

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

States convening at the United Nations for a high-level meeting on
Sudan on September 24, 2010, should press Sudanese authorities to ensure
that the forthcoming referendum on southern independence is free of the
human rights violations that marred the April elections, Human Rights
Watch said today.
More than 30 nations and international organizations are expected to
attend the meeting, convened by the UN secretary-general to coincide
with the annual General Assembly meetings. Delegates are expected to
express their support for the January 2011 referendum, which will
determine whether Southern Sudan remains part of Sudan or secedes and
becomes an independent nation.
"The delegates at the Sudan meeting should do more than confirm that
the referendum will happen on time," said Rona Peligal, Africa director
at Human Rights Watch. "This is also a prime opportunity for them to
insist on better human rights conditions in Sudan."
The April elections and the upcoming referendum for southern
independence are milestones in the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement,
which ended 22 years of civil war in which an estimated 2 million people
lost their lives.
Human Rights Watch remains concerned about impunity for human rights
violations by security forces across Sudan, restrictions on civil and
political rights, and the treatment of minority groups throughout Sudan.
The two parties to the peace agreement - the ruling National Congress
Party (NCP) and the southern ruling Sudan People's Liberation Movement
(SPLM) - should state publicly that they will not expel each other's
minorities in the event of secession, Human Rights Watch said.
The delegates to the September 24 UN meeting should also address the deteriorating situation in Darfur.
"Focus on the southern referendum should not shift attention away
from the ongoing crises in Darfur," Peligal said. "The nations concerned
about the situation in Sudan need to press Khartoum now to end impunity
for ongoing human rights violations in Darfur."
Election-Related Violations
As Human Rights Watch has extensively documented, the national elections in April 2010
were deeply flawed. They were marred by human rights violations,
including restrictions on free speech and assembly, particularly in
northern Sudan. The elections also occasioned widespread intimidation,
arbitrary arrests, and physical violence against election monitors and
opponents of the ruling parties by Sudanese security forces across the
country.
In the period following the elections, the human rights situation
deteriorated further as the ruling party, using the National
Intelligence and Security Services, cracked down on opponents,
activists, and journalists in Khartoum and northern states. Human Rights
Watch documented additional cases of arbitrary arrests of activists in
August and September.
Human Rights Watch has repeatedly called on the Sudanese national
government to enact key human rights reforms required under the peace
agreement, such as reforming the repressive national security apparatus.
In Southern Sudan, election-related disputes sparked clashes between
the southern government army, the SPLM, and aggrieved candidates and
other opponents of the southern ruling party. In Jonglei state, for
example, General George Athor, who unsuccessfully ran for governor,
clashed with the southern army on multiple occasions. As of September,
large numbers of the southern army's soldiers were still deployed in
northern Jonglei state where civilians continue to report rape and other
abuses. Soldiers have also conducted violent operations against armed
groups aligned to opponents of the southern ruling party in Upper Nile
state, resulting in human rights violations there.
Both national and Southern Sudanese authorities should hold their
security forces accountable for human rights violations that occurred
during and after the elections, Human Rights Watch said.
Civil and Political Rights Threatened
Although the head of the national security service in early August
lifted pre-print censorship, other restrictions on political expression
remain in place. During research in Sudan in August, Human Rights Watch
found that both in the northern states, where authorities support the
continued unity of Sudan, and in Southern Sudan, where authorities
support southern secession, journalists and civil society are not free
to speak openly about any opposition to the prevailing sentiment.
Human Rights Watch also found increased anxiety over the citizenship
rights of southerners living in Khartoum and elsewhere in northern
states. Southerners living throughout Sudan will be eligible to vote in
the referendum. The vast majority of them live in Southern Sudan, but an
estimated 1.5 million live in Khartoum and other northern towns, many
in settlements for displaced persons.
