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.

Turkey should stop shooting at Syrian civilians fleeing fighting and immediately allow them to cross the Turkish border to seek protection, Human Rights Watch said today. Renewed fighting between the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, and armed opposition groups in Northern Aleppo has displaced at least 30,000 people in the past 48 hours, with Turkish border guards shooting at some of them as they approach Turkey's new border wall.
Turkey's border remains firmly shut, a year after the authorities started rejecting all but the most seriously injured Syrians. Turkey has previously indicated it wants to create a "safe zone" in Syria to which Syrians could ostensibly flee and Turkey could return Syrian refugees. In its March 8, 2016 deal with Turkey, the European Union said it would work with Turkey to "allow for the local population and refugees to live in areas which will be more safe."
"As civilians flee ISIS fighters, Turkey is responding with live ammunition instead of compassion," said Gerry Simpson, senior refugee researcher at Human Rights Watch. "The whole world is talking about fighting ISIS, and yet those most at risk of becoming victims of its horrific abuses are trapped on the wrong side of a concrete wall."
According to international aid workers in Turkey and heads of six of the 10 displaced persons camps east of Azaz near the Turkish border, ISIS advances on April 13 and 14 have forced out at least half the camps' 60,000 residents. They have fled to other camps, to the Bab al-Salameh camp on the Turkish border and to the nearby town of Azaz. Three of the camps - Ikdah, Harameen and al-Sham - are now completely empty of the 24,000 people previously sheltering there.
On April 14, Human Rights Watch spoke with the representatives of six of the 10 camps and seven displaced Syrians who had been living in camps that had been taken over by ISIS or that were close to the fast-changing ISIS front line. All of the residents said they wanted to flee to Turkey but that the closed border meant they had nowhere to escape to. Some said they had stayed in the camps under ISIS-threat because they were afraid they wouldn't be able to find shelter elsewhere, knowing other camps along the Turkish border were completely full. Others said they had returned to their nearby home villages even though they were still unsafe.
The head of Ikdah camp, on the Turkish border, said that ISIS had taken over the camp, which sheltered just under 10,000 people, early on April 14, fired shots in the air, and told residents to leave.
A camp resident who escaped described what happened:
"At dawn we heard gunshots near the camp. A short while later ISIS arrived and used a loudspeaker to tell us we all had to leave. They said we had nothing to fear and that we should all go east, into ISIS territory. We left the camp but headed north through olive groves toward the Turkish border. We were about 2,000 people. As we approached the border wall we saw Turkish soldiers on a hill behind the wall and they just started shooting at us. They shot at our feet and everyone just turned round and ran in all directions. I took my family and we walked to another [displaced persons] camp nearby, called al-Rayan. We're afraid now because ISIS is close to this camp too. But where can we go."
The head of al-Sham camp, close to the town of Kafr Bureysha two kilometers south of the Turkish border, said during an interview that the sound of machine gun fire in the background was coming from advancing ISIS pickup trucks from the new front line town of Kafr Shush, about a kilometer away. He said that gunfire had injured a 30-year-old man in the camp earlier in the day and that people in the camp who couldn't escape quickly enough were digging holes to protect themselves.
On April 14, displaced persons' representatives on the Syrian side of Turkey's closed Bab al-Salameh border crossing told Human Rights Watch that about 5,000 displaced people from camps to the east taken by ISIS or under ISIS threat the previous night and earlier that morning had arrived in the Bab al-Salameh camp and the nearby town of Azaz.
"Turkey's closed border is forcing Syrian men, women, and children to dig ditches and hide to escape the horrors of war," Simpson said. "Turkey's attempt at creating a so-called safe zone is a terrible joke for civilians cowering underground and desperate to escape Syria."
As of early April, Turkey had completed a third of a 911 kilometer rocket-resistant concrete wall along its border with Syria. Satellite imagery dated April 8 reviewed by Human Rights Watch showed that the wall had sealed off significant parts of the border north of Aleppo.
Starting in late March, Syrian armed opposition groups opened an offensive from their enclave in Azaz to retake key areas from ISIS along the Turkish border. After armed groups took the town of al-Rai, ISIS began a counteroffensive on April 9, retaking a number of areas. Clashes in the towns near the Turkish border continue as armed rebel groups and ISIS try to gain control over towns there.
