View previous stories
	We call for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering by Hundreds of scientists and leading academics   We call for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering - Hundreds of scientists and leading academics   We call for immediate political action from governments, the United Nations, and other actors to prevent the normalization of solar geoengineering as a climate policy option.   Governments and the United Nations must assert effective political control and restrict the development of solar geoengineering technologies at planetary scale. Specifically, we call for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering.   Solar geoengineering⎯a set of hypothetical technologies to reduce incoming sunlight on earth⎯is gaining prominence in debates on climate policy. Several scientists have launched research projects on solar geoengineering, and some see it as a potential future policy option.   To us, these proliferating calls for solar geoengineering research and development are cause for alarm. We share three fundamental concerns:   First, the risks of solar geoengineering are poorly understood and can never be fully known. Impacts will vary across regions, and there are uncertainties about the effects on weather patterns, agriculture, and the provision of basic needs of food and water.   Second, speculative hopes about the future availability of solar geoengineering technologies threaten commitments to mitigation and can disincentivize governments, businesses, and societies to do their utmost to achieve decarbonization or carbon neutrality as soon as possible. The speculative possibility of future solar geoengineering risks becoming a powerful argument for industry lobbyists, climate denialists, and some governments to delay decarbonization policies.   Third, the current global governance system is unfit to develop and implement the far-reaching agreements needed to maintain fair, inclusive, and effective political control over solar geoengineering deployment.   The United Nations General Assembly, the United Nations Environment Programme or the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change are all incapable of guaranteeing equitable and effective multilateral control over deployment of solar geoengineering technologies at planetary scale.   The United Nations Security Council, dominated by only five countries with veto power, lacks the global legitimacy that would be required to effectively regulate solar geoengineering deployment.   These concerns also arise with informal governance arrangements such as multi-stakeholder dialogues or voluntary codes of conduct. Informal arrangements face barriers to entry by less powerful actors and risk contributing to premature legitimization of these speculative technologies.   Science networks are dominated by a few industrialized countries, with less economically powerful countries having little or no direct control over them. Technocratic governance based on expert commissions cannot adjudicate complex global conflicts over values, risk allocation and differences in risk acceptance that arise within the context of solar geoengineering.   Without effective global and democratic controls, the geopolitics of possible unilateral deployment of solar geoengineering would be frightening and inequitable.   Given the anticipated low monetary costs of some of these technologies, there is a risk that a few powerful countries would engage in solar geoengineering unilaterally or in small coalitions even when a majority of countries oppose such deployment.   In short, solar geoengineering deployment cannot be governed globally in a fair, inclusive, and effective manner. We therefore call for immediate political action from governments, the United Nations, and other actors to prevent the normalization of solar geoengineering as a climate policy option.   Governments and the United Nations should take effective political control and restrict the development of solar geoengineering technologies before it is too late. We advocate for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering specifically targeted against the development and deployment of such technologies at planetary scale.   The International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering should commit governments to five core prohibitions and measures:   The commitment to prohibit their national funding agencies from supporting the development of technologies for solar geoengineering, domestically and through international institutions.   The commitment to ban outdoor experiments of solar geoengineering technologies in areas under their jurisdiction.   The commitment to not grant patent rights for technologies for solar geoengineering, including supporting technologies such as for the retrofitting of airplanes for aerosol injections.   The commitment to not deploy technologies for solar geoengineering if developed by third parties.   The commitment to object to future institutionalization of planetary solar geoengineering as a policy option in relevant international institutions, including assessments by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.   