UNITED STATES COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
(HELSINKI
COMMISSION) HOLDS HEARING ON HATE CRIMES
NOVEMBER 6, 2007
COMMISSIONERS:
REP. ALCEE L. HASTINGS, D-FLA., CHAIRMAN
REP. LOUISE M. SLAUGHTER, D-N.Y.
REP. MIKE MCINTYRE, D-N.C.
REP. HILDA L. SOLIS, D-CALIF.
REP. G.K. BUTTERFIELD, D-N.C.
REP. CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, R-N.J.
REP. ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, R-ALA.
REP. MIKE PENCE, R-IND.
REP. JOSEPH R. PITTS, R-PENN.
SEN. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, D-MD., CO-CHAIRMAN
SEN. CHRISTOPHER J. DODD,
D-CONN.
SEN. RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, D-WIS.
SEN. HILLARY RODHAM
CLINTON, D-N.Y.
SEN. JOHN F. KERRY, D-MASS.
SEN. SAM
BROWNBACK, R-KAN.
SEN. GORDON H. SMITH, R-ORE.
SEN. SAXBY
CHAMBLISS, R-GA.
SEN. RICHARD BURR, R-N.C.
WITNESSES/PANELISTS:
DR. DOUDOU DIENE,
UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON RACISM
DR.
TIFFANY LIGHTBOURN,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY DIRECTORATE
MICAH H. NAFTALIN,
UNION OF COUNCILS FOR SOVIET
JEWS
NICKOLAI BUTKEVICH,
UNION OF COUNCILS FOR SOVIET JEWS
HON. URS
ZISWILER,
SWISS AMBASSADOR TO THE U.S.
OLEKSANDER SHCHERBA,
EMBASSY
OF UKRAINE,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
RICHARD RUBENSTEIN,
INSTITUTE FOR
CONFLICT ANALYSIS AND RESOLUTION,
GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY
[The hearing was held at 10:02 a.m. in Room 2154 Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, D.C., Rep. Alcee L. Hastings, Chairman, moderating.]
[*]
HASTINGS: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. This is a particularly awkward
room. But we work with what we have, and we will go forward here.
I'd like
to get started, in the interest of time. And I know that because of the floor
schedule, I will likely be called away at some point, and the briefing, of
course, could go on.
I'd like to thank you for your interest in this
morning's briefing on combating hate crimes and discrimination within the OSCE.
And I am certain that real soon, Senator Gordon Smith is going to be with us.
And he, along with Senator Kennedy have led efforts in the Senate to make hate
crime laws more inclusive, as well as my colleague, Hilda Solis, who is the
special representative on migration for the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly. I
expect her here.
As we approach the anniversary of Kristallnacht, it is
incumbent upon us to recall what can happen when intolerance is not addressed in
a society. Not only are hate crimes in the OSCE on the rise, but discrimination
is also an everyday experience for many persons who live in OSCE countries.
Political parties and other leading figures have also become increasingly more
xenophobic. While censorship is not the answer, leaders and society do bear a
unique responsibility to promote tolerance and mutual respect and not show
mistrust and discord.
This is the reason that I and Congressman Mark Kirk
responded so swiftly in leading congressional efforts to condemn the
anti-Semitic remarks of the Belarusian president.
Some years ago, I and my
co-chairman, Senator Ben Cardin, and other commissioners, came together to push
for the OSCE to address tolerance issues following a spike in anti-Semitic
incidents taking place in Europe.
Now, five years later, the OSCE has an
established tolerance unit that publishes an annual hate crimes report, trains
law enforcement on responding to hate crimes, and has developed numerous
tolerance education initiatives that address anti-Semitism, racism and
xenophobia, and intolerance and discrimination against Muslims, Christians and
members of other religions.
While this briefing focuses on the situation
overseas, it is the first of several initiatives we are planning to bring
attention to intolerance and discrimination throughout the OSCE region,
including the United States.
The current reluctance of this Congress to
expand hate crimes laws to include gay and other vulnerable groups says that we,
too, have a way to go in protecting the fundamental rights of the most
vulnerable in our society.
Last evening in the Rules Committee, we spent a
considerable amount of time on legislation ending discrimination against gays,
lesbians and transgender people in the workplace. And some of the arguments
that I heard that were made against it were the same arguments that were made in
the run-up to the 1964 Civil Rights Act -- the identical arguments. You know
infringement on states’ rights and the business of religious institutions.
And I just find it astounding that we are still having this discussion, here in
America, let alone when we get outside of the OSCE.
To kick off events this
Congress, we are honored to have some distinguished guests with us here today.
And I really do appreciate them taking their time.
I'd like to thank Dr.
Doudou Diene for making a special trip to be here today. I understand, sir,
that you have also received an invitation to prepare a report on the United
States.
Given the voter disenfranchisement in my own state of Florida, over
159 reports of anti-Semitic incidents in my congressional district last year,
the reintroduction of the noose -- and the list goes on -- I'd say the special
rapporteur has a lot of work ahead of him. And I hope he will join us in the
future to share his final report on the United States.
I'd also like to note
that we also extended an invitation to Human Rights First and the SOVA Center in
Russia. As many of you well know, Human Rights First has published a report on
hate crimes in Europe, while the SOVA Center has taken on the difficult but much
needed task of collecting statistics on hate crimes in Russia, and monitoring
the responses of law enforcement and the government.
While they
unfortunately could not be here today, we hope to have them at future events, as
much of our work on the commission on these issues cannot be done without them.
The biographies of our witnesses you will find at the desk outside. And
therefore, I won't go into their four biographies, but I'll begin this morning
with Dr. Diene. He is United Nations special rapporteur on contemporary forms
of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.
Dr.
Diene, you have the floor, sir.
DIENE: Thank you very much, sir.
HASTINGS: My colleague, Ms. Solis, after Dr. Diene and any opening remarks you
might make.
Yes, sir.
DIENE: OK. Thank you, Congressman Hastings, and
thank you for inviting me this morning.
I think I will start by explaining
what the special rapporteur job is. You may not know exactly what the mandate
is.
Basically, special rapporteurs are independent experts elected by the
Human Rights Commission Council -- not paid. We are not U.N. staff, not
diplomats. And our mandate is to monitor certain issues worldwide, and also by
country, by visiting countries, and submitting their recommendations also in our
reports.
My mandate is racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
intolerance. I have been special rapporteur since 2002.
I have been
visiting many countries in the last few years, almost 15 to 20. The last one is
the Dominican Republic last week, before that the Baltic States, Italy (ph),
(inaudible) German (ph), Japan, Brazil, Ivory Coast, Colombia, et cetera.
But congressman, your invitation is for me to share with you some reflections on
the issue of hate crime as it may be related to my mandate, racism. So, the
first thing I would like to share with you is my beliefs (ph) from (ph) the
conviction that there is already a strong rise of hate crimes. Their crime is
rising, worldwide.
And as a context of this really serious trend is that we
are witnessing certain basic trends worldwide, which makes hate crime something
difficult to analyze and combat.
As far as racism is concerned, racial
discrimination and xenophobia, all forms of racism are rising -- all of them.
The old forms of racism and discrimination -- anti-Semitism, racism against the
black people, against other races -- and the new forms since 9/11.
But
three (ph) main trends are emerging. One, the rise of racist violence. The
rise of racist violence, killings, we have witnessed many in different continent
(ph) parts (ph). To talk of the OSCE countries, in Belgium not a long time ago,
a Malian national (ph) was killed, with a little bad (ph) issue (ph) was taken
care of.
I went to Russia to investigate racism there. Many minority
members have been killed. These were (ph) Kavkazian (ph), Central Asian,
African, Asian, Arab, et cetera.
Then the rise of violent racist crime,
mainly from the extreme right groups and the neo-Nazi groups.
But several
(ph) times, which is maybe one of the foundations of this rise is what they call
the political instrumentalization of racism.
We are witnessing two very
serious trends.
One is the fact that political parties, namely, extreme
right parties, are being elected, and are getting a stronger electoral position
on open racist and xenophobic platforms. These platforms are getting worse.
They are getting votes for these platforms.
And many (inaudible) back (ph)
on immigration, asylum-seekers combat against terrorism, et cetera.
