NS Christmas campaign: Show your solidarity for Pussy Riot

The New Statesman is supporting Amnesty's Write for Rights Campaign.

Their trial made international headlines. Their conviction sparked criticism from politicians to pop stars. Yet widespread censure and general outrage could not deter Russia’s judiciary from enforcing the harsh punishment on the three members of punk band Pussy Riot for their performance in a Moscow cathedral.

Charged with "hooliganism on the grounds of religious hatred", Maria Alekhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova are now spending two years imprisoned in Russia’s penal colonies after they performed a song in a cathedral in Moscow criticising Russia’s president and some leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church (the third member Ekaterina Samutsevich had her conviction reduced to a suspended sentence upon appeal).

Certainly, some considered Pussy Riot’s performance of the “Punk Prayer” to be offensive. The band members themselves admit this and have apologised if they caused offence. However it was clear to most observers – including Amnesty International – that the harsh punishment is emblematic of the fact that in recent years Russian authorities have become increasingly intolerant of criticism and legitimate dissent.

Journalists and human rights defenders and artists (including some punk band members) in Russia regularly face the challenge of exercising their right to freely express their opinion sometimes at the risk of their own freedom or even physical security.  The recent move by Russia’s judiciary to ban Pussy Riot videos online is another indication of Russia’s attempt to trample on freedom of expression.  

At the time of their arrest, Amnesty International described the punk protesters as “prisoners of conscience” and called for their immediate and unconditional release.  It continues to campaign for their release and the imprisoned Pussy Riot members feature prominently in its annual Write for Rights Campaign.

For the next four weeks, the New Statesman will be supporting Amnesty International’s Write for Rights Campaign which successfully connects men and women, young and old in the UK with people elsewhere who have been wrongly imprisoned, at risk of harassment and intimidation for carrying out human rights work and to family members seeking justice for their loved ones. 

As Amnesty has seen in previous years, not only does sending a letter to the authorities and the people at risk remind the recipients that thousands are aware of their plight and are standing in solidarity with them, it also sends a worrying signal to the authorities who see the number of messages being delivered to these men and women at risk that the world is standing up with them, and for them. It takes just five minutes to show your solidarity for Pussy Riot. Just visit www.amnesty.org.uk/pussyriot.   

For more information about Amnesty’s Write for Rights Campaign visit www.amnesty.org.uk/write.

Protestors shackled outside the Russian Embassy in London. Photograph: Imran Uppal/Amnesty International

Eulette Ewart is a press officer for Amnesty International UK.  Follow Amnesty's media team on Twitter @newsfromamnesty.

Getty
Show Hide image

On the "one-state" solution to Israel and Palestine, what did Donald Trump mean?

The US President seemed to dismantle two decades of foreign policy in his press conference with Benjamin Netanyahu. 

If the 45th President of the United States wasn’t causing enough chaos at home, he has waded into the world’s most intricate conflict – Israel/Palestine. 

Speaking alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump made an apparently off-the-cuff comment that has reverberated around the world. 

Asked what he thought about the future of the troubled region, he said: “I’m looking at two-state and one-state and I like the one that both parties like.”

To the uninformed observer, this comment might seem fairly tame by Trump standards. But it has the potential to dismantle the entire US policy on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Trump said he could "live with" either a two-state or one-state solution. 

The "two-state solution" has become the foundation of the Israel-Palestine peace process, and is a concept that has existed for decades. At its simplest, it's the idea that an independent state of Palestine can co-exist next to an independent Israel. The goal is supported by the United Nations, by the European Union, by the Arab League, and by, until now, the United States. 

Although the two-state solution is controversial in Israel, many feel the alternative is worse. The idea of a single state would fuel the imagination of those on the religious right, who wish to expand into Palestinian territory, while presenting liberal Zionists with a tricky demographic maths problem - Arabs are already set to outnumber Jews in Israel and the occupied territories by 2020. Palestinians are divided on the benefits of a two-state solution. 

I asked Yossi Mekelberg, Professor of International Relations at Regent's University and an associate fellow at Chatham House, to explain exactly what went down at the Trump-Netanyahu press conference:

Did Donald Trump actually mean to say what he said?

“Generally with President Trump we are into an era where you are not so sure whether it is something that happens off the hoof, that sounds reasonable to him while he’s speaking, or whether maybe he’s cleverer than all of us put together and he's just pretending to be flippant. It is so dramatically opposite from the very professorial Barack Obama, where the words were weighted and the language was rich, and he would always use the right word.” 

So has Trump just ditched a two-state solution?

“All of a sudden the American policy towards the Israel-Palestine conflict, a two-state solution, isn’t the only game in town.”

Netanyahu famously didn’t get on with Obama. Is Trump good news for him?

“He was quite smug during the press conference. But while Netanyahu wanted a Republican President, he didn’t want this Republican. Trump isn’t instinctively an Israel supporter – he does what is good for Trump. And he’s volatile. Netanyahu has enough volatility in his own cabinet.”

What about Trump’s request that Netanyahu “pull back on settlements a little bit”?

“Netanyahu doesn’t mind. He’s got mounting pressure in his government to keep building. He will welcome this because it shows even Trump won’t give them a blank cheque to build.”

Back to the one-state solution. Who’s celebrating?

“Interestingly, there was a survey just published, the Palestinian-Israel Pulse, which found a majority of Israelis and a large minority of Palestinians support a two-state solution. By contrast, if you look at a one-state solution, only 36 per cent of Palestinians and 19 per cent of Israel Jews support it.”

 

 

Julia Rampen is the editor of The Staggers, The New Statesman's online rolling politics blog. She was previously deputy editor at Mirror Money Online and has worked as a financial journalist for several trade magazines.