text:
Lockdown for citizens, beach holiday for tourists: New ad exposes Turkey’s lopsided COVID rules · Global Voices
Arzu Geybullayeva

Screenshot from the promotional video released by Turkey's Ministry of Culture and Tourism released in May 2021.
A new promotional video by Turkey's Ministry of Culture and Tourism encouraging international tourists to visit the country, while the local population is still under lockdown rules, has sparked fury on social media. The ad was pulled from government websites in less than 24 hours following the reactions.
Released on May 13, the video shows hotel and other industry employees greeting tourists with masks that read “Enjoy! I'm vaccinated!” while a voice-over says: “sanitized resorts and vaccinated staff. We call it double safety for tourism. Our guests call it peace of mind. Come and enjoy the safe haven, the Turkish Riviera.”
Turkey laid down fresh lockdown rules on April 29 in a bid to curb a new COVID-19 wave — but international holidaymakers are exempt from following them.
Citizens caught violating the measures are subject to a steep fine of 3,180 lira (380 US dollars) and an additional fine of 900 lira (110 US dollars) if they are caught without a mask. In addition, the Ministry of Interior banned all retail sales of non-essential products, such as stationery, cosmetic products, potting soil, and alcoholic beverages. The measures are set to end on May 17.
In an attempt to boost the afflicted tourism industry, which last year suffered losses of €8.3 billion (10.1 billion US dollars), with gross revenue declining around 40 percent in comparison with 2019, Turkey prioritized vaccination of all tourism employees in detriment of other sectors. “We are vaccinating all tourism employees, hotel and restaurant staff, drivers, airport employees, and everyone who can be seen by the tourist, including tour guides,” said Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu during a visit to Berlin last week.
The ad swiftly attracted criticism on Turkish social media. Leaders of different opposition parties termed the video “humiliating.” The former prime minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu, called for the resignation of the current tourism minister in a tweet.
#TurizmBakanıİstifa (meaning “minister of tourism, resign”) has been trending on Twitter since.
Turistlere sunulan köleler gibiyiz resmen! https://t.co/tB2Bvtzvwr
— tuğba tekerek (@tugbatekerek) May 13, 2021
We are like slaves presented for tourists!
Turistlerin göreceği Türkler, İngilizce yazan “Ben aşılandım” maskeleriyle dolaşacakmış.
Kulağımıza da küpe takın, aramızda saldırgan olanları zehirleyin, tepki olursa barınaklara atar sahiplendirirsiniz! pic.twitter.com/unOkbMbzIV
— Batuhan Çolak (@batuhancolak33) May 13, 2021
Turks seen by tourists will be wearing masks that say “I am vaccinated”. Put an earring on us, poison those who are aggressive, and if there is a reaction, put us up in shelters, maybe someone will adopt us.
In Turkey, street dogs who have been vaccinated against rabies carry tags on their ears.
Bu kadar olmaz…
Milleti aşılayamıyorsunuz, bari aşağılamayın! https://t.co/g7FzPoIdg4
— Eren Erdem (@erenerdemnet) May 13, 2021
This cannot be real. You may not vaccinate people, but at least don't humiliate them!
Zaytung, a Turkish satirical magazine, shared a mock news story in response to the video, assuring incoming tourists that the next measure by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism would be to castrate all male waiters and beach employees, who would wear t-shirts that read: “Enjoy! I am castrated!”
While many Turks responded to the promo video with dark humor, frustrations with the ruling Justice and Development Party remain high amid the pandemic. The last thing citizens need right now, it seems, is a reminder of how badly the authorities have handled the pandemic over the last 14 months.

author: Arzu Geybullayeva


text:
The different faces of gender equality in Vietnam politics · Global Voices
The 88 Project

Women activists who faced state harassment for speaking the truth in Vietnam. Tran Thi Nga (top left), Dinh Thi Thu Thuy (top right), Doan Thi Hong (bottom left), Cao Vinh Thinh (bottom right). Photos from the database of The 88 Project
This article was originally published on The 88 Project, an independent news site covering Vietnam, and an edited version is republished on Global Voices as part of a content-sharing agreement.
The Vietnamese government boasts about its achievements in pursuing gender equality. Referring to the ratio of women representatives in the Vietnam National Assembly, which stands at 27 per cent, the government insists on its myth of the progressive development of Vietnamese politics and sometimes even its superiority over other countries in this area. However, such an assertion is deceptive and dangerous, as shown by evidence from the actual power distribution of the state and examples of how the regime treats single mother activists and independent women’s associations.
The number of Vietnamese women in the National Assembly is, indeed, impressive. Considering that the U.S. political body only has 23 per cent participation of women in both of their chambers, followed by the Republic of Korea with 19 per cent, and Japan with just 10 per cent, one might argue that the Vietnamese government is doing wonders in improving and promoting women’s voices in politics.
However, such a depiction is misleading. As pointed out by Luat Khoa, the true power picture of Vietnam does not start with the National Assembly. The body is just a “rubber stamp” for the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP) to try to legitimize its top-down decisions via a pseudo organ of popular sovereignty. The right places to analyze the power structure of Vietnamese politics are the Central Committee and the Politburo, and of course, the regime’s “troika”– the party’s general secretary, state president, and prime minister. None of them shows that Vietnam has evolved in gender equality.
The record of women delegates on the Central Committee is 9.5 per cent, just one-third of the National Assembly (equivalent to 19 out of 200). Women only have one seat in the Politburo (out of 18 seats), and none in the troika power of the Communist Party. If we look at these “real” numbers, the actual development of gender equality in Vietnam is quite stagnated.
Yet this is just one layer of the story.
Exploring The 88 Project’s database, nine out of 26 activists arrested in 2020 were female. That is a surprising 1:2.8 ratio against the male counterparts. Even in 2018, the most serious year of state persecution against human rights defenders in recent years, women activists still accounted for 20 per cent of all the arrests. The 88 Project has also documented a record number of female activists who faced administrative fines and other forms of harassment. From former political prisoners to the wives of jailed activists to ordinary citizens, many women have been subjected to mistreatment and harassment one way or another. According to our research, 22 per cent of at-risk activists in Vietnam are women.
The 88 Project has also collected extensive evidence showing the unfair, unlawful and inhumane treatment by the authorities against female activists.
Consider the case of Doan Thi Hong. Hong is a single mother based in Binh Thuan Province. She was said to have participated in the national demonstrations against the bills on special economic zones and cybersecurity on June 10, 2018. Besides this, she was reportedly also a member of the Hien Phap (Constitution) group, which aims to promote people’s understanding of their human rights in the 2013 Constitution.
The 2015 Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code of Vietnam specifically assert that pre-trial detention will not be applied to women who have children under 36 months old at the time of their arrest. Concerning national security crimes, unless there are clear and convincing indications that without pre-trial detention such a person would severely affect public order and national security, a mother cannot be subject to this detention mechanism and does not have to begin serving her sentence until her child reaches the appropriate age.
In the case of Hong, although she, along with members of the Hien Phap group, only called for a peaceful demonstration, they were treated as if they had planned to violently overthrow the regime. Hong was denied her legal rights and separated from her toddler. In our interview with her sister, Doan Kim Khanh, she said that while she was outside taking care of the toddler and advocating for Hong’s release, she was contacted by Hong from the prison and was able to meet with her there. Hong reportedly specifically asked Khanh not to fight for her rights.
Khanh recalls:
Hong contended that my actions outside will only worsen her condition. The officers warned her that a crime against national security is very serious, that she should think about the future of her daughter.
With no counsel from lawyers, and barred from contacting the outside world, Hong’s reaction and concern for her daughter are understandable. She was later sentenced to two and a half years in prison with two years of probation; Hong was released from prison this March.
The examples of mistreatment continue with Tran Thi Nga’s case. Nga was once a prominent activist in Vietnam, and one of the founders of Vietnamese Women for Human Rights, a non-governmental group. To punish her for her outspoken activism, the authorities sentenced her to more than nine years in prison back in 2018 for her online writings deemed “propaganda against the state.” Nga was deprived of seeing her sons for over 15 months, half of her time in prison, and was also repeatedly physically attacked and given death threats by cellmates from August to October 2018. The constant physical and psychological pain and a desire to protect the well-being of her family are the reasons Nga had to choose to go into exile from the country, where she lives in exchange for early release from prison and her agreement to leave Vietnam.
Recently, Green Trees environmental activist Cao Vinh Thinh accused the government of pressuring her landlords to evict her from her rented house and business location. Accompanying Thinh, a single mother, was her seven-year-old daughter, who also had to endure the eviction and harassment. Thinh has not participated in any political activities recently. The action of local authorities seems meant to force her into a corner until she cannot sustain her livelihood.
The arrest and treatment by local authorities of activist Dinh Thi Thu Thuy are also worrisome. For criticizing several policies of the Vietnamese government during the “national war” against COVID-19, Thuy was treated as a dangerous criminal. Her pre-trial detention lasted over eight months, and she was held incommunicado while her 10-year-old son had to live with his grandmother. For mere online commentaries, Thuy was sentenced to seven years in prison. It means that her son will go through his primary and secondary school education without his mother.
In Vietnam, the formation of an association must strictly follow the rules set down by the Communist Party. A new association cannot compete in the same sphere of influence as established associations. Therefore, since there is already a Vietnamese Women’s Union, no other women’s association can register. The requirement effectively creates a monopoly even in social welfare and activism. In reality, however, the Vietnam Women’s Union is essentially subordinate to the Party rather than an association working for the rights and benefits of women.
This is why the independent group Vietnamese Women for Human Rights (VWHR) was quickly denounced as a “reactionary force.” It was deemed an unlawful association by the Indoctrination Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam on the state-run channel National Defense Television on July 4, 2020, with no legal explanation. This also explains why the country’s only recognized women’s association has played no role in stopping the arbitrary arrests of female activists, the strategy of using their children as bargaining chips to obtain confessions, or in supporting distressed women activists.
The situation is a result of decades of systematic suppression against dissidents and independent political activities in Vietnam. Thus, we do not expect that any gender-particular or separate effort can effectively improve the conditions. Women’s rights alone cannot be advanced if the overall democratization process is stalled and the human rights movement faces constant crackdowns. However, the Vietnamese government should first honor its commitment to Article 7 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), ensuring that all Vietnamese women enjoy the right to participate in non-governmental organizations and associations concerned with the public and political life of the country. Independent gender-specific initiatives and women-led organizations are the keys to a radical and successful reformation of both public and state prejudices against the role of women in political and civic life.