So, more
and more parties of this -- extreme right parties are being elected, getting
strong groups from a democratic process. So, this is the first point. Racist
and xenophobic platforms are electorally vote for to be elected to parliament or
government.
Second trend on the instrumentalization is the fact that the
ideas, these platforms, are slowly implementing the political program of
democratic parties. They are influencing democratic parties' programs. If you
analyze the program of political parties, democratic parties in many countries
in the last 10 years, you will see slowly the concepts, the rhetoric, the ideas
of the extreme right platform implementing these programs.
That is a serious
development.
But a third development in this same dynamic, because of this
electoral success of these platforms, most of these parties -- extreme right
parties -- are getting access to power through coalition of governments. We are
seeing more and more countries, where, in the OSCE countries, these parties
become part of the government, and being in a position to literally implement
their agenda, their xenophobic agenda.
And not only implementing their
xenophobic agenda, but hurting (ph) the democratic agenda of the nation, of the
countries concerned, especially as (ph) is (ph) related to migrations,
asylum-seekers, terrorism, et cetera.
So, these three developments put
together is what I characterize as one of the most serious threats to democracy,
is the political instrumentalization of racism.
So, what we are witnessing
is a kind of democratization of racism.
Second development which is, I
think, very serious, which also explains is at the basis of the rise of hate
crime, is what I call the intellectual and scientific legitimization of racism
and discrimination. We are seeing more and more books written by scholars from
well respected institutions, openly advocating ideas of (inaudible), of racist,
of groups of ethnics, and openly advocating racist and xenophobic ideas.
This plan (ph) is very strong now in Europe, but is a latest development you
know it, is a scientific legitimization, a return to the scientific explanation
or legitimization of discrimination. The latest example is the Nobel Peace
Prize Watson, when he spoke of the inferiority intelligence of Africans. Openly
he did it -- a Nobel Peace Prize -- you know.
But this is not an isolated
statement. I live in France. I live in Paris. And as you know, in Paris
recently the French government has submitted -- not the French government, their
main political party -- a proposal to submit the children of migrant workers to
DNA testing, to allow them to get to France.
So, what is happening here is
the use of DNA in a general context where migrants are ethnically seen (ph).
The migrants are -- there is the tendency to see the ethnic factored (ph) any
dimension (ph) of migrant workers, their ethnic origin, religion and culture.
And in this (inaudible) context, which allows and opens the way for
discriminations, this DNA testing has a special and very profound meaning.
So, if you put these three factors together -- the rise of violence from extreme
right groups, neo-Nazi groups, the political instrumentalization and the
intellectual legitimization -- these lead us to a situation where I think it is
one of my conclusions. Racial discrimination and hate crimes are one of the
most serious threats to democracy now.
Now, but what is at stake? What is
behind this violence?
I see two issues which I think we have to maybe
discuss later on. One is that there is at the core of the rise of racism, in
most of the countries I did visit, I visited, you find this issue of
multi-culturalism -- the resistance to multi-culturalism, the refusal to
recognize the cultural, ethnic and religious diversity.
This is something
which is a common factor in most of the countries I visited. And it is this
resistance to multiple (inaudible) which feed (ph) the program of the racist
platform of extreme right parties. So, we come back to square one.
But
behind the issue of (inaudible) terrorism (ph) is what I -- because you have to
try to analyze, to understand why this is happening.
Behind the -- at the
core of the multi-culturalism issue is the issue of identity construction. What
I have witnessed for my report in most of the European (ph) countries I visited,
is a crisis of identity -- a crisis of identity in the sense that the old
national identities of these third (ph) nations, which have been stripped (ph),
simply to (inaudible), but sometimes based on religious or ethnic factors.
It is national identities which have been put through education, everything.
These identities are contradicted and clashing with the multiple (inaudible) mix
of the societies. It means that the modern (ph) streets (ph) are multi-colored,
multi-religious and ethnic. The (inaudible) societies is marked by diversity.
The resistance to this diversity is expressed through the difference of the
national identity.
The notion of defending identity, defending the
difference of identity, defending of old national identity, and receiving (ph)
the multicultural trend.
And this is done through the debate on migration.
And migrants are seen as a threat, asylum-seekers as a threat to national
identity. And also, the old combat against (ph) terrorism also feeds this
rhetoric.
We have seen it in the United States, because the latest work of
somebody like Samuel Huntington in his book, "Who Are We?" when he elaborated
that the demographic and the cultural presence of the Latinos is a threat to
American identity. This approach is an expression of this intellectual
legitimization.
So, I think what I am trying to share with you is that we
have to try to deconstruct this rise of hate crime. And it is through this rise
of hate crime and this intellectual and political -- intellectual legitimization
and political instrumentalization, that we are witnessing what I call in France
the banalization of racism and the return of the very old stereotypes and
prejudices, which explain why in certain countries of OSCE, I did criticize it
in my last report to the Human Rights Council in September.
You see, for
example, in Poland, the same party, member of the coalition, the minister of
justice was a member of that party. He's advocating both (inaudible)
Islamophobic agenda, describing Europe as a Christian land, and Islam as a
threat to Europe, but in the same discourse, very strongly coming back to the
deeply-rooted anti-Semitism of the Polish society. So, the same person is
advocating the same lines.
But it is not the fact that he expressed such
ideas, it is the fact that he dare express them publicly in a democratic
context, which is one point I really want to share with you. Racist, xenophobic
ideas now banalized, are becoming mainstream accepted.
This, I think, is a
very dangerous trend, and which now, on the bed (ph) of which you see extreme
right groups, neo-Nazi groups using now violence to translate these hate ideas
into acts.
And it is becoming very serious, because another idea you have to
keep in mind is that extreme right parties, and especially neo-Nazi groups, are
getting very strong democratic position. They have a strategy of anti
(inaudible) that are entering democratic institutions.
You see now that in
the European Parliament, extreme right, neo-Nazi groups have now a parliamentary
group. They have now a parliamentary group, which has been strengthened by the
arrival of groups, parties from Central and Eastern Europe.
And recently in
Germany, in the region of Berlin, in the last elections, seven neo-Nazi (ph)
members of the euro region, regional parliament of Berlin have been elected.
So, what you have seen is that, not only a return to the rhetoric, verbal, the
violence, the intellectual construction and scientific legitimization, but also
the use of violence and also the democratic legitimization, and infiltrating the
democratic institutions.
So, Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, I think
this is something very serious to take into account, which leads me to two
conclusions.
One, the combat against racism, discrimination, xenophobia has
failed on one fundamental point. One is the political will to combat
discrimination -- all forms of discriminations.
And I do think that it is
one of the consequences itself (ph), the combat against terrorism. Some
governments have interpreted the necessity to combat terrorism as meaning that
they have to sideline, marginalize human rights issues and issues like racism --
acts of terror.
Secondly, the fact that governments also have not only not
expressing a strong political will to combat these crimes, hate crimes -- and I
try to give facts in most of the countries I visited. But also, what we are
saying also emerging very (ph) strongly is the fact that -- and this, I think,
explains also the rise of hate crime -- is the neglect of what I call the
intellectual front. The neglect of the fact that the ideas, the concepts which
are at the basis of all forms of discrimination, because all forms of
discrimination are intellectual constructions first, groups, communities, races
have been first demonized intellectually, conceptually.
And (inaudible) has
been intellectual buildup of critic (ph), that racism against black people has
been also intellectually constructed. And the combat on this front has been
neglected.
But one other point, also, the last point that I want to share
with you is the fact that the breakup of the front of the victims is also victim
of this hate crime in racism. These are Jewish communities, African
(inaudible), American Indian -- whatever groups.
All these groups are now --
are not uniting their effort to combat the problems they are facing together.
And this, I think, is a very serious problem, the fact that victims are not
united. They are not identifying the same enemies, and they are not organizing
a common front to combat it. And I think that in the discussion, we'll come
back to that very important and (inaudible) bases (ph).
So, Mr. Chairman,
these are some of the preliminary ideas I wanted to share with you, and later on
to answer any of your questions.
Thank you.
HASTINGS: Thank you, Dr.
Diene.
