Syria and Chemical Weapons: listen to the experts

By Elizabeth Kendal

On Monday 26 June 2017, the White House issued the following press statement:

The United States has identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime that would likely result in the mass murder of civilians, including innocent children.  The activities are similar to preparations the regime made before its April 4, 2017 chemical weapons attack.

As we have previously stated, the United States is in Syria to eliminate the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.  If, however, Mr. Assad conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons, he and his military will pay a heavy price.


Coming, as it does, comes hot on the heels of President Trump’s visit to Riyadh and his speech to the Arab Islamic American Summit, this statement may indicate that the Trump administration is preparing to escalate the conflict in Syria.

See: Trump in Riyadh: A Message to Tehran,
by Elizabeth Kendal, Religious Liberty Monitoring, 29 June 2017

Now that President Trump has redrawn Obama’s Red Line, all we have to do is wait for the chemical attack that should deliver the Turkey-Arab Sunni Axis and its militant/jihadist proxies exactly what they so desperately want: US missile strikes against the Syrian government – only this time, far more devastating.

Like previous chemical attacks, this one too will be the work of Islamic jihadists – most probably foreigners who have no qualms about sacrificing Syrian nationals for what they regard as the greater Islamic good.

Anyone who finds this difficult to believe should consider the following expert analysis.

Under the heading: “Strategic Trajectories: Indicators of emerging patterns of global significance”, Issue 4,2017 of Defense & Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy (D&FA, the magazine of the Washington-based International Strategic Studies Association) included a report entitled, “Attack on Syria: US Has Returned to ‘Business as Usual’.” 

Excerpt:

“US Pres. Donald Trump may, on April 7, 2017, have sacrificed the direction of his Presidency largely to calm domestic critics. He authorized the firing, by two US Navy destroyers in the Western Mediterranean, of 60 BGM-109B unitary warhead and BGM-109D cluster munition Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles (TLAM) at the Syrian Air Force base at al-Shayrat; 58 of the TLAMs hit designated targets. The incident may well be a strategically pivotal – domestically as well as internationally – as the decision in January 2002 by US Pres. George W. Bush to attack Iraq.” (emphasis in the original)

After examining various intended and unintended or unavoidable consequences of this action, D&FA examined the casus belli (the incident that provoked the attack).

Excerpts: 

“The US attack authorized by Pres. Trump was in response to an alleged attack by Syrian Air Force aircraft on the north-western Syrian town of Khan Sheikhoun, in southern Idlib province, supposedly using chemical-payload bombs. Despite US government claims of irrefutable evidence that the Syrian Arab Air Force had used chemical weapons, no evidence was provided that the Syrian Government was involved in the use of chemical weapons. The US claims, when examined, are all based on reports from partisan sources within the Syrian opposition and from the Turkish Government, and not a single piece of evidence was from direct reporting by any US military or intelligence officer with an understanding of chemical weapons.

“Site investigations of the alleged attacks, in fact, revealed cratering from BM21 122mm Grad rocket launcher munitions, not aircraft-delivered munitions. Several of BM21 systems – including long range versions – were brought in from Turkey to jihadists groups operating in Idlib province shortly before the alleged ‘Syrian attack’, roughly about the same time that the US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson stated that the removal of Syrian Pres. Assad was not (then) a US priority.”

As D&FA notes, every time the US had indicated that the removal of Assad was no longer an absolute goal, “Turkey and its allies (including jihadist and ‘Syrian opposition’ groups) produce ‘evidence’ that Syria had used chemical weapons against its own people”. . .  What’s more, “The model for the release of such ‘evidence’ has been virtually identical in all cases . . .”

D&FA also notes that “Sarin (GB) has been the chemical weapon of choice by terrorist groups linked to Saudi Arabia and Turkey in the past in the Syrian conflict, not just the August 21, 2013, now-verified false-flag attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, by Saud-backed jihadists with the knowledge of the US Intelligence Community. . .