source: news-globalvoices

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: The 88 Project


text:
Environmental activists convicted in Cambodia for planning ‘one-woman walk’ · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

File photo of Mother Nature member Long Kunthea, one of the activists convicted on May 5. Long Kunthea was a central figure in a planned one-woman walk to the prime minister's residence in September 2020. Source: Facebook
Five members of the environmental group Mother Nature were convicted on May 5 in Cambodia on charges of “incitement to commit a felony or disturb social order.”
Phoun Keo Reaksmey, Thon Ratha, Long Kunthea, Chea Kunthin, and Alejandro Gonzalez-Davidson were sentenced to 18-20 months in prison and ordered to pay a fine of 4 million riels (US$1,000).
Phoun Keo Reaksmey, Thon Ratha and Long Kunthea, who were arrested in September 2020, were present in the court during the handing down of the verdict. Chea Kunthin is in hiding ,while Alejandro Gonzalez-Davidson, the Spanish national who founded the group, is barred from returning to Cambodia after being deported in 2015.
Mother Nature relies on social media campaigning to raise awareness of environmental issues. In 2015, the group successfully prevented the construction of a mega dam in the remote Areng Valley by highlighting its impact on farmers and rural villages. Since its founding, eight of its members have been arrested by the Cambodian authorities.
The three who were arrested in September were planning a one-woman walk to the prime minister’s residence as part of a campaign opposing the planned privatization and reclamation of Boeung Tamok lake, one of the last remaining lakes in Cambodia's capital city, Phnom Penh.
In recent years, real estate projects displacing lakeside residents have sparked intense conflicts in the city. Activists claim most of the projects were given to close associates of ruling party officials. They also warned of the harmful environment consequences of filling in natural lakes.
Alejandro Gonzalez-Davidson told Radio Free Asia that their group did not violate any law, as the arrest was done hours before the planned walk:
We decided to do a one-woman march: (Long Kunthea) walking for three kilometers all dressed in white, alone, and another woman, 19-year-old Phuong Keo Raksmey, she would be recording and live streaming, and then Thun Ratha, he would be basically in the conversation from his own home, live streaming it through social media. So that was our plan. And the idea was to walk towards the residence of the prime minister. A few hours before the march started, they arrested the three activists and confiscated pretty much everything that the organization owned — cameras, laptops etc.
During the trial, videos that had been uploaded to Mother Nature’s Facebook page were presented as evidence. The presiding judge reportedly stated that the campaigns initiated by the group could “create anger for the masses.” The judge also asserted that developing Boeung Tamok lake could ease traffic congestion in Phnom Penh.
After his conviction, Thon Ratha was heard shouting to court reporters:
This is very unjust. Sentencing people who just care about nature … they are very eager for trials.
The Khmer court is like this. Please tell people that we are still strong.
The court’s decision was criticized by human rights groups both inside and outside Cambodia, who linked it to broader attacks on freedom of expression over the past year. Naly Pilorge, director of Cambodian human rights group LICADHO, said:
These young people were arrested for trying to protect Phnom Penh’s largest lake and preserve it for current and future generations. These environmental defenders have suffered for too long and we call on authorities to release them from overcrowded prisons so they can reunite with their families and communities.
After the verdict, Mary Lawlor, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights, posted this tweet:
I'm saddened to hear that three human rights defenders from Mother Nature #Cambodia were today convicted to between 18 and 20 months in prison.
I shouldn't have to say this: peacefully defending the environment is not a crime.
— Mary Lawlor UN Special Rapporteur HRDs (@MaryLawlorhrds) May 5, 2021
The Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Cambodia to the UN Office in Geneva countered by issuing a press statement:
Crime is crime and it cannot be justified because it is in pursuit of other aspirations.
Days before the announcement of the verdict, Mother Nature asked the public to watch their campaign videos as proof of the innocence of the detained activists:
Watch it and decide by yourselves whether MNC [Mother Nature Cambodia] activists are indeed criminals who deserve to be in jail, or if you think they are merely young Cambodian patriots who want to protect the nation’s natural resources, and as such should be released immediately.
Mother Nature is planning to appeal the verdict.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
Women in Science: Neuroscientist Caroline Geisler on ‘standing out from the crowd’ · Global Voices
Liudmila Zhustareva

Dr Caroline Geisler, courtesy photo, used with permission.
As part of its continuous efforts to explore the role of women in science, Global Voices spoke to Caroline Geisler, PhD, an independent research associate in the neurobiology department at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich. Geisler works in the field of computational neuroscience, with a focus on the emergence and function of rhythmic neuronal activity.
Having entered the world of science with a primary interest in physics, she has shifted over the course of her career from the abstract to more human and life-related studies, and divides her time between the university's cognition and neural plasticity lab and teaching PhD and Masters students.
Global Voices (GV): What sparked your interest in physics and inspired you to become a scientist?
Caroline Geisler (CG): Well, I always had a mathematical mind and was very good in maths, which in high school became especially clear. I was interested in space, small particles, computers and literally wanted to become a rocket scientist. I studied at a girls’ school and had a group of friends with the same interests, such as memorizing stars in the sky, rather than going shopping for clothes. Being surrounded by friends with the same interests, of course, strengthened my passion for science.
GV: Would you agree that at that time the sciences, particularly physics, were considered to belong to the male realm and that for a woman it would be harder to build a career in this sphere?
CG: In this sense it was an advantage to study at a girls’ school, because there, the gender division simply did not happen. I sometimes ask myself whether I would have pursued science with the same enthusiasm if I had studied in a mixed school. And I still don’t have a definitive answer. Several studies have actually shown that girls from girls’ schools are more likely to enter fields that are male-dominated, precisely because there is no gender division, which to some extent creates certain mental barriers.
In primary school, where I studied in a mixed group, the teacher in science classes always gave the experiments to the boys, but not to me, although I wanted to do the experiments too and felt it extremely unfair. So the fact that I studied in such a school could have played a role in making my choice.
And I was lucky to have enormously supportive teachers who recognized my strong points and believed in me, thus encouraging me to dive fully and seriously into the world of science. I remember, I had a very nice maths teacher, who at the time when I struggled with English, came to me and cheered me up by saying: “I do understand you very well, cause I also always had problems with English. But you’re good in maths and that’s enough for life.” His support was very important for me and helped me not to get frustrated.
GV:  What about your undergraduate university years? What was the percentage of girls in the faculty of physics and did you see any difference in the treatment of female students?
CG: Actually no, not at all. Although there were only about 10 percent women in the faculty and in some classes I was the only woman, it only motivated me to perform better. Because being almost the only girl in a group doesn’t give you a chance to dissolve in a crowd, to disappear from the view of a teacher. Standing out makes you always think twice before saying anything out loud, because if it’s something silly then you know that everybody will remember who said it. That ‘no chance to hide’ position bothered me a little bit and made me feel uncomfortable sometimes, but those concerns were more from my own mind, not caused by any bad intentions or biased attitudes from teachers.
Very occasionally some slight and unconscious gender biases took place. For instance… one older professor in a lecture on thermodynamics gave an example of baking cakes and turned to me, saying: “Indeed, you should know this.” And I said: “Why? Sorry, but I don’t.” Because I actually had no idea how to bake cakes at that time.
On the other hand, I had a female physics professor who was very kind and caring and especially helpful and supportive to me. Partly I explain her goodwill by the fact that I was the only girl in the group and she felt therefore some special connection with me and the inclination to help me. Her example showed me that I could also be successful in science, and I definitely benefited from her support.
GV: How does it feel to be a woman in physics in general? And what role, if any, does gender play in this field of science?
CG: I feel that, in physics, most of the time you’re either good or you aren’t, and others will certainly know that. In exact sciences,  such as physics… it wouldn’t help you just to tell everybody that you’re great. If you don’t publish good papers and do good work, no one will recognize you, so it makes no sense to pretend. This means that one is judged first on one’s work and last on gender.
Both at university in Germany and in the United States, and especially in the US, gender was never an issue, in my opinion, and I was always treated fairly. In fact, in the US I even heard about some programs that specifically supported women, which meant that if you were really good at what you were doing and you could prove it by your work, there could even be an advantage to being a woman in a certain field of research.
The dark side of this seeming tolerance though, is that sometimes people or organizations… prefer simply not to deal with female candidates or potential employees to avoid any gender-related troubles or suspicion of discrimination. That’s where this idea of gender tolerance and supporting women can actually backfire and the special status of being a female can play against you.
GV: What was the most challenging and simultaneously rewarding period in your career?
CG: I guess that would be the time right after my first child was born, while I was doing my postdoc in the US in the lab of Professor Buzsaki. That was a really life-changing time. I had to reconsider my schedule, adjust my working life to new circumstances and incorporate a number of new responsibilities, along with the existing ones, into the same 24 hours.
Especially in the case of researchers, most of them rely on the opportunity to immerse themselves completely in their subject, and time doesn’t matter for them anymore – if you want to figure something out you can stay up till 3am and then you get up whenever you get up and go back to your research. And then the baby appears and such a regime does not work for you anymore. That was for me the hardest period of transition to a new lifestyle, though, of course, it was full of rewarding and happy moments. My husband (Anton Sirota, also a researcher) and my colleagues in the lab were very supportive and understanding.
The maternity leave in the US is quite short and a few months after giving birth I got back to work, however, of course, my career slowed down from that moment. This moment is pivotal in terms of how much you can capitalize on whatever you achieved before, and how well your research is lined up and organized, so that you can pick up again without thinking too much about it.
Now, since we have three kids, I work part-time in order to be able to take care of children, although my husband shares many of the family-related responsibilities. Thankfully, in Germany, the part-time option for working mothers is a common thing. This flexibility allows you to stay in science and continue doing what you’re passionate about. However, among conservative people, you still encounter some judgment, and the assumption that you are indifferent to your kids and prioritizing work over family.
Also, I regard science as a highly creative process, similar to the arts, and therefore it’s very important to be fully emerged in your research, to be flexible and to dedicate most of your time and mental energy to your project. One needs to get into the right mood and invoke creativity, which is hardly achievable when one always has to check your watch to not be missing the time to pick up the kids from school or kindergarten. Now, although I still do my research, I am also teaching at the Graduate School of Systematic Neuroscience, which I really enjoy and find highly rewarding.
Dr Caroline Geisler (bottom row, second from the left) with her colleagues. Courtesy photo, used with permission.
GV: If you could give one piece of advice to other female researchers, what would it be?
CG: The absolute most important thing that everybody should always consider is doing what you really love, because only then will you have the endurance and discipline to get through the hardships and difficult times. If there is something that you really love to do, you should pursue it. And even if you’re thinking that you will never be able to earn money or find a job, if you’re really good at what you do and do it wholeheartedly, you will be more likely to find a job and overcome any challenges and difficulties that you encounter. Just be open, try to see the opportunities and be courageous enough to take them.

