bringing up the value of trust will be much valuable when you see the result of the opposite
one of the points that make people feel the value of things they have , is when they suddenly lose it (good example, mess happens in places , people that we see suffer from losing their houses, a good pet, someone you like in life, many examples …… )
some people may not going to like it ,please give it a time and read it
from Wikipedia
Betrayal is the breaking or violation of a presumptive contract, trust, or confidence that produces moral and psychological conflict within a relationship amongst individuals, between organizations or between individuals and organizations. Often betrayal is the act of supporting a rival group, or it is a complete break from previously decided upon or presumed norms by one party from the others. Someone who betrays others is commonly called a traitor or betrayer. Betrayal is also a commonly used literary element, also used in other fiction like films and TV series, and is often associated with or used as a plot twist.
Definition
Philosophers Judith Shklar and Peter Johnson, authors of The Ambiguities of Betrayal and Frames of Deceit respectively, contend that while no clear definition of betrayal is available, betrayal is more effectively understood through literature.
Theoretical and practical needs
Jackson explains why a clear definition is needed:
Philosophers should be able to clarify the concept of betrayal, compare and contrast it with other moral concepts, and critically assess betrayal situations. At the practical level people should be able to make honest sense of betrayal and also to temper its consequences: to handle it, not be assaulted by it. What we need is a conceptually clear account of betrayal that differentiates between genuine and merely perceived betrayal, and which also provides systematic guidance for the assessment of alleged betrayal in real life.
Signature and consequences
An act of betrayal creates a constellation of negative behaviours, thoughts, and feelings in both its victims and its perpetrators. The interactions are complex. The victims exhibit anger and confusion, and demand atonement from the perpetrator, who in turn may experience guilt or shame, and exhibit remorse. If, after the perpetrator has exhibited remorse or apologized, the victim continues to express anger, this may in turn cause the perpetrator to become defensive, and angry in turn. Acceptance of betrayal can be exhibited if victims forgo the demands of atonement and retribution; but is only demonstrated if the victims do not continue to demand apologies, repeatedly remind the perpetrator or perpetrators of the original act, or ceaselessly review the incident over and over again.
If no true apology, atonement, real remorse and plan to change one’s behaviors are not present, then the one who was betrayed can accept that it happened, and that the perpetrator is unwilling or unable to change. No real change means they can do it again. Lack of validation from the perpetrator can be been described as a “second assault,” which can exacerbate the effects of the initial trauma incurred. Accepting the betrayal and going no contact is the best route forward. The alternative is to stay in connection and realize the trespass can happen again, and may choose to avoid doing certain things to decrease severity. For example, if a person gossips, do not tell them your secrets.
Political
Most adults living in liberal democracies place trust in the state of which they are a citizen. When this trust is betrayed, at its worst, the individual can suffer psychological betrayal trauma. Betrayal trauma has symptoms similar to Posttraumatic stress disorder, although the element of amnesia and disassociation is likely to be greater.
The key difference between traditional post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and betrayal trauma is that the former is historically seen as being caused primarily by fear, whereas betrayal trauma is a response to extreme anger. Fear and anger are the two sides to the fight-or-flight response, and as such are our strongest and most basic psychological emotions.
Pure political betrayal trauma can be caused by situations such as wrongful arrest and conviction by the legal system of a western democracy; or by discrimination, bullying or other serious mistreatment by a state institution or powerful figure within the state.
I hope you like it
some people may not going to like it (I do apologize for that )
Since trust is so important in both working and personal relationships, how can we monitor it, build upon it and heal it when it becomes frayed? It is useful to view trust as a natural response to certain qualities in a person, group or organization, and the absence of these qualities will diminish the level of trust. These qualities are:
Reliability and Dependability: A person or group that is true to their word and fulfills their commitments encourages trust.
Transparency: People are anxious about unknowns and tend to assume the worst when they’re not informed about a new development. When management meets in secret or does not share important information, team members can easily become distrustful. On the other hand, when people share their thoughts, feelings and considerations, or when an organization, usually through its leader, tells its members what is going on, everyone knows where they stand and trust can flourish.
Competency: This is another element that is central to building trust. If you think a person, leader or organization is not capable of doing what they are supposed to do, you cannot trust them. Therefore, even when a person has a good heart or good intentions and we like them personally, they cannot win our trust if they’re not capable of doing what they promise.
