Breaking Turkey’s Taboos

Rising nationalist sentiments in certain circles in Turkey has put minorities in a vulnerable and compromising position. In Turkey ‘insulting the Turkish nation’ is a criminal offence, which someone can be arrested for. MRG’s Ara Iskanderian speaks to a young Turkish human rights campaigner working for DurDe, an initiative seeking to stop racism and nationalism within Turkey. Her name has been left out of the article for her protection.

After hearing about her work campaigning against racism at a recent conference in England, I managed to persuade a young Turkish activist to be interviewed.  After some convincing, she agreed to answer some questions while everyone else was at the closing party. She asked to remain anonymous: publicising one’s work on human rights doesn’t always go down well in her native Turkey.

I am Armenian: to break the ice we talk about shared favourite Turkish pop-songs and common dishes, translating the names into Turkish and Armenian. Gradually, I slip in some questions and begin interviewing the young, proud, twenty-something Istanbulite who passionately gesticulates as she speaks.

She begins talking about the Turkish penal code’s notorious Article 301, which criminalises any act seen as ‘insulting the Turkish nation’. The infamous article has led to charges being brought against over sixty Turkish intellectuals including Nobel literature laureate Orhan Pamuk. Pushing out her arms and opening her palms skywards she calls Article 301 racist and an attack upon freedom of expression, all too often used to silence political opponents. ‘You cannot make a law that privileges your nation, which is what 301 is’ she says referring to how 301 seemingly favours the Turkish majority at the expense of minorities. She adds angrily, ‘it’s ridiculous.’

Maybe because the book’s still fresh in my mind, I’m momentarily distracted by her resemblance to Turkish author Elif Shafak, another victim of 301. Shafak was subjected to a Kafkaesque trial because of certain comments made by a fictitious Armenian character in her novel, The Bastard of Istanbul. The book’s anti-heroine is a young Turkish girl called Asya: a secular liberal alone in the crowded city as she navigates awkward relationships with friends and history. The parallels between Asya and my interviewee, who tells me how onlookers give her dirty looks when she eats on the bus during Ramadan and how much she loved Shafak’s book, are remarkable, so I’ll refer to her as Asya from here on.
Asya looks uncomfortable about her last answer and explains her misgivings – she says she feels unqualified to talk, and worried about having her words used against her. She asks that we don’t continue, obligingly I fold my notes away. I can’t help wondering if fear of 301 causes her to clam up. Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink, tried and convicted under 301, talked of how the spectre of 301 made him feel ‘as scared as a dove.’ He was later killed by a Turkish nationalist.

A few weeks later and Asya sends me an email from Istanbul. Can we continue over the phone? Sure.

Following the murder and funeral of Dink in 2007, when crowds took to the streets declaring ‘we are all Armenian’ as an expression of solidarity with an ethnic minority, Asya and others like her took the initiative. They established an initiative that campaigns against racism and nationalism. ‘Nationalism is seen as a positive in Turkey, people are proud to be nationalists, but it’s often a negative in reality’ Asya says. She is quick to add that her organization is not ideologically motivated, saying that it reacts to incidents rather than pursuing an agenda.

In just two years, their support base is nearly 30,000 strong and includes young Turks and prominent intellectuals alike. Asya however, laments that this is not enough in a country of 75 million people, especially as their support base is almost exclusively within Istanbul and Ankara.

Asya tells me of an incident in January when in the Anatolian town of Eskishehir the director of a cultural foundation placed a sign up in his headquarters stating, ‘No Jews or Armenians allowed, dogs are free to enter.’ She describes such actions as ‘horrible’ and talks about the statement her organization released in response. ‘We work on hate speech and hate crime’ she says and identifies 301 as a major obstacle, saying that it must go.