In recent months, officials in the northern ruling party have
publicly threatened that southerners may not be able to stay in the
north in the event of a secession vote. Both southerners in the north
and northerners living in Southern Sudan told Human Rights Watch that
they feared retaliation, even expulsion, if secession were approved.
International standards protect people from arbitrary or
discriminatory removal or deprivation of their nationality. The Sudanese
authorities should publicly pledge that no one will be at risk of
statelessness, or risk losing enjoyment of other basic rights, as a
result of the outcome of the referendum.
"The UN meeting provides a perfect opportunity for the parties to
declare there will be no expulsions of southerners from the north, or
northerners from the south," Peligal said.
Impasse at Abyei
Delegates at the UN meeting this week should also press the two parties
to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement to make it an urgent priority to
resolve the political impasse over Abyei, the oil-rich area along the
north-south border where northern and southern forces clashed in 2008. The issue remains a key flashpoint for further conflict and human rights abuses, Human Rights Watch said.
"The situation in Abyei could easily deteriorate and lead to more
conflict without a concerted effort to protect civilians and defuse
tensions on the ground," Peligal said.
Under the peace agreement, the area is to hold its own parallel
referendum in January 2011 to decide whether it will belong to the north
or south, but the parties have made no progress in agreeing on the
arrangements for this vote or in taking steps to resolve differences
between local populations and protect their rights, as Human Rights
Watch documented in August.
The United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS), which has a mandate to
protect civilians, should increase its patrols throughout Abyei and
other key volatile areas along the north-south border, and Sudanese
authorities should ensure peacekeepers' access to these areas, Human
Rights Watch said.
Abuses by Soldiers in Southern Sudan
The Sudanese government and international supporters should not ignore
human rights violations by security forces in Southern Sudan, where
election-related grievances have provoked human rights violations by the
southern government's soldiers in the months following the April vote,
Human Rights Watch said.
In northern Jonglei and Upper Nile states, for example, Human Rights
Watch documented killings and rapes committed by these soldiers in June
and July. The soldiers targeted civilians whom they accused of
supporting "renegade" commanders and local militia groups who opposed
the southern ruling party.
In Upper Nile state, the governing party's troops conducted
particularly violent operations against a militia group allegedly linked
to SPLM-DC, a breakaway political party led by Lam Akol. In one
village, a 60-year-old woman told Human Rights Watch that soldiers had
rounded up her son and three friends, tied their hands behind their
backs, and shot them dead.
"These incidents underscore the urgent need for the southern
government to instruct soldiers on their human rights obligations and to
hold them accountable for all violations," Peligal said.
Human Rights Watch also urged human rights personnel for the UN
mission to monitor and report on these abuses and to press the southern
armed force to strengthen its accountability mechanisms before the
referendum. International donors engaged in reforming the security
sector in Southern Sudan should include accountability and human rights
in their programs.
The Government of Southern Sudan has, appropriately, put the southern
police forces in charge of referendum security, rather than soldiers
who have been responsible for abuses, Human Rights Watch said.
Protect Civilians and Insist on Justice for Crimes in Darfur
Human Rights Watch also urged the international delegates to ensure
stronger protection of civilians from ongoing violence and rights abuses
in Darfur, Human Rights Watch said.
The delegates should insist that those wanted by the International
Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and
genocide allegedly committed in Darfur appear in The Hague to face the
charges against them. President Omar al-Bashir; Ahmed Haroun, the
country's former minister for humanitarian affairs and current governor
of Southern Kordofan state; and Ali Kosheib, a "Janjaweed" militia
leader whose real name is Ali Mohammed Ali, are all subject to arrest
warrants by the ICC.
The situation in Darfur has deteriorated in recent months, and the Sudanese government continues to carry out armed attacks on rebel factions and civilians.