Sincerity, Authenticity and Congruency: People can often sense when someone says something that is not aligned with what they are feeling inside. When a leader is insincere or inauthentic, people don’t believe what he or she is saying. A leader who says one thing but who acts differently is not congruent. For example, it is hard to believe someone who says they want to listen but does not give you a chance to speak, or someone who says she is concerned about people yet seems to have a plan to lay people off. People may think they can hide their true feelings or contradictions, but others can quickly detect a lack of sincerity or congruency. That’s when trust is eroded.
Fairness: Some people act as if the needs and desires of others are not important, or they don’t truly listen to or respect both sides. Trust cannot grow in a relationship where it’s all about one person or in a workplace where all the energy is focused on the company or leader.
Openness and Vulnerability: If a person never says they are wrong and apologizes or acknowledges their mistakes, other people do not feel comfortable disagreeing with them or sharing their own thoughts. A leader who is “never wrong” never gets the truth from others. Yet a timely apology or admission of being wrong is a powerful weapon to build or rebuild trust.
this is one of the most important things to have public sense of it , How important to have Trust in dealing with each others .
by reading from time to time we may be able to bring this up
What Is Trust?
To have trust in a relationship means that you feel a sense of security and loyalty with your partner
“To trust means to rely on another person because you feel safe with them and have confidence that they will not hurt or violate you. Trust is the foundation of relationships because it allows you to be vulnerable and open up to the person without having to defensively protect yourself
Promotes Positivity
Trust is important in relationships because it allows you to be more open and giving. If you trust your partner, you are more likely to be forgiving of their shortcomings or behaviors that irritate you because overall you believe in them and know they have your back.
Reduces Conflict
Trust also allows you to navigate conflict. When you trust your partner, you are more willing to overlook problems or commit to finding solutions to issues because you feel allied in areas that mean the most to you. Even if your partner does something disappointing, you are more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt and see the good in them if you trust them.
Increases Closeness
Establishing trust creates a strong bond and foundation to build on. Knowing you can trust your partner promotes increased closeness and safety. When you trust one another, you feel safe knowing that your partner has your back and can be relied upon for comfort, care, and support.
very important step for EU to get more strength on the concerns and points that found a lot of the news about refugees
let’s say ,about this issue in countries like Turkey and others
the future of this issue to be solved
will make a good different
encourage you to make some search on it and just have an idea about the new agency and what is related to its job and how this going to impact certain type of news once this will be solved
Found this report about the status of democracy that give away more details about How democracy in the world is challenging ,freedom is shrinking
More comments about the report
has been made by an intergovernmental organization in Stockholm supports sustainable democracy worldwide, many democratic governments back down and take authoritarian tactics by restricting freedom of expression and weaken the rule of law, a trend exacerbated by the pandemic Corona.
This report comes ahead of US President Joe Biden’s Summit for Democracy to be held on December 9-10, where nearly 100 countries will meet to discuss challenges facing democracy
report was based on 5 main pillars in assessing the state of democracy: government, basic rights, oversight of government, impartial administration, and engagement.
According to the report, the number of declining democracies has doubled in the past decade, representing a quarter of the world’s population. This includes established democracies such as the United States, as well as European Union member states such as Hungary, Poland and Slovenia, where more than two-thirds of the world’s population lives in declining democracies or authoritarian regimes.
Overall, the number of countries moving in an authoritarian direction in 2020 exceeded the number of countries moving in a democratic direction.
The report notes that the world has lost at least four democracies in the past two years, either through flawed elections or military coups. Indicators of the global state of democracy show that authoritarian regimes have increased their repression, and 2020 was the worst year ever.
The coronavirus pandemic has deepened the trend of democratic deterioration, and as of August 2021, 64 percent of countries have taken measures deemed disproportionate, unnecessary or illegal to curb the epidemic.
TIINA JAUHIAINEN KNOWS the reach of the United Arab Emirates firsthand. In 2018, Jauhiainen helped her friend and skydiving partner Sheikha Latifa bint Mohammed al-Maktoum escape the country after accusing her father, the ruler of Dubai, of restricting her basic freedoms and locking up her sister. Jauhiainen and Sheikha Latifa fled the UAE on Jet Skis and boarded a yacht, but they were captured by Indian commandos in international waters and sent back to the UAE, where Sheikha Latifa was returned to her family and Jauhiainen was detained for a few weeks.
Months later, back in her native Finland, Jauhiainen applied for a visa to Australia, where she wanted to visit a friend. Australia rejected her application, stating that she was the target of a criminal investigation. She later learned that she was named in a “red notice” requested by the UAE and issued by international policing agency Interpol — and only after a lawyer intervened did she get the notice rescinded. “It just shows how easily they can abuse the system,” Jauhiainen told The Intercept.