The organization found a prominent ally in Baskin Oran, an academic who argued that the synonymy of ‘Turk’ and ‘citizen’ should be replaced with the term ‘citizen of Turkey’. Oran was also tried under 301. Asya tends to agree though, she says, ‘I’m from Istanbul or Turkey. I don’t say I’m Turkish or I’m a Turk, I go by geographical location’.

Given their activities it’s unsurprising that the organization added its weight to supporting the online petition (www.ozurdiliyoruz.com) ‘we apologise’. Asya helped organise a series of forums explaining why people apologised to the Armenians for the ‘Great Catastrophe’ of 1915.  The controversial petition led to suggestions of mass trials by certain nationalists. When I asked Asya why she added her real name to the petition, she makes it clear it was because she is a human being with a conscience. Asya doesn’t wish to be identified with either the modern day deniers or the historic perpetrators of the Armenian Genocide. She feels it’s important to make the distinction.

Asya’s dream is to see Greeks along the Aegean and Armenians in Istanbul, hear their languages spoken loudly, to have churches reopened and a multicultural Turkey accepting of its history and diversity. It’s a nice dream but Asya admits she’s a minority view before going silent again. Campaigners like Asya do important work and whilst some might consider their actions to be too little given the possible repercussions their bravery in breaking taboos is commendable and should be supported. Fear, though, shouldn’t be part of their doings and its fear of a backlash that has Asya reminding me again that she wishes to remain anonymous.

Courtroom hearing or courtroom drama?

The 10th hearing in the murder trial of the Armenian newspaper editor Hrant Dink took place on the 6th July, in Istanbul.  Dink was a popular minority rights activist in Turkey and was assassinated in January 2007.  Ogun Samast, a 17-year-old Turkish nationalist, has confessed to his murder. Nurcan Kaya, MRG’s Turkey Coordinator, was at the trial and reflects upon the theatrical display that overshadowed the trial.

It was as if everybody was play acting: the defendants’ lawyers were acting as if they had not been involved in the crime, the Dink family lawyers were acting as if they could do something to change the ongoing situation in the murder case, and even the judges were acting as if it was all just a simple criminal court case. The only people not acting were the Dink family members. They have been suffering for two and a half years now, and their pain has remained with them throughout the trial.

It was the first time that I’d attended the court case and was told that the defendants were behaving even worse in previous hearings. Ogün Samast grinned whilst the Dink family’s lawyers were talking and constantly turned round to talk to Yasin Hayal (who is charged with planning the murder and instructing Samast) and send signals to someone sitting in the audience.

Samast even threatened the Dink family at one point, saying, ‘wait for five years’.  The judge appeared not to have heard the threat. When lawyers insisted that they had heard him, Ogün responded that it was ‘because they are also Armenians,’ implying that anybody who is Armenian is a liar and could not be trusted. Only upon the lawyers’ insistence did the judge agree to record the threat and refer it to the public prosecutor in order to open an investigation against Ogün Samast.

Interestingly  I noted that when the Dink family’s lawyers took to the floor without the permission of the presiding judge, or when they insisted on Ogün Samast’s threat being recorded, the judge angrily  advised  them ,‘stop telling me how to do my job’. Contrarily, when the defendants took the floor without permission or threatened the Dink family, they were politely warned not to by the judge. It was impossible to find a good reason for such different treatment.

At one point a Dink family lawyer informed the judges that there were two plain clothes police officers attending the hearings and taking notes. She argued that they might be recording the statement given by Erhan Tuncel (who at the time of the murder was working as an intelligence agent for the Trabzon police and is alleged to have been involved in planning Dink’s assassination before he was fired), thereby  putting Tuncel under unnecessary pressure. Curiously, the two men left the court room at this juncture. Tuncel subsequently stated that he wanted to be released under a witness protection scheme as he was concerned about his safety.