Before I go to Dr. Lightbourn, I'd ask my fellow commissioner and
colleague, Congresswoman Solis, who is the special representative on migration
for the OSCE parliamentary assembly, if she would make any comments she'd (ph)
(inaudible).
SOLIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I really don't have a lot
to say right now, because I want to hear from the witnesses. And I find the
first speaker very intriguing, because as a woman of color serving here in the
House of Representatives, I know too well what you're talking about in terms of
hate crime and the fact that Latinos in this country are heavily scrutinized
right now in this particular arena, as we speak here in the House of
Representatives.
We have a tremendous debate going on about immigration
reform. And we see that even local governments -- as you say, democratically
elected -- are now taking some of these issues on their own and trying to
implement very restrictive laws, as well, to either prevent education, health
care, driver's license and many things of that nature.
So, it's happening
here in the U.S. We know there are ways to tackle this, so I'm very encouraged
to hear what our speakers are going to tell us today.
Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
HASTINGS: Thank you very much, Congresswoman Solis.
And now,
I'd ask Dr. Tiffany Lightbourn, of the Department of Homeland Security, Science
and Technology Directorate, if she would offer her comments.
Again, the
biographies of our witnesses are on the table outside.
Dr. Lightbourn, you
have the floor.
LIGHTBOURN: Thank you.
Chairman Hastings, Congresswoman
Solis and distinguished members of the commission, thank you for the opportunity
to participate in this briefing today.
It's a privilege to speak to you
about the global problem of xenophobia, research that we've been conducting on
the consequences of perceived individual and group discrimination, and what
governments can do to prevent and prepare for threats to national security due
to these societal ills.
We have a lot to learn from the experiences of
European ethnic minority and religious groups, and hope that the testimonies
today will bring us one step closer to tackling the complex issues of
multiculturalism and societal integration in our respective societies.
As.
Dr. Diene has noted, there's a growing prevalence of violent hate crimes,
xenophobic political platforms and reports of unequal treatment experienced by
racial and ethnic minorities within the countries of the OSCE.
Of particular
concern are accounts by Muslim and Jewish groups of experiences with
discrimination, alienation and political isolation.
The attacks of September
11 signaled to the world that members of a discontented Islamic diaspora in
Europe, directed by al Qaida, could organize and execute an attack on the United
States.
While this incident awakened to the U.S. the consequences of
radicalization of immigrant fundamentalist groups living in Europe, it also
signaled our need to better understand the process of radicalization at the
individual and group level.
My approach to this phenomenon is as a social
psychologist. My training is in the field of psychology, and I'm an immigration
researcher by practice. So, I am a scientist, and I have to apologize for that
as I go on with my remarks.
And I'm a scientist for the government. So, not
only do I ask the question why, but I ask the question why with a purpose. And
that purpose is not to legitimize discrimination, but to understand, predict and
prevent the causes and consequences of discrimination through policy, programs
and public education.
One caveat, and it's a pretty big one. Our
understanding of the relationship between immigrant status, religious
identification, experiences with discrimination, and the radicalization of
belief and behavior is still at its very nascent stage.
So, what do we know?
We know a lot from the 1950s on research on the psychology of
discrimination, why people hate others, the consequences of being hated. We
know a lot from researchers in the 1980s on the psychology of acculturation.
Those like John Berry (ph) at Queens (ph) University in Toronto.
We know
from rhetoric and case studies of confirmed terrorists, many of whom claim to be
the victims of discrimination, who express hatred toward their host societies
for their treatment, and who are demographically first, second or third
generation immigrants, that there is something going on here.
But to put the
pieces of this puzzle together, to stimulate a psychological process, is
something that we at the department are beginning to do.
To stimulate that
research pipeline to meet the need, in 2004, the Department of Homeland Security
initiated a competition for an academic center of excellence -- we call them
COEs -- to understand the social and behavioral aspects of terrorism and
counterterrorism.
In 2005, the University of Maryland was selected to lead
the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism,
and they dub themselves with the acronym START. START was awarded $12 million
for a three-year term of research.
Research by DHS's START clearly (ph) has
coalesced around the idea that there are two factors that facilitate
radicalization. And these are individual characteristics, like personality, and
the characteristics of the society in which an individual lives.
START
investigators, Dr. Clark McCauley, Bryn Mawr, and DHS post-doc Sofia Moskolensko
(ph), have just completed a manuscript identifying mechanisms that can serve as
radicalization catalysts for individuals, groups, as well as for societies.
At the individual level, personal victimization, political grievances and
joining a radical group seem to initiate a slippery slope of increasingly
extreme behaviors.
At the group level, isolation and perceived threats to a
group serve to heighten the potential for group radicalization.
As such,
country contexts that support the victimization of people based on their ethnic
or religious identities may produce pockets of people likely (ph) to be
radicalized into extremist behavior.
Important to note here is that, in
these early studies, it's not religiosity or religious identity that lead people
to become radicalized. Rather, it's the grievances that people feel from living
in a country context in which discrimination is tolerated or commonplace, that
leads them to seek similar others and form groups, social networks and
organizations, which can then possibly become conduits for radicalization.
Simply stated, the victims of discrimination, political grievances, personal
victimization and isolation can become catalysts for radical action.
To test
this relationship, START political scientist Jon Wilkenfeld at the University of
Maryland, and Victor Asal at SUNY in Buffalo, are investigating whether ethnic
organizations are likely to turn to violence and terror in order to express
their discontent with country conditions.
This work is currently being
supported by DHS's START COE, as mere (ph) interested (inaudible) covering
pathways to extremism and linked -- and find out what links political grievances
and radicalization, potentially, amongst ethnic minority and immigrant groups.
At the department, we are approaching the phenomenon of radicalization
amongst minority communities in a variety of ways. I am part of the DHS Science
and Technology Directorate, and we're making significant research investments to
better understand, predict and prevent the threat of radicalization.
The
START COE, which is sponsored by my home office, the Office of University
Programs, has over 30 active research projects, 60 active investigators working
on populations in the United States and Europe, North Africa, the Middle East,
Australia, Latin America -- you name it. And they're looking all at the social
behavioral aspects of terrorism.
In addition to the center's research
program, they're also engaged in unique educational activities. And I also have
with me today the director of their education program, Kate Worboys, in case you
have questions about their education program.
But one of the unique
activities they have is a multi-campus project to encourage dialogues between
Muslim, Christian and Jewish students. Activities include retreats involving
students from different faith traditions, dinner series for campus leaders from
different religious communities, collaborative community service projects and
the development of a multimedia arts program, focused on fostering respect for
different faith traditions.
The idea here is that building the social
relationships between faith traditions can help mitigate potential conflicts
when more serious differences may arise.
Also at DHS Science and Technology,
we have one of our core research divisions, the Human Factors Division, that has
as one of its core missions to apply the social and behavioral sciences to
improve detection, analysis and the understanding of the threats posed by
individuals, groups and radical movements.
This division has created a
dynamic research program on radicalization and radicalization deterrence, and
now is fully staffed with a program manager.
The DHS Office for Civil Rights
and Civil Liberties, led by Dan Sutherland, has been at the forefront of the
department's efforts to engage key communities with the belief that, "promoting
civic participation can help prevent the isolation and alienation that many
believe are necessary precursors to radicalization."
In this regard, our
civil rights-civil liberties office holds regular meetings with ethnic and
religious community leaders about its mission and challenges, and listens to the
concerns and ideas of these communities. By developing and cultivating
partnerships with American Arab, Muslim, Sikh and South Asian leaders, our civil
rights-civil liberties office hopes to have open lines of communication and
promote civic engagement amongst members of religious communities in the United
States.
We know from statistical data that Muslim communities in Europe and
American Arab and Muslim communities differ. They differ in how well integrated
they are in their host societies, their levels of wealth and levels of
education.
We know much less, however, about how these communities differ in
terms of their relationship to their national governments, the nature of their
political grievances and whether they hold radical beliefs, and what and when,
if those radical beliefs may lead to radical action.
What we do know is
that we share a need to increase the integration of new immigrants and the
tolerance of host societies for newcomers, particularly those from the Arab and
Muslim worlds, if there's hope to prevent the tiny proportion of those
individuals who may become vulnerable to radicalization.
