By Tasneem Tayeb
Jun 11 2020 (IPS-Partners)

With Covid-19 bringing economic activities across nations to a halt, more and more people are being pushed into poverty. Job losses, business losses and farming losses, leading to economic stress, are pushing many to the fringes of poverty. And as families are being rendered helpless, the worst sufferers are invariably the children.

“46 percent children suffer from multidimensional poverty,” suggests a report shared recently by Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha (BSS). And in the face of the growing economic hardships of the people, triggered by Covid-19, the number is likely to shoot up in the coming months.

From increased threats of modern slavery—domestic servitude, sex trafficking, and forced labour, such as begging—and reduced access to nutrition, basic healthcare facilities and education, to increased risk of emotional abuse and mental trauma, children today, especially the ones born into poverty, are at greater risk of exploitation.

According to Unicef, “The economic fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic could push up to 86 million more children into household poverty by the end of 2020.”

Save the Children and Unicef suggest that, “Immediate loss of income means families are less able to afford the basics, including food and water, less likely to access health care or education, and more at risk of child marriage, violence, exploitation and abuse. When fiscal contraction occurs, the reach and quality of the services families depend on can also be diminished.”

And with more and more people becoming jobless, chances of families abandoning their children, or using them to earn money is increasing by the day. According to a United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) report, “due to the pandemic, more children are being forced onto the streets to search for food and money, thus increasing their risk of exploitation.”

And more concerning are the lurking threats of the different ways in which children, in the wake of Covid-19 are being forced into sexual exploitation. For one, families in this part of the world, unable to feed “extra mouths”, often marry off their girls at an early age. Sometimes even in exchange for money. These little girls are subjected to marital rape by their husbands, and more often than not, suffer severe reproductive health damages due to the burden of early motherhood.

And if the girls are not so lucky, they are sold to traffickers by their husbands for money. Sometimes, in fact, predators marry young girls to be able to sell them for good money into sex slavery. While writing a detailed piece on this issue last year, I found that at times of desperation, the families themselves sell girls into prostitution. There have been cases where young sex workers had claimed that they had been sold to dalals by their own mothers.

Young boys face a different kind of fate. They are sent away to work in the informal sector to earn money for their families. And some of these young boys are preyed upon by predators for trafficking as slaves and sometimes into male prostitution.

According to a 2014 report by The Scelles Foundation, 42 million worldwide were involved in sex slavery. Of them, about eight million were men—it is not just women who are at the risk of being trafficked into sexual slavery. Male prostitution remains a less discussed issue, which is why when referring to sex slavery, the dialogues mostly centre around girls. But young boys do get raped and the possibility of them being forced into prostitution cannot be ignored.

And the children who have been sent out of the house to earn their living as beggars live with the constant threat of being exploited by their ring leaders. These girls and boys are not only taken advantage of by their employers but are also at times abused by the people giving them alms. I was once horrified when I saw a driver holding on to a semi-clothed girl’s hand while giving her alms. The girl—not knowing that it is not right for someone to touch her without her permission—was just happy that she got a note! Next time on the road, take a careful look, and the abuse of these children will become apparent.

But with Covid-19, you would think the demand for prostitution would have taken a hit, but you’d be wrong. The risk remains: according to Mama Fatima Singhateh, Special Rapporteur on the sale and sexual exploitation of children, appointed by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the Covid-19 lockdown has resulted in people finding newer ways of availing prostitution services—through “delivery” or “drive-through”. According to Singhateh, people’s tendency to access illegal websites featuring child pornography has also increased— “Producing and accessing child sexual abuse material and live-stream child sexual abuse online has now become an easy alternative to groom and lure children into sexual activities and to trade images in online communities.”

A report published by the Council on Foreign Relations echoes the same fear— “While the current drop in global demand might temporarily disrupt exploitative circumstances, this effect is likely short-lived and eclipsed by increased vulnerability. Within sex trafficking, for example, the demand for commercial sex has dropped due to social distancing regulations. However, there is evidence that online sexual exploitation of children is on the rise, indicating that perpetrators are adapting in response to the environment.”

And this brings into the picture a new set of prey: children from middle-income to higher-income families who have access to the internet. These children, for whom the internet is the only means of staying connected with their friends and teachers, are at risk of being preyed upon by malicious traffickers.

