Russian influence in Belarus

Why do some post-Soviet countries remain under Russian control and some don't? Are any of the countries in the Baltics, Balkans, or Eastern Europe safe from Russia's military or intelligence reach? What does Russia have to gain from influencing the politics of a country that seems to have little influence elsewhere? These questions are some of the most popular discussions in European foreign affairs, as each year every country must strategize about how they will continue their relations with Russia. 

This past year, Russia's influence in Belarus became unavoidably clear, as the two countries have been openly cooperating against anti-government movements. Just today, Russia sent fighter jets to help patrol Belarus's borders.

Over the last year, the world has watched Belarus's government, President Lukashenka in particular, increasing government control of the population and suppressing opposition parties within the country. The administration was supported by Russia's President Putin from the militarization of the government to limiting the freedom of speech, and public information. The tactics applied in Belarus are ones that Putin knows how to apply in his own country, and ones he would easily apply against the will of any other post-Soviet country.

Why should we talk about this today, if this has been going on for months? Russia's fighter jets have just added fuel to the already burning with anger NATO (anger that most likely won't result in anything but sanctions, but still...). With every year, tensions between Russia and Europe rise. Each time the Russian government attempts to further their military land base to countries that are allied with Europe (Georgia, Ukraine, the Baltics), new talks of the Russia issue arise. Yet, they rarely lead to anything because the European governments see the issues as too far removed, and the economic benefits from not getting involved as a too high set. 

This time might be one of the last ones before it is too late, therefore Europe and the US should finally begin thinking in the long run and forget about the short economic benefits. Promote freedom of speech within Belarus, start own anti-propaganda campaigns in the region, support those who speak out against the corrupt governments, and provide them with protection.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/belarus-and-europes-new-iron-curtain/

https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-moves-sukhoi-su-30-fighter-jets-belarus-patrol-borders-minsk-says-2021-09-08/

Secularism in France and Québec at the Expense of Muslim Women

Since the 1980s, France has been battling with keeping the country secular, by implementing laws specifically targeting Muslim women from wearing hijabs and face coverings. Last April, France’s dominant conservative party, Les Républicains, came on stronger, amending the laws to include forbidding anyone wearing visible religious attire to participate in sporting events, the outlawing of the burkini (a full body swimsuit), and prohibiting anyone under the age of 18 from wearing a hijab. 

Banning a source of pride and identity for Muslim women in France is not empowerment, it is oppression. The secular law bans civil servants from wearing hijabs, and appearing in a hijab for both students and parents. Not only does the amendment cut Muslim hijab-wearing mothers from participating in their children’s school activities but also denies them access to all governmental employment opportunities (The Guardian). Instead of allowing the freedom of choice for muslim women to express their religion, politicians claim the “anti-separatism” measures are in the name of public safety and empowerment, despite having the largest Muslim population in Western Europe (Times). French politicians believe that by allowing hijabs and religious wear, parents would ‘impose harmful dogmas’ onto their children at an age too early for their comprehension (Washington Post). Yet, if that assertion was true, regulations on hijabs and religious outfits would not exist at all. The government’s facade as savior and deliverer from oppression is deplorable and disturbing given how blatant their actions are to reclaim women’s freedoms. 

In rebellion, French women created the viral hashtag, #PasToucheAMonHijab, to protest the regulation of Muslim women’s bodies in the name of secularism and Islamophobia. While the redundancy is banal, women’s bodies are still being ruthlessly questioned, and what’s worse, Muslim women are intentionally excluded from the conversation (Washington Post). 

Following in France’s footsteps, in late April Quebec passed Bill 21, prohibiting government workers in positions of authority the right to wear religious symbols (BBC). Although those opposed have labeled this law “an assault on religious minorities,” Quebec Premier, Francios Legualt, argued that while serving the public, those in public positions should not be adorned in attire that could potentially encourage their faith (Washington Post, Quebec). He furthers the Catholic Church has long held unfair control, but however hypocrtically, chooses to take aggressive actions that are directed at muslim hijab-wearing women.

