RichardAzzouz

Al-hogra, a North African colloquial term meaning humiliation, degradation, and abasement, drove another vulnerable Moroccan to self-immolate out of utter powerlessness and despair in the face of the authorities’ oppressive treatment. Twenty-five-year-old street vendor Yassine Lekhmidi was beaten and his cart, the only source of his livelihood, was confiscated by police officers. Angered by their humiliating act, he set himself on fire on July 28, 2021, and died 10 days later. This incident parallels the self-immolation of Tunisian Mohamed Bouazizi, whose act spurred the Arab uprisings of 2011 in response to similar dire realities he had to endure. Immediately after Lekhmidi’s death, protests erupted in his impoverished town of Sidi Bennour. Persistence of Poor Socioeconomic Conditions Over the last decade, suicides for some Moroccans and street protests for others have become the means of last resort to protest the hogra and bring attention to their cause, in an attempt to effect change. Despite the state’s containment policies and the violent suppression of the 2011-2012 demonstrations led by the popular February 20 Movement for political democratic reform, socioeconomic protests continued in Morocco, reaching a crescendo in late 2016 and 2017 with the Hirak movement in the marginalized northern Rif region. The Hirak was triggered by the death of Mouhcine Fikri, a fish seller who was crushed to death by a trash compactor as he was trying to retrieve his confiscated fish. The Hirak of the Rif drew national and transnational solidarity among Moroccans inside and outside the country who were united against the hogra. The movement experienced heavy-handed repression by the state; its prominent leaders, including Nasser Zefzafi, were given excessive sentences reaching up to 20 years in prison. Notwithstanding minor improvements, persistent marginalization of the northern Rif region—and of vulnerable groups in Morocco in general—will most probably trigger more popular unrest. Notwithstanding minor improvements, persistent marginalization of the northern Rif region—and of vulnerable groups in Morocco in general—will most probably trigger more popular unrest against the central government. From December 2017 until March 2018, Moroccans in Jerada, a marginalized mining town on the border with Algeria, protested the accidental death of two informal miners and demanded job creation and the improvement of their socioeconomic conditions. Similar to other protests, the authorities resorted to violent suppression. Indeed, the streets of the country have been a fertile ground for perpetual social unrest and protest. It is clear that Morocco sits on a powder keg of social, economic, and political grievances. Failure of the Political Process The continuous popular frustration and discontent reflect a fact that the political class is not being responsive to the people’s legitimate demands, which has resulted in growing disillusionment and distrust of the political system. In a democracy, citizens can exercise their electoral rights to express a temporary withholding of trust from their government. However, in Morocco, the electoral route reproduces the same system of governance whose representatives are not accountable to the electorate but subservient to the interests of the royal court, the Makhzen. This explains the perpetual social unrest and the increasingly low turnout from one election cycle to another. The Arab Opinion Index of 2019-2020 found that 57 percent of Moroccans considered political conditions in their country to be bad or very bad. Forty-nine percent had no confidence in their parliament to oversee the government. The irony is that the lack of trust, the continuing protests against the hogra, and the state’s use of brutal force against peaceful protests are growing in a country that is allegedly in a process of political, economic, and social reform. The reality on the ground belies the democratization and reform process that the regime claims to have been incrementally implementing since the ascension of King Mohammed VI to power in 1999 and the constitutional reforms of 2011. The reality on the ground belies the democratization and reform process that the regime claims to have been incrementally implementing since the ascension of King Mohammed VI to power in 1999 and the constitutional reforms of 2011. Back in 2011, the king promised serious constitutional reforms, only to backtrack in 2012 and later by suppressing the February 20 Movement when popular uprisings in the Arab world were beginning to be suppressed by coercion. The second major setback was in 2017 when the king initially maneuvered to neutralize the charismatic reelected incumbent, Prime Minister Abdelilah Benkirane, and replaced him with the more subdued and compliant Justice and Development Party figure, Saadeddine Othmani. Afterward, the Makhzen responded with brutal violence against the popular Hirak of the Rif. By mid-2017, the royal court retreated from the brief political opening and restored the pre-2011 status quo, ushering in an “entrenched neo-authoritarian system.” This authoritarian core of the Makhzen continues to stifle any meaningful transition to democracy in Morocco. The monarchy still monopolizes the religious, political, and economic powers that secure and consolidate King Mohammed VI’s ultimate and supreme authority in the country. This is why the alleged political pluralism is primarily a façade, especially that political parties must accept the primacy of the king and continuously show their submission and loyalty to the palace to guarantee their political survival. The declared “2011 constitutional reform” did not ultimately establish the proclaimed political change that the king promised; rather, it maintained and consolidated the power of the centralized executive monarchy, the Makhzen. The king presides over the Council of Ministers where major policy decisions are made, ensuring that he has complete control over the government’s actions. This reality denies Morocco any status of a democratizing country. There is also a major discrepancy between the claims of the royal court regarding democratic freedoms and respect for human rights and rule of law, and the actual conduct and practice of the monarchy toward its citizens. An equitable and just rule of law is conditioned on the existence of an independent judiciary; however, the Moroccan judicial and legal system is under the control of the monarch. Although the 2011 constitution strengthened the independence of the judiciary as separate from the legislative and executive powers, as enshrined in article 107, the king nevertheless presides over the Superior Council of the Judiciary (article 56) and, by decree (dahir), makes appointments to the Superior Council of the Judicial Power (article 57). The king also designates six of the 12 members of the Constitutional Court and appoints one of them as the president of the court (article 130). Ironically, and in a glaring contradiction, the constitution stipulates in article 107 that the monarch guarantees the judiciary’s independence. In 2014, the interior ministry banned a sit-in by the independent Judges’ Club, which was demanding greater independence of the judiciary from executive and legislative powers, and from social and political lobbies, as the president of the club, Yassine Mkhelli, proclaimed. Limits on Journalists and Activists The Makhzen has been increasingly seeking a compliant press by muzzling the dissenting voices of journalists, even though the constitution, in its articles 25 and 28, guarantees the freedoms of thought, opinion, expression, and press without any restrictions. However, these constitutional rights are not defended and protected by the judiciary: the judicial system is being manipulated by the Makhzen to silence press activists, human rights defenders, civilians, bloggers, and others when it deems necessary. Journalists and activists are tried and punished by the penal code instead of under the new Press and Publications Code of 2016, which protects them from imprisonment for expressing critical opinions. Journalists and activists are tried and punished by the penal code instead of under the new Press and Publications Code of 2016, which protects them from imprisonment for expressing critical opinions. Morocco ranks 136 out of 180 in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index, regressing three positions as compared to 2020. This reflects an increasing crackdown on freedom of opinion and expression. Moroccan authorities have been targeting opposition press and jailing journalists on dubious charges. In March 2021, Akhbar Al-Youm, one of Morocco’s last critical daily media outlets, shut down after 14 years of service. State-sector advertisers boycotted the newspaper and the government withdrew aid to it (the assistance had been provided to the media in response to the COVID-19 pandemic). To be sure, this tactic is often used against independent and opposition newspapers. Taoufik Bouachrine, the publisher of Akhbar Al-Youm, is serving a heavy prison sentence of 15 years for multiple charges, including human trafficking, sexual assault, rape, prostitution, and harassment. Local journalists and press freedom advocates say they believe these trumped-up charges are a retaliatory measure against his critical reporting. The UN report that was issued by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention stated that these charges have been “unfounded” and there were levied as “retaliation for his journalistic work.” Journalist Soulaimane Raissouni, the former editor in chief of Akhbar Al-Youm, was also persecuted by the regime for being an outspoken critic of government corruption and human rights violations and an advocate of political reform. Critically ill as a result of a hunger strike, Raissouni is serving five years in prison on questionable sexual assault charges. The US State Department criticized Rabat on these charges and urged Morocco to protect press freedoms. State Department spokesman Ned Price told reporters: “We believe the judicial process that led to his verdict contradicts the Moroccan system’s fundamental promise of fair trials for individuals accused of crimes, and is inconsistent with the promise of the 2011 constitution and His Majesty King Mohammed VI’s reform agenda.” Raissouni’s niece, independent journalist Hajar Raissouni, also worked for the same newspaper and was sentenced to a year in jail for alleged premarital sex and having an abortion. She was later pardoned by King Mohammed VI. Omar Radi, an investigative journalist whose work is mainly focused on corruption and human rights violations and who was a former activist in the February 20 Movement and the Hirak of the Rif, was recently sentenced to six years on charges of espionage and sexual misconduct. In this stifling and threatening atmosphere, several journalists like Hajar Raissouni, Hicham Mansouri, and Afaf Bernani have opted for self-exile. “Today, every journalist in the country—and there aren’t that many left—is scared of being targeted next,” Moroccan freelance journalist Aida Alami told the Committee to Protect Journalists. The state is targeting independent journalists and activists to discredit and distort their reputation using defamation campaigns, character assassination, and accusations of moral and sexual impropriety. The state is targeting independent journalists and activists to discredit and distort their reputation using defamation campaigns, character assassination, and accusations of moral and sexual impropriety that clash with the general conservative values of Moroccan society. The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor listed more than 30 pro-monarchy websites and newspapers involved in these slander and defamation campaigns. This new tactic attempts to deprive the accused journalists and activists of any public sympathy and solidarity. Le Desk reporter Imad Stitou said the following: “In general, when journalists were facing anti-state charges, they were considered heroes, gaining so much popularity. Today, when a journalist is accused of shameful crimes like rape, it is guaranteed that public opinion will perceive them as unethical.” Journalists were surveilled using the Israeli-developed Pegasus mobile phone spyware to collect personal information and create fabrications around their private lives, and later indict them on dubious charges—as they did with Taoufik Bouachrine, Maati Monjib, Omar Radi, and others. Amnesty International and Forbidden Stories’ investigation, the Pegasus project, said that the Moroccan government targeted at least 35 journalists with the spyware it acquired from the NSO Group. In doing so, the regime is flagrantly violating the right to privacy that is enshrined in the Moroccan constitution: article 24 guarantees the right to the protection of Moroccans’ private life and states that private communications are inviolable. Moreover, Morocco bought mass surveillance technologies, called Evident, that allow surveillance of emails and mobile phone calls at the level of an entire country. Also, in 2011, Morocco invested €2 million in a surveillance system, named Eagle, which allows censorship and mass monitoring of internet traffic. It is apparent that the regime aims to muzzle dissent and create a general atmosphere of fear in order to deter criticism of the government and force self-censorship. The increasingly repressive practices of the Makhzen indicate that Morocco is moving toward a monarchical police state. This is reflected in heightened control by the Ministry of the Interior, security apparatus, and intelligence services over the liberty and freedoms of ordinary citizens. Such policies belie the purported transition to a democratic constitutional monarchy, a picture the regime attempts to paint for the international community. Transition to democratic rule requires Morocco to free the institutions of the state from the dictates and the stranglehold of the Makhzen. Morocco should also improve its human rights record in accordance with its own constitution and laws and the UN declaration of Human Rights, to which Rabat is a signatory. The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor calls for the Moroccan government to allow the special rapporteur on arbitrary detention and international organizations to visit Moroccan prisons to assess the condition of political detainees. The Sahrawi activists Mohamed Lamine Haddi, Sidi Abdallah Abbahah, and Bachir Khadda, who are serving sentences in Tiflet 2 in northwestern Morocco, have been subjected to psychological torture, harassment, and ill treatment in their cells of around 5m², where they have been in solitary confinement for at least 23 hours a day. Journalist Omar Radi has also been held in solitary confinement. It is vital that prisoners of conscience get fair treatment while in detention. The monarchy should stop stifling opposition press and journalists. As Human Rights Watch has stated, “A free and independent press is critical to healthy governance and state-society relations, as much as fair judicial proceedings are critical to ensuring justice, particularly for alleged sexual abuses.” The continuous state of poverty, inequality, corruption, and suffocation of democratic and political freedoms in Morocco is bound to continue triggering popular upheavals against the political class. The regime should be responsive to the protesters’ socioeconomic grievances and demands and put an end to undemocratic and repressive methods against peaceful activists. The regime must also cease violating the privacy of Moroccans. It should rebuild the lost trust with Moroccan citizens by reversing its repressive policies and put Morocco on the path of genuine democratic change. The views expressed in this paper are the author’s own an