An International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering would not prohibit atmospheric or climate research as such, and it would not place broad limitations on academic freedom.   The agreement would instead focus solely on a specific set of measures targeted purely at restricting the development of solar geoengineering technologies under the jurisdiction of the parties to the agreement.   International political control over the development of contested, high-stakes technologies with planetary risks is not unprecedented. The international community has a history of international restrictions and moratoria over activities and technologies judged to be too dangerous or undesirable.   This history demonstrates that international bans on the development of specific technologies do not limit legitimate research or stifle scientific innovation.   In sum, an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering would be timely, feasible, and effective. It would inhibit further normalization and development of a risky and poorly understood set of technologies that seek to intentionally manage incoming sunlight at planetary scale. And it would do so without restricting legitimate climate research.   Decarbonization of our economies is feasible if the right steps are taken. Solar geoengineering is not necessary. Neither is it desirable, ethical, or politically governable in the current context.   Given the increasing normalization of solar geoengineering research, a strong political message to block these technologies is required. An International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering is needed now.   http://www.solargeoeng.org/non-use-agreement/open-letter/   * Mar. 2024   At the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA6) in Nairobi, Kenya, Switzerland pushed UN member states to set up an expert panel to examine solar radiation modification (SRM) technologies. The untested technologies involve a deliberate and large-scale intervention in the Earth’s climatic system.   Countries were unable to reach consensus in Nairobi. Consequently, Switzerland withdrew a resolution it had tabled to examine the technology.   The original Swiss draft had called for the setting up of an advisory panel of specialists appointed by governments and representatives of international scientific bodies to gather information and produce a report on SRM’s possible applications, risks and ethical considerations.   The group of African nations were reported to be opposed to anything that enables SRM, arguing that the risks to the environment are too great and that the option of SRM undermines “real climate solutions”. Pacific Island states, Colombia and Mexico all opposed the resolution.   Solar geoengineering proposed techniques include stratospheric aerosol injection, spraying aerosols that scatter light, such as sulphur dioxide or calcium carbonate, into the stratosphere, or marine cloud brightening, adding sea salt to low clouds over the ocean to make them more reflective. Another technique is cirrus cloud thinning: adding aerosols to high-altitude cirrus clouds to reduce the infrared radiation they reflect back to the surface. Scientists have expressed profound alarm at the impacts on weather systems and agriculture, with any such techniques.   An open letter signed by more than 400 scientists in 2022 called for an international “non-use agreement” on solar geoengineering. It said United Nations bodies, including UNEP, “are all incapable of guaranteeing equitable and effective multilateral control over the deployment of solar geoengineering technologies at planetary scale”.   The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) noted critical risks related to SRM. It can “introduce a widespread range of new risks to people and ecosystems, which are not well-understood”, the IPCC’s scientists said in their 2023 report.   http://www.solargeoeng.org/non-use-agreement/open-letter/ http://www.ciel.org/news/ciel-response-to-geoengineering-srm-technology-rejection-unea-6/ http://wmo.int/news/media-centre/climate-change-indicators-reached-record-levels-2023-wmo http://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-2023-hottest-year-record http://climate.copernicus.eu/global-climate-highlights-2023 http://climate.copernicus.eu/weve-lost-19-years-battle-against-global-warming-paris-agreement http://wmo.int/media/news/wmo-confirms-2023-smashes-global-temperature-record http://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-analysis-confirms-2023-as-warmest-year-on-record/ http://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/thematic-reports/ahrc5425-toxic-impacts-some-proposed-climate-change-solutions-report   Mar. 2024   Nuclear is a dangerous distraction. (Climate Action Network, agencies)   Ahead of the Nuclear Energy Summit on March 21 in Brussels, Climate Action Network (CAN) Europe releases a myth buster to counter the recent hype around nuclear energy. It details why nuclear energy is a dangerous distraction from the transition to a fully renewables-based energy system and threatens to delay the urgently needed phase out of fossil fuels.   “We see the renaissance of nuclear energy with growing concern. The cheapest, fastest and only feasible replacement for fossil fuels are renewables. While the accelerated deployment of wind and solar has already delivered significant emissions reductions and lowered energy bills, nuclear power is a dangerous distraction. We urge policymakers to keep all efforts on delivering a fully renewables-based energy system,“ said Thomas Lewis, CAN Europe’s nuclear energy expert.   Key messages from the myth buster:   New nuclear energy in Europe is too slow, and too expensive to meaningfully contribute to the decarbonisation of the energy system by 2040. This pathway is a distraction which only delays fossil fuel phase-out and renewables uptake.   Nuclear energy is undermining renewables and is not an alternative or partner for renewables in the energy transition.   Small Modular Reactors are an unproven technology and, like conventional nuclear reactor designs, are unable to contribute meaningfully to decarbonisation. If developed, these units would increase the price for electricity, the levels of radioactive waste and risk the proliferation of nuclear materials.   A 100% renewable energy system by 2040, and therefore a managed phase-out and decommissioning of Europe’s existing nuclear fleet is required by 2040 at the latest to ensure a safe and sustainable future.   This document comes in the context of the Nuclear Energy Summit, as the industry looks to divert funds from genuine solutions towards nuclear energy. Hosted by the Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the summit brings together political and nuclear industry leaders with the aim to attract public finance to support the goal of tripling global nuclear capacity by 2050, announced by a small group of countries at COP28 in Dubai.   With nuclear energy, when things go wrong, they go very, very wrong, writes Masayoshi Iyoda, Campaigner in Japan for 350.org   On March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9 earthquake and a subsequent 15-metre tsunami struck Japan, which triggered a nuclear disaster at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Three of the six plant’s reactors were affected, resulting in meltdowns and the release of a significant amount of radioactive material into the environment.   Today, 13 years later, Japan is still experiencing the impacts of this disaster. Immediately after the earthquake struck, more than 160,000 people were evacuated. Of them, nearly 29,000 still remain displaced.   Disastrous health effects due to exposure to radioactivity are still a serious concern for many, and environmental impacts on land, water, agriculture, and fisheries are still visible. The cost of the damage, including victim compensation, has been astronomical; $7bn has been spent annually since 2011, and work continues.   Last year, Japan’s plan to start releasing more than a million tonnes of treated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean sparked anxiety and anger, including among community members who rely on fishing for their livelihoods, from Fukushima to Fiji.   Yet, Japan and the rest of the world appear not to have learned much from this devastating experience. On March 21, Belgium hosted the first Nuclear Energy Summit attended by high-level officials from across the globe, including Japanese Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiro Komura. The event was meant to promote the development, expansion and funding of nuclear energy research and projects.   The summit came after more than 20 countries, including Japan, announced plans to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050 at last year’s UN Climate Change Conference (COP28). All of these developments go against growing evidence that nuclear energy is not an efficient and safe option for the energy transition away from fossil fuels.   Despite advancements in waste-storage technology, no foolproof method for handling nuclear waste has been devised and implemented yet. As nuclear power plants continue to create radioactive waste, the potential for leakage, accidents, and diversion to nuclear weapons still presents significant environmental, public health, and security risks.   Nuclear power is also the slowest low-carbon energy to deploy, is very costly and has the least impact in the short, medium and long term on decarbonising the energy mix. The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report pointed out that nuclear energy’s potential and cost-effectiveness of emission reduction by 2030 was much smaller than that of solar and wind energy.   Large-scale energy technologies like nuclear power plants also require billions of dollars upfront, and take a decade to build due to stricter safety regulations. Even the deployment of small modular reactors (SMR) has a high price tag. Late last year, a flagship project by NuScale funded by the US government to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars had to be abandoned due to rising costs.   