In early September, for example, armed militias (some wearing
military uniforms) on camels and horses and in vehicles mounted with
guns killed 37 people in an attack on a market in North Darfur. The
UN-African Union peacekeeping mission in Darfur (UNAMID), which is
charged with protecting civilians and has a base 15 kilometers away at
Tawila, turned back in its first effort to reach the site on the advice
of a pro-government armed group and did not reach the market until
nearly a week after the attack.
The incident underscores the need for the peacekeeping operations to
interpret its protection mandate robustly and to insist on immediate
access to areas where violations occur, Human Rights Watch said.
Violence has also increased inside camps for people who have been
displaced by the conflict. At Kalma camp in South Darfur and at Hamadiya
camp in West Darfur, tensions in July between supporters and opponents
of peace talks, known as the Doha peace process, led to violence,
killing 11 people.
The impact of the fighting between armed groups in Darfur and of
government attacks on civilians has not been fully documented, in part
because the government and rebels have repeatedly denied peacekeepers
and humanitarian aid groups access to affected areas. Following violence
in Kalma camp, for example, the Sudanese government blocked
humanitarian organizations from the camp for several weeks.
Human Rights Watch has repeatedly urged leaders of the peacekeeping
operation to increase human rights monitoring and public reporting and,
where necessary, issue statements pressing Sudanese authorities to end
specific abuses.
In September, the Sudanese government endorsed a new security and
development strategy for Darfur, which the peacekeepers have publicly
supported. The plan envisions the return of displaced people to their
homes, but it does not contain clear measures to ensure their returns
are voluntary, or that militias are disarmed and soldiers held
accountable, Human Rights Watch said.
"Darfur cannot be developed unless there is real security," Peligal
said. "The international actors need to press the Sudanese government to
immediately end attacks on civilians, let humanitarian groups and
peacekeepers operate effectively, and send people home only when they
want. The government also needs to bring to justice those who have
committed abuses in Darfur, including by cooperating with the
International Criminal Court."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
"The truth is, Susan Collins doesn't serve us, she serves Donald Trump," said Platner. "She serves her corporate donors and the corrupt political system that has rigged the economy against us."
Graham Platner, a veteran and oyster farmer vowing to champion the working class against what he's called the "spineless and corrupt" political establishment, officially became the Democratic Party's nominee in the critical race to unseat five-term Republican Sen. Susan Collins, winning more than 70% of the vote in Tuesday's closely watched primary.
"I love every single one of you, everyone who has shown up at a town hall, who has knocked on a door, who cast their vote—not for me, but for a vision of a life in Maine that you can afford, a life of dignity, and a government that actually serves its people," Platner said in his victory speech. "The truth is, Susan Collins doesn't serve us, she serves Donald Trump. She serves the Epstein class. She serves her corporate donors and the corrupt political system that has rigged the economy against us. She does not serve us, and so we will defeat Susan Collins."
Platner's main primary opponent, Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, suspended her campaign in late April as the progressive political newcomer trounced her in polling, fundraising, and enthusiasm. But in the days leading up to Tuesday's contest, Mills reminded Maine voters that she was still on the ballot amid reporting about Platner's past relationships.
Last week, The New York Times published a story in which a Republican operative who dated Platner more than a decade ago accused him of physical abuse—an allegation that the candidate denied categorically.
With more than 80% of ballots tallied in Tuesday's race, Mills has received around 35,100 votes—over 94,000 fewer than Platner.
During his speech late Tuesday in Blue Hill, Maine, Platner accused "national pundits and the political establishment" of "looking for that one story, that one headline, that one moment in my life that they can define the campaign by."
"But in trying so hard to understand me, they fail to understand that this is not about me at all," he said. "This is a movement about us, about the far too many working far too hard in struggling far too much at the hands of the ruling class."