According to reliable United Nations sources in Turkey, as of April 14, ISIS had opened an attack against Azaz, which is near the Turkish border, and was in control of several villages to the east, including Hiwar Kalas, Kafr Shush, Zayzafun-Ekdeh, and Baraghideh.
As of April 12, various agencies had identified 75,000 displaced Syrians living in about 10 informal camps and a number of locations in Azaz, to the east of the town along the Turkish border and in Bab al-Salameh. They also estimated at least an additional 25,000 displaced people were in various locations to the east of Azaz. Many of them have fled multiple rounds of fighting and offensives in Northern Syria.
Since early 2015, Turkey has all but closed its borders to Syrians fleeing the conflict. On April 12 and 13, 2016, Human Rights Watch interviewed eight people who described how Turkish border guards at the Syrian border violently pushed them and dozens of others back to Turkey in February and March 2016. Two described how Turkish border guards beat fellow asylum seekers so badly they could not recognize their faces.
These recent accounts of Turkish border guard abuses are consistent with Human Rights Watch findings in late 2015 that Turkish border guards beat and summarily expelled dozens of Syrians who crossed to Turkey using smugglers.
Turkish authorities have allowed international aid groups based in Turkey to cross into Syria and join Syrian aid groups to distribute tents and other assistance to Syrians stuck at the border crossing and in nearby border areas.
Human Rights Watch said that allowing much-needed cross-border aid does not absolve Turkey of its obligation to respect the principle of non-refoulement. That principle, under customary international law and international human rights law, prohibits rejecting asylum seekers at borders when that would expose them to the threat of persecution and torture.
In July 2015, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey said that "cleansing the region of all threatening elements and establishing a safe zone constitutes the basis of 1.7 million Syrian refugees' return." The same month, Mevlut Cavusoglu, the foreign minister, said that, "When areas in northern Syria are cleared of the [ISIS] threat, the safe zones will be filled naturally.... People who have been displaced can be placed in those safe areas."
While Turkey's desire to limit the number of refugees may be understandable, the current situation in northern Syria makes clear that any "safe zone" would be safe in name only and would put the lives of displaced people in danger, Human Rights Watch said.
In mid-March, the EU concluded a controversial migration deal with Ankara to curb refugee and migration flows to Europe, offering EUR6 billion in aid to assist Syrians in Turkey, and reinvigorated EU membership negotiations and the prospect of visa-free travel for Turkish citizens. A key objective of the deal is to enable Greece, with EU support, to reject almost all asylum applicants arriving by boat from Turkey on the grounds that Turkey is a safe country. The EU's explicit pledge to work with Turkey to create in Syria "areas which will be more safe" where "the local population and refugees [will be able] to live" should be seen in the context of a broader plan to contain the flow of asylum seekers.
"The violence at the Turkey-Syria border is terrible proof of what's wrong with the EU-Turkey deal," Simpson said. "EU countries and Turkey should be working together to provide genuinely safe havens for Syrian refugees, not slamming doors shut in rapid succession."
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.
Democrats may have enough votes to pass a war powers resolution before the two-week recess, but party leaders have still not committed to doing so, even as the president appears ready for a ground invasion.
Backlash is continuing to grow after US House Democratic leaders made the decision to push off a war powers vote on President Donald Trump's Iran war for more than two weeks, even though they may have the votes to pass it immediately.
With Trump appearing poised to make the deathly unpopular decision to deploy ground troops into Iran within days, momentum around an act to restrict his warmaking capabilities only continues to grow.
Most of the Democrats who killed the last war powers resolution are now reportedly on board. So is Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC), who emerged from a closed-door House Armed Services Committee briefing on Wednesday saying she was “even more” opposed to boots on the ground than when she entered.
But despite having introduced the resolution himself, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, appeared to get cold feet about bringing it to the floor for a vote before next week's recess, a move which was met with anger and confusion from progressive critics.
A spokesperson for Democrats on the committee told Common Dreams on Wednesday that Meeks was very much committed to passing a bill to "hold President Trump accountable for his reckless war of choice," but that one could not be pursued until April 13, after the recess, because some of the necessary "yes" votes had left Washington.
Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim described this as a "pathetic" excuse. "As Trump threatens a ground invasion, Democratic members of Congress are saying they won’t do the one thing they are elected to do: Show up and vote," he wrote on social media.
Additionally, Grim reported on Thursday that Reps. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) and Emanuel Cleaver II (D-Mo.) had since returned to town. The only Democrat not currently in DC, he said, was Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), who said on Wednesday that his wife was undergoing a routine surgery.
