On May 5^th, 2014 International New York Times reported that “the Obama administration on Monday granted the group diplomatic status and pledged an additional $27 million in nonlethal assistance” bringing total assistance to about $287million so far. The non-lethal aid is going to include medical aid food rations, communications equipment and vehicles.

The decision is announced when an estimated 9 million Syrians have fled their homes many of which are seeking asylum in Europe and US or live in refugee camps in neighboring countries.

Opposition groups, who chose to fights and endanger themselves, now enjoy the benefits of the diplomatic status while Syrian civilians who involuntarily are paying a high price of war in their country live in refugee camps. Some children died during passed winter in camps due to cold and many others suffer from lack of nutrition. And most importantly insecurity is a threat to the mental and physical health to all Syrian families.

Furthermore the US officials stated the decision of granting $27 million is to “assist moderate opposition groups in Syria”, yet the officials do not explain how did they conclude that Syrian National Coalition (SNC) that is receiving such aid is actually a moderate group?

Is there any moderate group left in Syria? According to UN, SRW and many other research and news entities all groups in Syria are killing and they have used chemical weapons. Who are these moderate groups and how are they helping the situation in Syria that they deserve $287 million of our tax money?

Thankfully this administration is helping only in “nonlethal” assistance. But doesn’t that mean we are helping fighters have better food, better communicating and transportation methods and even diplomatic safety? As a result those fighters are stronger, healthier, and more comfortable killers? Correct?

In theory helping with food and cars is nonlethal assistance but in reality stronger killers are lethal and therefore our nonlethal assistance in resulting is stronger lethal fighters…. And that is against American values…

by Hawraa, A Shia Rights Advocate                                     on May 6th, 2014

The “Anti-Shia Alliance” in Indonesia has attracted attention from news agencies and raised serious concerns among human rights NGOs over Shia rights in Indonesia following their first anti-Shia rally on Sunday. According to reporters many Indonesians attended an anti-Shia rally on Sunday at the Al Fajr mosque in the West Java capital of Bandung, where an anti-Shia declaration was announced. The declaration called for the official ban of Shia Islam among other things. What has not been reported is that this “alliance” was organized immediately after it was revealed that Jalaluddin Rakhmat, a prominent Shia scholar and professor at Paramadina University, was being considered for appointment as Minister of Religious Affairs.

Two days before the announcement of the “Anti-Shia Alliance,” Shia groups in West Java contacted local authorities and expressed their concern about growing anti-Shiism, but the governor did not take any action. While the alliance spread fear in the Shia community and exacerbated the threat of human rights violations in Indonesia, it must me stressed that the creation of the anti-Shia Alliance was orchestrated by politicians for political interests. Indonesian activists reported to SRW that the gathering that took place on Sunday was a direct reaction to the potential appointment of a Shia Muslim to a key government position.

Shia Rights Watch believes that all citizens have the right to participate in their government and advocates for all citizens to use their democratic rights to promote peace, harmony and cooperation without regard to race, ethnicity or religion. Further, SRW advises Indonesian politicians to refrain from using religious differences to spread hatred among people for political gain. We also invite Indonesians, from all backgrounds and with all religious affiliations, to boycott discriminatory groups and events. “Collectively, we can end human rights violations and discrimination in all nations through the overwhelming power of peace. Every citizen should participate in spreading the message of peace and cooperation in their own cities, towns and neighborhoods,” said SRW director Mustafa Akhwand.

Historically, Indonesians from all faiths have lived in peace, and Indonesia has been known for its diversity. However, during the last decade, anti-Shia movements have created an atmosphere of fear in the Shia community in Indonesian. As SRW reported in its Shia Ethnic Cleansing in Indonesia publication, many Shia Muslims have been attacked and lost their homes in 2012. Their battle to return to their homes continues.

Fomenting alliances against others based on their faith is illegal and must be addressed by the Indonesian government. Indonesia now has about 4.5 million Shia and they deserve to have their right to live in peace with others protected and recognized by their government.

SIPRI, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, one of the reliable research institutes that researches into the arm control published a scary report on the increase spending on arms by countries with most human rights violations. According to the report China, Russia and Saudi Arabia are among the 23 countries around the world that have more than doubled their military expenditure since 2004. While developing countries are springing more on weapons, western countries such as US is spending less on arm forces and weapons.
Saudi Arabia’s spending increased by 14 per cent and reached $67 billion,

Bahrain’s spending increased 26 per cent,

Iraq’s spending is up to 27 per cent,

The report highlights that eight states bordering the Gulf—Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) are countries that invest most in arm forces and weapons.

Such report raises the important question of why such countries are inverting so much on weapons. And where do they buy these weapons from?

History reveals that all these countries have been involved in human rights violations, arm conflicts and unrest. Number of these countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are well known for arming different terrorist groups. Some others, such as Bahrain, are well known for oppressing peaceful pro-democracy native protestors.

It is interesting how money and economic priorities result in killings of many activists and pro-freedom civilians. The fact that all mentioned countries buy the weapons to mainly confront their own citizen is crystal clear to all yet no company or government stopped selling weapons to those countries. Except Korea that stated they stopped selling to Bahrain, no other country claimed such rightful decision.

If and only IF, international committees and nations would stop selling arms to countries that are famous for their human rights violations, there would be a hope for the peace in the future of the Middle East….

Too bad….

Every nation needs money and guest who has it?

Oil reached companies of Middle East…..

So it’s OK if they are killing people with it, as long as they pay CASH for the weapons….

by Hawraa Zakery, Human Rights Reseracher                      on    April, 15,2014