“Chemical analysis of the sarin residue found at Khan Sheikhoun indicated that it was made to the same recipe as the sarin used in the Ghouta attack in 2013, which has been absolutely and independently confirmed to have been used by Saudi-backed jihadis in that attack. It is explicitly not military-grade sarin and not the type which had been used by the Syrian Armed Forces before the internationally monitored disposal of Syrian chemical weapons stockpiles. . .

“It is probably that the Trump White House was aware that the evidence to support the claims of Syrian Government use of chemical weapons was questionable, tainted, and based on mere allegations. However, domestic political pressures in the US – coupled with a US media outcry at the reports – gave the President a chance to calm his critics at home by appearing strong internationally. . .”

Having covered asymmetric warfare and the August 2013 Ghouta false-flag chemical attack in my book, After Saturday Comes Sunday: Understanding the Christian Crisis in the Middle East, I was not remotely surprise to see experts declaring the April 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attack a false-flag; indeed, as noted by D&FA, the pattern was "virtually identical".

After viewing the White House Intelligence Report (WHR) on Khan Sheikhoun, chemical weapons expert Theodore A. Postol (Professor Emeritus of Science, Technology, and National Security Policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) penned a cursory assessment: “A Quick Turnaround Assessment of the White House Intelligence Report, Issued on April 11, 2017, About the Nerve Agent Attack in Khan Shaykhun, Syria”. [Full Text - Addendum]

The photo that launched 60 cruise missiles 

In his report, which makes fascinating reading, Prof. Postol is scathing about the US assessment.  He comments that both the cratering and the way the munition was exploded indicate that, rather than being delivered from the air (in which case it would have exploded outwards, and above the ground) it is clear that the munition had been placed on the ground and that an external explosive device was detonated on top of it, crushing it inwards, and leaving a crater. This is just one of Prof. Postol’s many cursory observations.

Postol writes: “It is hard for me to believe that anybody competent could have been involved in producing the WHR and the implications of such an obviously predetermined result strongly suggests that this report was not motivated by a serious analysis of any kind.

“This finding is disturbing.  It indicates that the WHR was probably a report purely aimed at justifying actions that were not supported by any legitimate intelligence. . .

“On August 30, 2013, the White House produced a similarly false report about the nerve agent attack on August 21, 2013 in Damascus. This report also contained numerous intelligence claims that could not be true. . .

“I therefore conclude that there needs to be a comprehensive investigation of these events that have either misled people in the White House, or worse yet, been perpetrated by people seeking to force decisions that were not justified by the cited intelligence.”

---------------------
UPDATE: In April 2018, rebels claimed that civilians in Douma had been subjected to a chemical weapons attack. Images of gasping children foaming at the mouth were provided as 'evidence'.

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was given complete access to the site, and took over 100 samples. It's report can be read here:
INTERIM REPORT OF THE OPCW FACT-FINDING MISSION IN SYRIA REGARDING THE INCIDENT OF ALLEGED USE OF TOXIC CHEMICALS AS A WEAPON IN DOUMA, SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC, ON 7 APRIL 2018
OPCW report: S/1645/2018,  6 July 2018

excerpt:
Analysis results
8.7 The results of analysis of the prioritised samples submitted to the designated laboratories were received by the FFM team on 22 May 2018. No organophosphorus nerve agents or their degradation products were detected, either in the environmental samples or in plasma samples from the alleged casualties.
--------------------

If the Trump administration has decided to enter the Syrian war on side of the regime change coalition (Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia), with the aim of pushing back against Iran, in defense of US allies Saudi Arabia and Israel, then it should stop playing games and just say so.

However, before the US Government starts firing missiles into Syria, it should also look forward and be open about the likely costs: Hezballah and Iranian Quds Force terror will surely strike back against US interests; Syria (presently secular) will become a potentially hostile Islamic state; and Syria’s Christians and Alawites will most surely face genocide.

------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth Kendal is an international religious liberty analyst and advocate. She serves as Director of Advocacy at Canberra-based Christian Faith and Freedom (CFF), and is an Adjunct Research Fellow at the Arthur Jeffery Centre for the Study of Islam at Melbourne School of Theology.

