Facing the corporate-government nexus: Defending peoples’ and community rights

Facing the corporate-government nexus: Defending peoples’ and community rights

AEPF Remembers Sombath Somphone. Webinar on defending people’s rights in the face of the corporate-government nexus.

12 years since the enforced disappearance of Sombath Somphone

Watch the Webinar

Speakers:

– Ng Shui Meng: Wife of Sombath Somphone
– Charles Santiago: Co-Chair ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights
– Ana Lorena Delgadillo Pérez: UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances
– Haider Butt: Progressive Democratic Lawyers Forum, Pakistan

Read More

Martial law, Militarisation and Peoples’ Opposition in South Korea

Martial law, Militarisation and Peoples’ Opposition in South Korea

The resistance from the South Korean people and opposition led to the quick end of martial law. However major challenges to the democratic forces remain. This webinar analyses the events and forces at play.

Watch the Webinar

Speakers:
1. Francis Daehoon Lee (ROK, Peace Momo)
2. Lee Jun Kyu (ROK)
3. Kaia Vereide (St. Francis Peace Centre, ROK)

Moderators: Kris Vanslambrouk (AEPF and 11.11.11) & Corazon Fabros (IPB &AEPF)

 

Read More

Laos: States should ask “Where is Sombath?” at upcoming review of human rights record

States should ask “Where is Sombath?” at upcoming review of human rights record

15 December 2024: On the 12-year anniversary of the unresolved enforced disappearance of Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, we, the undersigned civil society organizations and individuals worldwide, urge United Nations (UN) member states to express their concern over this continuing crime and to call for the prompt resolution of Sombath’s case at the upcoming review of the human rights record of Laos.

 

As UN member states prepare for the fourth Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Laos, scheduled for April/May 2025 in Geneva, Switzerland, we call on them to reinforce civil society’s long-standing calls for truth and accountability regarding Sombath’s enforced disappearance.

During the second UPR of Laos in January 2015, Sombath Somphone was the subject of recommendations, expressions of concern, and advance questions by 16 UN member states.[1] During the third UPR of Laos in January 2020, seven UN member states formulated recommendations or advance questions on Sombath’s case.[2]

During both reviews, the Lao government claimed its investigation into Sombath’s enforced disappearance was ongoing. Such statements have been contradicted by the undisputable fact that, for 12 years, the Lao authorities have consistently failed to provide any concrete information on the steps they claim to have taken to effectively investigate Sombath’s disappearance. Instead, the government has engaged in a protracted campaign of misinformation, denials, slander, and cover-ups.[3]

At the upcoming UPR, UN member states should call on the Lao government to take throrough and effective measures to establish the fate or whereabouts of Sombath and all other victims of enforced disappearances in the country, identify the suspected perpetrators of such serious crimes, and provide victims with an effective remedy and full reparations. To date, no case of enforced disappearance in Laos has been resolved and no perpetrators have been identified or brought to justice.

UN member states should also recommend the Lao government promptly ratify, without reservations, the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), which it signed in 2008, and fully implement it into national law, policies, and practices.

The Lao government’s failure to uphold its obligations under international human rights law and standards with respect to Sombath is reflective of the human rights violations constituting crimes under international law and related impunity that have plagued Laos for several decades. His enforced disappearance has also had a chilling effect on Lao civil society organizations and human rights defenders, and marked a significant escalation in the government’s silencing of independent voices.

Amid the serious constraints and repression faced by independent civil society organizations and human rights defenders in Laos, and the continued silence of donors, development agencies, and diplomats in the country, concerned international attention remains the primary hope for finding Sombath and delivering justice to him and his family.

We continue to stand in solidarity with Sombath and his family and urge UN member states to join us in asking the Lao government the same question we have been asking for the past 12 years: “Where is Sombath?”

Background

Sombath Somphone, a pioneer in community-based development and youth empowerment, was last seen at a police checkpoint on a busy street of Vientiane on the evening of 15 December 2012. Footage from a traffic CCTV camera showed that police stopped Sombath’s vehicle at the checkpoint and that, within minutes, unknown individuals forced him into another vehicle and drove him away in the presence of police officers. CCTV footage also showed an unknown individual arriving and driving Sombath’s vehicle away from the city center. In December 2015, Sombath’s family obtained new CCTV footage from the same area and made it public. The video shows Sombath’s car being driven back towards the city by an unknown individual.