author: Liudmila Zhustareva


text:
Bulgaria’s COVID-hit farmers struggle under media negligence and insufficient state support · Global Voices
Nevena Borisova

Use of greenhouses is an important aspect of agriculture in Bulgaria. Photo by Wikipedia user Biso, depicting Cveti Cvet greenhouse in Galabovtsi village, Bulgaria. CC BY-SA 4.0.
To many Bulgarians outside the agrarian sector, farming is seemingly a sector unaffected by COVID-19, and little efforts seem to shed light on what is happening there. Bulgarian media often report on the restaurant businesses and retail outlets being affected by the pandemic, but rarely explore the adverse effects on other industries like farming, and their interconnections. Therefore, having been left out of public debates or politicians’ and media's scope of interest for decades, farmers’ plights under the pandemic have rarely been noticed.
In a bid to alleviate the impact of the pandemic, the government did take a series of measures in order to support small and medium-sized enterprises and producers in agriculture. The aid, after approval by European Commission, was coming from allocated subsidies from the European Union (EU) funded Program for Rural Development 2014-2020.
Starting in May, COVID-related aid for agriculture will be offered for the second consecutive year, approving up to 7000 euros (about $8500) for each applicant.
What is problematic with the guidelines for the 2021 aid, however, is that those who received governmental support last year won't be eligible to benefit from this year's. This might leave agriculture entities still hit by the effects of COVID-19 without essential support. In addition, the aid is available only for those who applied in 2020 for financing by the EU's specialized funds.
The support for farmers, as well as small and medium enterprises affected by COVID-19 in 2020, also had its limitations. It hinged on specific conditions set by the Ministry of Agriculture, including a condition that applicants must have applied for subsidies in 2019 and 2020, unless they're beekeepers or beneficiaries of a valid contract under the Rural Development 2014-2020. According to critics, this condition was seen as an obstacle for new farmers who don't have history of applying for financing from EU funds.
Government officials dispersing these funds, who failed to respond to Bulgarian daily E-newspaper‘s inquiries, have yet to announce an official assessment of the impact of Covid-19 on Bulgarian agriculture. Farmers, on the other hand, were keen to share their neglected views, including their opinion on what possibly the aid so far lacks.
According to to Ivan Gyurov, who grows dessert grapes in vineyards in the village of Brestovitsa located near the city of Plovdiv in south-central Bulgaria, life has been tough under the pandemic. A member of an independent syndicate of agricultural producers, Ivan told Bulgaria's E-newspaper:
I can divide the difficulties into two. Initially, the lockdown in March 2020 led to labor-related difficulties, affecting transport of farmhands to the fields and making it harder to obtain supplies of plant protection products. The closure of restaurants and the subsequent decline in tourists during the summer season led to declined demand, lowering prices of farmers’ produce. On top of that, farmers from other EU member states, like Poland for instance, received much higher subsidies than those from Bulgaria, allowing them to sell in our market at extremely low prices.
Gyurov added that the main problem with the aid in 2020 was the regulation that allowed only farmers who have received subsidies during previous two years to apply for COVID-related aid packages.
In terms of impact, farmers were affected differently by the pandemic, depending on their product, and a set of changing variations throughout the year. In an April 2020 report, the US Department of Agriculture noted that at the start of the pandemic, retail chains reported an increase in sales of more durable and cheaper goods such as rice, flour and others. Consumers shopped cheaply and “conservatively” out of caution or lack of funds, the report said.
But with summer, it was reported that suppliers of fresh produce witnessed a steady drop in demand of more expensive seasonal products like strawberries and cherries, affected by decline of tourism and hotel and restaurant activity and consumers’ conservatism. Similarly, duck farmers and others catering to Western European market with more costly products have been severely affected, unlike growers of grains and other essential crops in general.
Small family businesses who relied on European clients paid a hefty price, as the search for new markets is challenging. A saffron producer , who lost foreign clients and took to Facebook in search of new ones, wrote:
We grow saffron, which we sell in the foreign market, but at the moment, this situation is making it difficult for us and therefore we have a fair amount left.
Casey Angelova. Photo: screenshot from the film Culinary Crimes, director Alexandra Val, fair use.
Casey Angelova, an American running a small farm with her Bulgarian husband near Kyustendil, a mountainous border city in the West of Bulgaria, is trying to keep her family business afloat. She said:
In the last two years, we have been working to register a distillery. We were in the middle of the process when the pandemic started. After the March 2020 lockdown, certain government agencies could no longer operate at full capacity. Our goal was to create cherry brandy from Kyustendil cherries. However, as our facility could not be inspected due to restrictions, we were unable to obtain a license in time to harvest cherries in June-July.
Angelova and her husband lost a year of effort and investment to create the brandy product and brand, but had to pause their distillery project.
Now the family is trying to recoup its losses through other investments. They began growing truffles, produce soap and run related tourism activities. In October and November 2020, at times of relaxed lockdown measures, they started organizing truffle visits, allowing people to join in the search for truffles with dogs, followed by truffles tasting.
However, since truffles and soap are not considered “traditional” products, the business was not eligible for state COVID-19 support.
Humans and dogs look for truffles in Bulgaria. Photo by Casey Angelova, used with permission.
Accordingly, and despite government efforts, many farmers continue to struggle. As Nidal Shaban, an expert on greenhouse vegetables production at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and a university lecturer, noted:
“Many of these producers did not apply due to the cumbersome bureaucracy of the district offices. The main disadvantage of receiving these benefits is that it deprives young producers with less than three years of experience, when in fact they need more support during a pandemic”.

author: Nevena Borisova


text:
Critically acclaimed Bosnian film stirs up the barely buried ghosts of Srebrenica · Global Voices
Mirza Hota