She has authored two books: Turn Back the Battle: Isaiah Speaks to Christians Today (Deror Books, Melbourne, Australia, Dec 2012) which offers a Biblical response to persecution and existential threat; and, After Saturday Comes Sunday: Understanding the Christian Crisis in the Middle East (Wipf and Stock, Eugene, OR, USA, June 2016).

See www.ElizabethKendal.com 

BURMA (Myanmar): Interests, Smokescreens, Chemical Weapons & Ethnic Cleansing

By Elizabeth Kendal

Burma/Myanmar is indeed the Sudan of Asia and the regime's recent reforms are nothing more than the calculated steps of a brutal Burman-Buddhist-supremacist regime determined to advance its own interests and ensure its own survival. Through these token reforms, the regime hopes to pacify the Burman-Buddhist masses and create a smokescreen around the centre, behind which it can pursue its brutal policies of racial and religious hatred; policies aimed at the subjugation and even extermination of the non-Burman, non-Buddhist ethnic minorities that live around Burma's periphery.

----------------------------------

Burma's reforms: not 'democracy', just interests and smokescreens

Burma has been subject to Western political and economic sanctions for decades on account of its repression of democracy. However, since the mid-1990s ascendant China has been taking Burma into its embrace, supplying it with loans and commodities, trading freely and building infrastructure -- but not out of benevolence. China is pursuing its own interests, in particular its interest in gaining access to Burmese ports on the Bay of Bengal, where there has long been a power vacuum. Motivated by this threat, the US is now pursuing engagement with Burma. Consequently Burma's geo-strategic value is rising in line with China's economic and military ascendancy, which means Burma (like Indonesia -- RLPB 119) can now play geo-politics to its own advantage. To this end, the regime is welcoming the US overtures as they offer a way to counter the anti-China sentiment rising inside Burma.

[While China's largess might have neutralised the impact of Western sanctions, many amongst the junta's powerful elite are not happy to see Burma becoming a client state of their former enemy. Many of Burma's military elite fought and lost comrades in the war that raged from 1968 to 1978 between the Burmese nationalists and the China-backed Communist Party of Burma (CPB). The fact that China continues to support the United Wa State Army (the successor to the CPB) is a sore point for many military elites; furthermore, it raises the spectre of Chinese duplicity. Further to this, Chinese goods have flooded the markets and Chinese firms are buying up the land, causing social tensions to escalate.]

The West is highly excited over Burma's recent reforms: the release of some 200 political prisoners (despite over 1000 still behind bars); talks held with Aung San Suu Kyi ; improvements in press freedom and the introduction of debate into its parliament.
See: Burma: At freedom’s gate
By Amy Kazmin, Financial Times, 24 October 2011

The Burmese, however, are more sceptical. The reforms really do need to be seen in the light of Burmese domestic realities. Domestically, the regime wants to lessen its dependence on China. It also wants to chair the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in 2014 (which will be decided this month ).

The only reform that has really captured the imagination of the Burmese is the regime's 30 September decision to suspend until 2015 the immensely controversial Myitsone Dam Project in Kachin State. A joint project between the previous Burmese junta and the China Power Investment Corporation, the Myitsone Dam project was not only opposed by the Kachin -- a Christian people whose lands would have been decimated -- but by many Burmese. For not only would 90 percent of the output and 70 percent of the profits go to China, but the impact on the Irrawaddy River -- Burma's life source -- would be catastrophic. So even this move must be seen in the context of the regime's survival strategy amidst Burma's internal reality of high anti-China sentiment.
See: A Case of Mistaken Priorities
By Aung Zaw, Friday, October 21, 2011
AND
China behind Myanmar's course shift
By Bertil Lintner, Asia Times Online, 19 Oct 2011

DAM SUSPENDED YET WAR CONTINUES

Whilst the regime has suspended the Myitsone Dam Project, its war on the Christian Kachin -- a war triggered in part by the dam project (see Religious Liberty Prayer Bulletin RLPBs 114 (28 June 2011), 115 (5 July 11), 118 (27 July 11)) -- continues unabated.