Now Jauhiainen and others who have been detained in the UAE are watching Interpol’s upcoming election with concern. Ahmed Naser al-Raisi, a senior official with the UAE’s Interior Ministry who oversees security forces and detentions, is running for president of the organization. Al-Raisi’s fate will be decided at a meeting of Interpol’s General Assembly in Istanbul next week, and human rights advocates have been waging a campaign to stop him and a Chinese official who is also running for office
Interpol, which is headquartered in Lyon, France, and brings together police forces from 194 countries, has long faced questions about its vulnerability to politicization, in part because its members include governments that are notorious for human rights abuses and the repression of dissent. While the agency maintains that it is politically neutral and its constitution stipulates that it must operate “in the spirit” of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Interpol has come under increased scrutiny in recent years as authoritarian regimes around the world have exploited its systems — particularly the red notices the agency distributes to alert countries about wanted individuals — as a way to target activists, dissenters, and political opponents. Many abuses of the red-notice system date to after September 11, when a U.S. secretary-general, Ronald Noble, oversaw an expansion of Interpol’s reach, rolling out a digitization effort that led to an abrupt spike in alerts.
An unusually large number of seats are up for grabs at Interpol’s November 23-25 General Assembly, which was canceled last year because of the coronavirus pandemic. Members will elect a new president and replace most of the agency’s executive committee, which runs its day-to-day operations, as well as all members of the Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files, which handles complaints about red notices.
While member countries are not obligated to act on an Interpol red notice, individuals targeted by them often face arrest and detention, sometimes for prolonged periods, as well as extradition. People named in red notices can also lose access to financial services or have their visas or passports canceled.“It’s a policing organization: It’s an organization that’s run by police, for the benefit of the police, and the police don’t necessarily like to be very open about everything that they do.”
Calls for greater transparency about the agency’s safeguard mechanisms and warnings about abuse of its systems have intensified in the lead-up to the election. While the presidency has traditionally been a ceremonial position, China recently tried to use the role to expand its influence. The lack of transparency and standards for who can run for office, critics warn, is symptomatic of much deeper problems within Interpol.
“It’s not just the idea that Interpol’s president might come from one of the worst abusers of human rights,” said Bruno Min, who leads the campaign to reform Interpol at the equal justice group Fair Trials, “but the fact that the whole process is so opaque.”
“It’s a policing organization: It’s an organization that’s run by police, for the benefit of the police, and the police don’t necessarily like to be very open about everything that they do,” he added, noting that Interpol is careful not to openly rebuke its members. “They don’t like doing things that might embarrass or undermine certain countries. … They’re very careful not to be too critical, they’re very diplomatic.”
Interpol did not respond to a request for comment.
Tiina Jauhiainen in London in October 2021.
Photo: Courtesy of Tiina Jauhiainen
A Tool for Autocrats
Interpol’s work began in 1914, when police from 24 countries got together to coordinate fugitive hunts. After World War I, the group came under the control of the Nazis, and many countries stopped participating. The agency later regrouped, evolving into Interpol in 1956 and expanding beyond Europe and North America.
In the aftermath of 9/11, as the U.S.-led “war on terror” ramped up, Interpol’s work grew exponentially. A technological upgrade removed bureaucratic obstacles and made it much easier, and faster, for countries to issue red notices. The number of notices issued increased tenfold over the last two decades, with 11,000 going out last year. According to Interpol, there are currently more than 66,000 active red notices, though less than 8,000 are visible to the public.
As the number of alerts surged, reports of them running afoul of the organization’s commitment to human rights also multiplied. Critics have pushed for Interpol to better protect its systems from abuse. Some have also called on member countries to prevent the agency from becoming a tool for autocrats, including by forming voting blocks to oppose candidates from authoritarian regimes
Much of the most recent criticism has focused on al-Raisi, the UAE official. Al-Raisi has actively campaigned for the presidency on a platform that includes expanding the agency’s use of technology, pointing to the UAE, which engages in extensive surveillance, as a model.
Several human rights groups have raised alarm about al-Raisi’s candidacy, with a coalition of 19 organizations pointing, in a joint letter, to the UAE’s “poor human rights record, including the systematic use of torture and ill-treatment in state security facilities,” and warning that his appointment would “damage Interpol’s reputation and stand in great contradiction to the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the organisation’s mission.” Al-Raisi, the group added, “is part of a security apparatus that continues to systematically target peaceful critics, rendering civic space virtually non-existent.” Some European officials have also opposed al-Raisi’s candidacy.
Critics have also noted the UAE’s record of using Interpol red notices to target individuals over bounced checks, a controversial practice common in several Gulf countries that “makes Interpol into some sort of international debt collection agency,” said Min. UAE officials did not respond to a request for comment.