For further information, please visit: https://www.sombath.org/

Organizations:

  1. Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma)
  2. Amnesty International
  3. Armanshahr|OPEN ASIA
  4. ARTICLE 19
  5. ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR)
  6. Asia Democracy Network (ADN)
  7. Asia Human Rights and Labour Advocates (AHRLA)
  8. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  9. BALAOD Mindanaw
  10. Bangladesh Krishok Federation
  11. Bir Duino
  12. Bytes For All
  13. Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC)
  14. Cambodian League for the Promotion & Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO)
  15. Center for Prisoners’ Rights
  16. Centre for Civil and Political Rights
  17. Centre for Human Rights and Development (CHRD)
  18. China Labour Bulletin (CLB)
  19. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  20. Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS)
  21. Community Resource Centre (CRC)
  22. Covenants Watch
  23. Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF)
  24. Defence of Human Rights (DHR)
  25. Equality Myanmar
  26. FIAN International
  27. FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights
  28. Focus on the Global South
  29. Fortify Rights
  30. Fresh Eyes
  31. Front Line Defenders
  32. Globe International
  33. Human Rights Alert
  34. Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP)
  35. Human Rights in China (HRIC)
  36. Human Rights Watch
  37. Indonesia Legal Aid Foundation
  38. Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights Association
  39. International Campaign for Tibet (ICT)
  40. International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
  41. International Rivers
  42. Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw)
  43. Justice for Peace Foundation
  44. Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law
  45. Lao Movement for Human Rights (LMHR)
  46. League for the Defence of Human Rights in Iran (LDDHI)
  47. London Mining Network
  48. Madaripur Legal Aid Association (MLAA)
  49. MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
  50. Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN)
  51. Manushya Foundation
  52. National  Commission for Justice & Peace (NCJP)
  53. National Fisheries Solidarity Movement
  54. Odhikar
  55. Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum
  56. Peace Rights Foundation
  57. People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD)
  58. People’s Watch
  59. Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)
  60. Psychological Responsiveness NGO
  61. Public Association “Dignity”
  62. Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU)
  63. Safety and Risk Mitigation Organization (SRMO)
  64. Stiftung Asienhaus
  65. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
  66. Taiwan Association for Human Rights (TAHR)
  67. Task Force Detainees of the Philippines
  68. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR)
  69. The Corner House
  70. Think Centre
  71. Transitional Justice Working Group (TJWG)
  72. Transnational Institute
  73. Union for Civil Liberty (UCL)
  74. Urgewald
  75. Vietnam Committee on Human Rights (VCHR)
  76. WH4C (Workers Hub For Change)
  77. Women’s Peace Network (WPN)
  78. World Organization against Torture (OMCT)

Individuals:

  1. Shui Meng and Sombath’s family, Vientiane
  2. Nico Bakker, Portugal
  3. Philip Hirsch, University of Sydney
  4. Rosanna Barbero
  5. Anne Sophie Gindroz
  6. Saeed Baloch
  7. Ame Trandem, The Hague, The Netherlands
  8. Nora Sausmikat, Germany
  9. Randall Arnst
  10. Larry Lohmann
  11. Sarah Sexton
  12. Nicholas Hildyard
  13. David JH Blake
  14. Angkhana Neelaphaijit

[1] Recommendations: Australia, Canada, Finland, Germany, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and United Kingdom; Expression of concern: Belgium, Netherlands, and Singapore. Advance questions: Slovenia, Spain, and United States.
[2] Recommendations: Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, and United Kingdom. Advance questions: Belgium and United States.
[3] For example, see: BBC, Laos accused of lying over Sombath Somphone abduction, 28 August 2013; https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-23862691; Radio Free Asia, EU Parliament Dissatisfied with Lao Efforts to Locate Missing Activist, 28 October 2013, https://www.rfa.org/english/news/laos/eu-10282013191323.html; Human Rights Watch, Laos: End Cover-Up in Activist’s ‘Disappearance’, 14 June 2013, https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/06/14/laos-end-cover-activists-disappearance; APHR, Lao government’s deceptive game on Sombath investigation must end, 12 September, 2014, https://aseanmp.org/publications/post/lao-governments-deceptive-game-on-sombath-investigation-must-end/; FIDH, Government slanders Sombath Somphone, issues “blanket denials” on enforced disappearances during rights review, 18 July 2018, https://www.fidh.org/en/region/asia/laos/government-slanders-sombath-somphone-issues-blanket-denials-on; Human Rights Committee, Information received from the Lao People’s Democratic Republic on follow-up to the concluding observations on its initial report, 18 December 2023, https://shorturl.at/6ZOYe; Sombath.org, The investigation [last accessed on 29 November 2024], https://www.sombath.org/en/who-is-sombath/video/the-investigation/