One can only hope that Lindsay Murdoch is right in his assessment: "Burma's armed forces have committed serious abuses against ethnic rebels in renewed fighting, setting back efforts by the country's leaders to convince Western nations they are serious about ending 50 years of brutal military rule." (emphasis mine)
See: Burmese military abuses cast doubt on leaders' reforms
Lindsay Murdoch, Bangkok, October 20, 2011

The trouble is, with the US working to bring Burma out of China's embrace into its own so as to secure strategic gains in the Bay of Bengal, it is quite likely that the US might be keen reward the tokens while ignoring the genocide, exactly as is happening in Papua, Indonesia.

ETHNIC CLEANSING

In its 18 October report, Human Rights Watch estimates that 30,000 Kachin are now displaced. Despite this, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has inexplicably downplayed the ethnic cleansing in Kachin , just as he downplayed the ethnic cleansing of Abyei, Sudan. In contrast, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Burma, Tomas Ojea Quintana, told the UN General Assembly on 19 October that recent fighting had resulted in more than 15,000 displaced Kachin being confined to a remote mountainous area on the Chinese border in conditions that can only be described as 'perilous'. According to Quintana, the UN informed the Burmese authorities that it was willing to help these Internally Displaced Persons but Thein Sein's government declined the offer.
See Quintana: Burma’s government failing to solve ethnic issues
Thursday, 20 October 2011 21:24 Thomas Maung Shwe

Further to this, Burma expert Zin Linn reports that China is blocking the delivery of food, emergency shelter and medicines, leaving some analysts wondering if Kachin State is being ethnically cleansed at China's behest.
See: Why does Burma want war in Kachin State?
By Zin Linn , for Asian Correspondent.com, Sep 26, 2011
and
Is Burma attempting to colonize Kachin state
By Zin Linn Jul 21, 2011

QUESTION: Is the suspension of the dam project just a smokescreen behind which Burma will have three years to ethnically cleanse Kachin State?

CHEMICAL WEAPONS

On 1 November 2011, Burma expert Zin Linn wrote to his blog The Democratic Question of Burma : "The Burma Army’s full-scale offensives are becoming greater than ever in Kachin State. The fighting seems vengeful as Burmese soldiers commit various crimes – such as looting, killing, raping and burning down the civilians’ villages – on the front line. [. . .] Kachin natives are singled out by the Burmese soldiers and they are not regarded as citizens of their own nation. It looks like the Burma Army has been launching a racial war. In frontline areas, Burmese soldiers are committing crimes freely as there are no effective or appropriate penalties set by senior authorities.

"The worst and concrete evidence is that the wicked Burmese Army has used a mysterious chemical weapon in the recent offensive against Kachin rebels in Northern Burma . . .

"For more than a week, Burmese soldiers used the unidentified chemical weapon in three war zones — Christian Prayer Hill and Lung Zep Kawng in Ga Ra Yang village, and Shwe Nyaung Pyin village — against the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) on Myitkyina-Manmaw (Bhamo) Road in Waingmaw Township. Those events were narrated by KIA soldiers, who said they were under attack by poisonous gas.

"On October 29, Burma Army troops fired two mortar rounds of chemical weapons on the People’s Army fighters under the KIA in Prayer Hill, said civilian fighters. 'Two rounds of chemical weapons were fired at us in Prayer Hill. There were seven of us present. Dark smoke billowed from the areas where the mortar shells landed,' La Gun, a civilian fighter and a victim of the chemical weapon told Kachin News Group on Sunday. When the victims breathed the dark smoke, they felt extremely dizzy, found it hard to breathe, thirsty and vomiting for hours, according to one victim.

"The same chemical weapon was used during the week-long fighting in Lung Zep Kawng last week, La Gun said. The same day, the chemical weapon was used by the Burmese Army in Ntap Bum battle zone, near the KIA headquarters Laiza. Four KIA soldiers suffered dizziness, fell on the ground and began vomiting for a long time, said eyewitnesses.