The UAE has sought a greater role in the agency’s operations in recent years. In 2017, it made an unprecedented $50 million pledge to the Interpol Foundation for a Safer World, a Swiss-based, independent nonprofit that supports Interpol’s activities. Despite its high profile, Interpol itself is a rather small organization, with an annual budget of just over $150 million. Member countries are required to contribute in proportion to their economies. The UAE’s donation to the foundation — far larger than its required $260,000 contribution to the Interpol budget — “represents one of the largest single donations ever made to Interpol,” according to a report published earlier this year by the U.K.’s former director of public prosecutions, David Calvert-Smith. The report questioned whether the UAE is exercising “undue influence” over Interpol.“I actually cannot believe that … I have to travel to the headquarters of Interpol to ask them not to make one of the men responsible for my torture their next president.”
The UAE also hosted Interpol’s General Assembly in 2018 and was scheduled to do so again in 2020 before the meeting was called off. (This year’s host, Turkey, has also drawn criticism for its history of targeting political dissenters.)
Jauhiainen is joined in her campaign against al-Raisi by two British citizens: Matthew Hedges, who was detained for nine months in 2018 while writing a dissertation on the UAE’s security strategy, and Ali Issa Ahmad, who was detained in Dubai in 2019 after wearing a Qatari T-shirt to a soccer game amid a feud between Qatar and the UAE. Both men were released following diplomatic pressure.
Hedges and Ahmad have filed legal complaints against al-Raisi in the U.K., France, Sweden, and Norway. “I actually cannot believe that almost three years after I was finally released, I have to travel to the headquarters of Interpol to ask them not to make one of the men responsible for my torture their next president,” Hedges said in a speech in Lyon in September
Influencing Interpol
Human rights groups have also raised concerns about other governments’ potential involvement in Interpol’s operations. In 2016, China’s then-vice minister for public security, Meng Hongwei, was elected president of the organization. He immediately sought to transform what had traditionally been a ceremonial role at Interpol into a position of greater influence and power, most notably by moving into Interpol’s Lyon headquarters with four Chinese assistants, while his predecessors had only visited a couple times a year. His contentious term was cut short in 2018, when he was arrested in China amid leader Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption crusade and was sentenced to 13 years in prison for bribery.
A Russian bid to install a senior official to Interpol’s presidency failed in 2018 after Western officials and human rights groups raised fears that the candidate would use the position to track and target critics of the Kremlin.
Now another Chinese public security official, Hu Binchen, is running for a seat on Interpol’s executive committee — reigniting fears that China could expand its control over the agency’s operations to target individuals wanted for political reasons.“I think there is, in general, a quite strategic move from China and other authoritarian regimes to take control of these organizations while Western governments are distracted or losing interest.”
Last week, a coalition of legislators from across the world launched a campaign opposing Hu’s candidacy. The group, the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, pointed to the recent arrest of Uyghur activist Idris Hasan in Morocco after Chinese authorities issued a red notice. While Interpol has since canceled the notice, Hasan remains detained in Morocco and fears extradition to China, where he faces detention and torture. Dolkun Isa, another Uyghur activist and president of the World Uyghur Congress, was briefly arrested in Italy in 2017 while traveling to address the Italian Senate. A red notice naming him was finally rescinded in 2018. (China joined Interpol in the mid-1980s and has issued red notices with increasing frequency since Xi came into power in 2012.)
As the Chinese government has continued to intensify its crackdown on minorities and critics, it has also sought to “bolster its legal mechanisms to extend its policing abroad,” Luke de Pulford, executive director of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, told The Intercept.
“I think there is, in general, a quite strategic move from China and other authoritarian regimes to take control of these organizations while Western governments are distracted or losing interest,” de Pulford added. “Our concern is obviously in individual cases where activists and exiles are arrested and threatened for deportation or extradition but more broadly, the chilling effect that that has on these communities, on anyone seeking to criticize the Chinese Communist Party globally.”
Hu’s election to the executive committee, the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China members wrote in an open letter, “would be giving a green light to the PRC government to continue their misuse of Interpol and would place the tens of thousands of Hong Konger, Uyghur, Tibetan, Taiwanese and Chinese dissidents living abroad at even greater risk.”
In a separate statement published by the World Uyghur Congress, nearly two dozen human rights advocates wrote, “As activists in exile who are particularly vulnerable to the Chinese Government’s attempts to persecute dissidents abroad, we fear the potential election of Hu Binchen would have grave consequences.”