In addition to that, according to a report released by Greenpeace in 2023, even in the most favourable scenario and with an equal investment amount, by 2050, the installation of a wind and solar power infrastructure would produce three times more cumulative electricity and emit four times less cumulative CO2 compared to a water nuclear reactor in the same period.   And the climate crisis is not just about CO2 emissions. It is about a whole range of environmental justice and democracy issues that need to be considered. And nuclear energy does not have a stellar record in this regard.   For instance, uranium mining – the initial step in nuclear energy production – has been linked to habitat destruction, soil and water contamination, and adverse health effects for communities near mining sites. The extraction and processing of uranium require vast amounts of energy, often derived from nonrenewable sources, further compromising the environmental credentials of nuclear power.   Nuclear energy also uses centralised technology, governance, and decision-making processes, concentrating the distribution of power in the hands of the few. For an equitable energy transition, energy solutions need not only to be safe, but justly sourced and fairly implemented. While nuclear power plants require kilometres of pipelines, long-distance planning, and centralised management, the manufacturing and installation of solar panels and wind turbines is becoming more and more energy efficient and easier to deploy.   If implemented correctly, regulation and recycling programnes can address critical materials and end-of-life disposal concerns. Community-based solar and wind projects can create new jobs, stimulate local economies, and empower communities to take control of their energy future as opposed to contributing more money to the trillion-dollar fossil fuel industry.   Although the 2011 disaster in Fukushima may seem like a distant past, its effects today on the health of its environment, people and community are reminders that we must not be dangerously distracted with the so-called promises of nuclear energy.   We must not transition from one broken system to another. Wealthy countries have an ethical historical responsibility to support global finance reform and provide ample funding for renewable energy in lower-income countries. To keep our world safe and fair, not only do we need to tax and phase out fossil fuels immediately, but it is essential that we power up with renewable energy, such as wind and solar, fast, widely, and equitably.   * Masayoshi Iyoda a campaigner in Japan for 350.org and a part-time lecturer at the Toyo Gakuen University. He has co-authored several books on energy and climate in Japan.   http://caneurope.org/press-release-nuclear-is-a-dangerous-distraction/ http://caneurope.org/myth-buster-nuclear-energy/ http://dont-nuke-the-climate.org/blog/iaea-nuclear-fairy-tales
	Migrants say they were shot at when they tried to cross into Saudi Arabia by Lighthouse Reports, HRW, agencies   July 2024   UNHCR/IOM Report highlights extreme horrors faced by Migrants and Refugees on Land Routes to Africa's Mediterranean Coast.   Refugees and migrants continue to face extreme forms of violence, human rights violations and exploitation not just at sea, but also on land routes across the African continent, towards its Mediterranean coastline. This is according to a new report released today by UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Mixed Migration Centre (MMC), titled “On this journey, no-one cares if you live or die”.   With more people estimated to cross the Sahara Desert than the Mediterranean Sea – and deaths of refugees and migrants in the desert presumed to be double those happening at sea – the report casts light on the much less documented and publicized perils facing refugees and migrants on these land routes.   Spanning a 3-year data collection period, the report also warns of an increase in the number of people attempting these perilous land crossings and the protection risks they face.   This is in part the result of deteriorating situations in countries of origin and host countries – including the eruption of new conflicts in the Sahel and Sudan, the devastating impact of climate change and disasters on new and protracted emergencies in the East and Horn of Africa, as well as the manifestation of racism and xenophobia affecting refugees and migrants.   The report also notes that across parts of the continent, refugees and migrants are increasingly traversing areas where insurgent groups, militias and other criminal actors operate, and where human trafficking, kidnapping for ransom, forced labour and sexual exploitation are rife. Some smuggling routes are now shifting towards more remote areas to avoid active conflict zones or border controls by State and non-State actors, subjecting people on the move to even greater risks.   Among the litany of risks and abuses reported by refugees and migrants are torture, physical violence, arbitrary detention, death, kidnapping for ransom, sexual violence and exploitation, enslavement, human trafficking, forced labour, organ removal, robbery, arbitrary detention, collective expulsions and refoulement.   