Screenshot from the film Quo Vadis, Aida? Photo from Wikipedia based on the clip posted at cineuropa.org by film director Jasmila Žbanić. Fair use.
Danish director Tomas Vinterberg's film Another Round won Best Foreign Language Film at this year's Academy Awards, but it was not the one most talked about online. Not in the Balkans, anyway. That honor goes to Bosnian director Jasmila Žbanić's 2020 film Quo Vadis, Aida?, a surprisingly sharp and unsentimental film about the 1995 genocide carried out by the Bosnian Serb Army of Republika Srpska in Srebrenica.
Considered a favorite by many critics, the movie ultimately lost out on the Oscar but it has clearly made an impact in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as regionally and internationally, LA Times’ Kenneth Turan, for example:
Starting to make my way through the foreign language Oscar shortlist and Bosnia's emotionally and morally shattering “Quo Vadis, Aida” blew me away. There may be other contenders as good, but none will be better.
— Kenneth Turan (@KennethTuran) March 3, 2021
Not surprisingly, the Serbian actors, Jasna Đuričić, who plays the titular Aida, and Boris Isaković (as convicted war criminal general Ratko Mladić) have both come under attack from extremists online for agreeing to take part in a film about a crime the vast majority of people in Serbia deny took place.
Serb extremists spammed various film sites like IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes with bad reviews in a smear campaign that mirrored their reaction to Angelina Jolie's 2012 debut film, In the Land of Blood and Honey. Jolie's film also dealt with the horrors of the Bosnian war, in particular, the rape camps run by Bosnian Serb forces where Bosniak and other non-Serb women, young girls, and also men and boys, were sexually and physically abused. In an interview with The Guardian, Jolie recalled that she and her cast had car windows smashed and were subjected to online smears, threats, hacked phone lines, and more.
This is part of a bigger problem, as the culture of denial is deeply rooted in Serbia and Republika Srpska. As former chief prosecutor of the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Serge Brammetz pointed out in an op-ed last year:
Leaders in the region have publicly denied the genocide, even calling Srebrenica a hoax and a lie. War criminals convicted by the ICTY are often hailed as heroes by prominent figures, while victims’ suffering is ignored, denied and disparaged.
Brammetz also pointed to the fact that a large number of suspected perpetrators of genocide—including political leaders and military commanders—have found a haven in Serbia.
That culture of denial also meant that Žbanić's film couldn't be shot in Srebrenica itself as the town's current mayor, Mladen Grujčić is a genocide denier. Most of the film was, therefore, shot in Mostar.
Žbanić had a similar experience filming For Those Who Can Tell No Tales in Višegrad in 2012. The film is based on the play Seven Kilometers North-East by Australian actress Kym Vercoe and her stay in Višegrad and the Vilina Vlas hotel and spa resort. Both Višegrad and Vilina Vlas have become notorious as sites of some of the worst atrocities during the Bosnian war, with Vilina Vlas being used as a detention and rape camp by the Bosnian Serb forces.
According to Žbanić and Vercoe, the film crew did not tell the people of the town what they were filming:
We were advised by some not to do that. One of our screenwriters, Zoran, had to pretend to be a Serbian director shooting a completely different film.
Quo Vadis Aida? is based in part on the book Under The UN Flag: The International Community and the Srebrenica Genocide by Hasan Nuhanović. As an employee of the UN and the Dutch Nuhanović survived the genocide while his brother, mother and father were not allowed by the Dutch to stay on the UN base. After the Bosnian Serb forces overran the base Hasan's family was taken away, never to be seen again.
Nuhanović and other survivors had criticized some of the decisions made by Žbanić, saying that the reality of Srebrenica was even worse than what was portrayed on the screen, including some scenes at the end of the film, They were also disappointed that the film didn't show a broader picture of the Bosnian genocide in the Drina Valley. Žbanić, on the other hand, defended her decisions by saying she had to leave out a great deal in order not to lose the audience's concentration.
I had deliberately avoided watching this movie for as long as I could despite the fact that I have spent the last two decades studying the Bosnian genocide, reading countless books, testimonies, trial verdicts, watching footage, and writing about the horrors of the genocide in three languages. I simply couldn't face up to it until last weekend when I sat down to watch it, which says something about the power of the medium.
Quo Vadis, Aida? is certainly Žbanić's best work, but it is incredibly difficult to watch. The film works so well because it focuses on the fear and hopes of those trapped at the UN Base in Potočari, fear because they know what the Republika Srpska army, police forces and paramilitaries had done before. Hopes because they saw the UN as the last refuge. For the viewer, it's gut-wrenching because we know what's going to happen.
The Dutch UN troops are correctly shown as mostly well intentioned but ultimately ineffective and unwilling to resist Mladić. As American journalist David Rohde pointed out, the Dutch soldiers could have done more, taken a firmer stand against Mladić's forces after Srebrenica fell, using other instances when the UN stepped in to protect civilians as an example. Instead, the Dutch stepped aside and allowed Mladić to overrun their base. Days after the fall of Srebrenica, footage appeared of the Dutch forces in Zagreb celebrating and relieved to have got out. This was taking place while people who sought shelter on their base in Potočari were being executed.
“Quo Vadis, Aida” is the most difficult film I've seen in many, many years. I had to stop various times. Above all, it is a film every Dutch ??person should see. Every. single. one. Because: it is not incidental what we did there. Or what we did not do. #Oscars2021 #Srebrenica pic.twitter.com/4dSC7xXqdi
— David de Bruijn (@dmdebruijn) April 26, 2021
One of the best documentaries I've seen on the genocide, the German Sky Above Srebrenica (Himmel über Srebrenica), details meticulously the lead up to the fall of the town, the airstrikes that were supposed to stop Mladić's forces but that never came and the ultimate surrender of the UN and the “international community” in Srebrenica and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The documentary ends with Mladić seeing off the Dutch with presents while the executions were underway.
For those who feel Jasmila Žbanić did not focus enough on the betrayal and the “international community,” I warmly recommend the above documentary. Still, what Žbanić does in her movie is extraordinary and it has rightly been recognized by critics and viewers around the world. Credit should be given where credit is due. By focusing on the fate of the victims, on family members being separated knowing they will never see one another again, and the plight of a mother desperately trying to save her family, her sons and husband from certain death, Žbanić shows what genocide looks like, what it means to lose everyone you love, to be uprooted from everything you know, to be left with only memories and sorrow.

author: Mirza Hota


text:
Nepal appeals for international support amidst sweeping second COVID-19 wave · Global Voices
Benju Lwagun

Prayer wheels in an ancient temple in Gokarneshwor, Nepal. Photo by Bishal Sapkota. Used under a Pexels License.
Nepal's second wave of the coronavirus has proven devastating, prompting the country to reach out for international support as its health infrastructure crumbles under the pressure. On Tuesday May 11th, The Asian country of around 29 million people recorded its highest infection rate, with 9317 cases, along its highest fatality rate, of 225 deaths in the last 24 hours.
Journalist Tarun Timalsina tweets:
Nepal has now surpassed India in covid deaths per capita. Please help a country in crisis: pic.twitter.com/8WmPDLIzQl
— Tarun Timalsina (@timalsinatarun) May 13, 2021
Hospitals in Nepal are overwhelmed and intensive care units are flooded with critical cases of COVID-19 patients. As hospitals are running out of oxygen supplies and medicines, patients are being turned away.
Subhash Ghimire, Editor in Chief of Republica Nepal tweeted:
Helplessness you feel when you can’t do anything for your friends & families who call you for ICU, oxygen and medicine! It’s a total mess. #COVID19 #crisis #Nepal
— Subhash Ghimire (@subhash580) May 11, 2021
IT professional Ujwal Dhakal tweeted:
Hospital System has been crashed in Nepal! Many of them are out of oxygen, beds & essential medicines/kits #StayHome
— ujwal dhakal (@areyoubumfuzzle) May 12, 2021
Nepal has been in totallockdown since April 29th, which has been extended until May 27. However, while international and domestics flights have been suspended, surprisingly, Nepal has kept Kathmandu-Delhi flights operational, despite the high risk. India too is grappling to control the pandemic, with an Indian variant of the virus raising concern in many countries for having the ability to spread “like wildfire“.
Vaccine Rollout in Nepal
In terms of vaccine rollout, Nepal was off to a good start. In January, the country received one million doses of Covishield vaccine from India as a grant and bought another one million doses the following month. Covishield, which was produced by the Serum Institute of India, was developed by Oxford University and AstraZeneca.
In March, Nepal also received another 348,000 doses of Covishield, which covered roughly 20 percent of Nepal's population as part of the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) program that was committed to supplying around 13 million doses for free.
As soon as vaccine supplies were made available, the first phase of the vaccination was rolled out in January with the support of government and non-government efforts. With vaccination rollout continuing till March 5, 438,000 people received the first dose and 370,000 were able to get the second dose of Covishield vaccine subsequently. The second phase started on March 7 for the citizens above 55 years of age and it gained much response as almost 1.3 million got the first dose of the Covishield vaccine.
However, as India struggles with COVID-19 and banned all vaccine export, Nepal's own vaccination efforts came to a halt. A shipment of one million dosages of Covishield vaccine that was due to arrive in April, never came through, and its unlikely that Nepal will receive it anytime soon.
China has also extended support to provide vaccines to Nepal. In March, China sent 8,00,000 doses of Vero Cell made by Beijing Institute of Biological Products Co. Ltd, under Sinopharm. The Vero Cell vaccination started on April 7 for the 18-59 age group which was temporarily suspended on April 29 as a result of the lockdown. So far, 289,000 people have received the first dose of Vero Cell vaccine and they expect to receive their second doses starting May 16, 2021. The vaccination for the rest of the population remain uncertain.
PM's ‘Under control’ comments trigger criticism
Despite the new variant killing hundreds of people daily and an already-debilitated health care system faltering, and resources in both the public and private services growing scarcer every day, officials’ are coming out with reassuring statements, triggering outrage among the public.
In an interview with the CNN earlier in May, Prime Minister KP Oli stated that the current situation of Nepal is under control.
Former public servant Krishna Gyawali tweeted:
A damage control initiative. Too late too little.
Should have come out before the CNN interview.
But better late than never!https://t.co/4xhf8ZGxoB
— Krishna Gyawali (@ruru_krishna) May 10, 2021
Meanwhile, Health professional Yub Raj Sedhai tweeted:
It's utterly disgusting to see the Prime Minister discounting a humanitarian crisis. People are forced to asphyxiate simply due to a lack of oxygen. Medical supplies, infrastructure, & workforce are already outnumbered.https://t.co/WAEqHjFGfs via @YouTube
— Yub Raj Sedhai, MD (@YubSedhai) May 10, 2021
Days later, PM Oli corrected his statement via an Op-Ed with the Guardian Magazine urging the international communities for support to end the COVID-19 crisis in Nepal.
Many Nepalese have started initiatives to help those most in need. Health workers and young people, even those overseas, are offering or funding free services to patients who stay at home, feeding the homeless as well as providing COVID-related information. One such example is the Nepal Covid-19 Support Facebook group, which was started by a number of activists, including medical professionals. The group has crowdsourced information including those of hospitals, ambulances, COVID-19 patients who are self-isolating, as well as help answer queries by medical professionals without taking any service charge. It also published a COVID-19 service directory that provides helpful information to patients and their families who are in need, without any fees.
Over 22,000 people have also signed a petition requesting that the US gives Nepal a fraction of the 60 million vaccines Washington DC said it would share with other nations. Nepalese living overseas are also trying to reach out to governments in their countries of  residence to ask for support for Nepal, while the Non-Resident Nepali Association in Oman has just sent 600 oxygen cylinders to Nepal.
Struck by a rapidly-deteriorating situation, the public is debating issues like the government's inefficiency, as well as the international community's approach to equitable distribution of the COVID-19 vaccines, especially in developing nations such as Nepal, which is struggling to secure the required numbers of vaccines, while many developed countries have secured far more vaccines than their need.
Sara Beysolow Nyanti, the United Nations Resident Coordinator in Nepal tweeted:
Nepal has not been able to secure vaccines for even 20% of those who need to be vaccinated. #Nepal should be prioritised at the top. I appeal to the countries which can spare vaccine to send them to Nepal immediately. https://t.co/AHD2zUc0Eu@UN_Nepal @WHONepal @unicef_nepal
— Sara Beysolow Nyanti (@NyantiSara) May 12, 2021