Read More

Webinar: Feminist Principles and Foreign Policy

Webinar: Feminist Principles and Foreign Policy

Feminists discuss how principles of feminism like representation, rights and peace can be part of the foreign policies of states.

Watch the Webinar


Speakers:
Radhika Coomaraswamy: Human rights lawyer & Former UN Under Secretary General (Sri Lanka)
Emilia Reyes: Programme Director – Policies and Budgets for Equality and Sustainable Development, at Gender Equity & Co-Convenor of the Women’s Working Group on Financing for Development (Mexico)
Shereen Talaat: Feminist/Global Economics and Climate Justice Advocate and Director/Founder of MENA Fem Movement For Economic, Development And Ecological Justice (Egypt)
– Patricia Munoz Cabrera: Research consultant on gender and intersectional analysis of sustainable development and trade policies & practices (Chili/ Belgium)
– Shweta Singh: Associate Professor of International Relations at the South Asian University (New Delhi, India)
– Christa Wichterich: Scholar-activist, & Former professor for gender politics at the University of Kassel (Germany)

Co-Moderators:

– Anuradha Chenoy: Adjunct Professor, Jindal Global University & Former Dean of the School of International Studies at JNU, New Delhi. (India)
– Priti Darooka: Founder and former Executive Director of PWESCR (Programme on Women’s Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights) & Co-founder and global coordinator of BRICS Feminist Watch (India)

Register Now

 

Read More

Webinar: Growing Inequality and Social Justice

Webinar: Growing Inequality and Social Justice

Globally inequality has reached extreme proportions. This is more so in the Developing Countries. There is dire need to protect the large vulnerable people with policies of social justice.

Experts in this webinar explains these issues.

Watch the Webinar 

Speakers:
1. Surya Deva (UN Special Rapporteur on Rights to Development)
2. Jenny Ricks (International coordinator of Fight Inequality Alliance Global)
3. Dr Kaiser Bengali (Economist, Pakistan)

Moderator: Farooq Tariq & Husnain Jamil Faridi

Read More

Global NATO: Implications for the Asia-Pacific (Part 2)

Global NATO: Implications for the Asia-Pacific (Part 2)

NATO has been extending its influence into the Asia-Pacific through political and military partnerships. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg highlighted that Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand share security threats that could affect Europe. Despite their recent involvement, these nations have historically had little connection to NATO’s traditional security agenda. This webinar aims to deepen the analysis of NATO’s presence in the region, explore the intersectionality of military security, geopolitics, peace, and environment, and provide insights into alternative approaches to security in the Asia-Pacific.

The webinar will be conducted online via Zoom for 1.5-2 hours.

Time: 6:00 pm Manila | 6:00 pm Perth | 3:30 pm IST | 7:00 pm South Korea | 6:00 pmBeijing | 12:00 pm Berlin
Organizers: ​​Asia Europe Peoples Forum (AEPF) and the International Peace Bureau (IPB)

Register Now

 

Read More

Webinar: Global NATO – Implications and Resistance

Webinar: Global NATO - Implications and Resistance

NATO is fast spreading into the Indo Pacific. What the the implications and challenges.
Join our experts discuss this in our webinar.

Watch the Webinar

Speakers:
Walden Bello ( The Philippines)
Joseph Gerson (USA)
Anu Chenoy (India)
Reiner Braun (Germany)
Moderators: Cora Corazon and Sean Conner

 

Read More

In a Volatile Time: Political Crisis and the Latice-Like Network of U.S. Indo-Pacific Alliances

In a Volatile Time: Political Crisis and the Latice-Like Network of U.S. Indo-Pacific Alliances

By Joseph Gerson*

These are increasingly dangerous times. Several years ago, Walden Bello wrote a book about counterrevolution. With Trump and Vance, two classical fascists, recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, and the Heritage Foundation Project 2025, we are approaching the climax of an American counterrevolution. Walden has also recently reminded us of Antonio Gramsci’s insight about the time that we are living through: “The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters.” Like Ulysses, we have to navigate the rapids between Scylla and Charybdis. 