The 2023 Human Rights Report on Morocco provides an overview of the human rights situation in the country during that year. Here are some key points from the report: Torture and Cruel Treatment: There were credible reports of torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment by some members of the security forces. This includes allegations of mistreatment of individuals in official custody1. Freedom of Expression and Media Freedom: Serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom were observed. This included unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists, censorship, and enforcement of criminal libel laws to limit expression. Gender-Based Violence: Extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence and sexual violence, remained a serious issue. LGBTQ+ Rights: Crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons were reported. Laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults were enforced1. Government Corruption: Serious government corruption persisted, although steps were taken to investigate officials allegedly involved in human rights abuses and acts of corruption1. Judicial Independence: There were serious problems with the independence of the judiciary. Freedom of Assembly and Association: Substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association was observed. Democratic Elections: Citizens faced challenges in changing their government peacefully through free and fair elections. Western Sahara: Authorities dismissed public complaints of abuse in Western Sahara and relied only on police statements regarding pro-independence protesters1. For more detailed information, you can refer to the full Morocco 2023 Human Rights Report published by the U.S. Department of State2. Additionally, Amnesty International also provides a report on human rights in Morocco and Western Sahara for the same period3. Learn more 1 state.gov 2 state.gov 3 amnesty.org 4 preview.state.gov

Trans-Saharan Slave Trade: From the 7th century through the early 20th century, Morocco was a significant center for the Trans-Saharan slave trade. Enslaved Black Africans from sub-Saharan Africa were transported along the trade route from Timbuktu to the slave market in Marrakesh. These enslaved individuals were then sent to other parts of Morocco and the broader Mediterranean world. The trade route facilitated the exchange of gold, ivory, salt, and slaves between North Africa and sub-Saharan regions. African tribes that converted to Islam captured non-Muslim people and exported them northward toward Morocco. Sultan Isma‘il ibn Sharif of Morocco received thousands of Sub-Saharan slaves annually, adding them to his army and slave-soldiers known as the Black Guard. The Trans-Saharan slave route primarily led to Marrakesh, which remained a major slave market for over a thousand years1. Barbary Slave Trade: Morocco was also involved in the Barbary slave trade, where Europeans captured by Barbary pirates were enslaved. This trade continued until the 19th century. The open slave trade was eventually suppressed in Morocco during the 1920s. Legacy and Modern Context: Owning black slaves in Morocco was considered prestigious until deep into the 20th century. Women were taken as concubines and domestics, while men worked in fields or served as domestics. Although the formal slave trade ended, remnants of this history persist, and issues related to racism and vulnerability remain relevant today2. In summary, Morocco played a significant role in both the Trans-Saharan and Barbary slave trades, impacting the lives of countless enslaved individuals over centuries. Efforts to address historical legacies and promote social justice continue in modern Morocco34.

Genocide, the deliberate and systematic destruction of a group of people because of their ethnicity, nationality, religion, or race. The term, derived from the Greek genos (“race,” “tribe,” or “nation”) and the Latin cide (“killing”), was coined by Raphael Lemkin, a Polish-born jurist who served as an adviser to the U.S. Department of War during World War II. Although the term itself is of recent origin, genocide arguably has been practiced throughout history (though some observers have restricted its occurrence to a very few cases). According to Thucydides, for example, the people of Melos were slaughtered after refusing to surrender to the Athenians during the Peloponnesian War. Indeed, in ancient times it was common for victors in war to massacre all the men of a conquered population. The massacre of Cathari during the Albigensian Crusade in the 13th century is sometimes cited as the first modern case of genocide, though medieval scholars generally have resisted this characterization. Twentieth-century events often cited as genocide include the 1915 Armenian massacre by the Turkish-led Ottoman Empire, the nearly complete extermination of European Jews, Roma (Gypsies), and other groups by Nazi Germany during World War II, and the killing of Tutsi by Hutu in Rwanda in the 1990s. Defining genocide: the Nürnberg Charter and the genocide convention In his work Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress (1944), Lemkin noted that a key component of genocide was the Criminal intent to destroy or to cripple permanently a human group. The acts are directed against groups as such, and individuals are selected for destruction only because they belong to these groups. In contemporary international law the crime of genocide is part of the broader category of “crimes against humanity,” which were defined by the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (Nürnberg Charter). The charter granted the tribunal jurisdiction to indict and try the leaders of the Nazi regime for inhumane acts committed against civilians, as well as for acts of persecution on political, racial, or religious grounds; in so doing, it also contributed to the international criminalization of other forms of abusive conduct. The momentum created by the Nürnberg trials and the ensuing revelations of Nazi atrocities led to the passage by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly of Resolution 96-I (December 1946), which made the crime of genocide punishable under international law, and of Resolution 260-III (December 1948), which approved the text of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the first UN human rights treaty. The convention, which entered into force in 1951, has been ratified by more than 130 countries. Although the United States played a major role in drafting the convention and was an original signatory, the U.S. Senate did not ratify it until 1988.