author: Benju Lwagun


text:
Armenian parliament dissolved, paving way for June elections · Global Voices
OC Media

Mehr News Agency via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 4.0
This article was first published on OC Media's website. An edited version is republished here via a content partnership agreement.
On May 10, Armenia’s Parliament was dissolved after formally failing to appoint a prime minister, paving the way for new elections in June.
Representatives held the second and final round of votes to elect a prime minister after Nikol Pashinyan resigned on April 25. The PM's resignation and parliament’s failure to appoint a successor were the required formalities for snap elections to occur.
Pashinyan agreed to hold early elections after reaching an accord with the two opposition parties with representation in Parliament, the Prosperous Armenia and Bright Armenia parties.
Opposition both inside and outside of parliament have accused Pashinyan of a failure of governance before, during, and after the country’s defeat in the Second Nagorno-Karabakh War. Following the Russian-brokered deal that brought an end to the war, thousands of protesters have come out to the streets calling on Pashinyan to step aside.
Pashinyan’s post-revolutionary popularity has seen a decline following the war, with the PM's tours to the regions frequently being met with protests and disapproval.
However, opinion polls suggest that Pashinyan and his My Step bloc remain by far the most popular political force in the country.
In a poll by Gallup International Armenia conducted in late April, 27 percent said they would vote for My Step, down from 32 percent a month earlier. The next highest rating went to Armenia's second president, Robert Kocharyan, whose support rose to 8 percent. No other party polled higher than the 5 percent threshold to enter parliament while almost half said they would not vote for any party.
Some in the opposition have warned that snap elections will not be held in a free and fair environment.
During the special parliamentary session on May 10, Pashinyan, who had remained as acting prime minister, stated that it would be impossible to rig the new elections as the “public won’t allow anyone to falsify the results.”
Snap elections held in 2018, the first after Pashinyan was swept to power in the peaceful revolution, were widely considered to be the most transparent and fair elections in the country’s post-independence history.
On May 9, several thousand supporters of Robert Kocharyan rallied in Yerevan, where the former president promised to “establish a dignified peace in Armenia.”
The rally took place alongside the ceremonial declaration of Kocharyan’s Armenia Alliance, along with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) and Rebirth Armenia parties.
Kocharyan last spoke at a pre-election rally back in 2003. During the address to supporters on May 9, he said that after leaving power he did not think he would ever return to politics.
He said that Armenia’s defeat in the war, security concerns in Armenia’s southern Syunik Province, the fate of Nagorno-Karabakh, and Armenia’s economic decline had changed his mind.
Kocharyan blamed the Pashinyan government for all of the problems the country is now facing, and said that ousting him was critical for all opposition parties.
Kocharyan also referred to an offer that he declined from first president Levon Ter-Petrosyan for all three former presidents to unite against Pashinyan. He said that he was ready to cooperate with them to oust Pashinyan but that this did not necessitate allying with them.
“I suggest, yes, both the first and the third presidents fight together against this government, fight every day if they intend to fight, then we will succeed. This will be everyone's success; I will put it this way: forming an alliance is just one of the techniques of that struggle,” Kocharyan stated.
Since Pashinyan came to power Kocharyan has faced several criminal charges.
In late March, the Constitutional Court ruled that charges of “overthrowing the constitutional order” levied against him were unconstitutional, throwing out the case.
He was charged over his role in the deadly crackdown on post-election protests in March 2008. The dispersal of protesters, which saw the deployment of the army to the streets of Yerevan, left ten people dead.
Kocharyan has also been charged with accepting a bribe of around $3 million; the trial is underway.

author: OC Media


text:
Demolition of iconic dragon mosaic in Almaty stirs debate on urban art in Kazakhstan · Global Voices
Paolo Sorbello

The “dragon”, a mosaic by Vladimir Tverdokhlebov, was torn down during a remodeling in the center of Almaty. Photo by Anara Forrester-Tverdokhlebova, used with permission.
When an Almaty business owner razed the building of a traditional Thai restaurant to build a new establishment, the incident didn’t go unnoticed by Kazakhstan’s citizenry.
Built in the early 2000s in questionable taste, the restaurant’s façade was adorned with the mosaic of a fiery red dragon that became a landmark of Almaty’s city center. It neighbored the iconic Hotel Kazakhstan, for 30 years the tallest building in Central Asia, and was regarded as a symbol of stability in a rapidly changing urban landscape.
As soon as word spread that the building had been rented to Ruslan Abishev, the owner of the restaurant chain La Barca, local residents launched a petition for him to spare the dragon. Activists advocating for the preservation of public art threw their support behind it. Abishev initially promised the dragon would stay.
However, on April 17, residents woke up to photos of the mosaic shattered to the ground. “We wanted to dismantle the panels as carefully as possible, but, unfortunately, it did not go as smoothly as [planned],” Abishev told the local press.
That night, unknown activists spray-painted “Cancel La Barca” on the plastic around the scaffoldings of the construction site.
Anara Forrester, the daughter of the mosaic’s author, posted photos on Facebook of the destroyed dragon and received an outpour of support. “My 77-year-old mother was sending me pictures from the site where my father had gone to talk to the workers in charge of the demolition,” she told Global Voices in an interview. “A security guard, in the end, escorted my father away from the site.”
The “dragon” in rubbles. (Photo: Anara Forrester-Tverdokhlebova, used with permission).
Already in March, warned from her father, Forrester had posted an appeal on Facebook against the demolition of the mosaic. Since then, Forrester and her family received confusing messages from La Barca's management. “At first, one of their managers called my father to reassure him that they will work together to remove the mosaic without destroying it,” she said. “Yet later on his tone changed and said he did not have time for the procedure and arrogantly dismissed my father’s plea, saying ‘it’s just a dragon’.”
According to Forrester, her father approached the construction workers on the day of the demolition in an attempt to arrange an appropriate dismantling of the mosaic. Unmoved by the artist’s requests, the workers proceeded to take it down.
She added that the security at the construction site was beefed up to six guards already in the evening on the day of her post.
Management at La Barca has not replied to Global Voices’ requests for comment.
The dragon mosaic’s author, 84-year-old Vladimir Tverdokhlebov, is one of Almaty’s most prolific monumental artists and mosaicists. Born in Russia, he was sent to Kazakhstan in the late 1960s to work on public commissions, mostly in Almaty, then called Alma-Ata.
In the 1970s and 1980s, he reached his creative peak, establishing the “Oner Art Combine”, working in connection with other masters of the various crafts involved in public art, says Dennis Keen, the founder of Monumental Almaty, a project dedicated to documenting and preserving Soviet public art. Keen also translated and subtitled the documentary “Monumental Art of Kazakhstan,” available on YouTube.
“Their ‘Oner Art Combine’ worked similarly to a factory. Tverdokhlebov would pull together the most professional work brigades, with talented designers and craftsmen,” Keen told Global Voices.
Be it as an instrument of propaganda, a description of a building’s purpose, or just a pleasant composition adorning a bus stop, monumental art was a timeless feature of the cities of the Soviet Union.
But since after its demise in 1991, and amid a dire economic crisis and a diminishing interest in public spaces, Kazakh authorities have neglected these murals and buildings. Over the past years, old cinemas, malls, and houses have all been gradually disappearing.
In 2015, the Alatau Cinema, in central Almaty, was demolished to make space for Central Asia’s first McDonald’s store. The nostalgic public comments by the elderly, who lamented the demolition, were somewhat matched by the enthusiasm of the youth and families lining up along Tole Bi street on the fast-food branch’s opening day.
In December 2020, a 35-year-old mosaic in the southern city of Shymkent was earmarked for demolition, drawing outrage on social media. After it was demolished, city officials installed billboards in its place. When questioned by journalists and activists, officials said: “The mosaic on this building’s façade is not considered as holding historical and cultural value.” Uzakbay Koshkinbayev, the author, had died months earlier. Ironically, his mosaic read: “Preserve cultural monuments”.
The context of mixed emotions between nostalgia and modernity is what inspires “Take it down immediately!,” a survey of the most iconic buildings and monuments of Kazakhstan’s large cities. It regularly attracts thousands of votes.
In an interview with the independent news outlet Vlast.kz on the future of public art installations in Kazakhstan, Abdumatalip Akhmetov, chairman of the Shymkent Artist Union, said that “the fate of these mosaics depends on the owners of the territory,” as long as they are not listed on the government-approved list of “sites and objects of historical and cultural heritage,” which is enshrined in a regularly updated 2019 law.
In her interview with Global Voices, Forrester echoed Akhmetov.
The fact that people rushed to defend the mosaic has something to do with the artistic value of the dragon, but I think the anger is mostly directed to the lack of care for the urban environment, be it on the part of the private business that demolishes a mosaic or from the side of the government which has yet to regulate the fate of such public art.
While mosaics and facades are disappearing, the debate about the preservation of the urban landscape will continue in Kazakhstan.
According to Forrester, it would be beneficial to foster this discussion through a regulatory body that would take into account the interest of the community. “The dragon, much like several features of Almaty’s urban environment, was taken for granted. It was never regulated or protected from the whims of business owners or private citizens, as it would be, for example, in the West.”
An earlier version of this story incorrectly related the interviewee Anara Forrester as saying her father approached the construction workers on the day of the removal – in fact she said he approached them  “on the day of the demolition”.
Forrester also specified that “Already in March, warned from her father, Forrester had posted an appeal on Facebook against the demolition of the mosaic.”