Platner: The national pundits, the political establishment, they keep looking for that one story, that one headline, that one moment in my life that they can define the campaign by. But in trying so hard to understand me, they failed to understand that this is not about me at… pic.twitter.com/BK5Zj4VB7h
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 10, 2026
Platner then turned his attention to Collins, the incumbent Republican senator who is widely characterized as a "moderate" despite her role in destroying Roe v. Wade and advancing President Donald Trump's deeply unpopular agenda. Collins' reelection bid has been backed by a flood of dark money and billionaire donations that are expected to grow in the months ahead.
"Susan Collins may have started her career decades ago in Washington with good intentions, but she has become just as spineless and corrupt as the establishment she now serves," said Platner. "If you are an independent voice, why do you vote with Donald Trump 95% of the time? If you're so bipartisan, why are you the deciding vote to put Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court? The deciding vote to defund our healthcare and our hospitals? Why did you rubber stamp the greatest redistribution of wealth from the working class from the working class to the ruling class in the history of our nation?"
"Susan Collins is only bipartisan when it doesn't matter," Platner added.
Progressive supporters of Platner's campaign applauded his victory in Tuesday's primary, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—the first prominent lawmaker to back Platner's Senate bid—declaring that "together, we will defeat oligarchy and create an economy that works for all, not just the few."
Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible, an advocacy group that endorsed Platner last month, said that Maine voters "have made their voices heard, and they are looking to fight back against special interests and push for new leadership this November."
"This result shows the momentum of voters who are choosing a different path and are looking for new leadership—one that will fight for them, not against them," said Levin. "As we look toward November, we are excited to flip this Senate seat, oust Sen. Susan Collins, and help Graham Platner bring meaningful representation to Maine."
“Congressional Republicans gifting ICE with billions of extra dollars of funding while Americans are struggling to make ends meet is an outrage," said one critic of the Trump-backed move.
The Republican-controlled House of Representatives on Tuesday narrowly approved nearly $70 billion in new funding for US Department of Homeland Security agencies responsible for the Trump administration's anti-immigrant crackdown, a move denounced by Democrats and advocacy groups.
The Secure America Act—a budget reconciliation bill approved last week by the Senate, where it was introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)—passed the House by a vote of 214-212. Every Republican present voted for the bill, while every Democrat in the chamber and Independent Rep. Kevin Kiley of California voted against it.
The legislation provides funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) through the end of President Donald Trump's term. The bill now heads to Trump's desk for his signature.
"In the final months of their House majority, House Republicans are doubling down on their failed approach: blank checks for ICE and not one cent to make things cheaper for working families," Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) said following Tuesday's vote.
"The day after threatening to cut Social Security and Medicare, they are sending billions to Trump’s mass deportation machine—which still has $100 billion sitting in the bank," he added. "The Republican Congress is a disaster for working Americans. When Democrats take back power, we must repeal this funding.”
Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-Fla.) said on X: "The House GOP just voted to give ICE and CBP $70 BILLION. Instead of investing in you and ensuring you can afford your healthcare, groceries, or rent—they chose to hand $70 BILLION to agencies operating without any guardrails while terrorizing and brutalizing our communities."
Civil society groups also blasted House Republicans after the vote.
“Congressional Republicans gifting ICE with billions of extra dollars of funding while Americans are struggling to make ends meet is an outrage," said Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, which decried what it called "a vote for cruelty and corruption."
“Trump’s ICE has proven that it is dangerous and out of control," Gilbert added. "Today’s vote is... a vote against the Constitution and the safety of our communities and neighbors. Shame on congressional Republicans for ramrodding through this egregious funding.”
FWD.us President Todd Schulte said, "At a time when voters remain rightly outraged at ICE, providing hundreds of billions of dollars to ICE and CBP to terrorize communities and tear families apart while the cost of living rises and healthcare funding is slashed is both a stunning policy failure, and incredibly unpopular with voters."
ACLU senior policy counsel Kate Voigt said in a statement that "it is unconscionable that the House would vote to write yet another blank check for ICE and Border Patrol’s campaign of chaos without any reforms. Over the past several months we’ve seen these abusive agencies kill our neighbors, harass and racially profile people, and tear thousands of families apart."