And stuck at home, detached from the life they used to live, these children—according to Kazi Amdadul Hoque, Director-Strategic Planning and Head of Climate Action, Friendship, an international NGO—face a different kind of trauma. The fear of uncertainty, the fear of contagion and the depression from the lack of access to friends and outdoor activities make these children especially vulnerable to predators.

Child psychologist Tarana Anis suggests that now more than ever, parents and families have to be vigilant about the kind of online content their children are being exposed to, who their children are interacting with online, and which website they are accessing frequently. She suggests that families should engage in more shared activities and open discussions about current issues with their children.

This is certainly one way of tackling this problem. But we must keep in mind that the threat of physically trafficking children and selling them into prostitution or forced labour remains. Maybe there has been a decline in demand now, but it is only temporary. With the state’s resources already stretched fighting Covid-19, the government will find it difficult to fight off these other diseases, but this one definitely needs attention.

The government, along with bringing the poor under social safety schemes, must also mobilise the law enforcement agencies to strictly monitor the trafficking situation in the country. And families should spend more time with children and educate them about the risks that they might face online. The communities must look out for each, support each other and report suspicious activities. It is time we start looking out for ourselves, our loved ones and our communities, and report the wrongs to the concerned authorities, for the greater good of our children.

Tasneem Tayeb is a columnist for The Daily Star.
Her Twitter handle is: @TayebTasneem

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

Excerpt:

Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf is pictured during the ruling at the International Court of Justice in the Hague, Netherlands on January 23, 2020. PHOTO: REUTERS/EVA PLEVIER

By Tasneem Tayeb
Jan 27 2020 (IPS-Partners)

(The Daily Star) – Two days after the Interna-tional Court of Justice (ICJ) approved emergency “provisional measures” asking Myanmar to stop persecution of the Rohingya in all forms— including killing, raping, and destroying homes and villages—two Rohingya women died in Rakhine State when the Myanmar army shelled a village. One of them was pregnant.

While many celebrated the ICJ’s order of provisional measures, some—especially those who have witnessed the ineffectiveness of the ICJ’s repeated “provisional measures” to protect Bosnian Muslims in 1993—had been cynical about the ultimate outcome of such a measure. Their scepticism is yet to be proven wrong.

Despite the ICJ’s order, Myanmar—it seems—remains defiant with its genocidal intent against the Rohingya. And Myanmar has good reason for its intransigence.

First of all, while the ICJ’s order is binding, it is not enforceable; and in the face of Myanmar’s non-compliance, The Gambia (the country that brought the case against Myanmar at the ICJ) at best can approach the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for it to decide whether it will use its powers to force Myanmar to comply with the ICJ’s order. And here lies the advantage of Myanmar.

China and Russia—two of Myanmar’s major allies—are two of the five permanent members of the UNSC, which also includes the United States, France and the United Kingdom. Both these countries have in the past resisted the United Nations’ attempts to address the Rohingya issue. To refresh the memory: in March 2017, China and Russia blocked a UN Security Council statement that would have “noted with concern renewed fighting in some parts of the country and stressed the importance of humanitarian access to all effected areas”, as reported by news agency Reuters.

With deep economic and military ties with China and Russia, it is no wonder that Myanmar is safe and strong in the knowledge that the UNSC will not be able to induce it to comply with the ICJ’s verdict in the months and years to come.

Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Myanmar earlier this month and the signing of 33 memorandums of understanding (MOUs), agreements, exchange letters and protocols send a strong signal to Bangladesh and to the wider world about its strategic ties with the country. According to Myanmar’s Directorate of Investment and Company Administration data, in 2019 China was the second biggest foreign investor in Myanmar, accounting for 25.21 percent of investment in the country; Singapore was the biggest, making up 26.86 percent of the foreign direct investment Myanmar received in the same year.

On the occasion of Xi’s visit, a joint statement in Chinese state media said that China “firmly supports Myanmar’s efforts to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests and national dignity in the international arena” and hopes for it to advance “peace, stability and development in Rakhine State.” Even if one does not read too much into these two lines, it would be difficult to misread China’s stance on the Rohingya issue.

During the visit, China and Myanmar also signed an agreement for the Kyaukphyu Special Economic Zone (SEZ) deep seaport project, a major town in the volatile Rakhine State that is at the centre of the Rohingya genocide.