Criminal gangs and armed groups are reported as the main perpetrators of these abuses, in addition to security forces, police, military, immigration officers and border guards..   http://www.iom.int/news/new-unhcr-iom-mmc-report-highlights-extreme-horrors-faced-migrants-and-refugees-land-routes-africas-mediterranean-coast http://www.unhcr.org/news/press-releases/new-unhcr-iom-mmc-report-highlights-extreme-horrors-faced-refugees-and-migrants http://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/data-visualization-tracks-myriad-dangers-faced-refugees-and-migrants-land-routes   May 2024   UN Panel underscores need for monitoring Abuses at Borders. (Human Rights Watch)   A United Nations Human Rights Council panel on May 15 shed light on the crisis of human rights violations against migrants at borders worldwide. At the session, survivors and civil society representatives presented harrowing testimonies, emphasizing the need for greater action to prevent abuses and ensure accountability.   The UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants stressed the importance of justice and accountability and called for an independent monitoring mechanism at and around borders, echoing similar calls previously made by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and a global coalition of civil society groups.   Human Rights Watch has documented serious rights abuses against migrants along borders around the world. In the last few years alone, we have seen mass rights violations along routes in Latin America, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Saudi-Yemen border.   At the panel, Human Rights Watch and Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) highlighted rights violations taking place along the Darien Gap, a jungle between Colombia and Panama transited by hundreds of thousands of people every year. Our recent report documented severe abuses along this route, including sexual violence. Dozens, if not hundreds of people have gone missing during this dangerous crossing. These abuses go largely uninvestigated by Colombian and Panamanian authorities, and accountability is rare.   Nearly a year ago, over 600 people drowned when a boat carrying migrants sank off the coast of Pylos, Greece. There is no accountability in sight: the Greek Naval Court’s investigation into the responsibility of the Greek Coast Guard has made little progress. The Court should advance its investigations promptly, effectively, and impartially to provide truth and justice to survivors and the families of victims.   Another shocking example is the mass killing of up to thousands of Ethiopian migrants and asylum seekers by Saudi border guards, who used explosive weapons or shot at them as they attempted to cross the Saudi-Yemen border.   People we interviewed described shocking scenes: killing fields, with dead and dismembered bodies strewn across the mountainous landscape. Ethiopia and Saudi Arabian authorities have promised investigations but to date have provided no further information.   To ensure proper investigation into these crimes and other abuses at borders, and to help prompt justice for victims, the UN Human Rights Council should create an independent monitoring mechanism without delay.   http://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/29/un-panel-underscores-need-monitoring-abuses-borders   May 2024   Clandestine operations in North African countries dump tens of thousands of Black people in the desert or remote areas each year to prevent them from coming to the EU. (Lighthouse Reports)   To dissuade sub-Saharan migrants from attempting to cross to Europe, at least three North African nations are engaging in draconian practices. Evidence shows migrants, including pregnant women and children, are being systematically rounded-up and dumped in remote areas miles from water, food or shelter, leaving them exposed to the elements and at huge risk to their lives and human trafficking. And it is being clandestinely funded and supplied by Europe.   The investigation focused on three countries with deep EU partnerships: Tunisia, Morocco, and Mauritania. It revealed their systemic and aggressive operations towards mostly black North African migrants. According to the report, tens of thousands of migrants are detained and dumped in extremely remote areas, often barren deserts, each year. This is done to create such extreme suffering that it acts as a deterrent. The training, trucks, and equipment used in these cruel operations can be traced back to money and shipments from Europe.   Marie-Laure Basilien-Gainche, a human rights and legal expert, said “European states do not want to be the ones to have dirty hands. They do not want to be considered responsible for the violation of human rights, so they are subcontracting these violations to third states.”   Abandoned with no food or water in the most inhospitable parts of North Africa, migrants, including pregnant women and children, can wander for days before finding shelter and safety. The desert dumps also expose them to increased risks of kidnapping, extortion, modern slavery, torture, sexual violence, and even death.   