In conclusion, we
have a long road ahead in better understanding the causes and the consequences
of being the target of xenophobia, how discriminatory conditions contribute to
the phenomenon of radicalization, and the ways in which governments can
proactively address these issues.
In the aftermath of the 2005 London
bombings, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff made a public statement that, "America
values its rich diversity. Muslims in America have long been a part of the
fabric of our nation. The actions of a few extremists cannot serve as a
reflection on the many people who have made valuable contributions to our
society."
Senior government leaders in the U.S. and in Europe need to be
encouraged to make public statements of support for diversity and civic
engagement, if we want to foster climates conducive for peaceful multicultural
societies.
Simultaneously, we need to invest significant resources in
researching the root causes of radicalization within one's own country context.
The lessons learned from these domestic investigations need to be shared. They
need to be shared rapidly and often with international counterparts to
facilitate knowledge transfer and to build a science of radicalization.
Lastly, we have to encourage civic engagement in key minority communities by
government outreach and public education regarding pro-social means of
expressing one's political grievances and how to become involved in civic
society.
There's a lot more that I could talk to you about today, and I hope
that these questions will come up during our discussion. I thank you for the
opportunity to brief you today, and I welcome your questions later.
Thank
you.
HASTINGS: Thank you very much, Dr. Lightbourn.
We've been joined
by fellow commissioner and good friend, Senator Gordon Smith. And if the
gentlemen from the Union of Councils for Soviet Jews would permit, I'd like for
Senator Smith to make any comment he may wish to at this time.
SMITH: Thank
you, Mr. Chairman. It's great to be with you, and I appreciate your holding
this hearing. I'm glad I found this room, after going to the other designated
place.
HASTINGS: (inaudible) the other body.
SMITH: Yes. I should
know my way around your chambers better, but it's an honor to be with you. And
I thank all of our distinguished guests who have joined us to discuss an issue
which is growing in importance for the United States and its European partners.
I, for one, am deeply concerned by the increase in discrimination and hate
crimes, not just in America, but in Europe. It seems to me that there are
several factors at work, such as immigration pressures, political elitism and
current events in the Middle East.
These pressures on European societies
have contributed to a growing problem of ethnic and sectarian violence. Given
the history of Europe, this is particularly unwelcome. But a related phenomenon
is the rebirth of virulent nationalism on the continent of Europe.
For the
past several years, I have watched with some alarm at the right wing extremist
parties that are becoming increasingly popular. These groups often espouse
viciously anti-Semitic slogans and appeal to a 19th century form of European
ethnic identity. I had hoped that this identity had faded into the rubble of
the last European war. I hope I'm wrong, but I may not have been.
In
Hungary last month, 600 people publicly joined a right wing paramilitary group
in a mass ceremony. Members wear apparel reminiscent of Hungary's World War II
Fascist government. And they support an ideology of xenophobia and bigotry.
The ceremony was an unwelcome reminder of a bitter past, to which I cannot
believe any European would willingly return.
The recent victory in
Switzerland of the Swiss People's Party is also alarming. I don't believe that
the SVP is another version of those Hungarian extremists, but some of its tenets
are eerily similar. For me, the SVP does not pass the respectability test,
particularly when it is viewed in the broader spectrum of nationalist resurgence
in Europe. In places as diverse as former East Germany -- and incredibly, even
in Israel -- the rise of right wing extremism has made the SVP's success more of
a concern.
I do not believe that all hate crimes perpetrated in Europe are
attributable to these groups. However, they are at least part of the phenomenon
of ethnic hatred, which has plagued the glorious continent for too much of its
history.
So, thank you all for participating in this hearing today, and I
look forward to your testimony, and hope that you can shed light on what is
apparently a growing problem. It's not a problem just of Europe; we have our
share of it, as well. But we all ought to be united against it.
HASTINGS:
Thank you very much, senator. I appreciate very much your being here.
And
in the audience, and when we turn to the audience for any more questions that
you may have, since it's a briefing, we have with us, Senator Smith and
Representative Solis, the ambassador of Switzerland, Mr. Urs Ziswiler. And I
don't know whether he would like to make a comment, but I would ask, if he does,
we would allow that he do so.
But right now, I'd ask Mr. Micah Naftalin of
the Union of Councils for Soviet Jews to proceed, and to be followed by our
final presenter this morning, Nickolai Butkevich, who I believe is just back
from Russia in the last couple of weeks, I read somewhere or saw somewhere.
But anyway, Mr. Naftalin?
NAFTALIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members and
staff...
HASTINGS: Is that mike on there with you?
NAFTALIN: I think
it is. How's that?
HASTINGS: All right.
NAFTALIN: (inaudible)
Helsinki Commission.
I commend your attention to our briefing paper, which
was prepared by Nickolai and me, and some attachments, and ask that they be
incorporated into your record.
HASTINGS: Without objection.
NAFTALIN:
No briefing could be more timely and important to UCSJ than anti-Semitic and
xenophobic hate crimes and discrimination against ethnic and religious
minorities in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. These examples of the breakdown of
rule of law have been the principal subject of UCSJ's human rights monitoring
and advocacy since 1970.
With the Moscow Helsinki Group, the UCSJ recently
inaugurated an unprecedented international alliance of 30 human rights and
religious freedom NGOs across these three countries, called the Coalition
Against Hate. We're putting into practice Dr. Diene's call for a united front.
Through the medium of a bilingual blog, we will coordinate counteraction
against neo-Nazi groups and disseminate information about how the authorities
respond to hate crimes. At bottom, we seek to infuse these rule of law goals
into the fabric of diplomacy and statecraft.
The Helsinki Commission and
OSCE play a vital role in this, because NGOs are built into the Helsinki
process.
Beyond the credibility of election monitors, we encourage the
following:
Strengthening OSCE's role in the face of Russia's hostility to
the agenda of the third basket;
An even stronger relationship between ODIHR
and the hate crime monitoring NGOs; and
Developing special criteria for
ODIHR to assess the relationship of hate crimes and rule of law to promoting
democracy and international security.
I commend to you our very detailed
paper that goes into all of these issues in depth.
Thank you very much.
HASTINGS: Thank you very much.
Mr. Butkevich?
BUTKEVICH: Well, thank
you for the very kind invitation to speak here today.
I think the members of
the commission are very familiar with the trends of hate crimes, the fact that
they're increasing in Russia and Ukraine, which are the countries I'm going to
speak about today, primarily, the fact that, through geographic spread of these
crimes and of the activities of neo-Nazi groups, especially in Russia, has
greatly expanded in the past several years.
So, what I really want to speak
about today is how the governments are reacting to this increased neo-Nazi and
especially activity.
The good news is that the Russian government -- at
least the police forces -- are becoming more active in counteracting hate crimes
and hate groups. We have noticed, certainly, since President Putin first came
to office, an increase in the number of arrests. Nowadays, it's more likely
than not that people do get apprehended for committing hate crimes. And that
was not true under the Yeltsin government, unfortunately.
The problem now
lies in how suspects in hate crimes are charged and what happens after they are
detained. Far too often, hate crimes legislation, which exists on the books in
the Russian criminal code, is not applied or fully applied. And instead, we see
an overuse of very vague, catch-all provisions of the Russian criminal code,
especially the term "hooliganism," which seems to be able to encompass anything
from being drunk and disorderly in a bar, to sending someone to the emergency
room.
This has two effects. One, it lessens the prison time for people, if
they are convicted under hooliganism rather than under, let's say, assault
motivated by ethnic hatred, which can add another three to five years. Two, it
sends, perhaps unintentionally, a kind of a signal to these culprits that the
government is not taking their actions very seriously, and that it's a bit of a
wink and a nod.
And it really obfuscates this issue. It makes it very
difficult to get a handle on the trends, what's really happening on the ground,
where is it happening. The government itself is not doing a very good job of
following this. There's no systematic form of monitoring by government law
enforcement agencies. And if they are doing it, they're not sharing it with us
or with the Russian public.
Just as an example, the region of Oronyesh (ph),
which is a particularly bad region when it comes to these problems, put out
statistics about a month ago. I think the number was they recorded 437
instances this year in which anti-extremism legislation or legislation banning
(inaudible) ethnic hatred were violated. And that's all they said.