The 10 Worst Genocides In History There is nothing noble or worthwhile in genocide, which is typically defined as “the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.” The loss of entire people groups is ultimately a loss to the world because we always stand to benefit from the continued traditions and cultures of our cousins and peers. The word genocide is inherently controversial, as recognizing an event puts responsibility for reparation on currently existing governments. It is a somber reflection to recognize that this list covers nearly every section of the planet, implicating many modern-day nations. Because in some cases, these horrors are not so long ago, and worse yet: the assailants still walk the earth as free men. The Genocides Perpetrated By The Nazis In World War II

Humanitarian crisis in Gaza could get far worse, warns UN relief chief Fierce hostilities continue across Gaza from the air, sea, and on the ground, the UN’s top humanitarian official told Member States on Friday, reporting that 41,000 houses have now been destroyed or severely damaged. More than 1.5 million Gazans are displaced, 18 hospitals have shut down, and hundreds of thousands are living in fear and under continuing Israeli bombardment. “Casualties continue to mount, with the dead reportedly exceeding 11,000 people – the majority of them children and women,” said Emergency Relief Coordinator and Humanitarian Affairs chief, Martin Griffiths. “The actual total, however, is likely much higher as figures have not been updated for five days due to a collapse of communication networks in Gaza,” he added. Mr. Griffiths further stated that across Gaza, but particularly in the north, food and water supplies are running perilously low, and the lack of fuel means communications and essential services like water desalination are progressively failing. Free the hostages Across the border, civilians in Israel endure deep pain of their own as they mourn the brutal, inhumane killing of 1,200 people, he added, stressing that the nearly 240 hostages - from babies to octogenarians - must be released immediately and without condition. Mr. Griffiths reiterated the UN’s 10-point plan setting out the necessary requirements for an effective humanitarian response. He called on UN Member States to help achieve these objectives. Basic needs “We are not asking for the moon. We are asking for the basic measures required to meet the essential needs of the civilian population and stem the course of this crisis,” he stressed. In conclusion, Mr. Griffiths warned that for as dire as the situation is in Gaza, “it could get far worse.” “If we do not take action now, this is a conflict that could spread its tendrils further into other parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territory and beyond, and drag the region into a conflagration with even more catastrophic consequences,” he said. Our work ‘mission impossible’: UNRWA official Tweet URL Natalie Boucly, Acting Deputy Commissioner-General for the UN agency assisting Palestine refugees, UNRWA, said that no part of the Gaza Strip has been spared from the bombardment. “Hospitals, mosques, churches, bakeries, and over 60 UNRWA buildings and schools have been hit across Gaza,” she said. Most of the agency’s impacted facilities were in the middle areas and in the south, Ms. Boucly added, noting that this was where people were told to go for safety. “They came to UNRWA buildings to be protected by the UN flag,” she said. The UNRWA official stressed that the work of the agency has become “mission impossible”. “We cannot fully protect people in UN premises, under the UN flag. We cannot reach people in need, including thousands still trapped in the north. We cannot provide sufficient assistance to those we can reach,” she said. UNRWA’s fuel stocks are almost depleted, with massive implications for the civilian population, including its 13,000 staff. Concluding her briefing, Ms. Boucly said that there is a collective responsibility on the part of the international community to ensure that the war ends now. “We must remain steadfast in our determination, and I must quote from a famous text: ‘to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, and reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person’,” she said, recalling the preambular text from the UN Charter.

All must be targeted by the international judiciary system and popular movements! Soldiers, Israelis associates, politicians, supporters of crimes against humanity must be made to answer for their evil deeds. No exception, a crime is a crime. Boycott the Zionists, and their criminal accomplices supporters. Now... A crime is a crime!

Rise for it Fight for it... Fight for it!! Stop children's massacring, genocides, and your fascists ethnic cleansing now! Stop supporting Arab's dictatorships!! We hold you Guilty, accomplices.