"President Thein Sein’s government has to take responsibility for the use of such chemical weapons. . ." (emphasis mine)

See: Kachin fighters claim Burma Army using chemical weapons
By Zin Linn Nov 01, 2011

CHURCH DEEPLY IMPACTED

With the Kachin people being over 90 percent devout Christian, the Church is being hit hard. Churches in Kachin State have been attacked, seized, used as prisons and burned. The Christian Kachin are being raped, brutalised, enslaved, starved and slaughtered.
See Religious Liberty Prayer Bulletin (RLPB) label: Burma
ALSO: Burma Army Targets Christian Civilians in War on Insurgents
Troops attack churches in Kachin state conflict.
Compass Direct News, 28 Oct 2011

Furthermore, Christian Solidarity Worldwide reported on 31 October, that in Maw Wan Ward, Phakant Township, the town administration is now requiring Christians to seek official permission to read the Bible, pray and fast, amongst other Christian 'cultural' activities. Requests must be accompanied by recommendations from other departments and must be submitted to the Township Administration Office 15 days in advance.

With war and repression escalating behind a smokescreen of token reforms from a Burman-Buddhist-supremacist regime operating from a position of increasing geo-strategic significance, the Christian Kachin need our prayers for God's intervention now more than ever.

For suggested prayer points:
RLPB 132. Burma: Interests, Smokescreens & Ethnic Cleansing

Christian mission and persecution

Why the new rules for Christian witness will not solve the problem of persecution.

By Elizabeth Kendal,
Religious Liberty Monitoring, 6 July 2011

The Church is slowly waking up to the reality that we are living in days of escalating persecution. Global trends such as booming population growth, rapid urbanisation and mass migrations are converging, producing fierce competition for land, resources and power; creating societies that are increasingly difficult to govern, especially where institutions of governance were not already established. Add to this volatile mix the trend of escalating religious tension -- the result of converging religious trends -- and we have an incendiary environment.

This reality provides the context for the document:

Christian Witness in a Multi-Religious World
Recommendations for Conduct
World Council of Churches
Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue
World Evangelical Alliance
28 June 2011

The WEA press release states: "This historic document is in part a response to criticisms levelled at Christians by some religious communities in what they perceived to be a use of unethical methods. In some case these objections have led to anti-conversion laws and violence."

Jean-Louis Tauran, president of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue (PCID), said the text "will help us reduce unnecessary tensions and present the truth of God in a credible way to the world around us".

However, it is highly unlikely that the "Recommendations for Conduct" -- a document which provides Christians with principles to follow "as they seek to fulfil Christ's commission in an appropriate manner, particularly within interreligious contexts" -- will have their desired effect. While the document might be a handy tool in the hands of those engaged in "quiet diplomacy", it will not change the reality on the ground because the Church and her accusers are speaking totally different languages. As such, interpretations will continue to differ, and accusations will continue to fly. In fact the very existence of this document might lead to the situation where the Church will be expected to hold Christian evangelists, missionaries and humanitarians accountable for violent persecution.

The reality is: the intense hostility the church is facing in the early 21st Century has been building for decades. A mighty flood is upon us for which there is no quick fix and only one real solution.

NO QUICK FIX

On 21 August 2007, the UN's Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, Doudou Diene, presented his report on Islamophobia and defamation of religion to the sixth session of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). A profound anti-Western and anti-Christian bias was evident from the outset.

See UNHRC: Watershed Days
By Elizabeth Kendal, for WEA RLC, 19 Sept 07

According to the report, "defamation" of Islam produces Islamophobia which expresses itself as hatred of Muslims which in turn generates "extremism". As such, those who "defame" Islam should be held accountable for Islamic extremism (violence and terror).

Likewise, Christian missionaries were accused of having exploited freedom of expression to defame Hinduism, thereby creating militant Hindutva. According the UN report, "Christianophobia" is a consequence not of escalating intolerance, but of the "aggressive proselytism of certain evangelical groups".