In 2019, a report by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and Frontex, the EU border agency, flagged these abusive practices, leading to internal discussions by European officials. Five years later, the lack of adequate response points to a tacit willingness by Europe to look the other way while continuing to fund inhumane and abusive policies outside their own borders.   Interviews with 50 migrants who were victims of the round-up and dump policy highlight the abject cruelty of this approach to deterrence. Two women from Guinea, along with their group, were left by Mauritanian forces in a desolate, unpopulated part of the frontier with Mali. They were “chased” toward the border “like animals,” where they had to walk for four days until they reached a village.   Lamine, a 25-year-old from Guinea, said despite having refugee papers from UNHCR, he has been repeatedly beaten and detained by Moroccan forces in Rabat, then dumped in the interior. One of the most disturbing accounts involves migrants rounded up and sold by Tunisian government officers for a little over $6 each to unscrupulous military agents in Libya. One of those sold was Moussa, a young man from Cameroon.   Moussa stated: “What they’re doing to us is still the system of slavery, they have no respect for human beings, no respect for the African man.”   After being sold, Moussa and his group were held by plainclothes militiamen carrying AR-style rifles and taken to a small, dirt-floor prison where roughly 500 migrants were packed together under a corrugated roof.   Prisoners were forced to provide a phone number so ransom could be demanded from their families. With only a hole in one corner as a toilet, they were fed once a day and repeatedly beaten, leaving behind scars from machete hacks by guards. To keep the migrants under control, the captors also randomly fired their weapons. Before Moussa was released due to his mother paying the ransom, he witnessed three migrants die of wounds caused by stray bullets.   The trucks Tunisian security forces used to round up Moussa and his group were provided by Italy and Germany to “fight human traffickers” or “combat irregular immigration and organized crime.” While Tunisian forces did the dirty work, the investigation makes clear it’s Europe providing the material support facilitating these human rights abuses..   http://www.lighthousereports.com/investigation/desert-dumps/ http://www.freedomunited.org/news/rounded-up-abandoned-europes-covert-support-of-migrant-atrocities/ http://www.ohchr.org/en/topic/migration http://migrantprotection.iom.int/en/about/intro-migrant-protection http://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/who-we-protect   Aug. 2023   Ethiopian migrants say they were shot when they tried to cross from Yemen into Saudi Arabia, by Paul Adams. (BBC News)   Saudi border guards are accused of killing migrants along the Yemeni border in a new report by Human Rights Watch.   The report says hundreds of people, many of them Ethiopians who cross war-torn Yemen to reach Saudi Arabia, have died.   Migrants have told the BBC they had limbs severed by gunfire and saw bodies left on the trails.   Saudi Arabia has previously rejected allegations of systematic killings.   The Human Rights Watch (HRW) report, titled They Fired On Us Like Rain, contains graphic testimony from migrants who say they were shot at and sometimes targeted with explosive weapons by Saudi police and soldiers on Yemen's rugged northern border with Saudi Arabia.   Migrants contacted separately by the BBC have spoken of terrifying night-time crossings during which large groups of Ethiopians, including many women and children, came under fire as they attempted to cross the border in search of work in the oil-rich kingdom.   "The shooting went on and on," 21-year-old Mustafa Soufia Mohammed told the BBC.   He said some in his group of 45 migrants were killed when they came under fire as they tried to sneak across the border in July last year.   "I didn't even notice I was shot," he said, "but when I tried to get up and walk, part of my leg was not with me."   It was a brutal, chaotic end to a three-month journey fraught with danger, starvation and violence at the hands of Yemeni and Ethiopian smugglers.   A video filmed hours later shows his left foot almost completely severed. Mustafa's leg was amputated below the knee and now, back with his parents in Ethiopia, he walks with crutches and an ill-fitting prosthetic limb.   "I went to Saudi Arabia because I wanted to improve my family's life," the father-of-two said, "but what I hoped for didn't materialise. Now my parents do everything for me."   Another Ethiopian migrant, who we are calling Ibsaa to protect his identity, said he was shot at the border by men wearing Saudi military uniforms.   "They beat us, killed some and took those who survived to the hospital. The bodies of those killed were left scattered on the ground," he told the BBC.   "I was shot between my thighs near my groin, and my legs are paralyzed now. I can't even walk. I thought I would die."   Some survivors show signs of deep trauma. In the Yemeni capital, Zahra can barely bring herself to speak about what happened. She says she is 18, but looks younger. We are not using her real name to protect her identity.   