It is highlighted here an underlying theme of comparative politics- countries lead by example. What is unjust and inhumane will continue to penetrate other areas of the world if measures are not taken to resist oppression, the audacious will of a patriarchal society and the unrelenting, insidious nature of inequity across borders. 

https://time.com/6049226/france-hijab-ban/

https://www.vie-publique.fr/loi/277621-loi-separatisme-respect-des-principes-de-la-republique-24-aout-2021

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/04/21/france-hijab-ban-vote-exclusion/ 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56821752 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/04/20/quebec-canada-religious-hijab-turban-ban/ 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/27/i-felt-violated-by-the-demand-to-undress-three-muslim-women-on-frances-hostility-to-the-hijab

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2018/05/outrage-over-hijab-reveals-hypocrisy-french-secularism

https://m.facebook.com/PasToucheAMonHijab/photos/?ref=page_internal&mt_nav=0

World Human Rights Day

Excellent post by one of my former Professors at McMaster University and my mentor.

Check out Professor Rhoda Hassmann's post on World Human Rights Day:

http://rhodahassmann.blogspot.com/ 

Photo Credit: https://www.officeholidays.com/holidays/international-human-rights-day

Russia's new term limits and ban on same sex marriage

On Tuesday of this week, Vladimir Putin officially signed a new referendum altering the Russian constitution. His signature affirmed the change first proposed by Putin last year after receiving an overwhelming supportive public vote. However, the election was seen to be flawed as it presented many irregularities including pressure on voters. The now in-order bill outlaws same sex marriage, adoption by transgender individuals, as well as setting a two term limit to the presidency. The bill clearly persecutes innocent civilians while hypocritically altering the constitution in his favor.

The discriminatory aspects are significantly alarming as they highlight major human rights violations while also exposing flaws within US media coverage. The ban on same sex marriage and adoption by transgender people clearly violate the rights of those Russian individuals and should not be overlooked by other aspects of this referendum. The campaign featured propaganda depicting same sex marriages in a very offensive light. This move was just one way Putin spreads his harmful agenda.  Major US news sources actively covered the signing of this bill during the past week. However, many platforms only included information regarding the term limits and their impact on the future. This exemplifies many flawed aspects of media converge in regards to picking and choosing what information to share. 

While the bill stated a two term limit to the presidency, it also includes a section which states that the two term limit is to start after Putin’s current term ends. Outlawing more than two terms, as well as limiting the ability to shuffle between President and Prime Minister, like Putin did in 2008. The hypocrisy, deeply rooted throughout this section of the referendum is extremely alarming. Putin actively changed the flaws in the systems while using the change to his advantage. In turn, discrediting the changes he was trying to make. His choice to make the new limit only apply to future terms, acts as a focal point for the discussion around corruption. 

In conclusion, Vladimir Putin has officially paved a path to rule until he is 83, persecutes individuals for who they are, and further Russia down a dark path. The referendum is wrong in a plethora of ways. It violates human rights, tarnishes the minuscule aspects of democracy within Russia, and poses a threat to both human rights and democracy world wide. 

. 

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20210405-putin-signs-law-enabling-him-to-stay-in-power-until-2036

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/05/europe/putin-russia-presidential-term-intl-hnk/index.html

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/vladimir-putin-russi-president-law-7261383/

https://www.fox8live.com/2021/04/05/putin-signs-law-allowing-him-more-terms-russias-leader/

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/01/886440694/referendum-in-russia-passes-allowing-putin-to-remain-president-until-2036

https://www.timesofisrael.com/putin-triumphant-as-critics-slam-vote-extending-his-rule/

https://www.dw.com/en/russia-vladimir-putin-signs-law-allowing-him-to-rule-till-2036/a-57103630

The UK and Brexit

Intro: 

EU and the British flag

The UK is experiencing a large amount of division over the political aspects of Globalism v. Nationalism. The argument at its roots is finding the balance between nation-state sovereignty and global nation-state treaties and organizations. Support of nationalism and globalism by UK citizens is geographically divided between Rural and Urban areas. Rural areas have more nationalist beliefs. Urban areas have more Globalist beliefs. There are several reasons for this: Different educational funding, land ownership in rural areas, and economic differences between rural and urban communities. 