author: Paolo Sorbello


text:
Fifteen Georgian political parties sign joint agreement on queer rights · Global Voices
OC Media

Signed document. Photo published on Tbilisi Pride Facebook page.
This story was first published on OC Media's website. A lightly edited version is republished here under a content-sharing agreement.
Fifteen political parties in Georgia have signed a statement outlining their commitment to protecting the rights of queer people.
The agreement, which was drawn up by Tbilisi Pride, was signed by most major opposition parties including the United National Movement (UNM), European Georgia, Lelo, Republican Party, Strategy Aghmashnabeli, and both Girchi parties. Aleko Elisashvili’s Citizens party, the Labour Party, as well as MPs from the European Socialists party, did not sign the document.
The statement was also not signed by the ruling Georgian Dream party.
The signatories agreed to use “all mechanisms at their disposal [to] fight to eliminate discrimination and violence against queer people.”
They also vowed to “protect the freedom of assembly and expression of every citizen, regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity.”
Attempts by queer rights activists to demonstrate for their rights in recent years have repeatedly been attacked by conservative counter-demonstrators. In 2019, Georgia’s first queer pride march could not go ahead as planned after the Interior Ministry announced that the police would not protect them.
The statement also said that signatories would “not allow the stirring up of social strife and the use of hate speech in the political process on the grounds of homophobia.”
Speaking to OC Media, the director of Tbilisi Pride, Giorgi Tabagari, said that the signing of the document was a turning point in Georgian politics.
“For the first time, political parties have taken an effective step towards protecting the rights of LGBT people. This agreement has no legal force and is symbolic, but it is a very important step,” Tabagari said.
Tabagari said that their group approached all political parties in Georgia and had been in communication with Georgian Dream about the statement for half a year.
“For six months we communicated with many leaders of the ruling party,” he said. “Unfortunately, representatives of Georgian Dream did not agree to sign this document, although they did not explicitly refuse,” he said.
“We hope that the Georgian Dream will change its position and sign this document,” Tabagari added.
A representative of Georgian Dream agreed to comment on why the party did not sign the document, after which they became unreachable by phone.
Despite repeated inquiries by OC Media, Georgian Dream refused to comment on why the party did not sign the document.


text:
From child refugee to journalist: How Liberian Tecee Boley paved her own path in media · Global Voices
Mark Neywon Mengonfia

Liberian journalist, Tecee Boley. Image used with permission.
It took many years for women journalists in Liberia to take on leadership positions as editors, directors of news, and managers. Editors would often tell them, “This area is not for women,” or “That is a man’s beat (assignment), so women cannot go there,” according to Liberian journalist Tecee Boley, 36, who has worked in print and digital media as a reporter for a little over sixteen years.
As of 2016, women were only 13 to 16 percent of media practitioners according to the Internews report “Women and the Media in Liberia: The Uneven Course.”
At first, women were only used as reporters limited to some assignments, like DJing or reading announcements between breaks, until recently when women started advancing themselves educationally and taking on the challenges to go toe-to-toe with their male counterparts in the newsroom and other sectors in Liberian society.
Boley is one of many female journalists in Liberia who has faced these barriers. But she reached the top of her profession not because she sat down waiting for someone to babysit her. Boley, who lives in Monrovia, Liberia, has written for World Policy Journal, Reuters, World Vision Report, and United Nations Radio, now ECOWAS Radio.
Boley studied Journalism and Media Studies at Wits-University of Witwatersrand. In 2013, she earned a degree in Economics at the United Methodist University (UMU). She also holds an accounting degree from the Stella Maris Polytechnic.
Born December 25, 1984, just years before civil unrest would break out, Boley did not enjoy her childhood like many other children in other parts of the world. This was because she and her parents were running from being killed by rebel groups who ravaged the country during that period.
“I lost my father to the war,” she told Global Voices in Monrovia as she recalled her childhood. Her father died due to the conflict that targeted certain tribal groupings in Liberia.
Liberia has had two periods of civil unrest, which led to the killing of hundreds of thousands of Liberians and the looting of properties.
The First Liberian Civil War was an internal conflict from 1989 until 1997. The ethnocultural antagonisms between and among the ethnic groups Gios, Manos, Krahns and Mandingos led to the first civil war in that West African nation.
The conflict officially ended in 1997 after military intervention by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and United Nations. This led to a ceasefire and a peace deal, after about 150,000 civilian deaths and 850,000 refugees were displaced into neighbouring countries.
The second Liberian Civil War began in 1999 when a rebel group, Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD), emerged in northern Liberia to fight against the government of Charles Taylor, who was elected president at the end of the first conflict. Then, another rebel group, the Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL), emerged in the south in 2003, launching another challenge to Taylor's rule.
Thousands of people were displaced in what has become known as the Siege of Monrovia in 2003 when the rebel group LURD fought with government forces in the capital.
Women and children were used as combatants. Those who were fortunate to flee to neighbouring countries did not spend their childhood as normal children would during the days of peace. This is the story of Boley.
“As a child, I saw horrible things,” she reflected, during an interview she granted me in the Liberian capital Monrovia.
She narrated that during her days as a child in refugee camps in Ivory Coast shifting from one camp to the other, she observed that only men would gather around what she then believed was a ‘box.’ Only later did she realize it was a radio and that the men were listening to BBC to ascertain what was happening back home and other parts of the world.
Boley then realized that radio was a powerful tool for advocacy and made up her mind to make the maximum use of it. She had earlier planned to take on a different career path such as a banker, doctor, or another profession a child would dream of during their early days before the conflict.
Boley said that she decided to become a journalist in the camp in Ivory Coast, when her childhood friend was raped and died of the injuries.
Boley then took up journalism to enable her to tell stories about children like her friend, and to move stakeholders to take action.
Liberian journalist Tecee Boley. Image used with her permission.
During her days in active field reporting as a journalist, before transitioning to public relations, Boley worked with FrontPage Africa, one of Liberia’s well-respected newspapers as its senior reporter.
She always wears a smile across her face, but when it comes to being professional, she always meets her deadlines. As a reporter, she loves to excavate deeper.
Boley focuses her attention on thorough research. “It is good to always go beyond what the newsmaker tells you. Do your research. Dig deeper and deeper,” she said.
For ten years, Boley served as New Narratives (NN) Women’s Reporting Africa fellow. At NN, she further honed her interest in reporting on women and girls.
Motivated by the traumatic experiences during her childhood that led to the death of her early childhood friend, she broke stories on the rise of child rape and unsafe abortions, which prompted United Nations (UN) investigations into the use of child prostitutes by UN peacekeepers.
Her work advocated for laws designed to protect women and children during the administration of former Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. In 2011, her efforts bore fruit when an act to establish the children’s law was announced by the Liberian Legislature to protect women and children from being violated.
In 2011, Boley was awarded the Development Journalism Award by the Press Union of Liberia (PUL).
In 2011, Bolay receiving the Development Journalism Award from the Press Union of Liberia in 2011. Image used with permission.
Frank Sainworla, a media trainer and one of Liberia’s outstanding journalists spoke highly of Boley in an interview recounting their days at a Catholic radio station VERITAS, now Radio Maria.
“Tecee is well-rounded, versatile, passionate, and professionally aggressive. With a strong academic background, she is smartly able to blend theory with practice,” Sainworla said.
Friends who have worked with her have always spoken well of her especially when it comes to how she carries herself as a journalist, according to Sainworla.
As a Catholic, Boley believes in a higher power greater than everyone. She dreams of a world where people love each other and those who have perpetrated injustices against others must answer for their actions.
Boley believes in the rule of law as the panacea of solving the inequality in Liberian society. For this reason, Boley has enrolled at the Louis Arthur Grimes School of Law to serve her country as a human rights lawyer.
Boley wants to see justice for ordinary women and poor girls in Liberia to accomplish her quest for justice for her friend who was abused to death in the refugee camp years ago.

author: Mark Neywon Mengonfia


text:
Protecting its people and preserving democracy: Germany’s pandemic predicament · Global Voices
Taylor Whitsell