It is not going to be pretty,  

Clearly Biden is no gift to the world. Recently a senior arms control diplomat who is close to Ron Klain, President Biden’s first Chief of Staff, said that only three people can convince Biden to step aside: Jill Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Biden’s sister. There are reports that Pelosi will inform Biden that it’s time to go, but there are no guarantees that she will or that if she does he will step aside, or if he does step aside that the Democrats will be able to come up with a candidate who can beat Trump and his dishonest lackey Vance.

Little noticed here in the United States has been the immensely powerful and dangerous lattice-like network of U.S. military alliances assembled by the Biden Administration in the desperate, probably futile, and multi-faceted U.S campaign to contain China.  As the NATO Summit Declaration put it, the threat as seen from Washington is “global and interconnected.” With the passing of the post Cold-War’s unilateral era and the relative decline of U.S. power, Washington has become increasingly dependent on alliances, across the Indo-Pacific and in Europe to contain Chinese and Russian ambitions. Hence the increasing integration of NATO with the array of U.S. Indo-Pacific alliances, some of which date from World War II’s transformation of the Pacific Ocean into an American Lake and others of more recent vintage. 

Don’t expect this to change if, as seems likely, Trump regains the Oval Office. Over the last two and a half decades there has been remarkable continuity in U.S. Republican and Democratic administrations. The U.S. elite has understood, as Biden’s National Security Statement put it, that China “is the only competitor with both the intent to reshape the international order and, increasingly, the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to advance that objective.” Bush the Lesser planned to focus on China but was distracted by 9/11. Kurt Campbell and Obama gave us the Pivot to Asia. Trump doubled down on the Pivot. And despite the Ukraine and Gaza Wars, the People’s Liberation Army has been Biden’s military pacer, driving us toward what former Australian President Rudd terms “an avoidable war.”

A place to begin is President Biden’s statement that the outcome of Prime Minister Kishida’s recent state visit to Washington was “the most significant upgrade in our alliance since it was first established.”  Forget Japan’s Peace Constitution. The Japanese government has! Recall that the U.S.-Japan Mutual Security Treaty was secretly forced on Tokyo in 1952 as a requirement to end the United States’s post-war occupation of Japan. It didn’t end the occupation. Okinawa remained occupied until reversion in 1972, but even the U.S. Consul General in Naha said several years ago that the entire island remains a U.S. military base. And while US bases are concentrated in Okinawa, they extend across the Japanese archipelago, including a massive US air base in the nation’s capital.

The summit with Kishida was designed in part to Trump-proof the alliance. and it deepened military cooperation, including joint development of AI, space technology, and semiconductors. It was formally announced that Tokyo will be purchasing 400 Tomahawk  missiles as part of its now preemptive strike doctrine against China and North Korea. In something of a role reversal, Tokyo will now export of weapons to the US to replenish depleted US stocks that have run low because of the Ukraine War.   There will also be a “joint operations command,” possibly led by a four-star US general, and plans are afoot to create a NATO office in Tokyo.  Meanwhile, the SDF is building up its forces on Okinawan islands in preparation for a possible war for Taiwan.

This alliance expansion is a keystone of the lattice-like alliance network which is not centralized along the model of NATO.  The deepening of the U.S.-Japan alliance undergirds the tripartite U.S.-Japanese-South Korean alliance. Not incidentally, in July Washington and Seoul signed a nuclear guideline that provides for US deployment of U.S. nuclear assets in and near South Korea. The April Biden-Kishida-Marcos summit reiterated Washington’s “ironclad commitment” to the Philippines, while also resolving to increase interoperability between the three nations’ militaries as they contest China for dominance in the South China/West Philippine Sea. 

With Australia and Britain, we now have AUKUS. It  will provide new nuclear powered submarines to augment U.S. naval forces in the Pacific and Indian Oceans and fatten military-industrial complex coffers.  It also reinforces “Anglo-Saxon” Indo-Pacific neocolonialism. Not limited to the Five Eyes intelligence gathering network of the US the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, the “Anglo-Saxons” are increasingly engaged in joint and collaborative military maneuvers from US-Australia-New Zealand joint exercises to the dispatch of British warships to the Taiwan Strait. To reinforce this network, US, Japanese, Australian, and Philippine military chiefs met recently in Honolulu.