Despite the theatrics there were some important developments in the trial. Firstly, it became evident that Ogün Samast was not acting alone.  One witness, attending the trial for the first time, stated that the murder took place in front of her eyes and that Ogün Samast was not alone at the crime scene.  She said that the second person she had seen resembled Yasin Hayal, but could not identify him for certain. Another witness statement that was read at the hearing strengthened this allegation. A few days before the murder, the witness had been in a patisserie with Hrant Dink and spotted Ogün Samast waiting outside and speaking to a second person.

Responding to the Dink family’s lawyers for the first time, Erhan Tuncel insisted that he had passed all intelligence regarding the murder plans to his superiors. When asked why he thought he had later been fired by his boss he said, ‘Maybe he did not like me… maybe he wanted to employ somebody else… or maybe he did not want to prevent the murder’.

Despite several applications lodged by lawyers representing the Dink family, and the report issued by the Prime Ministry Inspectoral Board, which highlights negligence in prevention of the murder, public officials who failed to take any steps towards preventing the murder have not been prosecuted yet. The explanation issued by AGOS (the Armenian-Turkish weekly newspaper edited by Dink) before the trial summarises the situation – protection of public officials.

The government of Turkey has a crucial role to play in this trial, which will also help improve its reputation with minority communities. Convicting the five young men arrested for the murder will achieve nothing for the rule of law in Turkey and will not satisfy the Dink family. The government of Turkey cannot tell prosecutors and judges what to decide, however it can tell public bodies to issue information required by the Dink family lawyers, which will help them to further their investigations.

The right to life is protected by law in Turkey, as well as international treaties ratified by the state. The right to life does not simply protect citizens when the state kills, it also requires states to take preventive measures when there is a serious threat against any person’s life, carry out an effective investigation in to the crime and charge the perpetrators.

Public officials in Turkey did not take any measure to prevent this murder. Dink did not need to apply to the authorities for protection. He was publicly threatened and intelligence on the murder plans were passed to the police. Eventually he was shot dead. Hrant Dink’s right to life was violated. And now, as the state fails to carry out an effective impartial investigation, his right to life is being violated for a second time. As AGOS says, ‘Our hearts do not stand for this situation anymore’.

‘The media is part of the problem, not the solution!’

Ara Iskanderian, a British-Armenian interning in MRG’s publications department, reflects on the media’s influence on racist attitudes

It’s a rare hot, sunny day in Sheffield, United Kingdom. Young delegates representing organizations from across the length and breadth of Europe are taking their seats ahead of the afternoon’s plenary session. This is the bi-annual United conference, an opportunity for European anti-racism activists to network and share strategies with which to combat the far right. This afternoon’s topic: “How does the media contribute to combating racist attitudes?”.

Everyone’s a little tired, but the first guest speaker immediately rouses us as he declares loudly, “The media is part of the problem, not the solution!” His passionate speech sits people up straight in their seats. Around the room people from countries ranging from France to Georgia start nodding in agreement.

The speaker, who preferred not to be identified, was fresh from campaigning against the far right British National Party (BNP) in the run up to the June 2009 European elections. Frustrated with what he termed “sloppy” reportage by mainstream media outlets he called for a return to forceful investigative journalism. Against which the far right’s assertions don’t hold up.

Take the recent BNP electoral pamphlet I recently had shoved through my letterbox. Photos of ‘genuine’ British workers complaining about job losses turned out to be American models posing as the real thing. Similarly, spitfire airplanes used in the same pamphlet to protest against immigrants coming from Eastern Europe in fact belonged to a Polish RAF squadron. These discrepancies were eventually picked up by the mainstream British media, but the actual research had been carried out by anti-racism activists like our speaker, and not by journalists.

I find myself joining the chorus of nodding heads. As an ethnic minority, a British-Armenian, I feel let down by the media in Britain. I often read pieces where journalists rather emptily use words such as ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘diversity’ as stand alone terms, failing to elaborate what they mean by them. The result being that whilst multiculturalism is celebrated, not enough time is spent explaining as to why it should be.