Germans exercising their right to free speech in a protest against COVID-19 measures in Frankfurt, June 7, 2020. Photo by photoheuristic.info via Wikipedia, CC BY 2.0.
In early 2020, Germans expressed significant support for Chancellor Angela Merkel’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. A consensus initially emerged across supporters of most parties that the state was handling an extraordinary situation appropriately, with trust in the government rising to 80 per cent in April 2020. That consensus, however, had wavered by December 2020, as many Germans began to feel “Maskenmüde” (mask-tired) and frustrated by a rollout of a vaccine campaign characterized by shortages and lengthy bureaucratic procedures.
Adding to German citizens’ frustration was their shock at the “Maskenaffäre” (“face mask scandal”), revealed in March, in which two members of the conservative ruling party—Nikolas Löbel (of the CDU) and Georg Nüßlein (of its Bavarian branch CSU)—were found to have cashed in, to the tune of more than 910,000 euros in commissions (jointly) (almost 1.1 million U.S. dollars), through ordering personal protective equipment (PPE).
By spring 2021, a significant portion of the population had begun to question the restrictions imposed by the government to contain the spread of the virus. During several demonstrations, including one in March numbering 20,000 people in the town of Kassel, protesters claimed that freedom of speech had been sacrificed in the fight against the virus. Opinion polls speak to the polarization around the issue: around one-quarter of the population believes that the restrictions are going too far, although those who think they are not going far enough have also grown between January and April 2021.
Pointing to the closure of restaurants and hotels or the compulsory mask-wearing, those who are taking to the streets argue that their constitutional freedoms are being disproportionately restricted, and call for such measures to be put to an end. Meanwhile, members of the Bundestag (German parliament), particularly those from the liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP), demanded greater involvement in the political process, quoting a threat to democratic principles in the form of alleged executive over-reach. The FDP’s Marco Buschmann, in a letter to the chancellor’s office, asked for more parliamentary debate and warned that the restrictions of March 2021 would fail if politicians did not gain societal trust.
The surge in such protests suggests a tension at play between different interpretations of free speech: one that emphasizes the individual's ability to say anything, regardless of the offense that it might cause, and another that focuses on equal opportunity among all citizens to participate in public debate.
Recent demonstrations suggest that the former understanding, the one that allows the individual complete freedom, is the one held by parts of the German population. Protesters see increased government action on the coronavirus as a violation of their individual right to control their own lives, based on their own opinions and judgments. Undoubtedly, a healthy democracy requires active citizens, who have the right to gather in public and express their opinions. Restrictions of these fundamental freedoms are serious interventions that can only be temporary if they are not to harm democracy.
Such attitudes were expressed by a fraction of those who took part in a January survey conducted by the Berlin-based Centre for East European and International Studies and included more than 2,000 respondents, aged 18-64, from all across Germany.
When asked whether freedom of expression had been sacrificed in the fight against the pandemic, a sizable share of 11 per cent of respondents said this was entirely the case, while another 18 per cent thought it was somewhat the case. This minority tended to be individuals with lower levels of education, who, according to the survey data, were more likely to be unemployed, and who expressed lower levels of trust in state institutions and traditional media.
Responses to the question, ‘Do you think freedom of expression has been given up in the course of combating the corona pandemic?'—11.2%, yes fully; 18.2%, rather yes; 24.8%, rather not; 39.7%, not at all, and 6.1%, don't know. Data from ZOIS survey of 2,023 Germans aged 18-65.
However, these respondents do tend to trust online media, which can reinforce or radicalize an individual's views as a result of the rise in misinformation and “echo chambers” that have accompanied the digitisation of media. Research has shown that, although trusting online news sources does not automatically imply less critical news consumption, people who feel disenfranchised from society, are often more susceptible to misinformation.
German views on freedom of expression in the context of the pandemic also reflect the country's ongoing East-West divide. According to the survey, those who live in the east of the country, in the former Eastern Bloc country of the German Democratic Republic, are significantly more likely to believe that freedom of expression has been given up, whereas those in the regions that formerly made up West Germany are significantly less likely to agree. There is no statistical difference for residents of the formerly divided city of Berlin.
Age also plays an interesting role in the question of freedom of expression during the pandemic. From age 18 to approximately 40, Germans are generally more likely to believe that their voices are being suppressed. Germans aged 40 to 65 are on average decreasingly likely to share that impression. This view was also particularly pronounced among male respondents.
‘Freedom without a mask’ banner in German at a protest in Biberach an der Riss, October 25, 2020. Photo by Wald-Burger8 via Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 4.0.
Placing recent protests against COVID-19 restrictions in the context of “freedom’’ demonstrates the potential danger of invoking a term rich with implications: in times of crisis such as these, ideological fault lines can begin to crack and widen into gulfs.
French political scientist Jean-Yves Camus alluded to this tension when warning about the appeal of the extreme right across Europe for young people: “The far-right understood well that the younger generations … are attached to a freedom of expression and individual freedom that goes beyond the consensus that existed in the 1960s, 1970s, and which was based on the idea of a highly hierarchical society.”
It is undeniable that the population needs to be protected from COVID-19. But governments must be aware that restrictive policies can exacerbate existing social and political divisions, and require the support and trust of their citizens. Failing to recognize this could spell trouble for the health of the people, as well as democracy.
DISCLAIMER: Félix Krawatzek and Taylor Whitsell are members of the team that conducted the Centre for East European and International Studies survey. This is new data and more information will emerge as the team continues to analyse responses in the coming months.

author: Taylor Whitsell


text:
Women in Science: Theologian Regina Polak on interfaith conflicts and womanhood · Global Voices
Fausia S. Abdul

Regina Polak. Photo by: Joseph Krpelan, www.derknopfdruecker.com, used with permission.
As part of its focus on women in science, Global Voices spoke to Associate Professor Regina Polak Ph.D, head of the Department for Practical Theology at the Catholic-Theological Faculty at the University of Vienna, and Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairperson-in-Office on Combating Racism, Xenophobia, and Discrimination.
Founded by Duke Rudolph IV in 1365 and the oldest university in the German-speaking world, the University of Vienna opened itself to the enrolment of women in the academic year of 1897/98 limited to the philosophy faculty. Only three women enrolled. Now, depending on the discipline – one can speak of almost equal enrollment. The university continues to work on advancing gender equality by identifying and publicly discussing issues such as the decrease of women graduates of doctoral studies in recent decades. Its analysis has indicated structural problems such as conservative hierarchy and unequal pay women have to deal with when wanting to reach the highest levels of the academic career ladder.
Stadttempel, the main synagogue of Vienna. Photo by Wikipedia user Bella47, CC BY-SA 3.0 at.
Touching on the challenges she faced, and the support she got, to hold onto her academic career as a woman and a mother, Polak also speaks in her interview of her research, which integrates interfaith and intercultural encounters in society including racism and all other forms of group-related hostilities which migrants have to deal with when entering European society.
Polak is convinced of the importance of dialogue and the duty of Christians to foster this. With 2021 being a year of hope and recovery, communication and understanding are of utmost importance, especially in the light of the current challenges in Christian-Jewish and Christian-Muslim relations.
Global Voices (GV): What do you think is the biggest challenge, and solution, when it comes to working on inter-religious issues?
RP (Regina Polak): I think dealing with the question of truth is the biggest challenge – the conviction that what he or she believes in and what he or she bases his whole life on, is true. This is a great intellectual, psychological, and above all spiritual challenge, which can be quite painful and irritating. Respect and real friendship forms a long-lasting solution.
GV: How do you think one can overcome animosity against followers of different religions?
RP: Structured encounters, authentic dialogue following rules, and education are all important ways to overcome animosities. presupposing that I am willing to understand the other person better. Be critical: Where and from whom did I learn prejudices?
GV: And what about atheists and fundamentalists?
RP: Dialogue in a plural society with these groups encourages to better justify one's own belief. Exhausting, but enriching. However, fundamentalist atheism, – like religious or political fundamentalism – is incapable of dialogue and wants to enforce its own worldview by all means. But, there is no alternative to dialogue!
GV: Do you think intolerances towards different creeds depend on one's own religiosity?
RP: Yes and no. Yes, because in all religious traditions, there are interpretations of the sacred texts that are associated with a fundamentalist understanding of truth, and a derogatory attitude towards people of other faiths. No, because such interpretations often have historical and cultural causes as well as political interests, or are favored by authoritarian personality structures.
GV: How does theology relate to current social issues?
RP: Over the years, my theological research has become significantly more political and part of public debate. In German-speaking countries, I am currently observing a reception of postcolonial theologies among young scholars, but also socio-ethical issues such as bioethics, digitization, and gender issues. The theological reflection of the climate crisis is, for example, a core theme of theology, since it is about the question of our continuing existence.
Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church, Vienna. Photo by Wikipedia user Bwag , CC BY-SA 4.0.
GV: As Austria received an influx of mostly non-Catholic new citizens from the Balkans in recent decades, mainly Muslims from Bosnia and Orthodox Christians from Serbia, how is interfaith dialogue being influenced by politics in this region?
RP: With regard to Christian Orthodoxy, there is a long and proven ecumenical movement in Austria. Interestingly, politics in the Balkans region plays little role in the dialogue with Muslims. At the same time, the dialogue with Muslims in Austria has become much more difficult because it takes place in the context of political and public discourses that show massive anti-Islamic traits.
GV: Does your work overcome the legacy of the past, in terms of peace and conflict throughout Central Europe?
RP: The Catholic Church in particular has made a great conversion since the Second Vatican Council and recognized Judaism as a sister religion. Many faithful unfortunately do not know this history, yet. Unfortunately, it is different in the dialogue with Muslims. As for migration, it is regrettably clear that the historical inheritance of racism and xenophobia is still very much present.
GV: As a part of the OSCE, how does your work reflect their mandate? Do you believe religion is taken as seriously as it should be when it comes to policy towards peace?
RP: Yes, the OSCE takes the topic of religion very seriously, but as part of its comprehensive approach to protect and promote security and peace. This means that the OSCE has a human rights approach to religion – protecting and promoting respect for the freedom of religious or belief.
GV: How do you think interreligious dialogue can provide a solution for Austria, Europe, and the world in regards to increasing Islamophobia?
RP: Interreligious dialogue cannot solve the social, political and economic causes that underlie the hostility towards Muslims. But it can, most importantly, contribute religious ideas to a more peaceful and just coexistence.
Vienna Islamic Centre. Photo by Wikipedia user Bwag, CC BY-SA 4.0.
GV: Let's talk a bit more about you as a person in relation to your academic career. How do you relate yourself to the field of research?
RP: I have always been a curious child with a strong interest in questions concerning the meaning of life and the role of God in the entire whole. I had a great teacher who inspired me to keep exploring my curiosity for everything around us and later on to pursue religious studies. Of course, from that starting point to today, it was a long road with unexpected turns.
GV: Unexpected turns?
RP: Theology is the most fascinating discipline I can think of encompassing spiritual wisdom, ethics, literature, philosophy, history, social science, and many other disciplines. However, I took a detour into philosophy and journalismbefore working as an assistant at the department for Practical Theology and studying theology in 2000.
GV: How did you develop your career after that, as a woman and a mother?
RP: Two years later, at the beginning of my 30s, I became head of the department. It was a tough time as I had to do research for my Ph.D., my exams, teach, and take care of my son. My incredible colleagues and family supported me so much – I would not be in my current position, and without regret, if it had not been for them. Maternity leave would definitely have ended my career.
St. Stephen's Cathedral, the main Roman Catholic church in Vienna. Photo by Wikipedia user Bwag , CC BY-SA 4.0.
GV: How does working in research and promoting religion balance your womanhood?
RP: My Catholic identity results in a duty to explore interfaith dialogue. I do not see a conflict to be devoted to the church, my work, and being a woman. I am true to my church as I believe they people from the church bring valuable pearls of wisdom to humanity. And if one wants to change a faulty system, what better way to do so than from within? History proved, minorities are the ones who bring in innovation and possibilities.
GV: How does misogyny from different religious creeds affect your work?
RP: I sharpen my rhetoric against it. As a woman, you need to take responsibility for yourself as my mother and sister taught me from a young age onwards. The world is not a utopia, and when you do feel fear, you need to act accordingly.
GV: Have you experienced a threatening situation in your career which let you doubt your path?
RP: When situations occur, I speak up about it. My age does keep me safer in this environment. However, I am extremely lucky violence never happened to me, but if it had happened, I think I would have continued my work as this is my vocation. At least, I hope I would make that choice.
GV: If you could give one piece of advice to other women researchers, what would it be?
RP:  An academic career is like climbing a mountain. Never do it alone and have a safety net if you do fall. Especially as a woman. In Austria, it is still hard for a woman to enter the field of academic research.
GV: And for women of colour?
RP: There is much denial in society when it comes to racism, and dialogue about it includes layers of talking around it till the point is softly conveyed. After the defeat of the Nazis, the German word for race, ‘Rasse’, was abolished from the language. With that, it seemed even the phenomena of racism as being an actual thing disappeared, including addressing the harsh reality we still live in today.