French protectorate (1912–1956) See also: French conquest of Morocco French Protectorate Residence, Rabat, 1929 postcard The Treaty of Fes, which officially established the Protectorate on 30 March 1912 Part of a series on the History of Morocco Banner of the Moors, 1212. Prehistory Classical to Late Antiquity (8th century BC – 7th century AD) Early Islamic (8th–10th century AD) Territorial fragmentation (10th–11th century AD) Empire (beginning 11th century AD) Decline (beginning 19th century AD) Protectorate (1912–56) Modern (1956–present) Related topics flag Morocco portal History portal vte Bond of the French protectorate Morocco, issued 1 March 1918 France officially established a protectorate over Morocco with the Treaty of Fes,[25] ending what remained of the country's de facto independence. From a legal point of view, the treaty gave the legislative power to France, alongside the control of military defense, foreign policy and jurisdiction. The Moorish government exercised authority solely in Moroccan or Islamic affairs.[26] Sultan Abdelhafid abdicated in favour of his brother Yusef after signing the treaty. On 17 April 1912, Moroccan infantrymen mutinied in the French garrison in Fez, in the 1912 Fes riots[27] The Moroccans were unable to take control of the city and were defeated by a French relief force. In late May 1912, Moroccan forces again unsuccessfully attacked the enhanced French garrison at Fez. In establishing their protectorate over much of Morocco, the French had put behind them the experience of the conquest of Algeria and of their protectorate over Tunisia; they took the latter as the model for their Moroccan policy. There were, however, important differences. First, the protectorate was established only two years before the outbreak of World War I, which brought with it a new attitude toward colonial rule. Rejecting the typical French assimilationist approach to culture and education as a liberal fantasy, Morocco's conservative French rulers attempted to use urban planning and colonial education to prevent cultural mixing and to uphold the traditional society upon which the French depended for collaboration.[28] Second, Morocco had a thousand-year tradition of independence and had never been subjected to Ottoman rule, though it had been strongly influenced by the civilization of Muslim Iberia. Morocco was also unique among North African countries in possessing a coast on the Atlantic, in the rights that various nations derived from the Conference of Algeciras, and in the privileges that their diplomatic missions had acquired in Tangier (including a French legation). Thus the northern tenth of the country, with both Atlantic and Mediterranean coasts, were excluded from the French-controlled area and treated as a Spanish protectorate. Although being under protectorate, Morocco retained -de jure- its personality as a state in international law, according to an International Court of Justice statement, and thus remained a sovereign state, without discontinuity between pre-colonial and modern entities.[29] In fact, the French enjoyed much larger powers. Under the protectorate, French civil servants allied themselves with the French colonists and with their supporters in France to prevent any moves in the direction of Moroccan autonomy. As pacification proceeded, the French government promoted economic development, particularly the exploitation of Morocco’s mineral wealth, the creation of a modern transportation system, and the development of a modern agriculture sector geared to the French market. Tens of thousands of colonists entered Morocco and bought up large amounts of the rich agricultural land. Interest groups that formed among these elements continually pressured France to increase its control over Morocco. World War I An advertisement for an art exhibition for the benefit of Moroccan troops wounded serving France in WWI. It features an orientalist painting by Joseph de La Nézière.[30] France recruited infantry from Morocco to join its troupes coloniales, as it did in its other colonies in Africa and around the world. Throughout World War I, a total of 37,300–45,000 Moroccans fought for France, forming a "Moroccan Brigade."[31][30] Moroccan colonial troops first served France in the First Battle of the Marne, September 1914,[30] and participated in every major battle in the war,[32] including in Artois, Champagne, and Verdun.[31] Historians have called these Moroccan soldiers "heroes without glory" as they are not and have not been given the consideration they merited through valor and sacrifice in the war.[31] Brahim El Kadiri Boutchich identified the participation of Moroccan soldiers in the service of France in WWI as "one of the most important moments in the shared history of Morocco and France."[31] Lyautey and the Protectorate (1912–1925) Marshal Lyautey, first resident general of French Morocco. He represented French colonial interests while also upholding the authority of the sultan. Hubert Lyautey, the first Resident-General of the Protectorate, was an idealistic yet pragmatic leader with royalist leanings, who made it his mission to develop Morocco in every sector under French influence. Unlike his compatriots, Lyautey didn't believe that France should directly annex Morocco like French Algeria, but rather remodel and re-educate Moroccan society. He promised that, in this process, he would: ...offend no tradition, change no custom, and remind ourselves that in all human society there is a ruling class, born to rule, without which nothing can be done...[we] enlist the ruling class in our service...and the country will be pacified, and at far less cost and with greater certainty than by all the military expeditions we could send there... Lyautey's vision was ideological: A powerful, pro-French, Westernized monarchy that would work with France and look to France for culture and aid. Unlike in Algeria, where the entire nobility and government had been displaced, the Moroccan nobility was included in Lyautey's plans. He worked with them, offering support and building elite private schools to which they could send their children; one notable attendee of these schools was Thami El Glaoui.[33] Lyautey allowed the Sultan to retain his powers, both nominal and practical: He issued decrees in his own name and seal and was allowed to remain the religious leader of Morocco; he was further allowed an all-Arab court. Lyautey once said this: In Morocco, there is only one government, the sharifian government, protected by the French. Walter Burton Harris, a British journalist who wrote extensively on Morocco, commented upon French preservation of traditional Moroccan society:[33] At the Moorish court, scarcely a European is to be seen, and to the native who arrives at the Capital [sic] there is little or no visible change from what he and his ancestors saw in the past. Lyautey served his post until 1925, in the middle of the failed revolt of the Republic of the Rif against the Franco-Spanish administration and the Sultan. Economic exploitation Agriculture A farmer in a field of barley in the Chaouia, published 15 August 1917 in the magazine France-Maroc Learning from experiences in Algeria, where imprudent land appropriation, as Professor Susan Gilson Miller puts it, "reduced much of the native peasantry to a rootless proletariat,"[34] Lyautey solicited a select group of 692 "gentlemen-farmers"—instead of what he called the "riff-raff" of southern Europe—capable of serving as "examples" to les indigènes and imparting French influence in the rural colonization of Morocco from 1917 to 1925.[18] The objective was to secure a steady supply of grain for Metropolitan France and to transform Morocco once again into the "granary of Rome" by planting cereals primarily in the regions of Chaouia, Gharb, and Hawz—despite the fact that the region is prone to drought. After a period of minimal profits and a massive locust swarm in 1930, agricultural production shifted toward irrigated, higher-value crops such as citrus fruits and vegetables.[18] The industrialization of agriculture required capital that many Moroccan farmers didn't have, leading to a rural exodus as many headed to find work in the city.[18] Infrastructure Roadmap of Morocco in 1919 The Compagnie franco-espagnole du chemin de fer de Tanger à Fez built a standard gauge railroad connecting Fes and Tangier,[35] while Compagnie des chemins de fer du Maroc (CFM) built standard gauge railways connecting Casablanca, Kenitra, and Sidi Kacem, and Casablanca and Marrakech, completed in 1928.[36] Compagnie des Chemins de Fer du Maroc Oriental created narrow-gauge railroads east of Fes.[37] La Compagnie de Transports au Maroc (CTM) was founded in 30 November 1919 with the goal of accessing "all of Morocco." Its services ran along a new colonial road system planned with the aim of linking all major towns and cities.[38] It continues to offer intercity bus services nationwide. Natural resources An economic map of Morocco produced by the French protectorate in 1928 The Office Chérifien des Phosphates (OCP) was created in 1920 to mine phosphates out of Khouribga, which was connected to the Port of Casablanca by a direct rail line.[38] In 1921, 39,000 tons of phosphate were extracted, while almost 2 million tons were extracted in 1930.[38] The Moroccan laborers working in the mines did not benefit from any social protections, were forbidden from unionizing, and earned a tiny fraction of what Europeans earned.[38] Industry Industry during the early period of the protectorate focused on food processing for local consumption: there were canneries, a sugar refinery (Compagnie Sucriere Marocaine, COSUMA),[39] a brewing company (Société des Brasseries du Maroc, SBM),[40] and flour mills.[41][38] Manufacturing and heavy industry, however, were not embraced for fears of competing with Metropolitan France.[38] Opposition to French control Zaian War Main articles: Zaian War and Mouha ou Hammou Zayani The Zaian confederation of Berber tribes in Morocco fought a war of opposition against the French between 1914 and 1921. Resident-General Louis-Hubert Lyautey sought to extend French influence eastwards through the Middle Atlas mountains towards French Algeria. This was opposed by the Zaians, led by Mouha ou Hammou Zayani. The war began well for the French, who quickly took the key towns of Taza and Khénifra. Despite the loss of their base at Khénifra, the Zaians inflicted heavy losses on the French. With the outbreak of the First World War, France withdrew troops for service in Europe, and they lost more than 600 in the Battle of El Herri. Over the following four years, the French retained most of their territory despite the Central Powers' intelligence and financial support to the Zaian Confederation and continual raids and skirmishes reducing scarce French manpower. After Armistice with Germany in November 1918, significant forces of tribesmen remained opposed to French rule. The French resumed their offensive in the Khénifra area in 1920, establishing a series of blockhouses to limit the Zaians' freedom of movement. They conducted negotiations with Hammou's sons, persuading three of them, along with many of their followers, to submit to the French rule. A split in the Zaian Confederation between those who supported submission and those still opposed led to infighting and the death of Hammou in Spring 1921. The French responded with a strong, three-pronged attack into the Middle Atlas that pacified the area. Some tribesmen, led by Moha ou Said, fled to the High Atlas and continued a guerrilla war against the French well into the 1930s. Rif War Main articles: Rif War and Muhammad Ibn 'Abd al-Karim al-Khattabi Flag of the Rif Republic (1921–1926) Sultan Yusef's reign, which lasted from 1912 to 1927, was turbulent and marked with frequent uprisings against Spain and France. The most serious of these was a Berber uprising in the Rif Mountains, led by Abd el-Krim, who managed to establish a republic in the Rif. Though this rebellion began in the Spanish-controlled area in the north, it reached the French-controlled area. A coalition of France and Spain finally defeated the rebels in 1925. To ensure their own safety, the French moved the court from Fez to Rabat, which has served as the capital ever since.[42] Nationalist parties Amid the backlash against the Berber Decree of 16 May 1930, crowds gathered in protest and a national network was established to resist the legislation. Dr. Susan Gilson Miller cites this as the "seedbed out of which the embryonic nationalist movement emerged."[43] In December 1934, a small group of nationalists, members of the newly formed Moroccan Action Committee (كتلة العمل الوطني, Comité d’Action Marocaine – CAM), proposed a Plan of Reforms (برنامج الإصلاحات المغربية) that called for a return to indirect rule as envisaged by the Treaty of Fes, admission of Moroccans to government positions, and establishment of representative councils. The moderate tactics used by the CAM to obtain consideration of reform included petitions, newspaper editorials, and personal appeals to French. World War II Main article: Morocco in World War II During World War II, the badly divided nationalist movement became more cohesive, and informed Moroccans dared to consider the real possibility of political change in the post-war era. The Moroccan Nationalist Movement (الحركة الوطنية المغربية) was emboldened by overtures made by Franklin D. Roosevelt and the United States during the 1943 Anfa Conference during World War II, expressing support for Moroccan independence after the war. Nationalist political parties based their arguments for Moroccan independence on such World War II declarations as the Atlantic Charter.[44] However, the nationalists were disappointed in their belief that the Allied victory in Morocco would pave the way for independence. In January 1944, the Istiqlal Party, which subsequently provided most of the leadership for the nationalist movement, released a manifesto demanding full independence, national reunification, and a democratic constitution.[45] Sultan Muhammad V approved the manifesto before its submission to the French resident general Gabriel Puaux, who answered that no basic change in the protectorate status was being considered.[46] Struggle for independence The innovative fact about Moroccan nationalists is that they globalized the Moroccan question through transnational activism.[47]: 15  This way they created a vibrant and wide global coalition of supporters who advocated their cause. This way they also managed to make their concerns global ones.[47]: 15  Among their active international supporters was Robert E. Rodes who fought actively in the US Congress for gaining support for the Moroccan cause.[47]: 31–34  In the late 1940s and early 1950s, with political and nonviolent efforts proving futile, the Moroccan struggle for independence became increasingly violent, with massacres, bombings, and riots, particularly in the urban and industrial center, Casablanca. Tangier Speech and Casablanca Tirailleurs Massacre Main articles: Tangier Speech and Massacre of April 7, 1947 The Massacre of April 7, 1947 in Casablanca as reported in France-Soir on April 9.[48] In 1947, Sultan Muhammad V planned to deliver a speech in what was then the Tangier International Zone to appeal for his country's independence from colonialism and for its territorial unity.[49] In the days leading up to the sultan's speech, French colonial forces in Casablanca, specifically Senegalese Tirailleurs serving the French colonial empire, carried out a massacre of working class Moroccans. The massacre lasted for about 24 hours from 7–8 April 1947, as the tirailleurs fired randomly into residential buildings in working-class neighborhoods, killing 180 Moroccan civilians. The conflict was instigated in an attempt to sabotage the Sultan's journey to Tangier, though after having returned to Casablanca to comfort the families of the victims, the Sultan then proceeded to Tangier to deliver the historic speech, in the garden of the Mendoubia palace, on 9 April.[50][51] Murder of Farhat Hached Main article: Casablanca Uprisings of 1952 The assassination of the Tunisian labor unionist Farhat Hached by La Main Rouge—the clandestine militant wing of French intelligence—sparked protests in cities around the world and riots in Casablanca from 7–8 December 1952.[52] Approximately 100 people were killed.[53] In the aftermath of the riots, French authorities arrested Abbas Messaadi, who would eventually escape, found the Moroccan Liberation Army, and join the armed resistance in the Rif.[54] Revolution of the King and the People Main article: Revolution of the King and the People Glaoui's attempted coup In 1953, Thami El Glaoui attempted to orchestrate a coup against Sultan Muhammad V with the support of the French protectorate.[55] The 1953 Oujda revolt broke out ten days after his "electoral" campaign passed through the city.[56] Exile of Sultan Muhammad The general sympathy of the sultan for the nationalists had become evident by the end of the war, although he still hoped to see complete independence achieved gradually. By contrast, the residency, supported by French economic interests and vigorously backed by most of the colonists, adamantly refused to consider even reforms short of independence. Official intransigence contributed to increased animosity between the nationalists and the colonists and gradually widened the split between the sultan and the resident general. Muhammad V and his family were transferred to Madagascar in January 1954. His replacement by the unpopular Mohammed Ben Aarafa, whose reign was perceived as illegitimate, sparked active opposition to the French protectorate both from nationalists and those who saw the sultan as a religious leader.[57] By 1955, Ben Aarafa was pressured to abdicate. Consequently, Ben Aarafa fled to Tangier where he formally abdicated.[58] The French executed 6 Moroccan nationalists in Casablanca on 4 January 1955.[59] The aggressions between the colonists and the nationalists increased from 19 August – 5 November 1955, and approximately 1,000 people died[59] Facing a united Moroccan demand for the sultan’s return, a rising violence in Morocco, as well as the deteriorating situation in Algeria, Muhammad V returned from exile on 16 November 1955, and declared independence on 18 November 1955. In February 1956 he successfully negotiated with France to enforce the independence of Morocco, and in 1957 took the title of King.[citation needed] 1956 independence In late 1955, Muhammad V successfully negotiated the gradual restoration of Moroccan independence within a framework of French-Moroccan interdependence. Further negotiations for full independence culminated in the French-Moroccan Agreement signed in Paris on 2 March 1956.[60][61] However, provisions in the protocole annexe of the March agreement as well the Cooperation Agreement of 28 May 1956, which stipulated among other things that each country should refrain from adopting policies that were incompatible with the interests of the other, constituted an impediment to full independence,[62] as was the right of France to maintain troops in Morocco during a transitional period of unspecified duration. The outspoken support of the Moroccans and Muhammad V for Algerian independence brought about the rapid collapse of these agreements and the worsening of Franco-Moroccan relations, especially after the Meknès riots of 23–28 November 1956 in the course of which several hundred Moroccans and more than 50 Europeans were killed.[63] From a high of 350,000 in 1955, the number of European settlers dropped to 150,549 in 1963, and 25,343 in 1990.[64] French-ownership of agricultural land was gradually eliminated following the nationalization decrees of 1959, 1963 and 1973.[65] Following unrelenting diplomatic pressure by Morocco, the last French troops were finally withdrawn 1 November 1961.[66] The internationalized city of Tangier was reintegrated with the signing of the Tangier Protocol on 29 October 1956.[67] The abolition of the Spanish protectorate and the recognition of Moroccan independence by Spain were negotiated