Education:

UK educational poll on the EU. 

Education in the UK has four main checkpoints: Primary, secondary, further education, and higher education. Primary and secondary education is mandatory.

Researchers at the University of Leicester say that had just 3 percent more of the population gone to university, the UK would probably not be leaving the EU. 

Land Ownership:

Cities with more wealth were more likely to vote to remain in the EU. Middle-class and lower-income rural areas hold nationalist tendencies. Land and house ownership for the older British population has been increasing. Older populations vote for more nationalist policies such as Brexit. 

Economic Differences Between Rural and Urban Communities:

Election results of 2017 and 2019 with comparison. 

    Vanishing industry in the North and rural poverty in the Southwest caused British citizens to take on Nationalist stances. People clinging to middle-class lifestyles in the suburbs of once-great cities increasingly align to Nationalism and conservative parties in general. Nationalism has ties with anti-immigration stances and protectionism for the nation and its citizens. Elections in the UK increasingly show a divide between urban and rural centers.  

Brexit: 

Brexit Results

Brexit showcases all of the variables; Different educational funding, A sense of owning land in rural areas, and a division of economies in rural and urban communities. Urban centers generally attract higher educated populations. Land owning and economic differences between rural and urban areas contribute to polarization on the topic. 

Scotland: 

Scotland Airport Welcome sign 

The debate between nationalism and globalism is highlighted in the Brexit event. The sentiments about leaving the EU are very different when looking at Scotland. Scotland has a demographic challenge and is heavily reliant on immigration to provide a workforce. Without immigration, the economy of Scotland would slip into a depression.  

Conclusion:

The UK is experiencing a large amount of division over the political aspects of Globalism v. Nationalism. The argument at its roots is finding the balance between nation-state sovereignty and global nation-state treaties and organizations. Support for nationalism and globalism, by UK citizens, is geographically divided between Rural and Urban areas. Rural areas have more nationalist beliefs. Urban areas have more Globalist beliefs. Educational funding, a sense of owning land in rural areas, and differences between economies in rural and urban communities, drive polarization on the topic. Further research on life choices could create a more clear picture of why, geographically, The debate of globalism v. nationalism has rural and urban strongholds. 

Sources:
Calhoun, Craig. “POPULISM, NATIONALISM AND BREXIT.” Brexit: Sociological Responses, edited by William Outhwaite, Anthem Press, London; New York, 2017, pp. 57–76. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1kft8cd.8. Accessed 10 Mar. 2021.
Aihua Zhang, New Findings on Key Factors Influencing the UK’s Referendum on (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X17302474)
Stone, Jon. Did Homeowners CAUSE BREXIT? 19 June 2019, www.centreforcities.org/blog/did-homeowners-cause-brexit/. 
Department, Published by Statista Research, and Jun 20. “Brexit Votes by Education Level 2016.” Statista, 20 June 2016, www.statista.com/statistics/572613/eu-referendum-decision-by-highest-educational-attainment-uk/. 
VAN REENEN, JOHN. “Brexit’s Long-Run Effects on the U.K. Economy.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2016, pp. 367–383. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/90000441. Accessed 11 Mar. 2021.
Sampson, Thomas. “Brexit: The Economics of International Disintegration.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 31, no. 4, 2017, pp. 163–184. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/44425386. Accessed 11 Mar. 2021.
Leaving the EU, World Development, Volume 102, 2018, Pages 304-314, ISSN 0305-750X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.07.017.  