China is not the only actor investing in Rakhine. The World Bank in 2019 came under heavy fire from international human rights bodies and non-government organisations (NGO) for its proposed USD 100 million development project in the conflict-riven Rakhine State titled, “Rakhine Recovery and Development Support Project”.

In a letter to the World Bank dated April 9, 2019, obtained by Reuters, more than a dozen Myanmar-based NGOs said, “It is difficult to imagine how meaningful recovery and development are possible in Rakhine without addressing the underlying human rights issues that currently impact every aspect of life for communities.” Despite World Bank’s assurance that, “The project is being carefully prepared so that it does not reinforce or perpetuate movement restrictions or other forms of segregation, and that it creates new openings for social cohesion and positive exchanges between communities,” how it is going to make sure of this remains to be seen.

Meanwhile, Myanmar’s military ties with Russia have only strengthened over the years. In January 2018, Russia agreed to sell six Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets to Myanmar costing at least USD 204 million. The deal was announced during the official visit of Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoygu to Myanmar in January 2018.

As late as August 2019, Myanmar military chief Senior General Min Aung Hlaing paid a visit to Russia and during his stay, he visited the Irkutsk Aviation Plant Corporation that is assembling the six Sukhoi Su-30SM multi-role advanced fighter jets for Myanmar. Photos of him sitting in a cockpit next to a test pilot made quite a show of his trip to the plant.

Of course, warplanes are not enough; military personnel require training as well. Here too Russia comes to their aid –more than 600 members of the Tatmadaw (Myanmar’s military) were studying at higher military educational institutions in Russia in January 2018, as suggested by Russia’s Deputy Defence Minister Lieutenant-General Alexander Fomin.

Apart from these economic transactions, around 60 foreign companies from around the world have ties with businesses controlled by the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited and the Myanmar Economic Corporation—two military-governed businesses in Myanmar. It is these two conglomerates that dominate the economic and commercial landscape of the country. To address this, the UN fact-finding mission in 2019 urged imposing targeted financial sanctions on companies linked with Myanmar’s military and suggested that foreign companies doing business with Tatmadaw-controlled corporations could be complicit in international crimes.

During the Rakhine State Investment Fair in 2019, Suu Kyi said, “Myanmar has opened up its economy to the world. We have been constantly adjusting our policies, rules and regulations to be in line with international best practices and to make the investment climate more favourable, predictable, facilitative and friendly. We want to establish a welcoming economic environment for all.” Unfortunately, it seems the welcoming environment is not inclusive of the Rohingya.

Given the scenario, it is not surprising that the world, including international bodies like the UN, has miserably failed to address, let alone stop, the genocide unleashed by Myanmar against the helpless Rohingya. Thousands of adults and children have been killed; millions forced to flee; and an unaccountable number of women and girls have been systemically sexually violated, impregnated and exposed to various sexually transmitted diseases by the Myanmar military. And the world watched the spectre unfold before their very eyes like an audience at a macabre movie screening.

While the world is busy exploring potential economic tie-ups with Myanmar, thanks to its vast untapped resources and strategic geopolitical importance, it is the Rohingya and Bangladesh that are bearing the brunt of Myanmar’s economic possibilities. While the ICJ’s verdict is a welcome move, without political will to hold Myanmar to account it will not yield any positive outcome for the Rohingya. Expecting much from it would be a folly. The 1995 Srebrenica massacre should serve as a reality check.

Tasneem Tayeb is a columnist for The Daily Star.

Her Twitter handle is: @TayebTasneem

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

Protesters gathered in Cairo shouting anti-government slogans on September 21. PHOTO: MOHAMED ABD EL GHANY/REUTERS

By Tasneem Tayeb
Oct 6 2019 (IPS-Partners)

The recent protests in Egypt, sparked by the allegation of financial misappropriations by a government contractor against the country’s current president and former army chief, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, have died down almost as soon as they came to life. The Sisi administration resorted to its usual tactic of using brutal muscle power to clamp down on the protesters and the media. While the national media outlets—very much under the control of Sisi—did not dare breach “professional codes”, the Egyptian State Information Service (SIS), which is responsible for accrediting foreign journalists, warned the media that it has “carefully monitored” the protest coverage.

The SIS also called on the reporters to “strictly abide by professional codes of conduct.” This coming from a suppressive regime, with a track record of detaining journalists and feeding fabricated content to the local media outlets, it would not be hard to read between the lines when it comes to the SIS guidance.