Axios reported on Thursday afternoon that Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) is also absent due to the recent death of his father, and Rep. Jared Golden (Maine), one of the Democrats who opposed the last war powers vote, was still wavering as of Wednesday.
Even with some absences, Republicans are also not at full strength. Assuming that Republican Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Warren Davidson (Ohio) plan to vote yes, as they did in February, there may still be enough votes for the resolution to pass.
When asked by Drop Site reporter Lily Franks on Thursday whether there were enough votes to pass the resolution, Meeks insisted, "We can't win the vote."
"When you see me put the bill on the floor, that means we're going to win," Meeks said sharply. "I know how to count. I know how to do my job."
When Franks pointed out that enough Republicans appeared to be on board, Meeks—continuing to interrupt—told her to "go find out" herself if there were enough votes.
"If only there were some mechanism on the House floor to find out how somebody might vote," Grim quipped in response.
The Democratic spokesperson could not be reached for comment when asked by Common Dreams whether Meeks was now planning to push for a resolution vote before the recess, given that some Democrats have returned to Washington.
Nathan Thompson, a senior policy adviser for Just Foreign Policy, argues that even if Democrats do not have the votes to pass the resolution now, there is no reason not to bring it to a vote.
"Forcing a vote will make House Republicans own an increasingly likely ground invasion," he said in a letter sent to House Democrats on Thursday morning, which was shared with Common Dreams. "Even a vote that falls short will be painful for House Republicans and put real pressure on the Trump administration."
"The attendance excuse doesn't hold," he said. "Members can return by tomorrow to vote, and Republicans aren't at full strength either... An unfortunate scheduling error should not prevent Congress from weighing in at a critical moment in history."
Calls for a war powers resolution on Capitol Hill continued to grow after reports that the Trump administration is mulling several potential ground operations in Iran, potentially as early as Friday.
Axios reported on Thursday that the Pentagon is considering "invading or blockading" Kharg Island, Iran’s primary oil export hub—and sending American forces “deep inside the interior of Iran” in an effort to seize the country’s enriched uranium.
The concerns about the repercussions of a prolonged war—even for just another two weeks—are broadly shared. Speaking on MS NOW on Thursday, former Defense Secretary and CIA Director Leon Panetta warned that serious dangers exist that a short extension of the war could lead to a much more intractable situation.
"If we continue the war," Panetta said, "if we go another 16 days of war and we incur casualties, or they incur serious casualties, then the likelihood is that you're planting the seeds for a more permanent war."
As the risk of a more protracted conflict was magnified on Wednesday, Trump insisted that the US is not at war at all, but is simply waging a "military operation" against Iran.
This has heightened the urgency among many Democrats on Capitol Hill, including Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.).
"If it looks like a war, sounds like a war, and costs like a war… It’s probably a war," the former chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus wrote on social media Thursday. "Trump is admitting to violating the Constitution. No amount of doublespeak can change that."
"Congress must vote on another war powers resolution," she added.
Rep. Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) told Axios that there was "absolutely" frustration among progressives that Democrats were planning to punt the vote to next month.
Meanwhile, critics are increasingly raising suspicion that Meeks—whom The Lever noted received more than $2.2 million from pro-Israel lobbying groups according to the watchdog group TrackAIPAC—is intentionally dragging out the vote.
A prolonged war and the resulting economic turmoil are brutally unpopular, including among Republicans, and the theory goes that Democrats may seek to let it become an albatross around their opponents' necks in this fall's midterms.
Independent journalist Aída Chávez has emphasized that Meeks held up the previous war powers vote by overinflating the number of Democrats likely to defect, and may have attempted to do so again.
But with Democratic stragglers on board and more Republicans "starting to break," Chávez said: "Democratic leadership can’t keep hiding behind process.
"Bring the Iran war powers resolution to the floor right now," she said.
Thompson of Just Foreign Policy warned Democrats that "failing to force a vote will be noticed and covered in the media," and that "the Democratic base is watching and expects their party to put up a real fight."
"Even if the vote falls short by a couple votes, the members who voted yes will have a powerful record to champion to their constituents," he said. "The members who voted no will have a very difficult record to explain if troops end up being killed and injured on the ground in Iran."
"We hope that in the United States, if justice truly exists, a trial will be held that will lead to President Maduro’s freedom," said one supporter of the Venezuelan leader.