"Peace" in Afghanistan at the Price of Women's Rights

Is a speedy peace agreement in Afghanistan more important than maintaining women's rights in the region? The United States seems to think so. 

Afghani women are quickly losing their power and involvement in the peace talks. Their fear is that the rights that women have won since the Taliban regime fell in 2001 will be sacrificed so that there can be a quick peace. And progress has not been on their side - though the UN Resolution 1325 said that women must have "equal participation and full involvement", the current US plan only mentions a "meaningful" participation of women. 

Habiba Sarabi has been one of four women at the peace talks in the past six months, and this past month, she was the only woman there at all. Out of 21 people, with 12 from the Afghan government and 10 from the Taliban, only one member was a woman. She alone advocates for women's rights, and fights for the end of the murdering of women by the Taliban. 

Habiba Sarabi, representing all women at the peace talks.

Why the loss of power now? Last year Trump made a deal with the Taliban, in an effort to end the two decades of US presence in Afghanistan. Now the Taliban, a militant extremist group, feels that they have the lead role in the peace process. The US failed to ensure that this deal guaranteed the protection of women's rights, and with the Taliban's refusal to recognize the existing constitution, it seems likely that including them in the government will lead to a loss of women's rights. 

Over 100 global leaders joined forces to draft a letter urging the Afghan government to create a lasting peace that includes women's participation throughout the process, and which would preserve the constitution's gender equality. However, with the US transition to Biden's presidency, change seems unlikely. Biden is also eager to bring the peace talks to a close, and seems willing to sacrifice women's interests in order to so. The US is placing expediency over their stated principles. 

It has been proven that women's role in peace processes are essential. Between 1992 and 2019, women made up, on average, 13% of negotiators, 6% of mediators, 6% of signatories in major global peace processes. In previous peace talks, women constituted 33% of delegates in South Sudan, 20% of negotiators in Columbia (and 40% of their armed forces), and 25% in Kenya, just to list a few examples. It also has been shown that gender inequality brings instability and extremism, not peace. 

Afghan women attending a consultative grand assembly, known as Loya Jirga, in April 2019

As Akbhar, chair of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, put it, "if you exclude women and you move to an Afghanistan where half the population is entrapped and regarded as half-human, you are signing up for an Afghanistan that is poor, less developed, and cannot compete with other countries. That is counterproductive for everyone." 

If America stands for equality and women's rights, could they really sacrifice it for the sake of a speedy but insubstantial peace? Are they only willing to because it's a different country, and not their own? And will Afghani women stand up for their rights? Peace will only truly exist if they do. 

Bigio, O., & Cleaveland, D. (2020, October 05). Opinion: Women should be at the center of Afghan peace talks. Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/05/opinions/women-should-be-at-the-center-of-afghan-peace-talks-bigio-cleaveland/index.html

O’Donnell, L. (2021, March 30). Women cut out of the Afghan peace process. Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/30/afghanistan-women-taliban-peace-talks-biden/ 

Afghan peace summit includes just one female delegate. (2021, March 18). Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/18/afghan-activists-warn-over-absence-of-women-in-peace-process

Including women at the peace table produces better outcomes. (n.d.). Retrieved April 07, 2021, from https://www.cfr.org/womens-participation-in-peace-processes/

Russian Espionage within Italian Government

Last Tuesday, a mixture of Italian police forces made an arrest of Walter Biot a fifty-four year old Italian Navy Captian. Biot was accused of delivering a memory card containing one-hundred and eighty-one photos of classified Italian and NATO documents to a Russian Military officer in exchange for five-thousand euros, the equivalent of five thousand-nine hundred dollars. Roberto di Vitom, Biot’s lawyer released a statement saying that Biot had admitted to the exchange of information for money with his Russian counterpart, but had denied the contents was classified documents belonging to Italy and NATO.