Despite the hype when it was first convened, the  QUAD, comprised of the U.S., Japan, India, and Australia, is not yet a formal alliance. It remains a forum to develop security and economic strategies in the face of  China’s rise. But keeping its options open, India, which has engaged in joint military exercises with the U.S. and Japan, uses QUAD as a hedge against the possibility of finding it necessary to confront China more directly in the future. 

There is also deepening integration of Japanese and other U.S. Indo-Pacific allied militaries with NATO. French, Dutch, British, and German warships have all participated in joint naval maneuvers. Japanese Prime Minister Kishida, South Korea’s President Yoon, New Zealand’s Prime Minister Luxon, and Australian Deputy Prime and Defense Minister Marles all joined last week’s NATO summit in Washington. France and Japan have begun talks for a reciprocal troops pact. Japan and Italy have declared their ‘strategic partnership.”  And Britain, Japan, and Italy have agreed to develop a next generation jet fighter. 

And, for another time, there is the other alliance, more accurately an entente, that confronts the lattice-like network: the deepening military integration of China, Russia, North Korea, and Belarus.

Finally, as we face the probability of another catastrophic Trump presidency, I thought it would be helpful to share what Robert O’Brien, Trump’s last national security advisor who is tipped to return to the White House, describes Trump’s past and future foreign and military policy commitments. O’Brien’s pledge to renew nuclear weapons testing garnered the headlines, but there was more:  Chillingly, he explained that Trump adheres “to his own instincts.”  And, despite doubts about Trump’s commitment to alliances, O’Brien reported that:

  • The Trump mantra is “America first is not America alone…” Trump never canceled or postponed a single deployment to NATO. His pressure on NATO governments to spend more on defense made the alliance stronger.”
  • Trump’s 2017 “ fire and fury” threat against North Korea brought us closer to nuclear war than is understood
  • “Xi is China’s most dangerous leader since the murderous Mao Zedong. “It is “pablum to believe that China is not truly an adversary.”
  • NATO and U.S. cooperation with Japan, Israel, and the Arab Gulf States were all militarily strengthened when Trump was president”  
  • U.S. “should focus its Pacific diplomacy on allies such as Australia, Japan, the Philippines, and South Korea…[and]traditional partners such as Singapore and emerging ones such as Indonesia and Vietnam”
  • The Navy should move an aircraft carrier from the Atlantic to the Pacific, move the “entire Marine Corps to the Pacific” [later clarified to be operational troops, not admin.] He advocates adding  more stealthy Virginia class submarines and Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines and all 100 planned B-21bombers.
  • “Test new nuclear weapons for reliability…and resume production of uranium 235 and plutonium 239”
  • Decouple the US economy from China with a 60% tariff on Chinese goods and tougher export controls on technology
  • In the Middle East “maximum pressure” on Iran, the  source of Palestine-Israel conflict 
  • Support lethal aid to Ukraine paid for by Europeans, while keeping the door open for diplomacy with Russia. while NATO rotates ground and air forces in Poland. 

Would that it were otherwise. We face an exceptionally dangerous and  demanding period as we are moved into what appears to be an era of Trump/MAGA fascism and desperate U.S. efforts to maintain its global dominance. More imaginative and committed organizing for democracy, peace, and climate sustainability are the order of the day. It is also clear that we will need to increase and deepen our international collaborations, among them the current work on a vision for Common Security diplomacy, if the worst is to be prevented.

*This article is based on a talk for the Asia-Europe People’s Forum, July 17, 2024

Read More

AEPF Webinar Series: Rise of Authoritarianism and Challenges by People – The Indian Elections

AEPF Webinar Series: Rise of Authoritarianism and Challenges by People - The Indian Elections

The Indian elections in June 2024 had unexpected results and India will now have a coalition government led by the BJP. What were the issues before the electorate, what do the results mean for Indian democracy?

Watch the Webinar

Speakers:

– Ms. Seema Mustafa (senior journalist and former president, Editor’s Guild of India)
– Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay ( senior journalist and author of many books including a biography of Modi)
– Prof. Zoya Hasan (Professor Emeritus, JNU, writer, political analyst)

Moderators: Anu Chenoy and Andy Rutherford

 

 

Read More