More than 50 people have died in DHS custody since Trump returned to office, with experts asserting that many of the deaths were preventable. Detained immigrants have reported beatings and sexual abuse, medical neglect, hunger and inedible food, and denial of access to attorneys, and other mistreatment.
DHS officers have killed Americans Renee Good and Alex Pretti and Mexican national Silverio Villegas González, and have wounded numerous other people during Trump's second term.
ICE detainees across the nation are resisting abuse in detention centers across the nation through hunger strikes and other civil disobedience, as well as via lawsuits.
"These are tiny and piecemeal steps which will not prevent Israel from continuing to act with impunity in its genocide and crimes against the Palestinian people," said one group.
While some advocates for Palestinian rights welcomed Tuesday's joint announcement by a group of Western nations of new sanctions targeting "extremist" Israeli settlers amid their escalating ethnic cleansing efforts in the illegally occupied West Bank, many others called the measures inadequate and urged stronger action against Israel's government for enabling settler violence.
The foreign ministers of Australia, Canada, France, Norway, and the United Kingdom issued a joint statement announcing "coordinated action to introduce sanctions and other measures to hold extremist settlers accountable for the horrific levels of settler violence against Palestinian civilians."
France joined the other four nations and New Zealand—which is coordinating sanctions with the group—in banning Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who seeks to annex the West Bank and Gaza and lives in the illegal settlement of Kedumim, from entering their countries. Members of the coalition also slapped an entry ban on four leaders of settler organizations and 21 individual settlers.
"We are today imposing new sanctions against those responsible for intensifying colonization and violence in the West Bank," French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said on social media. "Smotrich actively promotes the annexation of the West Bank, which he openly claims, the creation of new settlements in the West Bank, the recolonization of Gaza, the economic collapse of the Palestinian Authority, and its deleterious consequences on the Palestinian population."
British Foreign Minister Yvette Cooper said Tuesday during a speech in Parliament that “settler expansion and violence is illegal and a fundamental threat to the viability of a two-state solution, and to long-term peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis.”
"I have strengthened our business risk guidance to make it clear and unambiguous: If you are a British citizen or business, you should not conduct any economic and financial activities in illegal Israeli settlements,” Cooper added.
Coalition countries previously banned Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir from entry. The International Criminal Court in The Hague has reportedly requested arrest warrants for Smotrich and Ben-Gvir for the crime of apartheid related to their plans, backed by the Trump administration in the United States, to expand illegal settler colonies in the West Bank and annex the occupied territory. The ICC issued warrants in 2024 for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza.
"Extremist violent settlers, with the backing of their supporters, continue to attack Palestinians and abuse their human rights," Tuesday's announcement states. "They use violence to displace Palestinians, destroy property, and perpetuate the illegal settlement enterprise, undermining the viability of the state of Palestine and the prospects for peaceful coexistence."
"For too long, violent settlers have been able to act with near impunity, and settlement expansion and creation of outposts continue with the support and facilitation of the government of Israel," the ministers said. "In some cases, settler violence takes place under the protection of Israel’s security forces. We continue to urge the government of Israel to take action to ensure meaningful accountability for violence in the West Bank."
The statement noted that the five countries "have all taken the historic decision to recognize the state of Palestine, reflecting the rights of the Palestinian people and as part of our common efforts to protect the viability of the two-state solution."
"Today, we are acting together again in support of the same objectives," the ministers asserted. "We stand ready to take more action if the government of Israel does not take urgent steps to address the situation on the ground."
Many Palestinians and their advocates said the sanctions don't go far enough.
“While this is a step in the right direction, it is woefully inadequate," Palestinian Ambassador to the UK Husam Zomlot said on social media. “We are beyond words of condemnation. Israel has demonstrated, time and again, its disregard for international law."