Supporters of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro gathered in both New York and the Venezuelan capital of Caracas on Thursday to demand his release.
Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were abducted by the US military in January and brought to the US to face narco-terrorism, drug trafficking, and weapons charges. The couple have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
As reported by The Associated Press, many demonstrators picketed outside a federal courthouse in Manhattan ahead of a scheduled status hearing for Maduro and Flores, and called for all charges against them to be dropped. A group of counterprotesters, meanwhile, demonstrated in support of the couple's prosecution.
"In a noisy scene, protesters and supporters chanted, blew horns, and beat drums and cowbells," reported the AP. "Among the anti-Maduro contingent, one person waved a sign reading 'Maduro rot in prison.' On the other side of a metal barrier, people held signs reading 'Free President Maduro.'"
Hundreds of demonstrators also gathered in Caracas for a government-sponsored rally demanding Maduro and Flores' return to Venezuela, which has been governed in his absence by acting President Delcy Rodríguez.
One attendee at the demonstration, an 80-year-old retiree named Eduardo Cubillan, told the AP that he hoped for a speedy acquittal of the deposed Venezuelan leader.
"We hope that in the United States, if justice truly exists, a trial will be held that will lead to President Maduro’s freedom," Cubillan said, "because this kidnapping violated international legal principles, and we want justice to be served."
In a social media message, the Embassy of Venezuela to Trinidad and Tobago also expressed solidarity with Maduro and Flores.
"Today, court day, we demand with strength and determination, the immediate release of Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro and his wife and MP Cilia Flores," the embassy wrote.
During Thursday's court hearing, reported ABC News, Judge Alvin Hellerstein said that he would not dismiss the charges against Maduro and Flores, although he "appeared to wrestle with how to assure Maduro had access to sufficient counsel."
The genetic testing put forward by the committee "fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny, and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk," said one advocate.
A new policy unveiled Thursday by the International Olympic Committee was presented as a ban on transgender athletes from participating in women's sports—but considering just one transgender woman has participated in the international games since they have been eligible to, critics said the new rules would likely have a greater impact on cisgender women with natural variations in hormones, who have already faced degrading treatment and exclusion in the sports community for years.
IOC president Kirsty Coventry, who campaigned to lead the organization with calls to "protect" women's sports in the Olympics, said that starting with the 2028 Summer Games in Los Angeles, athletes will be required to take a one-time genetics test with the screening using a cheek swab, blood test, or saliva sample.
"Eligibility for any female category event at the Olympic Games or any other IOC event, including individual and team sports, is now limited to biological females," said Coventry, adding that the new policy “is based on science and has been led by medical experts."
The IOC worked with experts to determine how to approach the issue of transgender women in sports, which in recent years has become the subject of talking points for the Republican Party in the US and other right-wing leaders. President Donald Trump signed an executive order last year barring transgender women from competing on women's college sports teams.
The committee conducted a review not just of transgender athletes but of those who have differences in sexual development (DSD), such as being intersex, and compete in women's sports. The review has not been publicly released, but the IOC said it found athletes born with male sexual markers had physical advantages even if they were receiving treatment to reduce testosterone.
The IOC had previously allowed transgender athletes to participate in the Olympic Games if they were reducing their testosterone levels. In 2021, a weight lifter from New Zealand, Laurel Hubbard, became the first transgender women to compete at the Olympics after transitioning.
Boxers including Lin Yu-Ting of Taiwan and Imane Khelif of Algeria have been subject to scrutiny and genetic testing regarding their sex; Lin was recently cleared to participate in World Boxing events in the female category. Both competed in the 2024 Olympics in Paris and won gold medals.
Khelif has said she naturally has the SRY gene that the IOC's screening would test for, and that she has naturally high levels of testosterone.
Under the IOC ruling, athletes who do not have the typical female XX sex chromosomes and have DSD will also be banned from competing. People with DSD are not always aware of their status.
South African runner Caster Semenya, who has a rare genetic trait giving her elevated levels of testosterone, was subjected to genetic testing after her fellow competitors complained about her appearance when she won a gold medal in a world championship in 2009.
Genetic screening for Olympic athletes "is not progress—it is walking backward," she told The New York Times. "This is just exclusion with a new name.”
Payoshni Mitra, executive director of the advocacy group Humans of Sport, told the Times that the new policy simply "polices women’s bodies."
“It fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny, and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk," she said.