These acquisitions were confirmed by Luigi Di Maio the Italian Foreign Minister this past Wednesday after The Italian Government held a trial of the Naval Captain which resulted in his expulsion from Military service and two Russian officials. Di Maio summoned Russian ambassador Sergey Razov to inform him of the countries decision on the matter. The Russian Diplomat who was caught with Biot was able to avoid being detained due to diplomatic immunity while within Italy’s borders.






Some have speculated that these actions could throw the relations within Europe back into a cold-war like state. However, Russia and Italys relationship has been fairly warm in comparison to most of Russia’s European counterparts. Russia has downplayed the occurrences in an effort to help propel their own Covid-19 vaccine called the Sputnik V vaccine which they hope to have approved by the European Union. The vaccines approval would give a much needed boost to the diminishing Russian economy.




SOURCES

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/europe/italy-russia-espionage-expulsion-intl/index.html




https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/31/world/europe/italy-russia-spy.html




https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/03/31/italy-expels-russians-after-spies-caught-red-handed-a73422

https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2021/03/31/648465/Russia-Italy-expel-diplomats




https://www.reuters.com/article/us-italy-russia-spies/suspected-italian-spy-gave-russia-highly-confidential-material-source-idUSKBN2BO5BA

Royal Family Feud May Hurt Regional Security

  Drama has been flaring up within the Jordanian Government, more specifically, within its ruling family– the Hashemites. The drama starts off with two half-brothers feeling differently about the growing issues within the country of Jordan. One of the half-brothers is Prince Hamzah bin Al Hussein of Jordan who has been criticizing the government for their constant neglect for growing economic problems and social unrest. The other half-brother is King Abdullah II of Jordan who believes that his half-brother, the prince, was “working in collusion with unnamed foreign entities to ‘destabilize’ Jordan.” 

Prince Hamzah has gained the majority of the population’s favorability in the case. Many Jordanian citizens believe that Prince Hamzah was the favorite son of King Hussein and they still idolize him to this day. Not only that, but he is also heavily supported by Jordanian tribes who had a lot to do with the development of the Jordanian Monarchy we see today. 

Over the weekend, Jordanian police arrested fifteen people, including a political figure and member of the royal family; Prince Hamzah bin Al Hussein. However, Hamzah is believed to have been placed under house arrest. Hamzah publicly criticized Jordan's leadership in a video that he actually sent to media outlets (those not in control by King Abdullah II). King Abdullah II’s argument was that Hamzah was “working in collusion with unnamed foreign entities to ‘destabilize’ Jordan.” Hamzah denied these allegations and stated in a video statement that these arrests were just a “bid to silence growing criticism of government corruption.” Hamzah’s popular support amongst the citizens has led them to openly oppose his alleged detainment. Surprisingly though, Hamzah decided to sign a letter pledging allegiance to the king– in a selfless manner– to put an end to such drama that has been growing uncertainty amongst the citizens… which did nothing.

On Tuesday, the Jordanian government imposed a “gag order” around Hamzah's case where images and videos related to the case have been banned, which keeps implying to me that they are trying to shut the door (SLAM the door) on any opposition. This couldn’t sound anymore corrupt to me, but once you read their words, what would you think?

"To protect the secrecy of the investigations that security apparatuses are carrying out, and which are connected to the His Royal Highness Prince Hamzah bin Al Hussein and others, publication of anything related to (the case) has been banned at this stage of the investigation"

Prince Hamzah’s response to this was that the Jordanians' "well-being has been put second by a ruling system that has decided that its personal interests, financial interests, that its corruption is more important than the lives and dignity and future of the ten million people who live here."

The bitterness between these two gentlemen may seem like a short run issue that will eventually be solved, but with the publicity of it all may imply a slow destruction of Jordan’s regional security. For example, the US has relied on Jordan as a “diplomatic, military and counter-terrorism partner over the years.” Furthermore, Jordan currently has the longest-running peace treaty with Israel who they work very closely with on defense and intelligence. With two royal family members in public opposition by defending separate morals, Jordan’s role in regional security could drastically fall apart.