The UN Special Rapporteur's report recommended therefore that international human rights covenants be reinterpreted and amended, and that "complementary standards" be adopted on "the interrelations between freedom of expression, freedom of religion and non-discrimination".

After much inter-religious dialogue, the World Council of Churches, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue and the World Evangelical Alliance appear to have taken the lead in the adoption and promotion of such "complementary standards".

Recommendations for Conduct

The document affirms Christian humanitarian service, but with the complementary proviso that exploitation of situations of poverty and of vulnerable people has no place in Christian outreach.

In reality it is virtually impossible to provide charitable services in hostile environments without being so accused. Think about it. How can a self-giving Christian humanitarian who in love desperately wants to ease the sufferings of the poor, downtrodden, infirmed and marginalised, avoid an accusation of exploitation?

Actually, the only way to avoid the charge of exploitation is to refrain from all Christian witness while serving impoverished, infirm and "vulnerable" people. Christians would have to refrain from witnessing to youths (children and teenagers). Christian aid workers would have to totally refrain from witnessing to the poor and marginalised. Christian pastors, doctors and nurses would have to totally refrain from witnessing to the sick and dying.

This of course, is precisely what the apostaphobic religious dictators of this world of want. "Yes please," they say. "Feed our poor, treat our lepers, dig our wells and build our schools, only don't threaten our authority by presenting an alternative truth."

And while it is fine to denounce the offering of allurements and rewards, one needs to understand that in some hostile environments a meeting place with seating is considered an allurement, and the offer of heaven a fraudulent reward.

Christians are also called to "reject all forms of violence, even psychological or social, including the abuse of power in their witness". But this will not appease India's Hindutva protagonists who regard conversion as violence. It will not appease those who accuse evangelical Christianity of cultural terrorism. Even Doudou Diene, the UN's Special Rapporteur, warned in his Aug 07 report that the "legitimate expression of ideas" could in reality be "ideological violence" or "intellectual violence". Is it psychological violence to warn of judgment? What is abuse of power in witness?

Along with this, Christians are also called to "reject violence, unjust discrimination or repression by any religious or secular authority, including the violation or destruction of places of worship, sacred symbols or texts".

While this fine statement presumably leaves individuals with the liberty to dispose of their own property -- idols, juju, shrines, texts -- as they see fit, those who have no understanding of the separation of church and state, those who don't understand liberty and only understand dictatorship, will expect religious and secular authorities to control and be held accountable for the deeds of individuals.

The text recommends that "churches, national and regional confessional bodies and mission organizations, and especially those working in interreligious contexts . . . [deepen] their knowledge and understanding of different religions, and to do so also taking into account the perspectives of the adherents of those religions", adding, "Christians should avoid misrepresenting the beliefs and practices of people of different religions".

The reality is however, that anything that is said about a religion or belief will misrepresent someone's personal perspective of that religion or belief. This strategy which recommends inquiring of the "street" over an examination of the texts is promoted primarily by Muslims keen to hide intolerant pro-Sharia, pro-jihad, anti-Semitic, anti-Christian fundamentalist Islam under a cloak of liberal, nominal, folk or secularised Islam.

The only way to deepen knowledge and understanding of a religion is to study its texts and then examine history in that light. And while "taking into account the perspectives of adherents" might be of value in revealing immense diversity of belief, it must be acknowledged that many, if not most adherents of religion are quite nominal, ignorant as to the contents of, and the demands made by, their own sacred texts.

Finally, a quote from the May 2006 consultation found in the Appendix (point 3), confirms the degree to which this document is influenced by world trends, while demonstrating the ultimate adoption of "complementary standards".

"We affirm that, while everyone has a right to invite others to an understanding of their faith, it should not be exercised by violating others' rights and religious sensibilities. Freedom of religion enjoins upon all of us the equally non-negotiable responsibility to respect faiths other than our own, and never to denigrate, vilify or misrepresent them for the purpose of affirming superiority of our faith."