Polls show only 20% of citizens trust the U.S. federal government to do what is right most of the time. Polls find the average American believes the nation is two-thirds of the way to "the edge of a civil war." Can the federal government unite and govern this polarized nation? If not, how does it divide? Devolution of Power directly addresses these questions. It provides a roadmap to unwinding the massive accumulation of federal power by returning many domestic functions to the states. By distributing power throughout the nation, the federal government can focus on protecting America while empowering citizens in the respective states with the freedom to determine the domestic policies they want to be implemented by more efficient governments closer to them. Unlike many books on government reform, Devolution of Power is not just a list of complaints that leave the reader seeking solutions. It addresses how to restructure a federal government before it collapses the nation: Rekindling the idea that government officials must serve as fiduciaries, not self-interested politicians. Providing alternative mechanisms for rolling back federal power. Outlining a restructuring plan to devolve federal power to the states. Identifying options for trimming the national debt and the federal bureaucracy. Describing the character traits needed by elected officials to restore trust in government. While electing fiduciaries and devolving federal domestic powers to the states may seem to be an impossible task, the author presents a compelling case that it is a far easier task than rebuilding a collapsed nation burdened with massive debt, regulatory sclerosis, continuous wars, and little concern for the average American.

Morocco 2023 Human Rights Report Executive Summary There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Morocco during the year. Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment by some members of the security forces; political prisoners; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media freedom, including unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists, censorship, and enforcement of or threat to enforce criminal libel laws to limit expression; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections; serious government corruption; extensive gender-based violence, including domestic or intimate partner violence, and sexual violence; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons; and the enforcement of laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults. The government took steps to investigate officials who allegedly committed human rights abuses and acts of corruption, but investigations into police,

Respect for the Integrity of the Person A. ARBITRARY DEPRIVATION OF LIFE AND OTHER UNLAWFUL OR POLITICALLY MOTIVATED KILLINGS Certainly! According to the 2021 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices by the United States Department of State, Morocco faces several significant human rights issues1. Here are some key points: Torture and Degrading Treatment: There have been credible reports of torture or degrading treatment by some members of the security forces. Political Prisoners: Allegations suggest the existence of political prisoners in Morocco. Restrictions on Free Expression and Media: The government has imposed serious restrictions on free expression and media. This includes criminalization of libel and certain content that criticizes Islam, the monarchy, and the government’s position regarding territorial integrity. Freedom of Assembly and Association: There is substantial interference with freedom of assembly and association. Political activists face surveillance and intimidation. Government Corruption: Serious government corruption remains a concern. There were reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings. On September 8, Youssef Bejjaj was reportedly chased by three police officers for not wearing a helmet on a moped. Bejjaj’s mother claimed he was then beaten to death by plainclothes police officers. On November 17, the National Brigade of the Judicial Police opened an investigation. The police investigation found that the cause of death was due to the collision of Bejjaj’s motorcycle with a police motorcycle. The report stated that the autopsy revealed injuries consistent with a collision and concluded there had been “no use of excessive force” against Bejjaj. Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: torture or degrading treatment by some members of the security forces; allegations there were political prisoners; serious restrictions on free expression and media, including criminalization of libel and certain content that criticized Islam, the monarchy, and the government’s position regarding territorial integrity; substantial interference with the freedom of assembly and freedom of association, including surveillance and intimidation of political activists; serious government corruption; and criminalization of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex conduct.