They
didn't say who the violators were. They didn't say what the crimes were. They
didn't say how many of these people were convicted. Were they neo-Nazis? Were
they Islamic radicals -- real or excused (ph) Islamic radicals? Were they
members of peaceful opposition groups who are increasingly falling afoul of this
new anti-extremism legislation? There's no real way of knowing, unfortunately.
So, in addition to, I would say, suppressing some of this data, the other
trend that's happening is that the Russian government is increasingly catering
to far right groups, Dr. Diene mentioned is happening in Europe to some extent,
how this is becoming -- this rhetoric is becoming normalized.
And in Russia
I would say it's to even a more extreme degree than in the rest of Europe.
We've seen the use of far right vigilante groups in conjunction with the federal
migration service. There are actions done in conjunction with police to do
raids of open air marketplaces where illegal migrants -- and in some cases legal
migrants -- who trade there and sell produce, and there are citizens of other
former Soviet countries, have been roughed up.
There was a neo-Fascist march
in Moscow just this last Sunday. An estimated 2,000 people participated -- not
a very large number. It should be noted that anti-Fascist demonstrations
usually attract far fewer people. But this demonstration was legally sanctioned
by the Moscow city government, and it's happened on November 4th every -- for
the last three years.
Now, most Americans will look at this and say, well,
freedom of speech. You know, we allow people like this to march, no matter how
obnoxious their views are, and that's true.
But we should keep in mind what
happened to Gary Kasparov and other peaceful political opposition activists who
tried to march in the same city not too long ago. The police reacted viciously,
beating them in broad daylight and rounding up several of them for arrest.
The same thing happened to gay rights activists in Moscow several months ago.
And several members of the European Parliament were beaten in front of the
international media by the police.
So, the Russian government has proven its
ability to suppress undesirable groups in the most extreme fashion, which raises
the question: Does this mean that the neo-Nazis are undesirable, or are they
desirable? Are they being used for some sort of political end?
I used to
think -- you know, there's this conspiracy theory that some factions within the
Russian government were trying to stimulate extremist nationalism for political
aims. I think the evidence of that is now overwhelming, unfortunately.
It
is a very sensitive time coming up right now. There's a lot of people in the
Kremlin who are very nervous about the succession to President Putin, about the
upcoming elections. And it seems that there is an effort to cater to these
groups, to use them, and a rather arrogant presumption that a certain amount of
extremist nationalism, a certain amount of inter-ethnic violence can be stirred
up for short-term political goals to be met. And then, when that's no longer
needed, the genie can put it back into the bottle and they'll come under
control.
And unfortunately, that's not the way this works. Quite often, if
you looked at Yugoslavia and some other countries, this sort of thing tends to
have a life of its own, and it could lead to a real nightmare scenario in
Russia, if it's not placed under control.
I wanted to speak very quickly
about the situation in Ukraine. It reminds me a lot when it comes to the
problem of neo-Nazi groups, of where Russia was six or seven years ago. We're
beginning to see the movement -- the neo-Nazi movement -- taking off there,
especially in the predominantly Russian-speaking parts of the country.
A
sharp increase in violence over the past three years has been noted by the
people we have there on the ground, especially in Kiev and the Crimea, and some
of the other, as I mentioned, Russian-speaking regions.
Unlike in Russia,
where the primary targets are dark-skinned migrants -- predominately Muslim
migrants and foreign students, et cetera -- the primary targets in Ukraine are
the Jewish -- it's the Jewish population.
There are a lot fewer migrants in
Ukraine than there are in Russia. There is less Islamophobia -- at least
outside of the Republic of Crimea -- because they're not involved in the Chechen
war, for instance. And so, while the Jews are on the list of people who get
attacked in Russia, they're much less prominent there than they are in Ukraine.
And we recorded four incidents just in the last week of September and the
beginning of October of this year, of physical attacks against Jews.
And it
should be noted, the fourth incidence, which happened in early October, of a
rabbi's home being burned down, may have been an ordinary robbery, and is
perhaps -- it's possible that the robbers were just burning down the home in
order to hide the evidence of their crime.
But this leads to some
recommendations I have, just to conclude, the first of which is, the police
forces that investigate hate crimes and ordinary crimes, as well, in these
countries are extremely dysfunctional, badly trained and badly paid. And they
seem to have a default position of torturing first and asking questions later,
rather than properly investigating crimes.
And so, the first recommendation,
obviously, would be to increase efforts at the OSCE level and elsewhere to
provide the rich experience that our own police forces have here and in Europe,
to try to improve police practices in Russia and Ukraine and the other former
Soviet states.
And second would be to try to put pressure on the Kremlin to
stop these political games, to stop empowering these extremist nationalists, who
in turn inspire violence by less respectable neo-Nazi groups.
And thirdly,
to use a small fraction of the enormous amount of oil and gas revenue that's now
flooding into the Russian government's coffers to promote inter-ethnic tolerance
-- in the schools, for instance. There is a program, and it's been in existence
for a few years, but it doesn't seem to be very well funded or heavily promoted.
There's only a few schools, as far as I know, that are actually teaching
inter-ethnic tolerance.
And the cliche about the youth being the future
really applies here, because young people especially seem to have the most
racist attitudes. And so, this is a problem that seems to have a future of
getting worse unless something is done about it.
Now, these are very simple
recommendations to apply. And the fact that they are not being applied raises
the discouraging (ph) possibility that perhaps the situation that's going on in
Russia now is actually to somebody's gain in certain political circles. And as
I said, this is -- what used to be conspiracy theory now -- at least it seems to
me -- to be more and more logical as the succession looms ahead of us.
And
finally, just what we can do here in the West is to keep, to shine the light on
what's happening there at hearings such as this. And perhaps even more
importantly, supporting the NGOs who are on the ground there, our colleagues in
Russia and Moscow, the Helsinki Group and other groups, whose names and
addresses and faces, in some cases have appeared on neo-Nazi Web sites, on death
lists, who are constantly being threatened, and in some cases being assaulted by
some of these hate groups.
And when they turn to help -- turn for help to
their own government, are often met with harassment rather than actual aid in
this struggle against extremism.
So, I don't want to exceed my time.
There's a lot in our written testimony -- statistics and such that you can look
at and base your questions on. And I'd be glad to answer them during the Q&A.
Thank you again.
HASTINGS: Thank you so very much.
I recognize the
pressure of time of both my colleagues. But I'd ask, if Senator Smith has any
additional comment or questions of our presenters, I'd appreciate your doing so,
senator.
SMITH: Thank you, chairman.
I wonder if any of our panelists
can give me some sense in regard to the hate crimes committed in Western Europe.
Can you estimate, perhaps, how many are influenced by current events? Who
are the primary actors responsible for the violence?
Is it more organized,
or is it just local? And what is the general European response to these
incidents?
HASTINGS: Anybody.
Dr. Diene?
DIENE: The question is on
Russia. Addressing Russia.
(UNKNOWN): (inaudible) Europe.
SMITH:
Western Europe.
DIENE: In Europe.
I think there are many factors which
are linked -- many factors which are links -- political dimension (ph),
intellectual -- and the activism of the neo-Nazi and the nationalist groups.
But one issue we did not touch for lack of time, but it is in our document, is
that the old complex issue of freedom of expression and hate crime.
What we
are witnessing is that the very skillful instrumentalization of freedom of
expression by certain groups to propagate their racist, anti-Semitic or
xenophobic platforms. And the governments are failing to confront that strategy
by going back to the international instruments, whereby the importance of
freedom of expression is very carefully balanced by its restriction and
limitation.
And the main (ph) restriction is that freedom of expression
shall not be used for incitement of racial or ethnic or religious hatred. This
is a sensitive and delicate issue.
But what I can say from my -- at the
conclusion of my investigation from countries and my reporting on Islamophobia,
anti-Semitism and Christian-phobia, which I have been pushing very much also, is
that the door is open now for these groups to literally push (ph) through (ph)
their ideas. And this, I think, is one of the key (inaudible), which shall be
reflected upon more profoundly.
SMITH: I think I heard you say that
anti-Semitism is one of the roots of this. And I guess, again, if any of you
others have a comment, are there sufficient constitutional protections or legal
protections in the nation-states or through the European Union, to be an
impediment to the rise of these kinds of groups?