Critics of both the UAE and Chinese bids have warned that those countries can exert economic pressure to influence the votes of other countries.
In response to a question about Hu’s candidacy, the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C., pointed The Intercept to comments foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian made in a press conference Wednesday: “Chinese police have long maintained a practical and friendly cooperative relationship with Interpol and law enforcement departments of its members.”
A view of a laptop computer screen showing the Interpol website which features a ‘Red Notice’ on September 26, 2013 in London, England.
Photo: Oli Scarff/Getty Images
No Transparency
Facing growing criticism, Interpol has undertaken a series of reforms in recent years. The agency adopted a policy meant to protect refugees from being targeted with alerts from their country of origin and calling on countries to notify Interpol before denying asylum claims following an agency notice. The agency also pledged to change how it vets alerts, for instance by ensuring that Interpol administrators review requests for red notices before they’re made available to member countries.
But while critics welcomed the changes, they warned that observers are not able to monitor whether the reforms are working. “Interpol says that is has very clear regulations around ensuring that political arrests don’t take place through Interpol systems, and what we would argue is that clearly their vetting process is not stringent enough,” said de Pulford, citing the cases of the Uyghur activists targeted by red notices.
Interpol does not publish data about how many red notices it rejects, making it hard to establish how well its vetting process is working. Countries can also bypass the vetting process by issuing “diffusions,” informal alerts to specific countries that theoretically carry less weight than red notices but often include many of the same details.“We don’t have any information about how they’re able to tell whether a red notice is abusive or not.”
“We don’t have any information about how they’re able to tell whether a red notice is abusive or not,” said Min, of Fair Trials, which has worked with individuals targeted by illegitimate notices, including refugees and activists. “That really makes us question whether they’re actually capable of doing the checks that they say that they’re doing. … They won’t go into any further detail about how exactly it’s done.”
The lack of transparency was on stark display earlier this fall, when Interpol announced, in a statement scant on explanations, that it had reinstated Syria’s access to the agency’s databases nearly a decade after having restricted it early in the country’s war. Syrian activists and critics of President Bashar al-Assad have denounced the move as part of a broader international trend toward the normalization of relationships with Assad’s regime. They warned that Interpol’s decision is “handing Assad new powers to hunt down dissidents beyond Syria’s borders.”
“If I am in any country, I might be arrested, or kidnapped, or taken by anyone, because I am on the blacklist of the Syrian regime,” Kholoud Helmi, a journalist and activist with Families for Freedom, a group that advocates on behalf of Syrians detained or disappeared by the regime, told The Intercept. “Especially for those of us who are everywhere, speaking to the international community, attending events in different countries, all over the world, is this going to silence us in the future? Are we going to jeopardize our safety and security? Am I going to be arrested?”
The following Security Council press statement was issued today by Council President Martin Kimani (Kenya):
The members of the Security Council expressed serious concern about the military takeover in Sudan on 25 October, the suspension of some transitional institutions, the declaration of a state of emergency and the detention of Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, as well as other civilian members of the transitional government.
The members of the Security Council called for the immediate release of all those who have been detained by the military authorities, and in this regard, took note of the reported return of Prime Minister Hamdok to his residence. They also called upon all parties to exercise the utmost restraint, refrain from the use of violence and emphasized the importance of full respect for human rights, including the rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression.
The members of the Security Council called upon Sudan’s military authorities to restore the civilian-led transitional government on the basis of the Constitutional Document and other foundational documents of the transition. They urged all stakeholders to engage in dialogue without preconditions in order to enable the full implementation of the Constitutional Document and the Juba Peace Agreement, which underpin Sudan’s democratic transition.
The members of the Security Council expressed their solidarity with the people of Sudan and affirmed their readiness to support efforts to realize Sudan’s democratic transition in a manner that achieves the hopes and aspirations of the Sudanese people for an inclusive, peaceful, stable, democratic and prosperous future. The members of the Security Council underscored that any attempt to undermine the democratic transition process in Sudan puts at risk Sudan’s security, stability and development. The members of the Security Council reaffirmed their strong commitment to the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity and national unity of Sudan.
The members of the Security Council expressed their strong support for regional and subregional efforts, including by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the African Union and the League of Arab States, and underscored the importance of their continued engagement in Sudan. In this regard, the members of the Security Council took note of the African Union Peace and Security Council’s communiqué of 26 October 2021 (PSC/PR/COMM.1041 (2021)).
The members of the Security Council reiterated their full support for the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan (UNITAMS) in implementation of its mandate.
The members of the Security Council expressed their intention to continue to closely monitor the situation in Sudan.