African slave trade See also: Gnawa The slave descendants, the Haratin have been, and still commonly are socially isolated in some Maghrebi countries, living in segregated, Haratin-only ghettos. They converted to Islam under the Arabs and Berbers[4] and are commonly perceived as an endogamous group of former slaves or descendants of slaves.[4][5] Between the 7th-century during the Middle ages until the early 20th-century, Morocco was a center of the Trans-Saharan slave trade of enslaved Africans along the route from Timbuktu to the slave market in Marrakesh, from which they were transported to the rest of Morocco and the Mediterranean world as a whole.[2] In accordance with the Islamic law that Muslims were free to enslave non-Muslims, African tribes who converted to Islam captured non-Muslim people and exported them along the trade route along the coast north toward Morocco. During the Almoravid dynasty (1040-1147) the trade route exported weapons and textiles from Spain in the north to Senegal south of the Sahara, in exchange for gold, ivory, salt and slaves from the non-Islamic areas south of Senegal to Morocco, al-Andalus in Spain and the Mediterranean world.[3] As a spoil of war after defeating the Songhai Empire, sultan Isma‘il ibn Sharif of Morocco was sent thousands of Sub-Saharan slaves from Timbuktu every year, which he then added to his massive army of black-African slaves and Haratin slave-soldiers named the Black Guard (or Abid al-Bukhari). They converted to Islam under the Arabs and Berbers[4] and were forcibly recruited into the Moroccan army by Ismail Ibn Sharif (Sultan of Morocco from 1672–1727) to consolidate power.[5] The Trans-Saharan slave route from the city of Timbuktu mainly went to the city of Marrakesh in Morocco, which was known as a big center of the Mediterranean market of African slaves from the 7th-century onward, and kept being so for over thousand years, until Morocco became a French protectorate in the 20th-century.[2] European slave trade See also: Barbary slave trade There is historical evidence of North African Muslim slave raids all along the Mediterranean coasts across Christian Europe.[6] The majority of slaves traded across the Mediterranean region were predominantly of European origin from the 7th to 15th centuries.[7] In the 15th century, Ethiopians sold slaves from western borderland areas (usually just outside the realm of the Emperor of Ethiopia) or Ennarea.[8] Between the 16th-century until the early 19th-century, Morocco was also a center of the Barbary slave trade of Europeans captured by barbary pirates in the Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea. Barbary corsairs and crews from the quasi-independent[9] North African Ottoman provinces of Algiers, Tunis, Tripoli, and the independent Sultanate of Morocco under the Alaouite dynasty (the Barbary Coast) were the scourge of the Mediterranean.[10] Capturing merchant ships and enslaving or ransoming their crews provided the rulers of these nations with wealth and naval power. The Trinitarian Order, or order of "Mathurins", had operated from France for centuries with the special mission of collecting and disbursing funds for the relief and ransom of prisoners of Mediterranean pirates. According to Robert Davis, between 1 and 1.25 million Europeans were captured by Barbary pirates and sold as slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries.[11] Function Female slavery See also: History of concubinage in the Muslim world, Islamic views on concubinage, and Ma malakat aymanukum Female slaves were primarily used as either domestic servants, or as concubines (sex slaves). The sex slave-concubines of rich Urban men who had given birth to the son of their enslaver were counted as the most priviliged, since they became an Umm al-walad and became free upon the death of their enslaver; the concubine of a Beduoin mainly lived the same life as the rest of the tribal members and the women of the family.[12] Female domestic slaves lived a hard life and reproduction among slaves was low; it was noted that the infant mortality was high among slaves, and that female slaves were often raped in their childhood and rarely lived in their forties, and that poorer slave owners often prostituted them.[13] The most famous use of concubines took place within the royal harem. According to the writings of the French diplomat Dominique Busnot, Sultan Moulay Ismail had at least 500 concubines and even more children. A total of 868 children (525 sons and 343 daughters) were recorded in 1703, with his seven-hundredth son being born shortly after his death in 1727, by which time he had well over a thousand children.[14][15] This is widely considered among the largest number of children of any human in history. Many of his concubines are only fragmentary documented. As concubines, they were slave captives, sometimes from Europe. One of them, an Irishwoman by the name Mrs. Shaw, was brought to his harem after having been enslaved and was made to convert to Islam when the Sultan wished to have intercourse with her, but was manumitted and married off to a Spanish convert when the Sultan grew tired of her; the Spanish convert being very poor, she was described by contemporary witnesses as reduced to beggary.[16][17] Other slave concubines became favorites and as such were allowed some influence, such as an Englishwoman called Lalla Balqis.[16] Another favorite was a Spanish captive renamed Al-Darah, mother to Moulay Ismail's once favorite son that he himself educated: Moulay Mohammed al-Alim; and to Moulay Sharif. Around 1702, Al-Darah tragically died strangled by Moulay Ismail whom Lalla Aisha had made believe she had betrayed him.[18] It is widely believed that part of the motive for her disgrace was that she pushed[18] him to kill a co-concubine and her son to elevate the chances of her own son of becoming the monarch. Male slavery Male slaves were used as laborers, eunuchs or soldiers. The conditions of slavery could be very hard, and male slaves were made to work in hard labor in heavy construction, in quarries, and as galley slaves, rowing the galleys, including the galleys of the barbary corsair pirates themselves.[19] Choosing slaves to undergo the grooming process was highly selective in the Moroccan empire. There are many attributes and skills slaves can possess to win the favour and trust of their masters. When examining master/slave relationships we are able to understand that slaves with white skin were especially valued in Islamic societies. Mode of acquisition, as well as age when acquired heavily influenced slave value, as well as fostering trusting master-slave relationships. Many times, slaves acquired as adolescents or even young adults became trusted aides and confidants of their masters. Furthermore, acquiring a slave during adolescence typically leads to opportunities for education and training, as slaves acquired in their adolescent years were at an ideal age to begin military training. In Islamic societies, it was normal to begin this process at the age of ten, lasting until the age of fifteen, at which point these young men would be considered ready for military service. Slaves with specialised skills were highly valued in Islamic slave societies. Christian slaves were often required to speak and write in Arabic. Having slaves fluent in English and Arabic was a highly valued tool for diplomatic affairs. Bi-lingual slaves like Thomas Pellow used their translating ability for important matters of diplomacy. Pellow himself worked as a translator for the ambassador in Morocco. The perhaps most famous slave military force was the Black Guard, also known as ‘Abīd al-Dīwān "slaves of the diwan", Jaysh al-‘Abīd "the slave army", and ‘Abid al-Sultan "the sultan’s slaves")[20] were the corps of black-African slaves and Haratin slave-soldiers assembled by the 'Alawi sultan of Morocco, Isma‘il ibn Sharif (reigned 1672–1727).[21] They were called the "Slaves of Bukhari" because Sultan Isma‘il emphasized the importance of the teachings of the famous imam Muhammad al-Bukhari, going so far as to give the leaders of the army copies of his book.[22] This military corps, which was loyal only to the sultan, was one of the pillars of Isma'il's power as he sought to establish a more stable and more absolute authority over Morocco.[23]: 230–231  Over the course of the later 18th century and the 19th century their role in the military was progressively reduced and their political status varied between privilege and marginalization. Their descendants eventually regained their freedom and resettled across the country. The Black Guard was dissolved in 1912. Slave laborers were also used on the building construction of the Kasbah of Moulay Ismail. Abolition Abolition of the Barbary slave trade The slave trade of Europeans ended after the Barbary wars in the early 19th-century. On 11 October 1784, Moroccan pirates seized the American brigantine Betsey.[24] The Spanish government negotiated the freedom of the captured ship and crew; however, Spain advised the United States to offer tribute to prevent further attacks against merchant ships. The United States Minister to France, Thomas Jefferson, decided to send envoys to Morocco and Algeria to try to purchase treaties and the freedom of the captured sailors held by Algeria.[25] Morocco was the first Barbary Coast State to sign a treaty with the United States, on 23 June 1786. This treaty formally ended all Moroccan piracy against American shipping interests. Specifically, article six of the treaty states that if any Americans captured by Moroccans or other Barbary Coast States docked at a Moroccan city, they would be set free and come under the protection of the Moroccan State.[26] The Barbary slave trade from Morocco against the ships of other nations also diminished following the Barbary war of the early 19th-century. Barbary piracy was eradicated after the Second Barbary war. Abolition of African slave trade and slavery The Trans-Saharan slave trade with Africans were ended by the French Colonial authorities in 1923, but the slavery as such persisted long into the 20th-century. The Trans-Saharan slave trade with Africans continued after the Barbary slave trade of Europeans diminished. In 1842 sultan Abd al-Rahman of Morocco made a statement defending slavery by stating that slavery was something "all sects and nations have agreed from the time of the sons of Adam".[27] In 1883, Morocco was given an official suggestion by the British Foreign Office to ban slave trade, but Morocco refused to introduce such a ban.[28] In 1884, the British and the French governments banned their own citizens and employees in Morocco to own slaves.[28] Between 1912 and 1956, Morocco was colonised by France, which effectively ended the open slave trade in Morocco. In 1923 the French colonial authorities officially banned the slave trade and closed the slave markets in Morocco.[2] While the slave trade was banned, slavery as such was never banned. However, when the slave markets were closed and open slavery visually disappeared from the public eye, slavery was considered to be de facto abolished.[2] In practice the slave trade continued illegally at least two decades after the abolition of the slave trade in 1923.[2] Slavery as such continued in private, mainly in the form of domestic servants. However, during the decades after 1923, slavery gradually diminished in Morocco since changing attitudes made it less common to acquire slaves, and to more common to manumit already existing slaves. By 1952 the majority of the existing slaves in Morocco were reportedly kidnapped as children, and when this was said to be against Islamic law, the speed of the manumissions increased. When Morocco won its independence in 1956, slavery was said to be essentially confined to the Household slaves of the Royal Harem.[2] The traditional Royal Harem still existed during the reign of king Hassan II of Morocco (r. 1961-1999): the Royal Harem included forty personal concubines (who by Islamic law were by definition slaves) as well as an additional forty concubines who the king had inherited by his father; additional concubines who worked as domestic servants in the Royal Harem, as well as male slaves performing other positions such as chauffeurs in the Royal Household.[29] The slaves of the Royal Household were descended from enslaved ancestors inherited within the household.[29] The Royal Harem was dissolved by Mohammed VI of Morocco when he ascended to the throne in 1999.[29][30] After abolition See also: Gnawa The slave descentants, the Haratin have been, and still commonly are socially isolated in some Maghrebi countries, living in segregated, Haratin-only ghettos. They converted to Islam under the Arabs and Berbers[4] and are commonly perceived as an endogamous group of former slaves or descendants of slaves.[4][5]

THE GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICAN JEWS IS ENDING Anti-Semitism on the right and the left threatens to bring to a close an unprecedented period of safety and prosperity for Jewish Americans—and demolish the liberal order they helped establish. By Franklin Foer