When the speaker emphatically declares, “We need to realize that we are on the defensive against the far right”, I find my mind racing. Personally I would like to see journalists proactively challenging racist opinions with solid, well-researched articles that provide balanced images of minorities. This would certainly attach more weight to the concept of multiculturalism.

Merely reporting facts isn’t enough. However, time and space restraints often dictate this to be the case. In such instances issues become simplified. For example there is an inadequate separation of issues such as immigration and job security. When in 2003, following Poland’s entry to the EU, thousands of Poles migrated to the United Kingdom it was reported as threatening British jobs, more often than not though Poles were filling areas of labour shortages.

When these issues are linked with commentaries on “Britishness” it’s a little hard as an ethnic minority to not feel as though what’s occurring is really veiled criticism of minorities in general. Journalists argue that what’s occurring is in fact a legitimate debate about immigration to Britain. But how can it be described as a ‘debate’ when those journalists conducting it are not representative of the communities themselves? There is a distinct lack of ethnic minority journalists commenting in the British print media.

As an ethnic minority reader it’s easy to feel a little bit ignored and unrepresented. What’s worse however is the tenuous connection made in some papers between immigration, job security and ‘Britishness’ – and it’s not difficult for the far right to play upon these links to its political advantage.

The speaker finishes up and receives a standing ovation. He looks humbled by the response.

In the proceeding comments one delegate suggests establishing media monitoring agencies. I don’t think regulation is a solution, its too open to criticisms of restricting free speech. Part of the problem is that media outlets lack accountability, so monitoring their impact is difficult. It’s equally difficult to know whether the media creates or reflects an issue. Can journalistic styles change, though? Balanced reporting should be the goal.

Delegates in a workshop at the United conference

We break for coffee. Conversations start amongst people from countries across Europe as they share their incredulity at the state of affairs in Britain. But it seems the British experience is far from unique.

A tap upon the microphone hurried us back to our seats. The next two speakers chart similar situations, but this time showing how sloppy reporting on ethnic minorities and their issues spiraled into violence in their countries. I sat there, in the stuffy warmth of a Sheffield conference hall, rather alarmed at the comparison I was able to draw between the initial stages of these last two speakers’ experiences of alienation and my own. But getting together to discuss these experiences and hear examples of what should and can be done to make a difference, left me hopeful and with plenty of food for thought.

World War II’s undesirable elements

On Sunday, thousands will be at the Cenotaph in Whitehall to pay respects to those who gave their lives for Britain in war, but there is a group whose contribution has been virtually forgotten – the Chinese crew of the Merchant Navy, says MRG’s Advocacy Officer Kathryn Ramsay.
My grandfather was in the Merchant Navy throughout World War II, sailing on the Atlantic convoys, risking the U-boats to bring vital supplies back to Britain. I still have a letter he wrote to my sister and I when I was nine; we had been given a globe for Christmas and his letter was a geography lesson in the form of a description of one of his longest voyages. It was years later before I learned that during that particular voyage, because he didn’t touch land for around nine months, he had been out of touch for so long that my grandmother thought he must have been killed.

I was only 14 when he died but I distinctly remember the stories he told about the places he visited and I think these are probably what inspired my own love of travel. He never spoke to me directly about the trauma of war though – he thought I was too young. A few of his stories were about the Chinese crew of the ships he sailed on. He spoke of their hard work and their loyalty and he made us laugh with politically incorrect impersonations of their pronunciation of particular English words. And he talked about their ingenuity in making the best of difficult circumstances.

During and after the war a lot of food stuff was in very short supply in Britain and there was a thriving black market. The crew of the merchant ships were given rice supplies to last the voyage. One day when the ship was in dock in Liverpool, my grandfather was returning from a trip into the city when he saw a trail of rice leading from the gates of the dockyard all the way to his ship. He knew exactly what had happened. One of the crew had been stopped leaving the dockyard and the customs officer had found a bag of rice destined for the black market. Customs officers had to report any misdeeds to the ship’s captain but by the time they reached the Captain’s quarters, the evidence had disappeared – thanks to a small hole in the paper bag.