Sources:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/06/middleeast/jordan-prince-social-media-ban-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/05/middleeast/jordan-arrests-royal-family-explainer-intl/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/03/middleeast/jordan-royal-family-arrested-hassan-bin-zaid-intl/index.html

https://www.middleeasteye.net/sites/default/files/styles/article_page/public/images-story/King%20Abdullah%20II%20and%20Prince%20Hamzah%20bin%20Hussein_AFP.jpg?itok=Q0eyrdoo

https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/000_96L4B6.jpg?resize=770%2C513

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/L3XmMRvNicsGpvQYL_7l9ATsUlI=/0x0:3000x2000/2570x1446/filters:focal(826x396:1306x876):format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/69083471/GettyImages_51264775.0.jpg

Saudi Arabia announces peace plan in hopes of ending conflict in Yemen

   

    Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan of Saudi Arabia recently presented a peace plan to put a stop to their conflict with Houthi rebels in Yemen. This conflict first began when Houthi forces backed by Iran captured Sanaa, the capital of Yemen. Saudi Arabia who supported Yemen’s central government under President Hadi began to launch attacks against the rebels. A war that the Saudi government thought would be a matter of weeks turned into years of fighting. In 2017, Saudi forces set up blockades barring any travel by land or sea in hopes of preventing gun smuggling from Iran to help the Houthi. In turn this blockade has sprung widespread starvation across Yemen. Roughly 66% of the Yemen population are dependent on supplies that come in from the port of Al-Hudaydah (BBC). According to the UN nearly 10 million people are nearly in a state of famine.

Houthi Rebels

    These years of war between Saudi Arabia and Houthi forces have also had global impacts. In 2019, Houthi rebels launched drone strikes on oil fields in Saudi Arabia which dismantled half of their oil production which makes up 5% of oil globally (BBC). Returning peace to Yemen is also important considering their geographic location. Houthi rebels are able to gain full control of Yemen they will be able to disrupt travel within the Bab al-Mandab Strait. Ships that head south along the Suez Canal must pass through the Bab al-Mandab Strait in order to reach the Indian Ocean. In 2018, 6.2 million barrels per day of crude oil passed through the Bab al-Mandab Strait (EIA). Houthi rebels would become a threat to the global economy if they were to gain control along the Bab al-Mandab Strait. With the endangerment of the Yemeni people and these global threats, the United Nations and the United States government intervened.

    The Biden administration has offered the support of the United States to ensure that this peace plan can be agreed upon. Houthi forces have offered initial criticism of the peace plan particularly whether or not the blockades will be removed. The United Stats have engaged in negotiations alongside Saudi Arabia with Houthi negotiators over the terms of this plan. The United Nations have also strongly supported Suadi Arabia’s peace plan. The UN has agreed to help in the application of this peace plan if terms are finally agreed upon.

    In the past several attempts at peace have been made but none have been successful. However now with the active support of the United States along with the United Nations peace seems more likely than ever. It will be interesting to see how negotiations unfold in the future as to whether the Houthi rebels will give up their land. At the end of the day, terms of peace must be met in any way possible as the lives of innocent Yemen civilians depend on it.

References

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-56491503

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/22/980031673/yemen-saudi-arabia-proposes-a-peace-deal-but-houthis-say-its-not-enough

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=41073

https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2020-04/yemen-17.php

The Violence of the LGBTQ+ Community In Africa

Religion & It's Influence 

  In many African countries homosexuality is illegal, with many anti-gay laws being passed within these various countries violence against this community has significantly increased in more recent years. Africa has a total of 54 countries, and and in only 22 of those countries are same-sex relations legal. The punishment for being in a same-sex relationship can sometimes be as harsh as serving a lengthy prison sentence, or even being sentenced to death. The emergence of these anti-LGBTQ+ politics in Africa is often attributed to Christianity, religion is a fueling factor to homophobia. Christianity is the dominating religion throughout African countries, and many religiously affiliated groups seem to be to blame for the oppression. Churches are a main source. Uganda Evangelical pastors have actively campaigned for the Anti-Homosexuality Bill, when voicing their opinions on homosexuality many political leaders have argued that it is "un-African", "un-biblical", and "un-Christian".  Religion is arguably the most aggressive obstacle for Africans within the LGBTQ+ community to overcome in attempt to gain acceptance from their greater communities. 