Note: Christians are called to refrain from any exercise of religious liberty that might violate another's "rights and religious sensibilities". Does "rights" include the right not to be offended -- a now routine feature of contemporary anti-discrimination and equal opportunity law? What are "religious sensibilities" and how are they violated?

Furthermore, Christians are called to "respect faiths other than our own". Really? Must we respect Islam? Must we respect Hinduism? Must we respect Buddhism? Must we also respect Shinto? Where can we draw the line? Must we respect Aum Supreme Truth? Must we respect Voodoo? This language mirrors that of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference's "Combating Defamation of religions Human Rights Resolution 2005/3". Is the church really being called to follow in the OIC-led UN which now protects religions more fiercely than it protects humans, in particular the human's fundamental right to proclaim, pursue and receive truth?

This pulls the rug right out from under Principle 7, which affirms freedom of religion and belief while denouncing religious persecution and calling upon Christians to "engage in a prophetic witness denouncing such actions". For while this is a fine statement, to which all Christians should give a loud AMEN, how does one "engage in prophetic witness denouncing [religious persecution]" without being accused of arrogance, condescension and disparagement (principle 3); false witness (principle 10); disrespect, denigration, vilification and misrepresentation (Appendix 3); and of course "defamation" of religion (as per UN Resolution 2005/3, which expresses "deep concern that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism Islam with human rights abuses, violence or terrorism" (emphasis mine)).

The reality is, it is not possible today to denounce persecution without being so accused.

ONLY ONE SOLUTION

There is little doubt that at the root of most persecution in the world today, is hostility towards Christian witness / evangelism / mission. However, Christian witness / evangelism / mission provides the only solution to the problem of persecution.

"And they will do these things [hate you, persecute you] because they have not known the Father, nor me" (John 16:3 ESV).

Christians must step out in faith with the word of God, at the direction and in the power of the Holy Spirit, to seek to make the triune God known. And while we are cautioned to be "wise as serpents and innocent as doves", we are also encouraged to commit ourselves to the Lord's care, and trust HIM (Matthew 10).

No matter how much integrity we practise, hatred, false accusations and persecutions will continue. "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places" (Ephesians 6:12 ESV). Indeed if we are to truly imitate Jesus Christ, as the document asserts (Principle 2), then we must be prepared to suffer as he suffered.

The Principles for Conduct will do little to reduce religious tensions and persecution. All we can do is prayerfully walk by faith, not fearing man, with eyes fixed on Jesus -- our means, our goal and our role model (Hebrews 12:1-3) -- remembering the paradigm of Isaiah 2:1-4: that spiritual transformation is the foundation, not the consequence, of peace.

"I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry" (2 Timothy 4:1-5 ESV).

Laos: Eliminating Christianity.

Date: Tuesday 6 October 2003
Subj: Laos: Eliminating Christianity.
To: World Evangelical Alliance Religious Liberty News & Analysis
From: WEA RLC Principal Researcher and Writer, Elizabeth Kendal.


Communist Laos in South East Asia is one of the world's most severe religious liberty abusers, being one of the few nations in the world where the government has expressly declared its intent to eliminate Christianity. Reports indicate that government abuses go well beyond systematic intimidation, deprivation, harassment and persecution of Christians. The Lao government is also engaged in the systematic killing of Hmong civilians, militarily, by means of chemical weapons and forced starvation.

RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION

Of all the people groups in Laos, the Hmong have been the most responsive to the gospel. There have been great turnings to Christ amongst the Hmong and the Khmu, sometimes with whole villages coming to Christ. Gospel radio has been a significant instrument, and now indigenous evangelists are spreading the Good News at great personal risk and in the midst of great persecution.

Through the 1960s the Hmong fought with the Americans against the Communists in the Indochina war. The Hmong continue to call for democracy and religious freedom and have been waging a low-level guerrilla insurgency against the Communist government for many years. Hence the Hmong are considered enemies of the government, and a channel for Western influence.