There were large numbers of Chinese sailors based in Liverpool during the war; the city had a thriving Chinatown. They took the same risks as British sailors; one, Poon Lim holds the record for the longest survival time on a raft after a torpedo sank his ship. But they were paid less than their British counterparts and whether or not they received a War Risk Bonus depended on the discretion of the company they worked for. As the war came to an end, some of the companies, fearing increased competition from US companies, slashed the wages of Chinese sailors. Then between October 1945 and mid 1946 the British Government repatriated many of them through changing the terms of their contracts so they had to leave and through round ups and forcible deportations. Many of the deportees had British wives and children.

I first heard about the deportations a few years ago when my sister was making a documentary for BBC Close Up North about a Liverpool man’s search for his Chinese father who disappeared during this period. She uncovered documents from the Home Office which showed they wanted to reduce Liverpool’s Chinese population. A Home Office report accused the Chinese of being ‘an undesirable element in Liverpool’ and suggested their wives were ‘of the prostitute class’. The Home Office’s description completely contradicts reports and letters from the time, including from Liverpool and Birkenhead police.

Racism against foreigners serving Britain, either in the armed forces or like the Chinese sailors, in the Merchant Navy during WWII was common. Yet recent court cases have shown that although much improved, unequal treatment continues today. The government is happy to receive the services of foreigners but is still unwilling to provide equal benefits, residency or care. A group of retired Gurkhas had to go to the high court to win the right to settle in Britain but lost a case for equal pension rights. Injured Commonwealth soldiers faced being deported if they had less the four years service until a media investigation resulted in the Home Office changing its guidelines.

My grandfather hated Remembrance Day and could never bring himself to attend any events. Memories of the friends he’d lost and the ships he’d seen go down made it too painful. For me, when I buy my poppy or keep the two-minute silence, I think of him and of the others like him who sailed on the convoys but weren’t so lucky. And now I also think of the Chinese sailors who served with him and whose contribution has been forgotten. Perhaps one day, they too will be represented at the Cenotaph.

European Roma Summit – an opportunity missed

Snjezana Bokulic, MRG’s Europe and Central Asia Programmes Coordinator, writes on the ‘missed opportunity’ at the recent historic EU Roma summit organised by the European Commission in Brussels

A historic event took place in Brussels on 16 September – the European Commission organized the European Roma Summit, a high-level meeting on Roma in the European Union, the first of its kind, as the organizers were pleased to stress.

In his opening speech, Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso very vividly described the plight of Roma in Europe. He talked of the exclusion, discrimination and racism faced by Roma communities, their limited access to mainstream education, jobs and housing. He was, nevertheless, eager to qualify the role of Brussels. “Dramatic situation of the Roma,” he said, “cannot be solved from Brussels.” Then he raised the stakes as regards the expectations for the meeting. This summit, he said, was to be “much more than just another meeting.” It turned out it wasn’t.

In spite of some high-level speakers who, in addition to Barroso, included Vladimir Spidla, Commissioner for Employment, Social affairs and Equal Opportunities, Jan Fiegel, Commissioner for Education, Training, Culture and Youth, Jacques Barrot, Commission Vice-President and Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs, as well as George Soros, the American businessman and philanthropist, the conference offered little novelty and even fewer concrete points. It was a sort of déjà vu – we’ve heard it all many and many times over, the sombre criticism, praise, and when it was due, self-criticism, as well as the emotional and controversial views.

In short, the conference was a disappointment.