Is there a sufficient, and
is there a public opinion also in the way of this spreading much further than it
has?
NAFTALIN: This is one of the great ironies. Probably, there aren't
too many constitutions that are better on these issues than the Russians. So,
the issue isn't the laws there. It's that there is really no will to enforce
them. And I think this is the key issue across the board.
But it also
becomes a foreign policy issue, because to the extent that a government like
Russia is not accountable across the board in terms of rule of law standards or
anything else, it gives them the opportunity to be quite dangerous in the
foreign policy area, as well.
SMITH: Is this becoming legitimate among
popular opinion of Europeans generally, Russians in particular?
NAFTALIN:
You know, we started developing a network for anti-Semitism and xenophobia
monitoring in the late '90s. When we realized that -- in the Soviet period, the
KGB controlled when there was racism and when there wasn't, when there were
street demonstrations and when there weren't.
But in the late '90s, General
Makashov gave a speech on the parliament floor, the Duma, which was essentially
a call for pogroms. And in effect, he took the genie out of the bottle of
grassroots racism.
At that time we said, in Russia's period, what's been
most successfully privatized is racism. It gave the authority to people to
start organizing with impunity.
And so, we had a series of groups that most
recently has become tens of thousands of neo-Nazi skinheads terrorizing Russia
with almost no opposition.
SMITH: Gee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
HASTINGS: Thank you very much, senator.
And as I indicate, I recognize
we're pressed of time.
I am going to go to Ms. Solis, but in light of the
fact that the Swiss ambassador is present, and met (ph) with no criticism, just
taking into consideration an article that appeared in the "Washington Post" that
points out, among other things, that what was a fringe group of anti-immigration
Swiss People's Party, now represents 55 of the 200 members of parliament of the
lower house.
And I think that underscores what Dr. Diene was saying about
political legitimization of these matters.
And so, when the occurrence of
the man that was harmed by two persons with the chainsaw in Switzerland, Dr.
Diene is reported as having said that the racial intolerance certainly was being
promoted, and accused the party and its campaign pollsters of advocating racist
and xenophobic ideas.
And a gentleman named Schluer referred of the -- he's
a member of that party -- he referred that "That's nonsense. It's not against
race. It's against people who break laws. People were fed up."
Well, if I
could relate that only to the one incident, I don't know what in the world he
was talking about. The man that was attacked with the chainsaw was working at
1:30 a.m. in the morning in a McDonald's. He certainly wasn't in the business
of breaking any laws.
So, Dr. Diene, we'll get back to that. But maybe the
Swiss ambassador can give us some feeling.
And let me personalize this a
little bit. I go to Europe a lot. And I've been called twice in Denmark racial
names. I have had overt discrimination take place in Germany. My colleague,
Ms. Solis' husband met with substantial resistance, not in Europe, but in Israel
-- one of our partners in the OSCE.
And when I'm in Germany, senator, I used
to go out in Germany when I had long layovers. But because of the feelings that
I have -- I'm talking about me -- I don't go outside the airport anymore in
Frankfurt or Munich, because of being confronted by people in an untoward
manner.
Now, it's not that I'm any different than anybody else. But the
simple fact of the matter is, if I have that kind of feeling, I can only imagine
what others may have.
And we need to be very, very, very much trying to
promote our tolerance in this country as a model. And I would hope that we
would undertake that.
I went way past what I thought I would in the way of
time.
But Mr. Ambassador, did you -- yes, sir -- did you care to make
remarks? We invite you to do so. And there's a podium right over here, if you
would help us with our keeping the record.
And I might add, mine isn't a
personal attack on Switzerland. I haven't been set upon in Switzerland yet.
(LAUGHTER)
ZISWILER: I didn't take it as such. Thank you very much,
chairman and senator.
Dr. Diene, you made a perfect analysis of what's
happening in Europe now, that some parties, some movements are using xenophobic
platforms to win elections.
Two points struck me mostly. The fact I just
mentioned, that there are political parties, movements using that, and are
restricted deliberately to xenophobic, because nobody would dare use racist
arguments -- at least so far -- in Switzerland.
You mentioned as well a very
crucial point, that in many European countries with strong immigration,
recently, there is a crisis of identity. And migrants are considered as a
threat by many.
The fact that in Switzerland we have 20 percent of the
population with a foreign passport might explain -- not excuse -- such use of
xenophobic arguments. Twenty percent is by far the highest percentage,
probably, worldwide of a population.
When I presented my letters (ph) as an
anecdote to President Bush about (ph) the day of his speech about immigration
the 10th of May 2006, and obviously, that was his subject. And I told, "Mr.
President, we share a common problem, that is migration, immigration. Twenty
percent of our population has a foreign passport."
He was laughing and
clapping (ph) his hands on my shoulder (ph) and said, "Well, lucky you. At
least they have a passport."
This is an anecdote to show that migration,
immigration problems and xenophobic problems is not unique to my country. And
it goes back, unfortunately, to the '60s, in my country particularly. We had
referendums in the '60s, which were very narrow at the time, not pushed by one
particular party.
It was a rightist movement who entered afterwards to
parliament, too, and managed to get 48 percent in the referendum, to send back
as many as 40 percent of the foreigners living in Switzerland. Thank God, that
referendum was turned down.
To Senator Smith, you mentioned the party who
won the elections, SVP, called Swiss People's Party. Let me put that into
perspective.
They won two percent compared with last elections. They won
seven seats compared with last elections.
On the other side of the political
spectrum, the Greens and the Green Liberals won nine additional seats. We have
three blocs in our parliament: a more right, a left to the center -- Social
Democrats and Greens, fortunately, 30 percent of the electorate -- in the
center, Christian Democrats and Liberals, another 30 percent. And then, more to
the right, the People's Party, with now 29 percent of the electorate.
So,
and this is also not unique to Switzerland. If you go back in the last 20 years
in Europe, you might have found in any developed, industrialized country, a
tendency to have between 20 and 30 percent of an electorate of the same kind --
not to mention France, not to mention the leader of that party, Le Pen, not to
mention Austria...
SMITH: Austria, yes.
ZISWILER: ... not to mention
Italy, not to mention the Flanska (ph) Bloc (ph), not to mention the
Breakthrough (ph) Party in Denmark, not to mention the FrP (ph) Party of Carl I.
Hagen in Norway -- almost 30 percent of the electorate.
So, I don't want to
excuse. It's deplorable if any movement in any country uses xenophobic
arguments to win elections, or to win electorate.
But I wanted to say, we
have to see it in the perspective. It is a phenomenon in all European
countries. It is a phenomenon also in my country. It's deplorable, but
unfortunately, it's not a unique case.
Thank you very much.
HASTINGS:
Thank you very much ambassador.
And your reaction, and then Ms. Solis.
NAFTALIN: I'd just like to add 10 seconds to my earlier answer to Senator Smith
about public opinion.
Nickolai mentioned that about half the population has
subscribed to the slogan, "Russia for the Russians." But I wanted to add, that
at the last parliamentary election, the combination of Communist Party
candidates and the two Fascist Party candidates -- some of whom were supported
by the Kremlin -- elected -- ran on an explicit anti-Semitism and anti-American
platform, and they won one-third of the parliament the last election.
So,
there's a lot of public support that we have to deal with.
HASTINGS: Right.
Ms. Solis?
SOLIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I wanted to direct my
question to Dr. Lightbourn regarding your definition of radicalization. Can you
go into a little bit more detail, because I'm getting a little confused about
the way it's -- the way you're using it?
Because to me, we're really talking
about violence towards different groups. And whether you are the perpetrator or
the victim, how do you separate that when you use this definition?
LIGHTBOURN: When you're talking about the phenomenon of radicalization, you're
usually talking about the movement from radical extremist beliefs to behavior.
You're usually talking about the perpetrator and not the victim.
And so, in
the work that's done by START -- and again, there's no universally accepted
definition of radicalization in the literature. You will find that everyone who
writes an article with a topic of radicalization will spend their first to
second paragraph defining how they're using the term.
And so, the way that
we've been using it as a department, is looking at those behaviors and attitudes
that lead one to adopt and support violence for one's political beliefs.