The Laotian government considers Christianity to be a violation of Lao custom and an 'imperialist foreign religion' backed by political interests in the West, particularly the United States. Christians are therefore regarded as subversive and enemies of the state.

Persecution has escalated continuously since the Communists took over in 1975. Since the late 1990s, Lao believers have been beaten, imprisoned, tortured and forced off their lands and into severe hardship for refusing to sign the government's "Voluntary resignation from a foreign religion" document. (For some good background on Laos see link 1.)

-------------------------------------------------------
A letter to Far East Broadcasting Company (FEBC) from a Hmong believer in Laos
- June 2003. (Link 2)

"This is the first letter that I have written to you. I want to let you know that I am already a believer, however during these times the government has refused Christians any sanction to worship and therefore have closed all public churches in our part of the country. The government wants us to go back and worship evil spirits, which breaks my heart.

"Not only that, but if the government sees us praying, they will persecute us and will jail us. At this time, the non-Christians in our village have reported the Christians they know. They claimed that we practiced our religions without evidence, so some have been persecuted. Other claims include espionage for the country of America, which carries stiff fines.

"Despite our problems, I want to know if you can send me a tape that teaches us how to keep our faith in the Lord, and away from false prophets. Pray for us so that we can pay whatever fines have been imposed on us. Any Bibles or scripture teaching tapes would be beneficial to us.

Thank you so much!"

-------------------------------------------------------
EXPOSING THE 'SECRET JUNGLE WAR'.

CHEMICAL WEAPONS

In early September 2003, the WEA RLC interviewed a Laos observer who reported that many Hmong groups isolated in the jungle are under constant military attack which includes the use of chemical weapons. For security reasons this observer's identity must remain secret.

"There are at least 5,000 such people in several groups. But my reports say that only about 20% are men and the rest are women and children. The reason that there are so few men is that so many men have been killed defending themselves as they fight against the government troops. The Hmong are asking for democracy and freedom, and are therefore under constant attack from government troops.

"What's more, the Laos government is doing everything in its power to ensure that the world does not know anything about this 'secret jungle war' against the Hmong. It is practically impossible for foreigners to get to meet these people, as you have to walk for many days in the jungle.

"The army is attacking in three ways: with ground troops (soldiers), bombs from aircrafts and chemical weapons. The Government uses helicopters and they spray out something that looks like 'yellow rain'. It creates headache, diarrhoea, blindness, and the teeth fall out of the mouth. Within three weeks people die. As these people only eat leaves and roots they also often eat leaves that are affected by the 'yellow rain'. When they do that they usually die within three days. These attacks are directly against people (including women and children), water and trees.

"It is impossible to say exactly how many have died. One Hmong group consisted of 8,000 four years ago and today there are only 750 left. My estimation is that many hundreds have died from chemical attacks. Many others have died from starvation and sickness, as they do not have any medication. Many have also surrendered and subsequently been killed.

"There are videos of these attacks, and hundreds of photos. These have been presented both to the International Red Cross and the UN but nobody in the West seems interested to help."

STARVATION AS A WEAPON

Amnesty International released a Public Statement on 2 October 2003 entitled, "Laos: Use of starvation as a weapon of war against civilians". It reads, "Amnesty International is gravely concerned by the sharply deteriorating situation of thousands of family members of ethnic minority groups, predominantly Hmong, involved in an armed conflict with the Lao military in jungle areas of the country.

"Reports have reached the organization of scores of civilian deaths, predominantly among children, from starvation and injuries sustained during the conflict. It is known that several of approximately 20 rebel groups with their families are surrounded by Lao military and prevented from foraging for food that they traditionally rely on to survive." (Link 3)

- Elizabeth Kendal

Links

1) OMF Laos, Background.
http://www.us.omf.org/content.asp?id=23596&cachefixer=

2) Far East Broadcasting Company
http://www.febc.org/hmong_letters.html

3) Amnesty International, 2 October 2003
Laos: Use of starvation as a weapon of war against civilians.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA260132003