Her journey, which had already cost around $2,500 in ransoms and bribes, ended in a hail of bullets at the border.   One bullet took all the fingers of one hand. Asked about her injury, she looks away and cannot answer.   According to the UN's International Organization for Migration, tens of thousands of people a year attempt a perilous journey, crossing by sea from the Horn of Africa to Yemen and then travelling on to Saudi Arabia.   Human rights organisations say many experience imprisonment and beatings along the way.   The sea crossing is dangerous enough. More than 24 migrants were reported missing last week after a shipwreck off the coast of Djibouti.   In Yemen, the main migrant routes are littered with the graves of people who have died along the way.   Dozens of migrants were killed two years ago when fire tore through a detention centre in the capital, Sanaa, run by the country's Houthi rebels who control most of northern Yemen.   But the abuses outlined in the latest HRW report are different in scale and nature.   "What we documented are essentially mass killings," the report's lead author, Nadia Hardman, told the BBC.   "People described sites that sound like killing fields - bodies strewn all over the hillside," she said.   The report, which covers the period from March 2022 to June this year, details 28 separate incidents involving explosive weapons and 14 of shootings at close range.   "I have seen hundreds of graphic images and videos sent to me by survivors. They depict pretty terrifying injuries and blast wounds."   The report says it is impossible estimate how many migrants have been killed along the border   The remoteness of the border crossings and the difficulty of tracking down survivors make it impossible to know precisely how many people have been killed, say the authors.   "We say a minimum of 655, but it's likely to be thousands," Hardman said. "We have factually demonstrated that the abuses are widespread and systematic and may amount to a crime against humanity," she said.   Reports of widespread killings perpetrated by Saudi security forces along the northern border first surfaced last October in a letter by UN experts to the government in Riyadh.   They highlighted "what appears to be a systematic pattern of large-scale, indiscriminate cross-border killings, using artillery shelling and small arms fired by Saudi security forces against migrants."   Despite the horrific nature of the allegations, the letter went largely unreported.   The Saudi government said it took the allegations seriously but strongly rejected the UN's characterisation that the killings were systematic or large-scale.   "Based on the limited information provided," the government replied, "authorities within the Kingdom have discovered no information or evidence to confirm or substantiate the allegations."   But last month, the Mixed Migration Centre, a global research network, published further allegations of killings along the border, based on its own interviews with survivors.   Its report contains graphic descriptions of rotting corpses scattered throughout the border area, captured migrants being asked by Saudi border guards which leg they want to be shot through, and machine guns and mortars being used to attack large groups of terrified people.   The report from Human Rights Watch is the most detailed yet, with multiple eyewitness reports and satellite imagery of the crossing points where many of the killings are said to have taken place, as well as makeshift burial sites.   The report also identifies a detention centre at Monabbih, just inside Yemen, where migrants are held before being escorted to the border by armed smugglers.   According to one migrant interviewed by HRW, Yemen's Houthi rebels are in charge of security at Monabbih and work alongside the smugglers.   While the HRW report covers events up to June this year, the BBC has uncovered evidence that the killings are continuing.   In the northern city of Saada, footage seen by the BBC shows migrants injured at the border arriving in a hospital as late as Friday. In a nearby cemetery, burials were taking place.   The BBC has approached the Saudi government for comment about the allegations made by UN rapporteurs, the Mixed Migration Centre and Human Rights Watch, but has not received a response.   A Saudi government source told AFP news agency that the allegations were "unfounded and not based on reliable sources".   In a letter sent to HRW in response to the report, the Houthi-led government in Sanaa said it was aware of "deliberate killings of immigrants and Yemenis" by Saudi border guards. It also denied working with smugglers, saying it considered them to be criminals.   * The Government of Ethiopia has announced it will launch a joint investigation with Saudi Arabian authorities into a Human Rights Watch (HRW) report.   http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-66545787 http://reliefweb.int/report/saudi-arabia/they-fired-us-rain-saudi-arabian-mass-killings-ethiopian-migrants-yemen-saudi-border-enar Visit the related web page
	View more stories