And
I just wanted to say a little something in response to the ambassador's comment
about the situation in Switzerland and the relationship between xenophobia and
racism, that it's OK to be xenophobic right now in a lot of countries in Europe,
but not so OK to be accused (ph) of saying (ph) racist comments.
When we
think about the psychology of everyday (ph) racism, in some ways, we don't sort
of -- in the (inaudible), we'll just say that they're distinct, that often what
underlies xenophobic behaviors may be some underlying racist beliefs. The
people that they're talking about hating, because of their foreignness are often
also racialized.
And so, they're not completely separate constructs, meaning
that one can be higher on racism, but it's usually (ph) lower on xenophobia, or
very high on xenophobia and low on racism. Sometimes these things overlap.
That's all I would say (ph).
HASTINGS: Yes, sir, ambassador?
ZISWILER
(off-mike): Well, what I said, it's that the platform ...
LIGHTBOURN:
Right.
ZISWILER (off-mike): ... of movements or parties -- racism was not
used as a reference (ph)...
LIGHTBOURN: Because you were...
ZISWILER
(off-mike): ... (inaudible) often used as (inaudible).
I have to give an
answer to you, Chairman Hastings, (inaudible).
HASTINGS: (off-mike)
ZISWILER: We were, of course, as you, shocked to see those pictures. And we
went very thoroughly into that crime.
And so far -- and I'm very cautious
what I say now -- it's not proven that there was a racial background.
I
would say, it's 90 percent sure that there was no racial background, but
internal fighting between friends and colleagues of the same area. But as long
as I don't have the proof, and it's an ongoing court case now, I don't want to
be quoted that I denied that it was a racial background.
I actually spoke to
the "Washington Post" about. And I must admit, it was very poorly referred by
the journalist -- very, very poorly. It was one witness who she asked for that
case, one source. And that's unfortunately not very sufficient.
Then also,
you mentioned Mr. Schluer. The fact is that he was not re-elected in the last
elections. You mentioned him as one of the most outspoken and member of
parliament in this particular environment. He was not re-elected.
HASTINGS:
Well, I appreciate your being here and offering clarity.
And I saw Dr.
Diene about the react, and so, go right ahead, sir.
And then, ladies and
gentlemen in the audience, if any of you have any questions, if you would assume
the podium. And we will allow that your question be put to our panelists, as
well.
OK, Dr. Diene?
DIENE: Well, chairman, just under (ph) six (ph)
the (inaudible) ambassador that this trend is -- European trend -- very strong.
But in the last election in the (inaudible) has been two contradictory
pictures. One is the strength of the UBC, that party which has the openly
xenophobic platform, and which, as you know, has advertised a poster throwing
three white sheep kicking out of the Swiss territory a black sheep. I wrote a
letter to the government to ask explanation.
But in the same country, you
had at the last election somebody from (inaudible), the man who has been beaten
in the McDonald's, from Angola, who has been elected a member of the parliament
just last week.
We were (ph) in France a firm (ph), a country which has many
colonies in Africa. There is not a single migrant, descendent of migrant or
African or Arab who is member of the parliament.
The Swiss parliament just
elected one.
So, there is this very contradictory situation. So, my
conclusion, chairman, is, certainly we can give facts, figures of violence. In
Germany, just last month, Indian businessmen who were attending a fare in a big
city have been chased and openly (ph) and beaten in the streets by extreme right
parties -- beaten, badly beaten. The police were standing by.
So, we are
witnessing the return of these things.
But what I would like to suggest, the
last point, is that when we take the case of Switzerland, it shows that
political will is the issue. Because in Switzerland, political parties -- one
political party -- took this man from Angola and put him in the list, to compete
democratically and to be elected. Where is the answer (ph)?
In most of the
countries, they don't want to give visibility politically to those minorities.
So, these are just some of the point.
And I may add as an anecdote,
(inaudible) chairman (ph), but the same party, UBC, after my visit to
Switzerland, I see this gentleman (ph), saying that it is normal that
Switzerland receive investigator from the United Nations. But how come it is an
investigator from Senegal?
So, he raised the issue that, because of my
origin, my blackness, my nationality, he wanted to have somebody blond and with
blue eyes to come in there and see it, but not somebody from Africa.
(LAUGHTER)
So, he said that, openly. But he was immediately condemned by
the president of the federation and most of the establishment. So, this is a
contradictory picture.
HASTINGS: Let's go to the podium. And if you would
give us your name and your question, please?
SHCHERBA: I'm with Ukrainian
embassy. My name is Oleksander Shcherba. Just a small correction on our part.
Mr. Butkevich referred to this very deplorable incident in Uzhgorod, where
the house of Uzhgorod rabbi was attacked.
The house wasn't burned down. It
was robbed. And the gas lamp was let open. So, of course, it was a very
dangerous situation.
And I spoke to the crime detection of Uzhgorod. They
are giving a top priority to this case. And I know that there have been made a
couple of apprehensions, so we have a couple of -- two people were apprehended
and arrested.
And right now, there are no direct indications that there was
some anti-Semitic motive behind that.
But at this time, at this stage, I'm
not entitled to disclose all the details, just small correction on our part.
HASTINGS: Mister...
BUTKEVICH: Let me respond, though.
As I said, it
could have been a robbery. And thanks for the correction about the arson.
There does seem to be some efforts within the Ukrainian law enforcement agencies
to begin to address this problem more seriously. Before, they would just issue
a -- I think a couple of years ago, they would have just issued a flat denial
that these groups even exist. We saw many instances of that, where they would
deny that neo-Nazi groups even exist in their cities.
But now, there are
efforts, or at least discussions underway within the MVD (ph), and within the
SDU, which is the KGB successor agency, to create anti-extremism task force
within these agencies, to actually address this problem. So, there is some
forward movement here.
When I said that they remind me of where Russia was a
few years ago, what I meant was that I think this is -- they're not taking it as
seriously as they should. I think that this progress is a little bit too slow.
And there's a reluctance to acknowledge it. And I think the political
instability in that country has something to do with it. Unfortunately, they're
very preoccupied with other things right now.
But I hope that such, this
progress does continue.
HASTINGS: Thank you.
Sir?
(UNKNOWN): Thank
you.
HASTINGS: What's your name?
(UNKNOWN): (inaudible), with RTVi,
Russian television.
A question for Dr. Doudou Diene, who has been to Russia
last year, and you submitted your report to the Human Rights Council.
Could
you say a few words about the situation with nationalism and xenophobia in the
Russian Federation and the rise of the extreme right political parties?
And
secondly, you're now preparing a report on the Baltic states, including Estonia.
Could you say a few words about the situation there with the ethnic and
linguistic minorities?
Thank you.
HASTINGS: Yes, sir, please.
DIENE: Yes, I am preparing a report on the three Baltic states. I was there
two weeks ago. And it's interesting, because in the Baltic states, the minority
which is facing some forms of discrimination are the Russian minorities. And
there are other minorities, but the Russian minority.
In a complex context,
whereas the Baltic states, after independence, are reasserting their national
identity, rightly (ph). But they are doing it against a minority which was --
became a minority in the context of domination of the Soviet Union.
So, it
is interesting in the sense that, when I visited Russia, and when I submitted my
report on racism in Russia, there were some Russians who reacted very angrily
and rejected my report out of hand, without wanting to discuss it.
But when
I went to the Baltic states, I found that situation.
So, what I'm saying is
that the problem is denial. In most of the countries I visited, and in many
more which I did not visit, the seriousness of the culture of hatred, of racism,
is not recognized by the authorities. They refuse to look at it very
profoundly.
And as this country is now, intimating (ph) literally, the old
system, not only (inaudible), the activism of neo-Nazi groups. But by the --
when we read newspapers throughout Europe, the way immigration is ethnicized,
the ethnic reading (ph) of immigration is a reading of immigration as a threat
to identity and security.
And the adoption of policies and a growing
rhetoric of leaders -- all these create an atmosphere which allows -- where the
passage (ph) have (ph) led (ph) to the violence, the killing or these beatings.