Kakuma Refugee Camp Protests 

   Kenya is home to one of the world's largest refugee camps,  Kakuma Refugee. 171,000 people live in this camp, around 71% are refugees, more than 800 are from South Sudan and are primarily woman and children, new ones arriving each week. Kakuma Refugee is made up of communities, and local tribes who will look after orphan children. The area rarely receives rain as it is very dry and muggy, and many young students living there are only provided with one meal a day. In Kenya, like many other African countries, homosexuality is a crime. Within the Kakuma Refugee camp there are LGBTQ+ refugees. These refugees have reported being violently beaten by locals and other refugees living in the camp. After experiencing this violence they attempted to camp out by the UNCHR for safety reasons, but were failed to receive any assistance and were instead forced to go back into the homophobic community where they were brutally attacked by refugees. Although police and ambulances were called for the violent events, they were slow to respond and did not do much. In June 2018, Ugandan refugee Mbazira Moses scheduled to host a pride march, which would be the first gay pride event in the camp. 

Although the march seemed to be a positive step forward, attracting many onlookers from Kakuma, it did not end well. Following the march, murderous threats towards the LGBTQ+ community were posted around the camp, telling them to leave or be killed. Violence at the camp worsened for the rest of 2018, and many refugees had to be relocated. Refugees have also accused administrators of the camp for turning a blind eye on the violence, due to their own personal homophobia. 

Simon Lokodo-Uganda 

Simon Lokodo, a former Catholic priest, and politician who served as Minister of State For Ethics & Integrity in the office of the president, has been very outspoken with his homophobic beliefs. He is proudly one of the creators of the countries anti-homosexuality bill. This bill sparked many protests. 

                                            Protestors wore masks to preserve their anominity.

 In an interview Simon Lokodo said he could never imagine kissing a man, he said "I think I shall die. I would not exist. It is inhuman. I would be mad. Just imagine eating your faeces". Lokodo believes that homosexuality is a choice, and that people a part of the LGBTQ+ community are set out to recruit other people to join them. In an interview Lokodo said, "Homosexuality is unnatural, abnormal and strange to our cultures," he said. "It has no output whatsoever; it only does damage and destruction. You cannot have a right to be a sick human being. There is no right in homosexuality. It must be cured." 

Conclusion 

    With many political leaders of different African countries who share beliefs similar to Simon Lokodo, it is hard to see where change will hopefully be made. Many individuals who hold high political positions are also very religious, specifically Catholic. Religion is a major barrier between the oppression of the LGBTQ+ community in Africa and their freedom. However, with people like Simon Lokodo and many, many others, it is hard to try and see a future where the LGBTQ+ community will no longer be oppressed and punished for just being themselves. 

Sources

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/africa-homophobia-uganda-anti-gay-law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/30/gay-rights-world-best-worst-countries

https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2021/03/06/on-gay-rights-young-africans-share-the-intolerance-of-their-elders

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-africa-22578648

https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c8nq32jwjp0t/lgbt-rights-in-africa

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/2018/07/beyond-african-religious-homophobia-how-christianity-is-a-source-of-african-lgbt-activism/

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/gay-refugees-kenya-report-repeated-attacks-locals-n1113456

https://seedsofsouthsudan.org/our-students/kakuma-refugee-camp/#:~:text=He%20informed%20SoSS%20that%20171%2C000,sent%20to%20Kalobeyei%20Settlement%20Camp.