Girl in a Roma camp in Milan. Photo: Paolo Poce

One of the major human rights violations currently underway in one of the founding member states of the European Union – Italy’s intended practice to fingerprint Roma communities in camps and settlements – remained on the sidelines, in spite of the attempts of the European Roma Policy Coalition, a Brussels-based NGO initiative, to bring the issue to the attention of the audience. In the middle of Barroso’s speech, Coalition members stood up, one by one, holding or wearing T-shirts with a message condemning ethnic profiling. Barroso acknowledged them, expressed his support for their position, yet the conference failed to discuss in concrete terms and condemn this gross abuse of fundamental human rights, yet another indication of racism and discrimination which Roma communities face in every day life, not only in Italy. A range of speakers followed, from governments and civil society, including Roma civil society. Yet the course of the meeting allowed for little to no discussion, no dialogue between the ‘high-level’ and European Roma took place in reality. Even the agenda dodged the real issue – the urgently needed discussion of the obligations and responsibility of the European Union and its member states when it comes to the respect of the rights of European Roma.

So what difference is this conference likely to make in the lives of the Roma in Europe? Minimal to none in my modest opinion. It was more of the same, preaching to the converted yet again. What I would have liked to see is high-level decision makers attending the conference, actively participating and staying throughout and until the end. Commission officials and competent representatives of the national governments of the member states publicly committing themselves and the institutions they represent to specific actions they will undertake following the conference. Commissioners Spidla and Figel and, most importantly perhaps given the flagrant violations of human rights of the Roma in Italy, Vice-President Barrot who is in charge of justice and home affairs, spelling out publicly what the top bureaucrats in Brussels will do for the benefit of Roma. High-level representatives of national governments pledging specific actions aiming at ending discrimination, social inclusion and racism against the Roma in their countries. These pledges and actions would have been negotiated jointly with the Roma communities and Roma civil society in advance of the conference. A system for monitoring the implementation of the pledges would have been put in place following the conference to hold the Commission and the governments to account. As it was, the conference remained a talking shop, albeit a high level one. Another opportunity lost, what a shame. How many more opportunities to end discrimination and social exclusion of its Roma population can the EU afford to lose?

“Serbs are our enemies”

Matilde Ceravolo, MRG’s Fundraiser, makes friends in Pristina and hopes for peace

Such a statement would attract international worries, had it not come from Besnik, a smiling, lovely 12-year-old, excited about practicing his English.

We are sitting atop the Prizren castle ruins, admiring the fascinating Turkish-style city at our feet, and the snow-capped mountains in front of us. Prizren is the main town inhabited by Kosovar Turks, and the only one where Turkish is still an official language. From our exceptional point of view we can observe the impressive quantity of minarets, but next to them, also several orthodox churches, demonstrating how this city has been a crossing point of different cultures.

Today, orthodox churches are surrounded by barbed wire, protected by German KFOR, behind ostensible UNMIK notices informing that no offence will be tolerated. Just under the castle, the Serbian quarter is still destroyed and inhabited. The owners never felt secure enough to return to their houses.

As I chat with my new friend and his schoolmates, I wonder how he gathered so much hate. He is too young to remember the Milosevic era. What must he be hearing from his father, commenting on the evening news?

The Serb quarter in Prizren

During my short stay in Kosovo I have heard and read testimony of hate against Serbs on a daily basis. Since 1989, Albanians in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia have been victim of systematic discrimination and violation of human rights. FRY forces are believed to have implemented deliberate ethnic cleansing. The hate against Serbia is understandable.

But Kosovar Serbs have also been victims of the conflict. It is estimated that about 200,000 of them were displaced. A number of extra-judicial killings have been documented, of which the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) was considered responsible.

Nowadays, KLA members have become political leaders of the independent Kosovo. Pristina and the whole country are filled with posters celebrating the KLA and its fighters. Albanian flags are everywhere; the National Museum in Pristina dedicates one entire floor to KLA history.

I wonder how Serbs could ever feel safe in a country that celebrates their killers; how would they ever accept to being a part of such a country?

Last Sunday Serb voters were divided, but the pro EU Democratic Party of Serbia’s president Boris Tadic got a clear majority. The new government is still to be decided and it is difficult to imagine that Serbia would accept the independence of Kosovo.

However, on behalf of MRG, during the last 10 days I have been meeting members of all the communities. The common issue that came out from all the meetings is that Kosovars have similar worries and aspirations: to live freely and safely in a country that respects their identity, no matter if the country is called Serbia or Kosovo.

Tomorrow I will be leaving this complex country and its fascinating people. I am far from having answered all the questions I had on the creation of this new state and the international intervention. But I believe that only dialogue and trust can create the premises for a sustainable solution, and for this to happen, leaders on both sides must abolish hate speech and adopt peaceful language.

All I wish to Besnik and his friends is they have the chance to grow up without enemies.

Take two cities

Matilde Ceravolo, MRG’s Fundraiser, reflects on the similarities and differences of two cities caught up in ethnic feuding

As my flight left Ljubljana, I wondered why it would take as much time to reach Pristina as it took to come from London. Naïve question soon answered. The plane went all along the Croatian coast, then into Italian airspace towards Brindisi, turned right into Albania and then North again to Pristina… Direct flights to Kosovo are not allowed into Serbian airspace.

I went to Mitrovica today, to meet the Serbian community. Airspace is not the only thing they are not prepared to compromise.

It is quite impressive how perceptions change when you change the point of view. South of the river, you are in independent Kosovo which contains a northern Serbian-inhabited region. You cross the river, and you are in the southern region of Serbia.

Mitrovica and Nicosia are the last divided cities in Europe. Different language, different religion, and a history that makes barbed wire difficult to remove.

In Cyprus, accession to the EU is playing a key role for the solution of the stalemate. The Turkish Cypriot community has showed a clear interest in dialogue, as does the newly elected President of the Republic. The hopes for reunification are at the highest point of the last 30 years.

Serbs in Mitrovica hope that the accession of Serbia will have the same effect on Kosovo, and that the independence process will be reverted. What they forget is that Northern Cyprus was never recognized by the international community (with the exception of Turkey), while Kosovo as been brought to life under the international protectorate.

As an outsider, walking in the streets of Mitrovica as well as in Nicosia, I feel the nonsense of once-neighbours transformed into enemies, while these places could host all their children in a peaceful community. Before 1999, Mitrovica used to be the most multi-ethnic municipality in Kosovo. Now it is the symbol of national identity for both Serbian and Albanian Kosovars.

Most of the responsibility lies at the door of the international community. Crimes of the recent past have never been prosecuted, ethnic cleansing has not been punished, displaced people have not been given the security to return to their homes.

Kosovo is at an historical turning-point. On 11 May, Serbian citizens (including Kosovars) will be called to elect the Government that will lead the country for the next year. It is the moment for Serbs to choose between renewed nationalism or dialogue.

Meanwhile, the new constitution of the Republic of Kosovo has been designed and must now be implemented.

Unless the new authorities on both sides – with the support of the European Community – create a safe environment for all communities, where human rights are protected and every citizen has equal opportunities, irrespective of its ethnicity, the frustration will rise again. And again… History has shown what unanswered frustrations and fear can bring. This is the moment to give answers.

Ethnic tension at home and abroad

MRG’s Media Officer, Emma Eastwood, hears tales of strife from Kenya and right below her nose in Hungary

Last night I interviewed Nyang’ori Ohenjo from the Kenyan Indigenous Fisher Peoples Network, whose analysis of the recent (and current) post-election violence in Kenya is somewhat more thorough than that portrayed by the international media. He tells me that even though many of the concerns of minority communities in Kenya were addressed in the 2001 Constitution review process, the 2002 government led by Mwai Kibaki reneged on those constitutional promises thus setting the stage for serious resentment and animosity towards the Kikuyu community loyal to him. Nyang’ori claims that come the December 2007 elections many people had simply had enough, with their backs up against the wall their only recourse was to turn to violence. For an in depth look at this issue see MRG ‘s 2005 report, Kenya: Minorities, Indigenous Peoples and Ethnic Diversity, which Nyang’ori helped to write.

