military documents• UK lawyer warns crimes may have involved British forces• Files show how US ignored torture• Full coverage of the Iraq war logsThe UN has called on Barack Obama to order a full investigation of US forces' involvement in human rights abuses in Iraq after a massive leak of military documents that detail torture, summary executions and war crimes.The call, by the UN's chief investigator on torture, Manfred Nowak, came as Phil Shiner, human rights specialist at Public Interest Lawyers in the UK, warned that some of the deaths documented in the Iraq war logs could have involved British forces and would be pursued through the UK courts. He demanded a public inquiry into allegations that British troops were responsible for civilian deaths during the conflict.The Guardian has analysed the 400,000 documents, the biggest leak in US military history, and found 15,000 previously unreported civilian deaths. The logs show how US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse, torture, rape and murder by Iraqi police and soldiers whose conduct appears to be systematic and generally unpunished.Nowak said that if the files released through WikiLeaks pointed to clear violations of the UN Convention Against Torture the Obama administration had an obligation to investigate them.The logs paint a disturbing picture of the relationship between US and Iraqi forces. Nowak said that UN human rights agreements obliged states to criminalise every form of torture, whether directly or indirectly, and to investigate any allegations of abuse.Speaking on the BBC's Today programme, Nowak, who has spent years investigating allegations of US participation in extraordinary rendition and the abuse of detainees held by coalition forces, said the Obama administration had a legal and moral obligation to fully investigate credible claims of US forces' complicity in torture.A failure to investigate, Nowak suggested, would be a failure of the Obama government to recognise its obligations under international law. He said the principle of "non-refoulement" prohibited states from transferring detainees to other countries that could pose a risk to their personal safety.The documents, which cover the period in Iraq from 2004 onwards, have prompted claims that this principle has not been observed. The files contain evidence that US forces were ordered to turn a blind eye to abuses committed by the Iraqi authorities.Numerous reports of detainee abuse, often supported by medical evidence, describe prisoners shackled, blindfolded and hung by wrists or ankles and subjected to whipping, punching, kicking or electric shocks. Six reports end with a detainee's apparent death.Nowak said the US had an obligation "whenever they expel, extradite or hand over any detainees to the authorities of another state to assess whether or not these individuals are under specific risk of torture. If this assessment is not done, or authorities hand over detainees knowing there is a serious risk of them being subjected to torture, they violate article 3 of the UN convention that precludes torture."Nowak said it would be up to the Obama administration to launch an "independent and objective" investigation with a view not only to "bring the perpetrators to justice but also to provide the victims with adequate remedy and reparation".He noted that neither the US nor Iraq had ratified the international criminal convention that would see officials from either country brought before the international courts for war crimes. It would be up to the US courts to determine whether US officials or soldiers had breached human rights laws. "If it is established that a particular individual is responsible for torture directly or by complicity, this person should be brought to justice in the domestic courts," Nowak said.As recently as December, the Americans were passed a video apparently showing Iraqi army officers executing a prisoner in Tal Afar, northern Iraq. The log states: "The footage shows approximately 12 Iraqi army soldiers. Ten IA soldiers were talking to one another while two soldiers held the detainee. The detainee had his hands bound … The footage shows the IA soldiers moving the detainee into the street, pushing him to the ground, punching him and shooting him."The report named at least one perpetrator and was passed to coalition forces. But the logs reveal that the coalition has a formal policy of ignoring such allegations. They record "no investigation is necessary" and simply pass reports to the same Iraqi units implicated in the violence. By contrast all allegations involving coalition forces are subject to formal inquiries. Some cases of alleged abuse by UK and US troops are detailed in the logs.In two Iraqi cases postmortems revealed evidence of death by torture. On 27 August 2009 a US medical officer found "bruises and burns as well as visible injuries to the head, arm, torso, legs and neck" on the body of one man claimed by police to have killed himself. On 3 December 2008 another detainee, said by police to have died of "bad kidneys", was found to have "evidence of some type of unknown surgical procedure on [his] abdomen".A Pentagon spokesman told the New York Times this week that under its procedure, when reports of Iraqi abuse were received the US military "notifies the responsible government of Iraq agency or ministry for investigation and follow-up".In response to the revelations, the Iraqi government has vowed to probe the allegations made against its soldiers and police. "The government will show no leniency when it comes to the rights of its citizens," said a statement issued by prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's office.Shiner told a press conference organised by WikiLeaks in London today that he plans to use material from the logs in court to try to force the UK to hold a public inquiry into the unlawful killing of Iraqi civilians.Shiner warned that it would be wrong to assume the US military files "had nothing to do with the UK". He said: "Some have been killed by indiscriminate attacks on civilians or the unjustified use of lethal force. Others have been killed in custody by UK forces and no one knows how many Iraqis lost their lives while held in British detention facilities."If unjustified or unlawful force has been used, prosecutions for those responsible must follow, so we are bringing forward a new case seeking accountability for all unlawful deaths, and we argue that there must be a judicial inquiry to fully investigate UK responsibility for civilian deaths in Iraq."He cited one case in which he claimed a British rifleman had shot dead an eight-year-old girl who was playing in the street in Basra. "For some reason the tank stopped at the end of the street, she's there in her yellow dress, a rifleman pops up and blows her away," he said.A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence, which has set up the Iraq Historic Allegations Team to investigate allegations of abuse, said: "It would be inappropriate to speculate on the specific detail of these documents without further investigation while the Iraq Inquiry is ongoing. There is no place for mistreatment of detainees and we investigate any allegation made against our troops."The WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, told the press conference that the disclosure of the secret files was about getting to the truth of the Iraq conflict."We hope to correct some of that attack on the truth that occurred before the war, during the war, and which has continued since the war officially concluded. While I am not sure we have achieved the maximum possible [political impact], I think we are getting pretty close."Assange highlighted how the reports documented 109,000 deaths – including 66,000 civilians, of which 15,000 were previously undocumented. "That tremendous scale should not make us blind to the small human scale in this material. It is the deaths of one and two people per event that killed the overwhelming number of people in Iraq."The electronic archive is believed to emanate from the same dissident US army intelligence analyst who earlier this year is alleged to have leaked a smaller tranche of 90,000 logs chronicling bloody encounters and civilian killings in the Afghan war.Iraq: The war logsUS militaryUnited NationsTortureHuman rightsBarack ObamaUnited StatesIraqMiddle EastDavid Battyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
In Yemen, the WikiLeaks Controversy May Involve the President's Taste for Whiskey Washington may be alarmed that its cover on drone attacks has been exposed as a lie, but Yemenis are shocked that their President jokes about liquor feedproxy.google.com |