The country’s autocratic regime has also detained Al Jazeera journalist Mahmoud Hussein in solitary confinement for the last 1,017 days, with charges and accusations that till date remain uncorroborated. The detention is in breach of the law of the land, which sets a maximum of 620 days of pretrial detention for people under investigation for felony. To make matters even muddier, there had been reports that the journalist was refused even passable medical attention after he suffered a broken hand, in an episode that carries reverberations from the imprisonment of the country’s first democratically elected president, who died while held in solitary confinement, with inadequate treatment and medicines.

In the 2019 World Press Freedom Index, compiled by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Egypt stood at 163rd out of 180 countries. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists’ (CPJ) annual report, Egypt held 25 journalists in 2018, and along with Turkey and China, accounted for half of all the journalists detained in 2018.

The situation in Turkey presents a grimmer picture, where 68 journalists had been incarcerated in 2018—all of them facing anti-state charges. Turkey’s uproar over the murder of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, while fully warranted, comes with a slight hint of irony. At a discussion organised by the Stockholm Center for Freedom (SCF) in Stockholm earlier this year, journalists who have had to flee Turkey in recent times claimed that journalists are being systematically targeted by the Erdogan regime and being brutally punished on the flimsiest of charges. Levent Kenez, former editor-in-chief of Turkey’s Meydan daily newspaper, which the Turkish government had pulled the plug on in 2016, said, “Defendants are not selected randomly, but systematically. When analysing cases, one can easily notice that those who were critical of the government, reported on corruption or exposed Erdogan’s support for jihadist elements at home or abroad, were blacklisted long before.”

Closer to home, in India, media outlets in Kashmir are struggling to cover events after the abrogation of Article 370 and 35A in August this year. A recent report by two rights networks—Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI) and the Free Speech Collective (FSC)—presents a despairing picture of the condition of journalists and media in Kashmir. The report reveals a “high degree of surveillance, informal ‘investigations’ and even arrest of journalists who publish reports considered adverse to the government or security forces; controls on the facilities available for print publication; government advertising to select publications; restrictions on mobility in select areas including hospitals and the most crippling communications shutdown of all time. Significantly, there is no official curfew, no official notification for the shutdown.”

The arrest of journalists has become a common scenario in the enchanting valley, which is also one of the most militarised zones in the world with the presence of around 900,000 troops. According to CPJ, as of September 24, at least four journalists have been detained since July 25 this year. While one was released later, the whereabouts of Qazi Shibli, editor of news website The Kashmiriyat, remain unknown, and two others—MT Rasool of Rising Kashmir and Sheikh Saleem of Kashmir Convener—have been kept in detention in a government-owned guest house in the valley’s Bandipora town, without any reason behind their arrest being forthcoming.

Apart from the fear of arbitrary detention, according to Kunal Majumder of CPJ, “communication blackout, the internet shutdown, limited access to government officials and politicians, strict controls on the flow of information, restrictions on travel, direct and indirect intimidation of journalists, and the long-running problem of dwindling government advertising revenue” have muzzled the media in Kashmir.

Often governments also resort to the use of soft power coercion to control and suppress the media; this is usually done through curtailing commercial revenues of media houses. In most of these cases, the governments not only cut down their own advertisement to these news outlets, but also discourage big corporations from giving advertisements to these media platforms. By doing this, the government tries to cripple the media outlets so that they go out of operation due to shortage of fund. A classic example of this is our own country, where the government had in 2015 asked the largest telecoms and consumer goods companies in Bangladesh to “restrict” their advertising in two of the mainstream newspapers.

Francis Fukuyama, in his book “Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy,” suggested that three elements are essential for a well-ordered society and good governance: a strong state, the rule of law and democratic accountability. However, rule of law and democratic accountability run contrary to the idea of a strong state, because when a state becomes strong, it becomes prone to discouraging accountability and rule of law. So how does one strike a balance between the three? Through a set of democratic institutions that enable a stable equilibrium.

Free press, by design, is one such institution. If there are dissenting voices within these ranks, they can easily be quashed. Alternatively, they can also spark constructive debates—debates that are the lifeblood of vibrant democracies.

Which path should we take? That is entirely up to us.

Tasneem Tayeb is a member of the editorial team at The Daily Star. Her Twitter handle is @TayebTasneem.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh