Bangladesh: Ensure Fair Trials for Mutiny Defendants

The Bangladeshi government should immediately stop the mass trials of the alleged mutineers of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) to ensure fair trials, Human Rights Watch said 26-07-2011. Those responsible for killing 74 people during the February 2009 mutiny by the border guard unit should be held accountable, but in trials in military and civilian courts that meet international fair trial standards.

Human Rights Watch expressed concern about the mass trial completed on June 27, 2011, in which 666 members of the 24th Border Guards Battalion were tried before the BDR tribunal, a military court. All but nine were found guilty and sentenced to terms ranging from four months to seven years in prison.

"It is impossible to try hundreds of people at the same time and expect anything resembling a fair trial," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The massacre shocked Bangladesh, but each of the accused should only be found guilty if the government provides specific evidence against them."

On February 25 and 26, 2009, members of the Bangladesh Rifles, since renamed the Bangladesh Border Guards, staged a mutiny against their commanding officers, killing more than 70 people and subjecting others to sexual violence. Under pressure from the army, which had urged the government to use overwhelming force against the BDR compound in a heavily populated area of the capital, Dhaka, the authorities responded with mass arrests of more than 6,000 members of the unit. 

The accused have been held and prosecuted in violation of Bangladesh's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Many were detained without charge for several months. The government has not produced individualized evidence against each detainee. All 6,000 accused face trials before special BDR tribunals created after the massacre. Some 847 of the accused also face charges under the Bangladesh Criminal Code, some of which carry the death penalty. Human rights groups documented the deaths of some of the accused in custody, including as a result of torture, in the first few months after the mutiny. 

The detainees' lack of access to counsel remains a serious concern, Human Rights Watch said. From the time they were arrested in February 2009 until December 2010, the accused in the mutiny cases were not allowed to consult with their lawyers. Since then, they have been allowed a 20-minute consultation at the beginning and end of each court day and a 30-minute consultation in between.

Many of the accused in both the military and civilian cases have no legal counsel, in some cases for financial reasons and in others for lack of information. Lawyers involved in the cases have complained to Human Rights Watch that it is impossible to provide an effective defense to each accused with so many clients and so little time to talk to each accused. 

The possible use of capital punishment in the upcoming criminal trial of the 847 accused heightens fair trial concerns, Human Rights Watch said. According to the prosecutor's office, some defendants share their lawyers with as many as 12 others in the same case. In addition to the concerns about time for consultations, the potential for conflict of interest is significant, as evidence that could prove one person's innocence could indicate another's guilt. Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty in all cases as a fundamentally cruel and irreversible punishment.

"The BDR mutiny was ugly and brutal, but the current approach appears to be a witch hunt against a group rather than an attempt to identify the individuals responsible for specific crimes," Adams said. "The government should rethink its approach to make sure the masterminds and perpetrators of serious offenses are brought to fair trial, but end the prosecutions of the rank-and-file who were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time."

"It is impossible to try hundreds of people at the same time and expect anything resembling a fair trial. The massacre shocked Bangladesh, but each of the accused should only be found guilty if the government provides specific evidence against them." - Brad Adams, Asia director

India: New Killings, Torture At Bangladeshi Border

Revised Instructions from Delhi Not Stamping Out Abuses.

he government oof India should undertake a speedy, fair, and transparent criminal investigation into fresh allegations of killings, torture, and other abuses by the Border Security Force (BSF) at the border with Bangladesh, Human Rights Watch said today. Those against whom there is credible evidence of culpability should be prosecuted as part of an effort to end longstanding impunity for abuses along the border.

In December 2010, Human Rights Watch released a report, Trigger Happy, documenting extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detention, torture, and ill-treatment by the BSF. In the past decade, the BSF has killed Indian and Bangladeshi nationals. After the release of the report, Indian authorities assured Bangladeshi officials that these killings would be stopped. The government announced that it would order restraint and encourage the use of rubber bullets instead of more lethal ammunition, steps welcomed by Human Rights Watch.

While the number of deaths due to shooting has substantially decreased in 2011, the Bangladeshi non-governmental organization Odhikar has documented at least 17 alleged killings of Bangladeshis by the border force and other instances of severe abuse since January. Local groups have documented several cases of deaths as a result of severe beatings by the BSF.

Despite orders from New Delhi to end killings and abuse and to exercise restraint in dealing with people crossing the border, new deaths and other serious abuses are being reported, said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director for Human Rights Watch. The government has issued some positive new directives, but it needs to prosecute those who commit abuses so the soldiers will understand they can't act with impunity.

MASUM, a Kolkatta-based non-governmental organization that conducts fact-finding in the border areas, reports that while the number of shootings at the border has significantly reduced, BSF soldiers have been brutally beating and torturing suspects. Indian residents in the border area, while expressing relief that the indiscriminate shootings have stopped, have complained about aggressive intimidation and beatings.

In one recent example, MASUM reported to the National Human Rights Commission of India that on July 13, a group of soldiers from the 91st battalion of the border force threatened a local human rights worker, Kanai Mondal, in the village of Char Rajanagar, holding a gun to his head to demand that he take down posters calling for an end to torture. The soldiers also threatened other activists and confiscated posters, MASUM said.

On June 30, BSF forces killed Mizanur Rahman, 25. According to Odhikar, he had slipped into India along with four other cattle rustlers, when border guards intercepted them. The others escaped, but the soldiers allegedly beat Rahman to death and dumped his body into the Saniyazan River.

On June 2, Odhikar documented two cases where BSF soldiers intercepted groups of cattle smugglers. According to Odhikar, Rafiqul Islam, 35, from Satkhira, was badly beaten and then dumped inside Bangladeshi territory, where Bangladesh Border Guards found him and took him to a hospital. In a separate incident, Indian soldiers caught Fazlur Rahman and his accomplices near the Panitor-Gazipur border. While the others escaped, Fazlur was badly beaten and left unconscious inside Bangladesh.

On April 18, 2011, border force soldiers killed Rekatul Islam, 17, as he and his accomplice, Mohammad Shahdat Hossain Odhikar, tried to smuggle cattle across the border. Shahdat said they were stopped by BSF soldiers as they tried to cross the border with 10 cows. Shahdat was injured, but escaped.

On April 9, MASUM reported that Biswanath Soren, an elderly Indian man, was beaten by border force troopers he believes were intoxicated. They brandished their firearms to intimidate him and finally released him, he said. Soren sent a written complaint to the police, but no action has been taken.

The excessive use of force and the arbitrary beating of people along the border are unjustifiable, Ganguly said. These abuses call into question india's stated commitments to the rule of law.

Many people routinely move back and forth across India's frontier with Bangladesh to visit relatives, buy supplies, and look for jobs. Others engage in petty and serious cross-border crime. The border force is mandated to address illegal activities, especially narcotics smuggling, human trafficking for sex work, and transporting fake currency and explosives. It also works to stop militants planning violent attacks in India's restive northeast.

In many of the cases investigated by Human Rights Watch, however, the victims were cattle rustlers, farmers, or laborers who said they were hoping to supplement their meager livelihoods by working as couriers in the lucrative but illegal cattle trade that is rampant at the West Bengal border.

Local police forces rarely register complaints against border security and sometimes encourage the victims to drop their cases, telling them that nothing will come of it. One victim told Human Rights Watch that the police informed him that the border forces had committed no crime since they were there “to beat the people.

The Indian government needs to do more to ensure accountability for violations committed by the border force soldiers and to ensure compliance with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, Human Rights Watch said.

While the Indian authorities vigorously protest attacks on fishermen who enter Sri Lankan waters, they seem unwilling to act against their own border forces when they commit crimes against Bangladeshis, Ganguly said. As a regional power, India should lead by example in South Asia to end the culture of impunity for security forces.

Norway: Blaming Muslims - Yet Again

With at least 92 people dead and several injured, the brutality of Friday's attacks in Norway left the country reeling.

But who to blame for the bomb blast that tore through Oslo's government district and the shooting spree that left scores of teenagers dead at a youth summer camp in nearby Utoya?

Moments after the explosion that, as of Saturday night, left seven dead, pundits and analysts alike had assigned blame to al-Qaeda or an al-Qaeda-like group (a close approximation will do, one can suppose).

There were also reports of a group calling the Helpers of the Global Jihad either claiming responsibility for the attack or lending it support to whoever carried it out. The group retracted its rather vague statement on Saturday. 

Norwegian police, meanwhile, concluded fairly early on that the attacks weren't the work of a foreign terrorist group. They have 32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik in custody - he is believed to be the gunman who opened fire on the teenagers attending a youth camp organised by the Labour Party. 

It's also been reported that Breivik bought six tonnes of fertiliser in May from a farm supply firm, which seems to take a page right out of another non-Muslim terrorist's handbook: Timothy McVeigh, who along with Terry Nichols, blew up the Alfred P Murrah Building in Oklahoma City in 1995 with a truckload of fertiliser, killing 168 and injuring 450.

Still, despite the initial lack of evidence shortly after the attack - and a growing stack of evidence pointing to the contrary later - some continued to look for a "jihadist" connection in the Norway attacks. Some looked for a link between the attacks and the anger that erupted after a Danish newspaper published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in 2005.

Local Muslims: 'Deep sorrow' 

This hits the Muslim community in Norway in two different ways - first, their sense of security is threatened as much as any other Norwegian. On top of that, they are automatically blamed for arguably the darkest days in Norway's recent history.

The local Muslim community was quick to respond.

 

The Islamic Council of Norway immediately issued a statement of condemnation, saying that any attack on Norway was an attack on the homeland of its members, while imams and other Muslim community members visited with various Christian groups and church leaders in an effort to not only offer condolences, but to improve lines of communication.

"We are in deep sorrow with the Norwegian community," Muhammed Tayyib, the coordinator of The Islamic Cultural Centre Norway, told Al Jazeera.

Tayyib said that even though most of the Muslim community are immigrants, that they are "part of the democratic system and support the freedom of expression. We are reacting [to the attacks] as Norwegians, not as outsiders".

Tayyib said that the mosque at the cultural centre, which is in the heart of Oslo and not far from the bomb blast, remained open to all on Saturday.

He said many non-Muslims had come in on Saturday to talk about the attacks or just to get to know the Muslim community better. 

Rizwan Ahmad, the general secretary at the cultural centre, said that reports of backlash against Muslims in Oslo left the younger members of the cultural centre feeling vulnerable. Two women wearing hijabs, he said, were harassed on the street while a Pakistani man was beaten on a bus.

But Ahmad said that the Muslim community remains in solidarity with the greater Norwegian community.

"We don't say anything about (the attacker) being Muslim or not Muslim. It's still a tragedy," he said of the attacks.

Dleen Dhoski, coordinator of the Muslim Student Association at the University of Oslo in Blindern, said that the concern wasn't about who was to blame. 

"Our main concern wasn't [whether] it was a specific group that performed this horrible action, but we were shocked and concerned about the wellbeing of those who got affected by the attack," said Dhoski, who said she felt that Norwegian media was fairly neutral in its reporting. 

"And [we were] even more shocked that something like this could be happening in our safe homeland ... This was an attack on peace and democracy in Norway, so I don't believe it has an effect only on the Muslim communities, but the entire nation," said Dhoski.

She said the Muslim community was focused on helping those most affected: "So the main priority right now for us all is showing our support towards the victims, and just try to contribute as much we can to make sure that Norway stays as it always has been." 

The group continues its public outreach, she said, attending debates and dialogues with non-Muslim groups while keeping an open line with the media.

Far-right connection 

Of course, it wasn't just the pundits and security analysts who were looking no further than the Muslim world to blame for the attacks.

The far-right - which has shown itself to be focused on with blaming Muslims for all European ills - was doing the same. Notably, the Nordisk group (a nationalistic, anti-immigration activist group described as having "Nazi-like beliefs) was busy blaming Muslims for the attacks on its forum.

Posters complained that the "uncontrolled immigration from Muslim countries" was to blame and that the attacks were "expected" and that, "terror will not decrease when the desert rats surge across Europe".

The group did not respond to an interview request on Saturday.

While Nordisk is certainly a somewhat fringe element, Norway, like many other European countires, where anti-immigrant groups have gained significant ground in recent elections, is swinging further to the right. Its Progress Party has been getting stronger, with some elements in the party seeking tougher immigration laws. In 2009, it called for the deportation of parents whose children wear the hijab to school.

The posters on the forum seemed unaware that Breivik is reportedly a member of their group. Norway's police confirmed that Breivik identified himself as a "Christian fundamentalist", while local media reported that he had posted anti-Muslim rhetoric online on several occasions.

Indeed, Breivik, it has been reported, was also rather taken with at least one member of the far right, Pamela Geller, a noted anti-Islam activist who fought against the construction of an Islamic community centre near the site of the former World Trade Center towers in New York.

Geller, who in May blogged that Muslims were responsible for "all rapes in the past five years" in Norway linked Friday's attacks to a "jihad".

Ali Esbati, an economist at the Manifest Center for Social Analysis, says the negative perception of Muslims in Europe has become a "convergence point" among right-wing groups, who spread the viewpoint of Muslims as an "occupying force and threat to Western society".

"The wider problem is that it's not even radical Islam that's seen as a threat - it's the idea that all of Islam or Muslims are a threat," said Esbati.

"So these (right-wing) radicals find a wider acceptance in mainstream politics."

He's not surprised by the knee-jerk response of Muslims being blamed for the attacks, as he says, discourse is not driven by facts or statistics. Rather, it is driven by perception - and right now, terrorism's face isn't of the radical right or of separatist groups in Europe (which, together, constitute the greatest terorrism threat to Europe) . This has lead to the proliferation of what Esbati calls fundamentally "racist" ideas towards Muslims.

"The tone in public discourse … has become much harsher, it's been a gradual process," said Esbati.

"It's the normalisation of ideas that were far more marginalised in the past."

The 'madman' angle

Still, the question remains: When what was targeted was a government building and a youth camp put on by a political party - one that calls for the recognition of a Palestinian state - why would a Muslim be a more likely suspect than, say, a far-right terrorist?

Essentially, the answer simply seems to be this: It's been nearly a decade since the September 11 attacks, which, it seems, have had the effect of making Muslims the terrorist fall-guy in the Western world.

"It was obvious that everyone would assume that it was a Muslim," said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. 

"All the Islamophobes on the internet jumped all over it."

He said that, even as of Saturday night, US media reports in the US were claiming "Islam this and al-Qaeda that."

But then, said Hooper, there's the "madman" angle, referring to the Norwegian official who said that the attacks were "not Islamic-terror related" and therefore "a madman's work."

"Unless it has been committed by a Muslim, it's not terrorism. If a non-Muslim commits an act of terrorism, they don't call him a terrorist. They say he was 'a madman,'" said Hooper.

Even though Breivik has been identified as a Christian, Hooper says he's sure his actions will not be affiliated with his faith - nor should they be. It's important, he says, to realise that an act of terrorism carried out by an individual, no matter what religion or creed, not be associated with the entire population following that faith. This, of course, is not the case for Muslims in the current climate, and so Hooper says the focus should be on outreach. Muslims in Norway must continue to build coalitions and to work to "marginalise extremists of all faiths",  he said. 

"Everything always comes down to education."

Children abandoned on east Africa's "roads of death"

Desperate Somali mothers are abandoning their dying children by the roadside as they travel to overwhelmed emergency food centers in drought-hit eastern Africa, U.N. aid officials said Monday.

Josette Sheeran, executive director of the United Nations World Food Program, told a conference in Rome that a combination of natural disaster and regional conflict was affecting more than 12 million people.

 

"We are seeing all the points able to distribute food completely overwhelmed," she said, adding that a camp in Dadaab in Kenya that was built for 90,000 people now housed 400,000.

"We want to make sure the supplies are there along the road because some of them are becoming roads of death where mothers are having to abandon their children who are too weak to make it or who have died along the way," she said.

Women and children were among the most at risk in the crisis, Sheeran said, calling it the "children's famine" given the number of children at risk of death or permanent stunting of their brains and bodies due to hunger. The WFP will feed 2.5 million malnourished children and is trying to raise money for more, she said.

HORRIBLE CHOICE:

"I believe it is the children's famine, because the ones who are the weakest are the children and those are the ones we're seeing are the least likely to make it," Sheeran told Reuters.

"We've heard of women making the horrible choice of leaving behind their weaker children to save the stronger ones or having children die in their arms."

Ministers and senior officials met at the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization in Rome Monday to discuss how to mobilize aid following the worst drought in decades in a region stretching from Somalia to Ethiopia, Kenya and Djibouti.

The WFP said it needed an extra $360 million in urgent funds. Oxfam said that overall another $1 billion was needed to handle the situation.

The World Bank said in a statement it was providing more than $500 million to assist drought victims, in addition to $12 million in immediate aid to help those worst hit.

Amid warnings that urgent action was required to stop a humanitarian disaster spreading across the Horn of Africa, officials said there was still a chance to support people and help them resume livelihoods as farmers, fishers and herders.

Governments worldwide and the U.N. have been criticized for their slow response to the severe drought but they face severe problems getting aid to a region in the grip of a raging conflict across much of southern Somalia.

The U.N. has declared a famine in two regions of Somalia and warned it could spread further afield.

Years of anarchic conflict in southern Somalia have exacerbated the emergency, preventing aid agencies from helping communities in the area. Nearly 135,000 Somalis have fled since January, mainly to neighboring Kenya and Ethiopia.

The WFP has said it cannot reach more than 2 million Somalis facing starvation in areas controlled by Islamist militants, who imposed a food aid ban in 2010 and have regularly threatened relief groups.

Oxfam's Barbara Stocking said it was very difficult for staff to access parts of Somalia but it was working with local partners to provide aid and they were trying to help them scale up their support in the current crisis.

Fanatic Answers His Questions

After Friday's dual attacks in Norway, more than 1,500 pages of the writings of the shooter Anders Behring Breivik have emerged -- a manifesto of madness if ever there was one.

The 32-year-old gunman is a Nordic ideal, and for at least nine years, he meticulously crafted his plan to root out anyone different. Breivik's rambling writings, grandly titled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, present him as a right-wing nationalist fueled by a combined hatred of Muslims, Marxists and multiculturalists. 

As part of the manifesto, Breivik interviews himself, offering a highly personal Q&A in which he throws himself admiring questions and answers them with disturbing calm. This abridged version of Breivik's interview is translated from Norwegian newspaper Bergens Tidende.

What tipped the scales for you? What particular things pushed you to plan the attack?

For me personally it was our government's involvement (engagement) with/in the attack on Serbia (Nato bombing in 1999) several years ago. It was completely unacceptable the way the U.S. and Western European regimes bombed our Serbian brothers. There have been many other cases that have strengthened my resolve. Among them, my government's cowardly handling of the Muhammed cartoons, and their decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to an Islamic terrorist (Arafat). There have been dozens of other questions. My government and our media capitulated to Islam years ago, after the Rushdie incident. Since then it has snowballed. Thousands of Muslims stream in each year through the asylum, institutions, or family connections in Norway.

What would you say to your European brothers and sisters?

Know that you are not alone in this fight. We have tens of millions of European sympathizers and tens of thousands of brothers and sisters who support us fully and are willing to fight beside us. Hopefully I will be able to help and inspire others. Build your network on Facebook. Follow the guidelines in this book and you will succeed! 

If you were to use a word for the ideology or movement that you represent, what would it be?
Cultural conservatism, or a nationalist/conservative orientation known as the Vienna school of thought. As for the political movement, I would describe it as a National Resistance Movement, an Indigenous Rights Movement or even a Right-revolutionary movement. 

Are you optimistic?

I am very optimistic. Cultural Marxism/multiculturalism, especially in combination with Islam, will defeat itself. The justification for this claim is that the cultural Marxist and Islamic alliance will not last. When the window of opportunity comes, we must be ready to seize the political and military control of all funds. When the time comes, we must not hesitate. We must risk everything for the chance to get our freedom and secure freedom for our relatives again. I have prepared myself mentally for a very long time and I would like to sacrifice my life for the benefit of my European brothers and sisters.

You said you have pure genealogy?

I am very proud of my Viking heritage. My name, Breivik, is a place name from Northern Norway, dating back to before the Viking era. Behring is a pre-Christian Germanic name derived from Behr, the Germanic word for Bear (or "those who are protected by the bear").

I suppose you wanted to tell your friends about this. Has it been difficult to live a "double life"?
First it was extremely difficult to avoid the temptation to tell your closest friends. I decided however to retain all relevant information. Revealing sensitive information to any of them would put them in a difficult spot, because they would be required by law to report this information to the authorities. It would also pose a serious threat to me if they decided to tell anyone. 

What motivates you? How have you managed to stay focused and motivated for more than 8 years? Is it bitterness and hatred against the so-called "cultural Marxist/the multiculturalism wonderful elites," or maybe towards Islam?

No, not at all. If they (the cultural Marxists) against all odds, gave up on multiculturalism tomorrow, if they stopped all Muslim immigration and started the deportation of all Muslims, I would forgive them for their past crimes. If they refuse to surrender until 2020, there will be no turning back. We will eventually wipe out every single one of them. I do not hate Muslims at all. I acknowledge that there are magnificent Muslim individuals in Europe. In fact, I have had several Muslim friends over the years, some who I still respect. This does not mean that I will accept an Islamic presence in Europe. Muslim individuals, who are not assimilated 100% by 2020, will be deported as soon as we manage to seize power. Although I admit that I am sick of the current development, I would say I'm driven by my love for Europe, European culture and Europeans. This does not mean I'm against diversity. But valuing diversity does not mean you support the genocide of your own culture and people.

How did you first involved in your current activities?

When I was around 16-17 years old, I joined the Progressive Party's youth organization (FPU), which was anti-immigration and pro-free market. Every journalist in the country considered the party's members to be racist because of their anti-immigration platform. The Progress Party was under constant attack from every media organization, from NGOs and all other political parties. They were called racists and Nazis, and were generally labelled "fascist pigs." The Progress Party appealed to me because I had seen the hypocrisy in society, and I knew even then that they were the only party that opposed multiculturalism.

Around 2000, I realized that the democratic struggle against the Islamization of Europe, and European multiculturalism, was lost. It is simply not possible to compete with democratic regimes that import millions of voters. 40 years of dialogue with the cultural Marxists / multiculturalists had ended up as a disaster. It would now only take 50-70 years before we, Europeans, were the minority. So I decided to explore alternative forms of opposition. But the biggest problem then was that there were no options for me at all. There was no known armed culturally conservative, or Christian, anti-Jihad movement.

Grudge Of A Christian Fundamentalist

The macabre killing of 93 people by a right-wing fanatic in Norway is the worst attack carried out in that country since the second Great War. Traumatised Norwegians mourn the death of the unsuspecting souls who did not have the slightest clue of the doomsday. 

After this, things will never be the same for the Norwegians. The horrifying scenes of blood and wail have left a deep scar on the national psyche of the peaceful nation. 

The 32 year old Anders Behring Breivik, who is now under police custody, surprised many by justifying his acts. In his first comments, after giving himself up to the police, made public through his lawyers, he said although the killing was 'atrocious' it was 'necessary'. We'll learn more from his deposition in the court. 

Investigators are planning to burrow deep into his beliefs and come out with a concrete outline of his actual profile, other than the one posted on the facebook. It is important to know what exactly he wanted to achieve. 

Till now, it is an act of a single man. There has been no evidence of multiple involvements as yet. Only time will tell the remainder of the story. Although outside links are not downplayed by political experts. 

He may have acted alone in this operation, but most likely inspired by 'extreme rightists' scattered across Europe. We have to wait till his depositions and intensive police findings that have got underway.

A witness to the massacre, Adrian Pracon, who escaped his bullets, said, he walked around calm and controlled and randomly shot at the crowd without showing any sign of thrill. 

What were his political beliefs? From boyhood he grew with a deep hatred towards multi-culturism of the lefts and of the Muslims. He hated "cultural Marxists" and wanted a "crusade" against the spread of Islam. He called himself a 'nationalist' and harbored a deep resentment against the immigrants, who he thought enjoyed benefits of his state without deserving them. A staunch believer in right politics he planned to create a far right nationalist party, mainly to set up a counter force to deal with the “violent Marxist organizations that he believed terrorized the politically conservative”. 

Breivik was a member of the Progress Party, albeit for a brief period, between 1999 and 2004. But he left the party blaming it for embracing

'multiculturism'. It was after walking out of the party, that his 'independent extreme views' took shape. All these years he worked alone. But he kept contacts with far right group members in several countries of Europe. He discussed political ideologies and strategies with them. We might have more information on them in future.

What spurred him to commit such a cold blooded massacre? Is it only his dogmatic political thinking that led him to this blood letting? Why did he have to kill those innocent young people attending a youth camp of their party? 

If Breivik is calling himself a nationalist it is like vindicating the aphorism that patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel. The macabre massacre he unleashed is the most degenerated form of exerting rancour on his own co-religionist compatriots. He appears to be a modern re-incarnation of Adolf Hitlter. 

Breiviks gruesome acts only substantiate the conventional wisdom of Europe that far right circles in that continent are getting intolerant and more confrontational. This is a dangerous phenomenon that powers in Europe and the world could ill-afford to ignore. Home-grown terrorists are hardly visible before they commit the most dangerous acts in their own yards.

However, people taking recourse to terrorism must be told that 'act of terrorism has little to do with politics or beliefs; it is a senseless and criminal act, not justifiable by any reasoning.

It is important that the First World democracies address the problems posed by the 'far right extremists' and 'Christian fundamentalists' in their countries. They harbour intense hatred and grudge against the immigrants and minorities and their religious belief. They also target those who believe in democracy and protect the rights of the immigrants and minorities. 

This is no secret. They have made it known through the media, through public rallies and through attacks and killings.

End killings, abuses, HRW asks Indian BSF

Rights watchdog Human Rights Watch (HRW) has asked the Indian government to carry out investigations into fresh allegations of killings, torture and other abuses by its Border Security Force (BSF) on Bangladesh border.

Saying that killings and severe abuses continue to take place despite India’s stated commitment to abide by international principles and exercise restraint at the border, the New York-based organisation asked the Indian government to ensure prosecution of those found guilty of such crimes.

In December last year, a HRW report titled ‘Trigger Happy’ prompted the Indian authorities to announce steps to stop killings at the border, including the use of rubber bullets instead of more lethal ammunition, a HRW news release said Monday.

The report outlined extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, torture and mistreatment of both Bangladeshi and Indian nationals by the BSF over the past decade. Although there has been a significant decline in the number of deaths caused by shootings at the border this year, at least 17 Bangladeshis have allegedly been killed by BSF soldiers since January, according to Odhikar, a Bangladeshi non-governmental organisation.

Local groups documented several cases of deaths as a result of severe beatings by BSF men, as well as cases of aggressive intimidation. Earlier this year, Odhikar reported two separate incidents where cattle farmers died as a result of excessive violence.

Mizanur Rahman, 25, was allegedly beaten to death by BSF men after he crossed the border into India. His body was later dumped into the Saniyazan River. The BSF also killed Rekatul Islam, 17, as he and his accomplice tried to smuggle cattle into the neighbouring country. Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director of the HRW, demanded an end to the longstanding impunity for abuses along the border.


“The [Indian] government has issued some positive new directives, but it needs to prosecute those who commit abuses so the soldiers will understand they can’t act with impunity,” she said.

The BSF is responsible for addressing illegal activities at the border, such as narcotics smuggling and human but in most cases victims were cattle rustlers, farmers, or labourers hoping to supplement their meagre livelihoods by working as couriers in the illegal cattle trade at the West Bengal border. The HRW press release concluded that Indian authorities need to do more to ensure accountability for violations committed by their border force men and to ensure compliance with international laws.

India’s human rights record makes a farce of its democracy

INDIA is a nation engrossed in confronting terrorism and suppressing intermittent local rebellions. It is also witnessing a surge in human rights violations, which the government seems to be happily lackadaisical in preventing.

The Asian Centre for Human Rights has documented a jump in cases of custodial deaths by 41.66 per cent over the last decade, including 70.72 per cent in prison and 12.60 per cent in police custody. It is indeed a paradox that the largest democracy is defiled by frequent cases of illegal detention, torture, extrajudicial execution and forced disappearances.

Moreover, nothing could be more disgraceful than the incarceration of thousands of people for political reasons in this multiparty democracy. Unfortunately, the state seems to be competing with the outlaws in trampling the basic rights of its citizens guaranteed by the Indian constitution. The common people, particularly minorities and the underprivileged, are enduring all forms of inhuman and degrading treatment at the hands of security personnel.

Mumbai-based grocer Faiz Usmani’s sudden demise during his grilling by investigating officers probing the July 13 serial bombing points to a greater malaise. Though Usmani’s brother is a suspected terrorist, ad hoc mass detention without specific charges following every major crime has become an unofficial practice.

Prakash Singh, a former director general of police and distinguished internal security expert struggling to usher in police reforms, candidly admitted to me that the ‘state has turned rapacious’, while simultaneously advocating appropriate legislative immunity in its tackling of the scourge of extremism.

Despite his admiration for the restraint displayed by Indian forces, the subaltern class—especially in underdeveloped areas—continues to face the combined wrath of militants, security agencies and state-sponsored militias. While rebels against the Indian constitution randomly exploit the poor, having no hesitation in extracting levy for a perjurious cause, the foot soldiers of the Indian state wilfully use this hapless population as human shields during counterinsurgency operations.d arm of the police show no qualms in resorting to criminal acts in insurgency-infested provinces. More inclined to treating homebred militancy as a mere law and order subject, the Indian government is adopting a carrot and stick strategy. 

Notwithstanding the rapid strides in enacting social legislation guaranteeing rural employment, the right to education, ownership of forest land for tribal people and strengthening social security of the unorganised workforce—there seems to be a reluctance to fetter the security agencies which use extralegal measures to enforce the law.

Intriguingly, the cabinet has drawn a veil over the prevention of torture bill, 2010 and is dithering over ratifying the UN convention on torture while ignoring calls from Amnesty International to ensure fair trials at international standards. Bodies such as the United Nations and the European Union have consistently voiced concern at India’s disregard for humanitarian laws. As far back as 1997, the UN human rights committee expressed its anxiety about the widespread use of torture by law enforcement agencies: ‘The EU has regularly taken up in the framework of its dialogue with India, the implementation of public order-related legislation and allegations of human rights violations,’ says Jean-Christian Rémond of the European External Action Service.

Alarmingly, India’s official human rights body—the National Human Rights Commission—has failed miserably to lead a national discourse on human rights and dignity, thus taking flak from the UN Human Rights Council. With limited resources and an enormous charter, the agency has been rendered ineffective. In a democratic framework, any extralegal activity by police undermines not only the established procedural set-up, but also the fundamentals of governance.

Sadly, such practice has infected India’s paramilitary and military units too. India’s Supreme Court has termed such authoritarian acts cowardly and unconscionable. The government must introduce appropriate reforms instead of maintaining a deafening silence. After all, the imposition of restrictive and predatory laws to contain public outcry stands as a glaring testimony to India’s abject failure to offer a proper outlet for popular grievances.

By - Seema Sengupta.

Seema Sengupta is a Kolkata-based independent journalist and recipient of National Award

for Excellence rendered in appreciation of excellent services in the field of

freelance journalism.

The Norwegian Crusade 1107 –1110

The Norwegian Crusade was a crusade that lasted from 1107 to 1110, in the outcome of the First Crusade, by the advance of the Norwegian king Sigurd I. Sigurd was the first European king to ever go on crusade to the Holy Land, and not one argue during the crusade was abandoned. The Norwegian crusade seems to have acted out very alike to ahead Viking raids, however the Norwegians' critical aims were more noble this time.

Sigurd and his men sailed from Norway in the autumn of 1107 with sixty ships and perhaps around 5,000 men. In the autumn he indoors in England, where Henry I was king. Sigurd and his men stayed there all the chill, awaiting the spring of 1108 when they again set sail westwards.

After numerous months they came to the city of St. James (Jakobsland) in Galicia (Galizuland) where they were permitted by a citizen lord to adjourn for the winter. However when the winter came there was a shortcoming of food, which made the lord decline to advertise food and cargo to the Norwegians. Sigurd then gathered his militia, attacked the lord's castle and looted what they could there.

During the journey the Norwegians encountered a great bandit ("viking") fleet of galleys which were seeking peaceful trading-ships to rob. However, Sigurd set his course arranged for the pirates and stormed their ships. After a abrupt time all the pirates had been also slain or escaped, and Sigurd acquired eight ships from them.

After this they came to a castle in Muslim Al-Andalus called Sintra (Sintre - award day Sintra, Portugal). They took the castle, and killed every man there as they had refused to be christened. Added they sailed to Lisbon, a "half Christian and half heathen" city, said to be the allotment between Christian and Muslim Iberia. There they won their third battle, and acquired great assets.

Their fourth battle was won in the city of Alkasse (maybe a allusion to Al Qar) where they killed so many people that the town was said to have been left bare. Also here they got great materials.

After another victorious battle against pirates when sailing through the Passage of Gibraltar (Norfasund) they sailed added along the saracen land (Serkland) into the Mediterranean (Griklands hafi), and inwards at the Balearic Islands. The Baleares were at the time perceived by Christians to be nothing more than a pirate harbor and slaving axis. The Norwegian raids are also the first recorded Christian attacks on the Muslim Balearic islands (although minor attacks certain have occurred).

The first place they inwards at was Formentera, where they encountered a great number of Blamenn (Black men) and Serkir (Saracens) who had taken up their abode in a cave. The course of the argument is the most complete of the complete crusade through written sources, and might maybe be the most notable historic affair in the small island's memoirs. After this battle, the Norwegians supposedly acquired the best materials they had ever got. They then went on to beat Ibiza, and then Minorca, in both spaces victoriously. The Norwegians seems to have avoided attacking the biggest of the Balearic islands, Mallorca, most expected as it at the time were the prosperous and well equipped center of an independent taifa kingdom. Tales of their sensation may have inspired the Catalan Pisan capture of the Baleares in 1113-1115.

In the spring of 1109, they reach at Sicily (Sikileyjar) where they were welcomed by the master Count Roger II who was only 12/13 years old at the time.

In the summer of 1110 they lastly inwards at the harbor of Acre (Akrsborg) (or perhaps in Jaffa), and went to Jerusalem (Jorsala) where they met the ruling crusader king Baldwin I. They were cordially welcomed, and Baldwin rode together with Sigurd to the river Jordan, and back again to Jerusalem.

The Norwegians were given greatly assets and remainder, counting a chip off the holy angry that allegedly Jesus himself had been crucified on. This was given on the clause that they would maintain to promote Christianity and beget the artifact to the committal locate of St. Olaf.

Later Sigurd returned to his ships at Acre, and when king Baldwin were departing to the "heathen" (i.e. Muslim) city of Sidon (Saett) in Syria (Syrland) Sigurd and his men accompanied him in the blockade. The city was then full and subsequently the Lordship of Sidon established.

Viewpoint: Attacks strike at Norway's values

Norway awoke this morning to the greatest loss of life it has experienced since World War II.

There is a pervasive sense of unreality. This kind of tragedy - a mass shooting and home-made explosive devices - happens elsewhere, not here.
There is disbelief that this has happened at all, at the dozens of dead people, and shock that a Norwegian could do this to other Norwegians. There is grief too that so many young lives have been lost in such a senseless way.

"I feared I would have nightmares overnight, but the nightmare came when I woke. This is impossible!" lamented Per Martin Hvam-Malmedal, a student.
Norway has a small population, so a relatively large proportion of people will be directly or indirectly touched by the events. In the streets and online, people are rallying to support each other.
This is a society where you can meet even top politicians strolling in Oslo's streets with no security.
The attack was squarely aimed at the values Norwegians treasure most. Their openness, freedom of expression and feeling of safety have all been shaken to the core.
On Utoeya Island politically active youngsters gather every summer to play football, participate in debates and meet the Labour Party leadership, former and present. In the words of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg, what was once a paradise for young people has been turned into hell.
Norway's dark corners:

Norway's openness and lack of security is in large part a result of it having such a small, homogenous population. It seems paradoxical that an extremist who appears to have fanatically wanted to protect Norway from intruders and the "dangers" of multiculturalism would himself do such damage to the nation.

Norway is now forced to look at the less attractive facets of its society.
Media reports say the arrested man expressed sympathies for the Progress Party (FrP), Norway's most right-wing mainstream political party. For many years, the FrP has been steadily growing in popularity at the expense of the left-leaning Labour Party and the more moderate Conservative Party, although it is yet to win an election.
There are also citizens' websites like Document.no, where Anders Behring Breivik left racist, extremist right-wing comments along with fellow anti-Muslims, and there were attempts to start up Norwegian satellite groups in support of the English Defence League.

These all represent, with varying degrees of extremism, a section of the Norwegian population which feels that the country's immigration policies are too lax. They feel disenfranchised despite Norway's attempts at distributing fairly its immense oil wealth. Norway might now be forced to deal head-on with this undercurrent of nationalism and anti-immigration sentiments.

Justice Minister Knut Storberget said the attack "is sure to change Norway... I hope we will come to value more highly the democratic and open work done by youth and others in political and voluntary organisations".
There is some relief that however tragic, the attacks were apparently not the work of international terrorists.
That at least gives less ammunition to those who are trying to stoke up anti-Muslim feelings.
But Norwegians fear their cherished freedoms may be affected in the aftermath.

"We should not let fear paralyse our ability to think clearly and wisely," wrote Harald Stanghelle, political editor of the daily Aftenbladet. "There is much that we should not allow to be sacrificed on the altar of fear."
Lars Helle, editor of the daily Dagbladet, said "we must avoid being preoccupied by fear, like the US was after 11 September 2001. Rather, we must look to Spain and England and how the people of those nations recovered their freedom after the horrible terrorist acts of 2004 and 2005".

 

A World In Hunger: East Africa And Beyond

A far wealthier world is more divided, and contains nearly twice as many malnourished people, as was the case in the early 1970s. These facts alone are a damning criticism of the way the world economic system has evolved, writes Paul Rogers.

A DROUGHT across much of east Africa in mid-2011 is causing intense distress among vulnerable populations, many of them already pressed by poverty and insecurity. The range of  the affected areas is extensive: the two districts in Somalia that are now designated as famine-zones are but the most extreme parts of a much wider disaster that stretches from Somalia across Ethiopia into northern Kenya, and as far west as Sudan and even the Karamoja district in northeast Uganda.

The numbers put at risk in this, the worst drought in the region since the 1950s, are enormous. At least 11 million people are touched by the disaster. In the Turkana district of northern Kenya, 385,000 children (among a total population of about 850,000) are suffering from acute malnutrition (see Miriam Gathigah, ‘East Africa: millions stare death in the face amidst ravaging drought’, TerraViva / IPS, July 18, 2011). In Somalia, the conflict between the Islamist Shabaab movement and the nominal government makes conditions even more perilous for those affected.

The world’s largest refugee camp, at Dadaab in northern Kenya, offers a stark illustration of the consequences of the drought. The population of Dadaab, which was designed to cope with 90,000 people, has increased in recent months to 380,000 —  and 1,300 more are arriving daily (see Denis Foynes, ‘Eleven million at risk in horn of Africa’, TerraViva / IPS, July 19, 2011).

The lessons of crisis:

BUT just as striking is that this is part of a recurring phenomenon. Major warning-signs of malnutrition and famine were already visible in April 2008; among them were climatic factors, steep oil-price increases, increased demand for meat diets by richer communities, and the diversion of land to grow biofuel crops (see ‘The world’s food insecurity’, April 24, 2008).

What made these ingredients more perilous was the way that (as is so often the case) they acted synergistically. The clearest example of this was the sustained world food crisis of 1973-74, when (at its peak) some 40 million people in thirty countries were at risk. The overall predicament derived from a combination of two long-term and five more immediate factors.

The long-term issues were the relative neglect of rural development since the 1950s, and the fact that many countries were just starting to make the demographic transition (meaning that they still had 40 per cent or more of their population under the age of 14). These were intensified by the short-term problems: the coincidence of poor weather conditions (including the seven-year drought in the Sahel and floods in south Asia), a huge increase in oil and fertiliser prices, increased demand for meat in northern countries, the failure of the green revolution to deliver sufficiently robust new crop varieties, and rampant commodity-market speculation that also forced up prices.

In the event the crisis of 1973-74 did not tip into real disaster. A transnational famine was avoided, partly because a few states (notably the newly wealthy middle-east oil-producers) belatedly provided enough aid. But the most significant aspect was that throughout, the world’s grain reserves were substantial; they did fall to around half of the usual stocks, but even at the peak of the crisis still averaged around 100 days of supply. The problem the crisis revealed was that far too many people could not grow enough of their own food and could not afford the inflated prices in local or national markets. At the heart of the emergency were issues of poverty and economic marginalisation.

The lessons of a near-catastrophe were never learned. The then United Nations plan for a major increase in tropical agricultural research and development was costed at the equivalent of 2 per cent of world military expenditure per year, yet barely a third of the money needed was actually raised.

There have since been nearly four decades of ‘development’, with contrasting outcomes: the world has grown very much richer yet the great bulk of the new wealth has benefited the richest 1.5 billion in a global population that the United Nations estimates will reach 7 billion in October 2011. A far wealthier world is more divided, and contains nearly twice as many malnourished people, as was the case in the early 1970s. These facts alone are a damning criticism of the way the world economic system has evolved, and in particular of the neglect of food security for tens of millions of poor and vulnerable people.

The climate factor:

WHAT makes this situation even more pressing is that it is now reinforced by the existing and likely impacts of climate change (see ‘The climate peril: a race against time’, November 13, 2009).

There is abundant evidence that the rate of temperature increase in coming decades will be faster over the tropical and sub-tropical land-masses — as much as three times the worldwide average in many such regions. The early effects will include a marked decline in what Lester Brown has called the ‘reservoirs in the sky’: the glaciated regions of the high Andes and the far greater water-stores locked up in the Himalaya and the Karakoram (sometimes termed ‘the third pole’) (see Lester R Brown, ‘Rising temperatures melting away global food security’, TerraViva / IPS, July 6, 2011).

The dry coastal areas of Peru and other parts of western south America depend on the Andean glaciers. But the value of the south Asian glaciers is hugely greater since they feed the Ganges, Indus, Brahmaputra and other river systems on which hundreds of millions of people depend for food. When the ‘reservoirs’ shrivel and temperatures rise, the result is increased heat- and water-stress in crops, causing yields to fall and thus food shortages. Such shortages already exist, as the east African crisis shows; on present trends they will become far worse in the coming decades (see ‘A century on the edge: 1945-2045’, December 29, 2008).

A degree of adaptation is in principle possible, not least through key technological and political changes: 

improving water conservation and the breeding of drought-resistant crops, and reforming the world economy to ensure far more equity and economic emancipation (see Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, 1999). These innovations alone would be near-revolutionary — but still not enough to solve the problems. This requires bringing climate change under control via a ‘great transition’ to ultra-low carbon economies.

The current crisis in east Africa requires immediate coordinated action to alleviate the widespread suffering. It is also a powerful reminder of the far larger efforts needed here and elsewhere, which are amplified by the preceding decades of neglect and waste. The ability to achieve the great transition — with all it entails in terms of sustainable livelihoods and social organisation — will determine whether the planet’s next generations are guaranteed the food and other resources to enable them to survive and build fulfilled lives.

The Crusade of 1101

In the Wake of Victory

Europeans were overjoyed to learn of the success of the First Crusade. With the news of the victory, however, came pleas for reinforcements and the people of Europe respond with enthusiasm. Rich and poor alike were eager to make their own pilgrimage to the Holy Land, to battle the infidel, and to win for themselves the earthly glory and the spiritual rewards that came with being being crucesignati. 

A new crusade was already being preached in the spring of 1099 by the Archbishop of Milan, for Urban knew that the crusaders were in dire need of help. Thus, in Lombardy, the preaching was already well under way, and being met with strong response, when the news of the fall of Jerusalem reached Italy in late summer. The new pope, Paschal II (1099-1118), sent legates into France as well. Perhaps just as important, he re-issued Urban's threat to excommunicate anyone who had taken the crusading vow but who had not yet actually gone. By the end of 1099 armies were being raised from all over western Europe. 

The Arabs were hardly more united in 1100 than they had been in 1096. There were at least as many crusaders in this second wave as had been in the first. The Latins were hopeful and confident, eager to equal the accomplishments of the great heroes who had won Jerusalem.

The Armies and their Leaders

As in the First Crusade, these pilgrims did not all leave together but rather moved out as national armies from their various regions. The most important groups were the Lombards, the Burgundians, the Bavarians under Duke Welf, the Aquitainians led by Duke William, and armies led by William of Nevers, Stephen of Blois and Raymond St. Gilles. With a few exceptions, these were all from regions only lightly affected by the preaching in the First Crusade, and there was a strong sense of having missed out. The armies all left at different times, with the Lombards being the first to go (September 1100) and the last of them leaving in the spring of 1101.

As in the First Crusade, too, this crusade had no effective leader and was, in truth, even more scattered and haphazard in its progress. The Lombards were a motley bunch, somewhat similar to those who marched in the People's Crusade. The leaders, mentioned above, were from about the same ranks of European nobility as the original leaders had been. There were still no kings leading, for much the same reasons as there had been no kings in 1096. Once again there was an archbishop designated by the pope as leader, and once again he was generally ignored.

The crusaders appeared to have no clear plans. Most were going to help out in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, but there are some slight indications that some, at least, may have intended to invade Iraq and even to attack Baghdad. Certainly some hoped to win lands for themselves as the original crusaders had done, but it should be noted that the vast majority of crusaders did not remain in the Holy Land and the newcomers probably intended to imitate that model: go, win great battles, obtain spiritual grace, visit holy sites, perhaps come away with a relic or two, then return home.

The Lombards March

The Lombards left from Milan on 13 September 1100. They crossed through Carinthia and into Hungary, spending the winter in Bulgaria. They had already heard about the "treacherous Greeks" and relations with the Byzantines were sour from the beginning. They quarreled with the locals all along the route and when they finally arrived at Constantinople, Emperor Alexius, by now quite fed up with rag-tag Latin armies, refused to allow them to enter the city. 

The Lombards cooled their heels for two months outside the city while their leaders negotiated for supplies and for transport across the Bosporus. They were such violent and demanding guests that Alexius finally ferried them over to get them out of his hair (21 April 1101). The Lombards waited at Nicomedia, having been advised they should not set out into Asia Minor without additional troops.

In the meantime, the crusaders learned of a great calamity that had befallen Outremer: the great Prince of Antioch, Bohemond, had been captured by the Turks. Moreover, it was learned, he was being held in Khorassan (in Pontus). The Lombards naturally felt specially called to rescue their countryman. Before they set out, they were joined by the Burgundians, northern Frenchmen under Stephen of Blois, and a small group of Provençals under Raymond of Toulouse (being nursed to health after a serious illness by the Emperor's own doctor). 

The French urged the Lombards to wait, but they could not prevail. Rather than see them go unaided, the French agreed to accompany them. It did not help that St. Gilles was urging caution, for the Lombards were convinced that he was the Emperor's lackey and that the Emperor would like nothing better than to let Bohemond languish in a Turkish prison. 

The Turks, for their part, had managed to put aside their differences to meet this new invasion. They had learned their lesson from the previous disasters and were determined that the Christians should not get through. Kilij Arslan, who had personal grievances with the Franks, led the united tribes. The Lombards set out in June, and from Chankiri onward the Turks harassed them unmercifully. No one really knew where Bohemond was being held, and their guides proved somewhat unreliable (or so the Christian sources report), and the crusade wandered a bit though it headed generally eastward.

Defeat

The Turks brought the crusaders to ground near the mountains of Paphlagonia at Mersivan. The terrain was well-suited to the Turks—dry and infertile, with plenty of open space for their horses. They had been harassing the Latins for some days, making sure they went where Kilij Arslan wanted them to go and making sure, too, that they did not find too many supplies.

The battle was spread out over several days. On the first, the Turks cut off the crusader advance and surrounded them. The next day, Duke Conrad led his Germans in a sortie that failed doubly. Not only did they fail to open the Turkish lines, they were unable to return to the main crusader army and had to take refuge in a nearby stronghold.

No serious fighting took place on the third day. Then, on the fourth, the crusaders made a concerted effort to break free of the trap. The crusaders fought fiercely, inflicting heavy losses on the Turks, but the attack ultimately failed. Kilij Arslan had been joined by Ridwan of Aleppo, Malik-Ghazi of Sebastia, and Karaja of Harran, all powerful Danishmend princes. The Latins were hopelessly outnumbered.

That night, the noble leaders of the crusade decided to abandon the fight and the army. They slipped away under cover of night in small bands, heading for the mountains. The Turks pursued as many as they could, and cut down those they caught. The next morning, the fifth day of the battle, the Turks assaulted the Christian camp. With the bulk of the knights gone, the army was helpless. Many were slaughtered, the rest were enslaved. Those who managed to escape were hunted down in the hills, though some few did manage to get away.

Aftermath of Mersivan

Raymond of Toulouse, Stephen of Blois, and many of the other great lords managed to escape the debacle and to return to Constantinople. They were widely criticized for the catastrophe by the other crusaders who were still in the city. Raymond was suspect. Emperor Alexius was blamed for failing to send his own troops. Some even said that Alexius had tipped off the Turks, not wishing to see the hated Bohemond freed.

This victory was a sweet one for Kilij Arslan, for it avenged his honor and restored his standing among the Danishmends. But he could not enjoy his victory, for he knew that more crusader armies were on their way.

The Nivernais Expedition

Count William of Nevers had in the meantime set out into Asia Minor on his own hook. He had come by way of Italy, crossing the Adriatic at Brindisi and arriving at Constantinople on 14 June 1101. Upon learning of the Lombard expedition, he set out almost at once, crossing the Bosporus on 24 June and setting out in pursuit.

By the time he reached Ankara it was plain that he was not going to catch up with them. Many in his army were not interested in rescuing the Norman, pointing out that their vows stated they were to go to Jerusalem. So William turned south, heading for Iconium (modern-day Konya). This was central Anatolia, a dry and harsh land ill-suited to the support of armies.

Finding Iconium too well-defended, and not wishing to risk a siege, William pressed on to Heraclea. This city was not defended at all, but the Turks had removed most of the supplies and had poisoned the wells. The army had no choice but to press on. It was now mid-August. The Lombard army had already been destroyed, though William did not know this.

The land south of Heraclea was a desert. The army struggled forward for a few days, for there was no other choice. Once they were sufficiently worn down, the Turks attacked. Once again the knights abandoned the foot soldiers, leaving the common people to be slaughtered and enslaved.

William and his knights hired locals to guide them through the desert, but their guides betrayed them. William and his men were robbed, stripped, and left on foot in the wilderness to perish. Amazingly, a handful of them, William included, managed to walk out of the desert, through the mountains and at last down to Antioch.

A second crusader army had been annihilated.

The Aquitainian Expedition

The third army consisted of Duke William of Aquitaine's men. William is rather famous as the troubador prince, for he was a great patron of the troubadors in southern France. He was a highly cultured individual who wrote poetry himself. He left his homeland in March and took the overland route, being joined along the way by the Poitevins and by Welf, Duke of Bavaria.

This army arrived in Constantinople in early June. They chose not to follow William of Nevers in pursuit of the Lombards; most felt they should proceed directly to Jerusalem. They were on hand to hear of the catastrophe in Paphlagonia. A portion, including most of the Germans, decided to go by sea rather than risk the overland route. The French now decided take the Nivernais route, marching into the interior and arriving at Heraclea in early September.

Kilij Arslan was fresh from his victory in the north. He ambushed the Aquitainians near Heraclea and wiped them out. At least here the knights actually stayed with the army and fought. The only result of their courage was that they, too, died.

William managed to escape, accompanied only by his squire, as did a handful of others. They made their way down to Tarsus and then returned to Constantinople. Alexius was bitterly disappointed in the poor showing of the Latin armies. Poor guests as they were, at least the previous crusaders had managed to defeat the Turks!

Effects of the Disasters in Outremer

In the space of two months, three large crusader armies had been almost completely destroyed. There was now no one to rescue the Prince of Antioch. There would be no armies to reinforce Jerusalem in its struggle with Egypt. There would be no influx of settlers to populate the Holy Land with Latin Christians. And Emperor Alexius at last understood that the West would be of no assistance to him in his struggle to recover Greek territories from the Turks.

These losses made it plain to everyone that the Crusader States were on their own. While individuals and very small groups continued to make their way to Outremer, some to settle, some for a single campaigning season, the Holy Land would have to be held by only a few hundred knights and a few thousand more footsoldiers. This forced Baldwin and the others to look for allies among their enemies, to enter into the complex politics of the Near East, and to become Oriental in their outlook. It also caused them to look eagerly to the Italian city-states, with their strong navies and promise of steady supplies, and to give into their demands for a near-monopoly on trade.

Effects of the Disasters in Europe

The effects in Europe were equally profound. Three whole armies destroyed. Thousands killed, and they never even made it out of Anatolia, much less arrived in the Holy Land. An objective observer might say that this was hardly more than to be expected, given the raw numerical superiority of the Islamic forces fighting on their home ground. But the success of the First Crusade had led Europeans rather to expect the miraculous, and the failures in 1101 seemed to need explaining.

The result was that Europe quickly lost its taste for crusading. There was some renewed effort around 1108, but there was no general call for crusade until the fall of Edessa in 1145. An entire generation passed in Europe, and the First Crusade passed into legend.

This long hiatus—the longest in the entire history of the Crusades—was due not only to the catastrophies of 1101, but also due to the fact that the papacy was entering into a renewed struggle with the Empire, first with Henry IV and then in a bitter war with Henry V. This was not settled until 1122, by which time the initial enthusiasm for crusading had long past.

Final Fate of the Crusaders

There are some postscripts to the Crusade of 1101 that are worth recounting. The survivors who gathered back at Constantinople—Count Raymond, William of Aquitaine, Stephen of Blois, William of Nevers, Conrad the Constable of Germany, Welf of Bavaria—were still determined to fulfill their vows. Alexius was so glad to be rid of them that he gave them ships and sent them on to Syria.

They landed at Saint Symeon in January of 1102 and proceeded to Antioch. Raymond's ship had gone off course and landed instead at Tarsus. Immediately upon his arrival, a knight stepped up and arrested the Count for his flight from Mersivan. He was turned over to Tancred, regent of Antioch. He was eventually released, but this took Raymond out of the subsequent events.

The others went from Antioch down to Beirut, where they were met by a large armed guard sent north by King Baldwin for their protection. The Kingdom of Jerusalem still hung by a thread and armies were on the march that spring. In fact, Baldwin had just won a tremendous victory over an Egyptian army the previous September, even as the crusaders had been losing spectacularly in Asia Minor. But the Egyptians were said to be planning another invasion. Few as they were, these Latins were a welcome addition. 

The newcomers at last fulfilled their vows and worshipped at the Holy Sepulchre. After visiting other holy sites, they decided to return home. They certainly did not linger to aid Baldwin: they had done their tour and were already ship-board by the end of April, 1102. William of Aquitaine and others made it home safely, but the ship carrying Stephen of Blois and Stephen of Burgundy was driven ashore by a storm off Jaffa. They were unable to find another ship, and in the meantime, word came that the expected second Egyptian invasion had arrived. Stephen decided to stay and help.

Second Battle of Ramleh

The Egyptians were determined to avenge their embarassing defeat of the previous year. The army amounted to about twenty thousand and was commanded by the Vizier's son, Sharaf al-Ma'ali. It arrived at Ascalon in mid-May, 1102, and advanced toward Ramleh.

Baldwin's forces, amounting to only a few thousand, were assembled at Jaffa (where Count Stephen found them). His reconnaissance was poor, however. He believed that he was facing only a raiding party and decided to advance without calling up his reserves, and to attack with only the knights. Stephen of Blois suggested caution and better reconnaissance, but of course his earlier cowardice ensured that no one would listen to him.

On 17 May, King Baldwin set out with about five hundred men. They rode straight into the Egyptians and their twenty thousand, and were spotted immediately. Before he had time to retreat, Baldwin found himself cut off. So he charged. The Egyptians could not believe that so few would charge so many and at first believed they were the forerunners of the full Christian army. But no one else showed up, and the Egyptians gathered their shaken resolve and attacked in full force.

A few managed to cut through to Jaffa, but many died on the field. Baldwin and others, including Stephen, were able to break out and reach Ramleh, where there was a small fortress, crowding into a single small tower. They were immediately surrounded, of course. During the night, Baldwin slipped out under cover of darkness and escaped. A few others did likewise, each scattering in separate directions. One of these made it to Jerusalem where he told of the disaster, but also encouraged the citizens to defend the city.

At dawn, the Egyptians piled wood around the tower. Rather than be burned alive, the Christians charged. Constable Conrad of Germany so impressed the Egyptians with his prowess that they spared his life, along with about a hundred others, who were all sent as captives to Cairo. Stephen of Blois died on the battlefield, at last redeeming his reputation.

The great crusade thus stumbled to an end in yet one more disaster. There would be no more grand expeditions for another four decades.

THE END