Nyang’ori Ohenjo

Talking to the journalists present at the seminar today from the new EU member states was informative but at times disheartening. The Slovenians told me of the difficulties they face getting coverage of international development issues past their editors and painted a picture of Slovenian society as increasingly inward looking following an initial euphoric period post-independence from the former Yugoslavia in 1991.

As we sipped our coffee on the balcony admiring the view of the Danube, one of the Hungarian journalists alerted us to a neighbourhood conflict happening right under our noses. Apparently a shopkeeper in the Jewish quarter of Pest refused to sell a ticket to a skinhead for a concert by an extremist group a few days ago and her shop was firebombed. A broad coalition of anti racist activists turned up the following day to show support for the shopkeeper and this afternoon the extreme right wing has organised a counter demonstration. Am I imagining it or can I hear more sirens than usual…

I’ll encourage the journalists to let us know what happened tomorrow morning – from what I’ve been told by members of the Hungarian NGOs here it’s not an isolated incident and reflects wider tensions throughout the country.

All together, all equal

MRG’s Media Officer, Emma Eastwood, is in Budapest for an MRG Europe seminar on the rights-based approach to international development

I’ve finally escaped the MRG office in London and am holed up in the Buda hills with NGOs and journalists from the new EU member states.

The venue couldn’t have been better placed for those of us new to Hungary, Budapest spreads out as far as the eye can see below our eyrie in the Council of Europe Youth Centre. Dominating the view is the gothic National Parliament building on the banks of the Danube, resplendent in the spring sunshine.

My role at the seminar is multi-faceted – I’m here to learn more about human rights and development, the work of the NGOs present and all importantly to build relationships with journalists from the new EU member states. At the same time I’ll also be giving an online demo of the new MRG World Directory of Minorities and Indigenous Peoples and will run a workshop on harnessing the power of the media for advocacy.

My covert mission however is to seek stories that bring the work of MRG to life and my eyes and ears are open for news ‘angles’. Tales of discrimination against Roma in this part of Europe abound… We’re meant to be looking at development in the South, yet many of the NGOs from this region are rightly focusing on their own neighbours - a 2003 report by UNDP found that Roma living conditions in central and eastern Europe were comparable to sub-Saharan Africa. Viera from the Slovakian NGO Center for the Support and Development of Human Potential illustrates the point when she tells me about over-crowding and lack of even the most basic amenities in what is effectively a Roma ghetto in the town of Kosice. Apparently the neighbourhood, called Lumik IX, appears in a gritty film about migration in central Europe called ‘Import Export’ by Austrian director Ulrich Seidl if anyone wants to check it out.

I’ve come well armed for the job of documenting the proceedings – laptop, MP3 recorder, mic, headphones, camera, mobile phone. I battle with a bona fide spaghetti junction of cables in my room… My hope is to interview MRG partners from Kenya and Uganda who’ve come to the seminar to contextualise the theory with case studies from the front line of EU development projects.

We begin by delving deeper into the definitions of poverty and human rights and examine the motivations behind overseas development assistance (we’re a cynical lot I’m afraid, I won’t depress you with our answers). I look around and realise that the gender balance of the seminar is shockingly awry – out of 30 NGO participants and speakers only four are men – interestingly it’s a trend similarly reflected back at the MRG office in London. This is gender mainstreaming gone mad, what about the introduction of quotas I say…

MRG’s SE Europe Programme Coordinator Snjezana Bokulic enlightening us all on UN mechanisms – I can’t help wishing that we could steal the Council of Europe’s slogan ‘all different, all equal’ – it embodies the protection of minority rights in just a few words compared to our tongue-twister of a mission statement (and maybe that way journalists would stop thinking I was calling them about a shareholders’ story).