"Words without action are not diplomacy. It is abdicating responsibilities," Zomlot continued. “What is needed now is clear: a ban on settlement products, comprehensive sanctions on those profiting from illegal settlements and the state sponsoring them, and guarantees that British companies, banks, and financial institutions are not contributing to Israel’s illegal occupation.“
"Justice cannot wait," the ambassador added. "The time for meaningful action is now.”
Amnesty International UK crisis response manager Kristyan Benedict called the new sanctions "a step, but not enough."
"If ministers are serious about sanctioning those 'who support and sponsor violence against Palestinian communities in the West Bank', they must act on the reality that settlements and settler violence are state policy—directed and funded from the top," Benedict argued.
“Targeting settler financing networks while the ministers who run this campaign face no consequences is not meaningful accountability—it leaves the architects untouched," he stressed, calling on the UK government to also sanction Netanyahu, Gallant, current Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz, and Settlement Minister Orit Strock.
“The legal obligation is clear, but the political will is still not strong enough," Benedict added. "Successive UK governments have failed to take meaningful action to stop Israel's crimes and those that enable them. That failure sends a dangerous message that Palestinian lives are not valued and that unlawful occupation and apartheid are acceptable. This must end now.”
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign said in a statement that "whilst any move towards additional sanctions is correct, these are tiny and piecemeal steps which will not prevent Israel from continuing to act with impunity in its genocide and crimes against the Palestinian people."
"In addition to these limited sanctions, the government has announced that it will ‘firmly advise’ British businesses against illegal activity, sending the disgraceful message that acting according to international law is optional," PSC added.
This week, around 140 Labour members of UK Parliament urged Cooper to take “urgent, concrete action to counter the escalation of violations against Palestinians” by “ending trade with illegal Israeli settlements.”
Adil Haque, executive editor at Just Security and distinguished professor at Rutgers Law School in New Jersey, said on X: "Better something than nothing, but if the aim is the removal of *all* illegal settlements, then targeted sanctions against a few groups and individuals will not do much."
Iranian-Canadian journalist Samira Mohyeddin replied to a social media post from Canadian Foreign Minister Anita Anand saying her country's government "continues to oppose the expansion of settlements," asking, "How?"
"How do you oppose them? Sanction ISRAEL," Mohyeddin asserted. "Those supporting the settlers are the Israeli state. Those who are arming them are the Israeli state. And it is Canadian Zionist charities that are funding them."
Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the country's government "firmly rejects the disgraceful measures adopted by foreign governments against Israeli citizens, entities, and a government minister," accusing the six nations of attempting to “impose a political stance regarding the right of Jews to settle in the Land of Israel and concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—camouflaged as measures against violence.”
The ministry also blasted what it called the countries' "resounding failure" to "combat the antisemitism that is rampant in their own countries,” adding that “anti-Israeli policies of the kind adopted today only serve to fuel that antisemitism.”
In July 2024, the International Court of Justice—where Israel is currently facing a genocide case related to the Gaza war, which has left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead or wounded—found the occupation of Palestine to be an illegal form of apartheid that must be ended as soon as possible. The ICJ also ruled that Israeli settler colonization of the West Bank amounts to annexation, also a crime under international law.
Efforts by the Israeli government, military, and settlers to expand West Bank settlement activity have accelerated dramatically since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. With the world's attention focused on Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza, Israeli soldiers and settlers have ramped up the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the occupied territory.
Attacks on West Bank Palestinians, including pogroms carried out by mobs of settlers protected and sometimes joined by Israeli troops, have killed at least 1,098 Palestinians between October 7, 2023 and May 18, according to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees. At least 240 of the slain victims were children.
Israeli settlers frequently attack Palestinian homes, businesses, and farms, and other critical infrastructure. The attackers burn homes, destroy crops, kill or steal livestock, and sometimes forcibly expel residents. Journalists who document the assaults and international activists trying to protect locals from the rampaging assailants have also been attacked.