So, it is the whole atmosphere which I think should be questioned, both in
(inaudible) and in (inaudible) chairman, my point on race is that one of the
causes of the rise of hate and the arrogance of the extreme right and the
neo-Nazi group is the fact that the nationalistic ideology of the government --
which is (inaudible) -- Russia is asserting its national identity as a power.
The political nationalism is ethnically read by the extremist groups. They
give it an ethnic content, while the government gives it a political content --
Russia as a nation, which is (inaudible) -- those groups are giving it an ethnic
reading.
Whatever is not Slavic has some color (ph) -- be it Asian, Central
Asian, black, et cetera -- is a threat.
So, the truth is, on the political
ideology and is intellectual legitimization.
HASTINGS: Thank you.
I
have -- before I turn to the other witness, I'd ask our panelists to give some
thought to the question of, we talk about hate crimes, and it's -- and it's easy
to give the anecdotes and to show statistically that they're on the rise in some
places and on the decrease in others.
But underlying all of that, and if I
only could reference the United States of America, I'm fond of saying that there
is an inseparable triumvirate of inadequate jobs, inadequate housing and
inadequate educational opportunities. And that seems to undergird much of what
I perceive as racism.
And I'm just curious whether that same kind of gap
exists in Europe in housing and in jobs and in education. And I may be doing
this rhetorically, because pretty clearly, many of the problems seem to come
along those same lines.
But not to disallow the folk who have been so kind
to be with us, you, sir?
RUBENSTEIN: Congressman, I think you partly asked
my question. I'm Richard Rubenstein from the Institute for Conflict Analysis
and Resolution at George Mason University.
HASTINGS: Thank you for being
here.
RUBENSTEIN: Thank you. And I wanted to ask you, especially, Dr.
Diene, in connection with your splendid statement, you call attention to an
identity crisis among OSCE members -- certain OSCE members.
And then you
identify migration as an immediate cause of that crisis, or an informer, at
least, of that crisis.
So, I can't help asking the professorial question, I
guess.
Are there other underlying causes of that identity crisis that
predispose people to react to migration in such a way? One might even ask the
same question of the witnesses. You were talking about Russia and the Ukraine.
If these matters are being used for immediate electoral purposes, what are
the underlying conditions that create a deficit of identity, if you like, or a
propensity to react in a way that suggests a threatened identity?
DIENE:
Chairman, briefly, the identity crisis has certainly many facets, many causes.
But one, I think, is what I call the nation-state identity. The confirmation
(ph) state has played a central role in the last centuries. And we know now
that it is a (inaudible) concept, which has led to wars, killing between
neighbors, nation-states, because their identity has been shaped, constructed in
many countries against somebody. And most of the time, there's an ethnic,
religious or cultural content.
The problem is that, even if that content has
historically reflected some reality, that concept is no more confirmed through
the dynamic of multiculturalism, of diversity in the societies.
But what I
am trying to point out is what I call the racism of the elite -- the elite,
intellectual centers, political centers. Because those are the groups which are
constitute (ph) identities. And those are -- these groups are marked by fear.
They are fueled (ph) by -- they are afraid of the diversity. They are afraid of
the suburbs (ph). They are afraid of these young people -- Arab, Africans,
Asians, who are all over the streets.
They are afraid to see their children
being like in Iraq (ph), under, you know, (inaudible), this kind of thing.
But more profoundly, as (inaudible) either (ph) (inaudible) forces. You take
the case of the demand of Turkey to get back (inaudible) with the European
Union.
As you know, one of the strong arguments given by some political
leaders -- and indeed, the Holy See -- is that Europe is a Christian land. And
that party is not part of that.
So, this is coming back to a world order
(ph) construction, which, in fact, is not even (inaudible) with anything,
because some of the most -- the first councils of the Christianism, which build
the foundation of Christianism were held on the Turkish territory. Turkey was
-- the land of Turkey was one of the two places where Christianism was also
(inaudible).
But what I'm saying is that, certain groups the elites have
given to the identity a certain content. And that content is a ghetto (ph)
(inaudible) identity. And they don't want to move it. And to recognize that
identity is a (inaudible) concept. And you refuse to evolve in that direction.
But in which now you have the issue of migration, which gives this ability,
there's a feel (ph) of diversity, because a migrant is read as ethnically,
culturally, religiously different, and as a threat for the national identity.
It's some (inaudible).
RUBENSTEIN: Thank you.
HASTINGS: Thank you
very much.
Yes?
BUTKEVICH: May I answer? He had a question about
Russia, as well, or applying the same question about a deficit of identity.
The Soviet experience for the Russian people was very contradictory. On the one
hand, they were the dominant people. Their language and culture was dominant.
On the other hand, it was heavily suppressed, and they were not given in some
ways the same cultural rights that some of the minority groups were, in the
sense that, at least in the early years of the Soviet Union before Stalin came
to power, minority cultures were heavily promoted.
And they were -- the
Russians were the most heavily Sovietized out of everybody. And so, the legacy
weighs the most on them. And therefore, the confusion about their national
identity is the strongest, I would say, amongst the Russian people.
And we
see with the reemergence of the Russian Orthodox Church, which was heavily
suppressed, because it was such a pillar of the czarist government, this
reassertion of Russian national culture, which has a lot of positive aspects, of
course. But having been suppressed and so deeply poisoned, I think, by the
Soviet experience, that helps to explain a lot of lives (ph) being expressed so
negatively.
Thank you.
HASTINGS: Well, I appreciate all of you for
being here and making your presentations, and ladies and gentlemen, those of you
that have been very patient in our audience, as well.
If I gather nothing
from this, or the one thing I do believe I have learned, is that it's going to
be necessary to have a briefing, dealing with nothing but solutions, as opposed
to identifying a problem.
So, I would ask those working with me if they
would be so kind as to -- oh, OK.
I was just told that the Croatian embassy
is represented here, as well. And if there was a comment you wanted to make,
you would have nearly the last word.
(UNKNOWN): Mr. Chairman, I'm afraid
I'm not from the Croatian embassy.
HASTINGS: Oh, OK.
(UNKNOWN): But I
do have a comment and a question...
HASTINGS: (inaudible) identify
(inaudible).
(UNKNOWN): ... to be very brief. I represent the Armenian
Assembly of America, and our organization takes strong interest in discussing
the question of xenophobia, anti-Semitism.
(inaudible) within the OSCE area,
I decided to take the floor to make this comment. I was going to ask -- now we
discussed two drivers, focused on two drivers of -- the underlying drivers of
anti-Semitism and xenophobia in the OSCE area, one being the migrant -- the
migration issue -- and the other being, of course, anti-Semitism, the whole
(inaudible) of anti-Semitism.
I'd like to suggest that we take another look
at and perhaps identify a third driver of xenophobia, the target of which are
national or ethnic, or ethnic or religious minorities living in our city,
countries, that are citizens of those countries, but for one reason or another,
are becoming or have become the subject of xenophobia, based on the attitudes of
the titular nation toward the national minorities.
The Armenian minority,
for instance, in Turkey, to give an example.
Dr. Diene mentioned Turkey and
Turkey's quest for European integration and the objections that Turkey has been
facing from various corners within Europe. Well, Turkey itself has a
institutionalized limitation on the freedom of expression, freedom of religion
and the freedom of national minorities.
And treatment of national minorities
has been the subject of constant concern, including in the recent report
released by the U.S. State Department -- Article 301, for instance, being one
such manifestation of Turkey's difficulties in addressing the (inaudible), not
simply addressing the (inaudible) xenophobia within the Turkish society, but
also maintaining an institutionalized, in a sense, legal provision within its
penal code, that institutionalizes xenophobia -- insulting Turkishness, for
instance.
Turkey has had a difficulty in addressing that question as part of
its adherence to the Copenhagen Committee.
So, I was wondering if there's
anything the panelists would want to say about a country like Turkey and its
record in combating xenophobia, especially given the (inaudible) article 301,
and the recent, now, assassination of an Armenian journalist, Hrant Dink, this
year, in (inaudible), who had been prosecuted also under Article 301.
Thank
you.
HASTINGS: Well, you have almost the last word.
I am going to have
the last word. And that is to thank you all for coming.
The hearing and
briefing is adjourned.
[Whereupon the hearing ended at 11:40 a.m.]
END
|