author: Fausia S. Abdul


text:
Australian government ‘mute’ on more ambitious plan to address climate crisis · Global Voices
Kevin Rennie

School climate rally Brisbane March 2019 – Photo courtesy Flickr user School Strike 4 Climate Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)
The Australian government continues to face mounting pressure, both locally and internationally, after its disappointing stance on tackling climate change at U.S. President Joe Biden’s Leaders Summit on Climate on 22 April, with Sydney failing to increase its modest target of 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, under the 2016 Paris agreement.
The Australian non-government Climate Council was among the first to condemn Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s contribution to the summit:
…Australia stands on its own as being particularly out of step.
Alone among more than a hundred nations, Australia has no target for reaching net zero emissions.
This was no surprise for many Australians. A few days before the online meeting, Morrison attacked those wanting stronger action. He was clearly aiming his remarks at so-called ‘greenies’, a grossly simplified image of Australians in urban areas who have environmental concerns, in contrast to members of rural and mining communities. His remarks were seen to be intentionally divisive, and fired up his critics on social media:
Morrison takes aim at inner city ‘cafes, dinner parties and wine bars’ in climate change co… Stop trying to divide and rule @ScottMorrisonMP . We are all in this together . We need to look after all workers and all future generations https://t.co/Yj5YDhTPJN
— ?Sally Lawry (@SallyLawry) April 20, 2021
“We’re not going to achieve net zero in the cafes, dinner parties & wine bars of our inner cities” Morrison said at a formal dinner with wine at an inner city hotel ??♂
We're not going to fix it with spin, no targets, vague technology promises & no plan!https://t.co/2yqxIbxEDQ
— Mike Cannon-Brookes ???? (@mcannonbrookes) April 20, 2021
The Biden administration and other nations have made it clear that countries such as Australia will be held to account for inaction.
Morrison’s summit presentation had an unfortunate start as his microphone was on mute. Many commentators saw this glitch as fitting. At The Conversation, environmental academics, Lesley Hughes Professor and Will Steffen, found his contribution very ‘depressing’:
…sadly for Australians, the summit revealed the clear contrast in climate policy leadership between Morrison and his international peers.
Australian economics professor John Quiggin also took up this theme:
In place of the approaches adopted elsewhere, the Morrison government is betting heavily on alternatives that have failed previous tests, such as carbon capture and storage. And it’s blatantly ignoring internationally proven technology, such as electric vehicles.
The government could have followed the lead of our international peers and backed Australia’s clean energy sector to create jobs and stimulate the post-pandemic economy. Instead, it’s sending the nation on a fool’s errand.
Morrison’s speech was mocked by many on social media. Marque Lawyers tweeted:
Not sure what this is but it’s magnificent. pic.twitter.com/Z7apJwg75F
— marquelawyers (@marquelawyers) April 23, 2021
Climate change policy has been politically controversial since the mid-2000s. Many observers believe that even the current goal is unlikely to be met without further action. Climate Action Tracker is among them:
According to our analysis, Australia will need to implement additional policies to reach its 2030 target, even with the expected emissions reductions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Any hopes of more expenditure were dashed in the latest Morrison government Federal budget announced on 11 May 2021. There was little extra funding for renewable energy or electric vehicles, or general environmental programs. It contained few green programs to aid economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.
The government is committed to a gas-fired recovery and handouts to fossil fuel emitters. In fact, funding for a new gas-fired plant has been announced just a day after the International Energy Agency recommended that there be no new investment in coal or gas projects.
Australian superannuation funds have called on the business community and consumers to push for stronger action:
Australian super funds to vote against company directors not tackling climate crisis [There is great power in advocacy – this can be done with votes at the ballot box, with votes at board & shareholder meetings – and every day via the products we purchase] https://t.co/il5viPd9hT
— kimchandlermcdonald (@kimchandler) April 26, 2021
Prominent finance commentator Alan Kohler found villains apart from the Prime Minister:
It’s not entirely Scott Morrison’s fault that he managed to look like a dissembling idiot at President Joe Biden’s leader’s summit on climate change last week.
…Those people who actually know what’s going on have allowed themselves to be intimidated by Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch and their bullies, who in turn have been collaborators in the crime of the century.
That the fossil fuel industry managed to turn global warming into a political issue – Left saying it’s happening, Right saying it’s not – might have been tactically brilliant, but it was also a vast global crime.
Some of the youth of Australia are not prepared to remain silent and are taking direct action. The Australian Youth Climate Coalition AYCC sent a clear message outside parliament house on budget night:
Tonight we sent a clear message for our Government to #FundOurFutureNotGas by investing in climate solutions & our communities. But @JoshFrydenberg & @ScottMorrisonMP have put their fossil fuel mates first #auspol #Budget2021 pic.twitter.com/kSYZRwNRSH
— AYCC (@AYCC) May 11, 2021
School student activists School Strike 4 Climate (SS4C) are at the forefront of action by young people. They have organised a day of protest across the nation for Friday 21 May 2021:
Together we are powerful. See you on #May21. pic.twitter.com/oSTAbv9ml2
— School Strike 4 Climate Australia (@StrikeClimate) May 16, 2021
There are many other voices in the ongoing campaign to bring about a change in government policy. Public policy think tank, the Australia Institute, held a webinar, which included Nigel Topping, UN High Level Climate Action Champion:
Australia stands *alone* in not having a significant climate plan
- UN High Level Climate Action Champion from UK @topnigel on @TheAusInstitute webinar yesterday
Quick read below in @GuardianAus
Watch full webinar here https://t.co/e6jy29WPuO#auspol https://t.co/8eL0TsKe9g
— Richie Merzian (@RichieMerzian) May 14, 2021
Many people hope that the government will take more ambitious targets to the November 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow. U.K. Prime Minster Boris Johnson is one of them:
Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison have spoken on the phone.
Here’s the Downing Street version of the conversation… #auspol @7NewsAustralia pic.twitter.com/rbjPhAQGZD
— Hugh Whitfeld (@hughwhitfeld) May 14, 2021
The message couldn't be clearer:
‘The Prime Minister emphasised the importance of all countries setting ambitious targets to cut carbon emissions, and encouraged Australia to commit to reaching Net Zero by 2050 which will deliver clean jobs and economic growth.’

author: Kevin Rennie