Mass graves in Gaza show victims’ hands were tied, says UN rights office. Disturbing reports continue to emerge about mass graves in Gaza in which Palestinian victims were reportedly found stripped naked with their hands tied, prompting renewed concerns about possible war crimes amid ongoing Israeli airstrikes, the UN human rights office, OHCHR, said on Tuesday. The development follows the recovery of hundreds of bodies “buried deep in the ground and covered with waste” over the weekend at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, central Gaza, and at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City in the north. A total of 283 bodies were recovered at Nasser Hospital, of which 42 were identified. “Among the deceased were allegedly older people, women and wounded, while others were found tied with their hands…tied and stripped of their clothes,” said Ravina Shamdasani, spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Al-Shifa discovery Citing the local health authorities in Gaza, Ms. Shamdasani added that more bodies had been found at Al-Shifa Hospital. The large health complex was the enclave’s main tertiary facility before war erupted on 7 October. It was the focus of an Israeli military incursion to root out Hamas militants allegedly operating inside which ended at the beginning of this month. After two weeks of intense clashes, UN humanitarians assessed the site and confirmed on 5 April that Al-Shifa was “an empty shell”, with most equipment reduced to ashes. “Reports suggest that there were 30 Palestinian bodies buried in two graves in the courtyard of Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City; one in front of the emergency building and the others in front of the dialysis building,” Ms. Shamdasani told journalists in Geneva. The bodies of 12 Palestinians have now been identified from these locations at Al-Shifa, the OHCHR spokesperson continued, but identification has not yet been possible for the remaining individuals. “There are reports that the hands of some of these bodies were also tied,” Ms. Shamdasani said, adding that there could be “many more” victims, “despite the claim by the Israeli Defense Forces to have killed 200 Palestinians during the Al-Shifa medical complex operation”. 200 days of horror Some 200 days since intense Israeli bombardment began in response to Hamas-led terror attacks in southern Israel, UN human rights chief Volker Türk expressed his horror at the destruction of Nasser and Al-Shifa hospitals and the reported discovery of mass graves. Tweet URL “The intentional killing of civilians, detainees and others who are hors de combat is a war crime,” Mr. Türk said in a call for independent investigations into the deaths. Mounting toll As of 22 April, more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, including 14,685 children and 9,670 women, the High Commissioner’s office said, citing the enclave’s health authorities. Another 77,084 have been injured, and over 7,000 others are assumed to be under the rubble. “Every 10 minutes a child is killed or wounded. They are protected under the laws of war, and yet they are ones who are disproportionately paying the ultimate price in this war,” said the High Commissioner. Türk warning The UN rights chief also reiterated his warning against a full-scale Israeli incursion of Rafah, where an estimated 1.2 million Gazans “have been forcibly cornered”. “The world’s leaders stand united on the imperative of protecting the civilian population trapped in Rafah,” the High Commissioner said in a statement, which also condemned Israeli strikes against Rafah in recent days that mainly killed women and children. This included an attack on an apartment building in the Tal Al Sultan area on 19 April which killed nine Palestinians “including six children and two women”, along with a strike on As Shabora Camp in Rafah a day later that reportedly left four dead, including a girl and a pregnant woman. “The latest images of a premature child taken from the womb of her dying mother, of the adjacent two houses where 15 children and five women were killed, this is beyond warfare,” said Mr. Türk. The High Commissioner decried the “unspeakable suffering” caused by months of warfare and appealed once again for “the resulting misery and destruction, starvation and disease and the risk of wider conflict” to end. Mr. Türk also reiterated his call for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all remaining hostages taken from Israel and those held in arbitrary detention and the unfettered flow of humanitarian aid. A young girl is transferred from the Kamal Adwan hospital, in the far north of Gaza to a hospital in the south of the enclave. (file)© WHO A young girl is transferred from the Kamal Adwan hospital, in the far north of Gaza to a hospital in the south of the enclave. (file) Massive settler attacks in West Bank Turning to the West Bank, the UN rights chief said that grave human rights violations had continued there “unabated”. This was despite international condemnation of “massive settler attacks” between 12 and 14 April “that had been facilitated by the Israeli Security Forces (ISF)”. Settler violence has been organized “with the support, protection, and participation of the ISF”, Mr. Türk insisted, before describing a 50-hour long operation into Nur Shams refugee camp and Tulkarem city starting on 18 April. “The ISF deployed ground troops, bulldozers and drones and sealed the camp. Fourteen Palestinians were killed, three of them children,” the UN rights chief said, noting that 10 ISF members had been injured. In a statement, Mr. Türk also highlighted reports that several Palestinians had been unlawfully killed in the Nur Shams operation “and that the ISF used unarmed Palestinians to shield their forces from attack and killed others in apparent extrajudicial executions”. Dozens were reportedly detained and ill-treated while the ISF “inflicted unprecedented and apparently wanton destruction on the camp and its infrastructure”, the High Commissioner said. Donate to the humanitarian response in Gaza

Amnesty International USA has called on the U.S. to immediately suspend weapons transfers to Israeli forces in a new report finding that Israel has repeatedly committed egregious violations of international law using U.S.-made weapons fired on Gaza and beyond. The report finds that, over the past seven months, Israeli forces have used U.S. weapons like JDAMs, small diameter bombs and white phosphorus shells in attacks that have violated human rights law in their injuring and killing of civilians. This includes two Israeli strikes in October using U.S.-made JDAMs dropped on residences in Gaza that killed 43 civilians, according to Amnesty International USA, and four Israeli strikes between December and January in the supposed “safe zone” of Rafah that killed 95 civilians, with at least one munition used in these attacks being a Boeing-made small diameter bomb. UN Official Says Clearing Gaza of Unexploded Bombs Could Take 14 Years There is currently 40 million tons of debris in Gaza, a UN Mine Action Service official said. By Sharon Zhang , TRUTHOUTApril 29, 2024 Amnesty International USA urges officials to stop sending weapons to Israel or else continue complicity in atrocities being committed by Israeli forces across the Middle East. “It’s shocking that the Biden administration continues to hold that the government of Israel is not violating international humanitarian law with U.S.-provided weapons when our research shows otherwise and international law experts disagree,” said Amnesty International USA National Director for Government Relations Amanda Klasing in a statement. “President Biden must end U.S. complicity with the government of Israel’s grave violations of international law and immediately suspend the transfer of weapons to the government of Israel.” The report further details numerous instances of Israeli forces committing violations of international law in which the group couldn’t directly identify the use of U.S. weapons, but that demonstrate the risk of U.S. weapons being used in such military incursions. In one instance, Israeli forces killed 46 civilians, including a three-month-old baby, in two separate strikes on shelters in central Gaza in October. The group said it found no evidence of military targets at the sites of the attacks, meaning that they were likely “indiscriminate attacks or direct attacks on civilians or civilian objects and must be investigated as war crimes.” Other moves, like Israel’s forced evacuation notices with only 24 hours’ warning, constituted “declar[ing] an entire region a military target” and in some cases utilized their blockade of humanitarian aid corridors as “a form of blackmailing residents into leaving.” “The evidence is clear and overwhelming: the government of Israel is using U.S.-made weapons in violation of international humanitarian and human rights law, and in a manner that is inconsistent with U.S. law and policy,” Klasing said.

Despite the weakness of its authority, the 'Alawi dynasty distinguished itself in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by maintaining Morocco’s independence while other states in the region succumbed to French or British domination. However, in the second part of the nineteenth century, Morocco’s weakness and instability invited European intervention to protect threatened investments and to demand economic concessions. Following the Hispano-Moroccan War of 1859–1860, Spain obtained the recognition by Morocco of its perpetual sovereignty over Ceuta, Melilla and the Chafarinas Islands as well as of the territory of Ifni. The first years of the twentieth century witnessed a rush of diplomatic maneuvering through which the European powers, France in particular, furthered their interests in North Africa.[13] French activity in Morocco began at the end of the nineteenth century. In 1904, the French government was trying to establish a protectorate over Morocco and had managed to sign two bilateral secret agreements with Britain (8 April 1904, see Entente cordiale) and Spain (7 October 1904), which guaranteed the support of the powers in question in this endeavor. That same year, France sponsored the creation of the Moroccan Debt Administration in Tangier. France and Spain secretly partitioned the territory of the sultanate, with Spain receiving concessions in the far north and south of the country.[14] First Moroccan Crisis: March 1905 – May 1906 Main articles: First Moroccan Crisis and Algeciras Conference The First Moroccan Crisis took place owing to the imperial rivalries of the great powers, in this case, between Germany on one side and France, with British support, on the other. Germany took immediate diplomatic action to block the new accord from going into effect, including the dramatic visit of Wilhelm II to Tangier on 31 March 1905. Kaiser Wilhelm tried to get Morocco's support if they went to war with France or Britain, and gave a speech expressing support for Moroccan independence, which amounted to a provocative challenge to French influence in Morocco.[15] In 1906, the Algeciras Conference was held to settle the dispute. Germany accepted an agreement in which France agreed to yield control of the Moroccan police, but otherwise retained effective control of Moroccan political and financial affairs. Although the Algeciras Conference temporarily solved the First Moroccan Crisis it only worsened international tensions between the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente.[16] French invasion

First Amendment Primary tabs Overview The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. It prohibits any laws that establish a national religion, impede the free exercise of religion, abridge the freedom of speech, infringe upon the freedom of the press, interfere with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibit citizens from petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791. The Supreme Court interprets the extent of the protection afforded to these rights. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Court as applying to the entire federal government even though it is only expressly applicable to Congress. Furthermore, the Court has interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. Freedom of Religion Two clauses in the First Amendment guarantee freedom of religion. The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from passing legislation to establish an official religion or preferring one religion over another. It enforces the "separation of church and state." However, some governmental activity related to religion has been declared constitutional by the Supreme Court. For example, providing bus transportation for parochial school students and the enforcement of "blue laws" is not prohibited. The Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government, in most instances, from interfering with a person's practice of their religion. Freedom of Speech / Freedom of the Press The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech may be exercised in a direct (words) or a symbolic (actions) way. Freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for interference with the right of free speech when it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. Generally, a person cannot be held liable, either criminally or civilly for anything written or spoken about a person or topic, so long as it is truthful or based on an honest opinion and such statements. A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. For more unprotected and less protected categories of speech see advocacy of illegal action, fighting words, commercial speech, and obscenity. The right to free speech includes other mediums of expression that communicate a message. The level of protection speech receives also depends on the forum in which it takes place. Despite the popular misunderstanding, the right to freedom of the press guaranteed by the First Amendment is not very different from the right to freedom of speech. It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination. It is part of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. It does not afford members of the media any special rights or privileges not afforded to citizens in general. Right to Assemble / Right to Petition The right to assemble allows people to gather for peaceful and lawful purposes. Implicit within this right is the right to association and belief. The Supreme Court has expressly recognized that a right to freedom of association and belief is implicit in the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Freedom of assembly is recognized as a human right under article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This implicit right is limited to the right to associate for First Amendment purposes. It does not include a right of social association. The government may prohibit people from knowingly associating with groups that engage in and promote illegal activities. The right to associate also prohibits the government from requiring a group to register or disclose its members or from denying government benefits on the basis of an individual's current or past membership in a particular group. There are exceptions to this rule where the Court finds that governmental interests in disclosure/registration outweigh interference with First Amendment rights. The government may also, generally, not compel individuals to express themselves, hold certain beliefs, or belong to particular associations or groups. The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances guarantees people the right to ask the government to provide relief for a wrong through litigation or other governmental action. It works with the right of assembly by allowing people to join together and seek change from the government. Federal Material U.S. Constitution First Amendment Fifth Amendment Fourteenth Amendment Freedom of Expression: Is There a Difference Between Speech and Press? Religion and Expression Obscenity Right of Association Federal Judicial Decisions Supreme Court: Historic Constitutional Law Decisions Recent First Amendment Decisions - Religion, Press, Speech Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. LII Supreme Court Bulletin State Material State Judicial Decisions N.Y. Court of Appeals: First Amendment Decisions Appellate Decisions from Other States International Material Conventions and Treaties Human Rights Treaties Key Internet Sources The First Amendment Encyclopedia (Middle Tennessee State University) Freedom of Expression (National Endowment for the Arts) Freedom Forum First Amendment Center EFF Legal Guide for Bloggers LII Sitewide: First Amendment Supreme Court Cases Overview 2000 – 2019 Additional Topics Category: Individual Rights Category: Constitutional Law [Last updated in December of 2022 by the Wex Definitions Team] wex CIVICS human rights the Constitution government constitutional law individual rights wex articles wex definitions Español

Wasting my time with the Moroccan Slaves!

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETHNIC CLEANSING AND GENOCIDE The United Nations (U.N.) first termed ‘genocide’ in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, while ‘ethnic cleansing,’ on the other hand, is not recognized as a crime under international law (United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect). The lines between the ethnic cleansing and genocide can become blurred; however, when it comes to the international community taking action to mediate in a crime, the difference between ethnic cleansing and genocide needs to be understood. Genocide Genocide, in the Convention, means “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such: Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.” Therefore, under international law, genocide is a punishable crime. Any person found guilty of carrying out genocide will be tried by a tribunal of the state where the genocide was committed or an international tribunal. Ethnic Cleansing Ethnic cleansing is the process of removing particular groups from a specific area based on race, nationality, religion and other identifying principles. While ethnic cleansing doesn’t, by definition, involve the intent to kill a group, the resettlement of said people typically results in the loss of lives; genocide, however, focuses on the “intent to destroy.” Ethnic cleansing is considered a crime against humanity. It has not been written and signed in any U.N. treaty, which means Member States do not have to protect those who have fallen victim. Critics of the terms “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide” say that many state governments will use the initial phrase — even in incidents that could arguably be classified as genocide — in order to escape the necessity of using state resources and taking action against the perpetrating nation. Responsibility to Protect International law, in general, is a tricky topic when it comes to holding perpetrators accountable and protecting human rights. However, there is discussion on the national and international level (especially within the U.N.) to improve global law enforcement mechanisms. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine says that “if a state is unable to protect its own population from “genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity” then the internationality community must do something.” R2P was adopted at the World Summit in 2005. It aims to hold member states accountable for the equal and moral protection of their own populations and all populations at risk of genocide and other mass atrocity crimes. Discussion is increasing to meet the needs of millions of individuals that have suffered (and are suffering) from ethnic cleansing and genocide in the world today.

The hypocrites Islamist's movements have always capitalized on people's miseries! Even now, the cowards could not dare to criticize the corrupt Arab's tyrants regimes of colonial's dogs, the self-serving traitors in complicities with the Europeans and the American's financial institutions. In their collectives' complicities with the Zionists massacring, ethnic cleansing, and genocides of cardinal standard, never witnessed by historical chronologies of atrocities, as we have been made to witness in 2024! Yet the opportunists continue to lie, and to scam the naive in a Complicite cowardice of coward traitors. The right way about their fiasco, id for us to stand as one, and demand investigations, judgements, and redress. Stop the opportunists from capitalizing and boosting above the Zionist's victim's graves. Idiots! No justice no peace. Free the Rif too from the Moroccan apartheid of Arab's brutal tyranny!

Pro-Israel Lobby Faces Challanges, after the war crimes, and genocides of demonic proportion. The AIPAC organization, should be judged for its national treason, corruptions, and complicities. The deceptive scamming terrorist organization of evil accomplices.

Focused attention. Focusing your attention is one of the most important elements of meditation. Focusing your attention is what helps free your mind from the many things that cause stress and worry. You can focus your attention on things such as a certain object, an image, a mantra or even your breathing. Relaxed breathing. This technique involves deep, even-paced breathing using the muscle between your chest and your belly, called the diaphragm muscle, to expand your lungs. The purpose is to slow your breathing, take in more oxygen, and reduce the use of shoulder, neck and upper chest muscles while breathing so that you breathe better. A quiet setting. If you're a beginner, meditation may be easier if you're in a quiet spot. Aim to have fewer things that can distract you, including no television, computers or cellphones. As you get more skilled at meditation, you may be able to do it anywhere. This includes high-stress places, such as a traffic jam, a stressful work meeting or a long line at the grocery store. This is when you can get the most out of meditation. A comfortable position. You can practice meditation whether you're sitting, lying down, walking, or in other positions or activities. Just try to be comfortable so that you can get the most out of your meditation. Aim to keep good posture during meditation. Open attitude. Let thoughts pass through your mind without judging them. Everyday ways to practice meditation Don't let the thought of meditating the "right" way add to your stress. If you choose to, you can attend special meditation centers or group classes led by trained instructors. But you also can practice meditation easily on your own. There are apps to use too. And you can make meditation as formal or informal as you like. Some people build meditation into their daily routine. For example, they may start and end each day with an hour of meditation. But all you really need is a few minutes a day for meditation. Here are some ways you can practice meditation on your own, whenever you choose: Breathe deeply. This is good for beginners because breathing is a natural function. Focus all your attention on your breathing. Feel your breath and listen to it as you inhale and exhale through your nostrils. Breathe deeply and slowly. When your mind wanders, gently return your focus to your breathing. Scan your body. When using this technique, focus attention on each part of your body. Become aware of how your body feels. That might be pain, tension, warmth or relaxation. Mix body scanning with breathing exercises and think about breathing heat or relaxation into and out of the parts of your body. Repeat a mantra. You can create your own mantra. It can be religious or not. Examples of religious mantras include the Jesus Prayer in the Christian tradition, the holy name of God in Judaism, or the om mantra of Hinduism, Buddhism and other Eastern religions. Walk and meditate. Meditating while walking is a good and healthy way to relax. You can use this technique anywhere you're walking, such as in a forest, on a city sidewalk or at the mall. When you use this method, slow your walking pace so that you can focus on each movement of your legs or feet. Don't focus on where you're going. Focus on your legs and feet. Repeat action words in your mind such as "lifting," "moving" and "placing" as you lift each foot, move your leg forward and place your foot on the ground. Focus on the sights, sounds and smells around you. Pray. Prayer is the best known and most widely used type of meditation. Spoken and written prayers are found in most faith traditions. You can pray using your own words or read prayers written by others. Check the self-help section of your local bookstore for examples. Talk with your rabbi, priest, pastor or other spiritual leader about possible resources. Read and reflect. Many people report that they benefit from reading poems or sacred texts and taking a few moments to think about their meaning. You also can listen to sacred music, spoken words, or any music that relaxes or inspires you. You may want to write your thoughts in a journal or discuss them with a friend or spiritual leader. Focus your love and kindness. In this type of meditation, you think of others with feelings of love, compassion and kindness. This can help increase how connected you feel to others. Building your meditation skills Don't judge how you meditate. That can increase your stress. Meditation takes practice. It's common for your mind to wander during meditation, no matter how long you've been practicing meditation. If you're meditating to calm your mind and your mind wanders, slowly return to what you're focusing on. Try out ways to meditate to find out what types of meditation work best for you and what you enjoy doing. Adapt meditation to your needs as you go. Remember, there's no right way or wrong way to meditate. What matters is that meditation helps you reduce your stress and feel better overall.

Protesting against the Moroccan dictator in the White House D.C

A boycott is an act of nonviolent, voluntary abstention from a product, person, organization, or country as an expression of protest. People engage in boycotts for various reasons, including moral, social, political, or environmental concerns. The primary purpose of a boycott is to inflict economic loss on the target or to express moral outrage, often with the aim of compelling the target to change an objectionable behavior1. The term “boycott” originated during the Irish “Land War” in the late 19th century. It was named after Captain Charles Boycott, an agent of an absentee landlord in Ireland. The Irish Land League organized social ostracism against Boycott when he attempted to evict tenants from their land. As a result, local workers stopped working for him, businesses ceased trading with him, and even the postman refused to deliver his mail. The word “boycott” quickly gained prominence and has since been used globally to describe organized isolation as a form of protest1. In summary, a boycott serves as a powerful tool to express dissent, influence change, and hold individuals, companies, or nations accountable for objectionable actions or policies.