question – Radio Free https://www.radiofree.org Independent Media for People, Not Profits. Mon, 28 Jul 2025 18:42:09 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://www.radiofree.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/cropped-Radio-Free-Social-Icon-2-32x32.png question – Radio Free https://www.radiofree.org 32 32 141331581 3 DRC journalists beaten, detained for trying to question provincial minister https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/28/3-drc-journalists-beaten-detained-for-trying-to-question-provincial-minister/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/28/3-drc-journalists-beaten-detained-for-trying-to-question-provincial-minister/#respond Mon, 28 Jul 2025 18:42:09 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=500931 Kinshasa, July 28, 2025—The Committee to Protect Journalists calls for authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to immediately drop legal proceedings against three journalists who were beaten and detained overnight while seeking to interview a provincial minister in the north-eastern city of Kisangani.

On July 23, KIS24 Info’s Steves Paluku, ElectionNet’s Paul Beyokobana, and Kisangani News newspaper’s Sébastien Mulamba visited the offices of Tshopo province’s Minister of Finance Patrick Valencio to ask him to respond to media criticism about his appearance in and alleged funding of a television series, Paluku and Beyokobana told CPJ.

The journalists said ministry officials beat them and injured Paul Peyokobana’s hand, shown here, on July 23, 2025, at the Ministry of Finance office for Tshopo province in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Photo: Steves Paluku)
The journalists said ministry officials beat them and injured Paul Peyokobana’s hand, shown here, on July 23, 2025, at the Ministry of Finance office for Tshopo province in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Photo: Steves Paluku)

Ministry officials beat the three journalists, who all work for privately owned outlets, with sticks and their fists, injuring Beyokobana’s hand, before armed police took them to a local police station and the Kisangani prosecutor’s office, where they spent the night, the journalists told CPJ.

The journalists’ lawyer, Andy Muzaliwa, told CPJ that they were released on July 24 and ordered to appear at the prosecutor’s office on Monday, July 28, to meet Valencio and his deputy chief of staff, Jacques Lomamisa.

Paluku told CPJ that the journalists did not appear in court on Monday because Muzaliwa was not available but were expected to do so in the coming days. Paluka added that on Monday he separately filed a complaint against Valencio at the Supreme Court of Kinshasa, the capital of the DRC, over his detention.

“The Congolese officials and police who attacked and detained journalists Steve Paluku, Paul Beyokobana, and Sébastien Mulamba must be held accountable and the legal proceedings against the journalists should be dropped,” said CPJ Regional Director Angela Quintal. “Authorities in the DRC should focus on ensuring the safety of journalists working to report the news, not violently silencing them for asking questions.”

Valencio’s office defended the minister, saying that Congolese law did not prohibit his participation in a film at a time when he was not a minister, the online outlet Boyoma Revolution reported.

CPJ’s calls to request comment from Valencio and Lomamisa rang unanswered.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/28/3-drc-journalists-beaten-detained-for-trying-to-question-provincial-minister/feed/ 0 546546 Gaza – an open question for NZ’s foreign minister Winston Peters https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/22/gaza-an-open-question-for-nzs-foreign-minister-winston-peters/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/22/gaza-an-open-question-for-nzs-foreign-minister-winston-peters/#respond Tue, 22 Jul 2025 23:48:33 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=117709 OPEN QUESTION: By Bryan Bruce

Dear Rt Hon Winston Peters,

There was a time when New Zealanders stood up for what was morally right. There are memorials around our country for those who died fighting fascism, we wrote parts of the UN Charter of Human Rights, we took an anti-nuclear stance in 1984, and three years prior to that, many of us stood against apartheid in South Africa by boycotting South African products and actively protesting against the 1981 Springbok Rugby Tour.

To call out the Israeli government for genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza is not to be antisemitic. Nor is it to be pro- Hamas. It is to simply to be pro-human.

While acknowledging the peace and humanitarian initiatives on the Foreign Affairs website, I note there is no calling out of the genocide and ethnic cleansing that cannot be denied is happening in Gaza.

The Israeli government is systematically demolishing whole towns and cities — including churches, mosques, even removing trees and vegetation — to deprive the Palestinian people the opportunity to return to their homeland; and there have been constant blocks to humanitarian aid as part of a policy forced starvation.

There is no doubt crimes against international law have been committed, which is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity.

So, my question to you is: why are you not pictured standing in this photograph (below) alongside the representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá?

The nations that took part in the Gaza emergency summit in were:

Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Djibouti, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Lebanon, Libya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.

representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá
Representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá. Image: bryanbruce.substack.com

Is your policy simply to fall in behind the USA denying there is genocide and ethnic cleansing happening in Gaza?

If not, are you prepared to endorse the six coordinated diplomatic, legal and economic measures already signed up to by 12 of the participating countries in the Bogetà summit, to restrain Israel’s assault on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and defend international law at large?

Remaining countries, which could still include New Zealand, have a deadline of September 20, to coincide with the 80th UN General Assembly, for additional states to join them.

The 6 agreed measures are:
Prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel.

Prevent the transit, docking, and servicing of vessels at any port
 in all cases where there is a clear risk of the vessel being used to carry arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel

Prevent the carriage of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel on vessels bearing our flag . . .  and ensure full accountability, including de-flagging, for non-compliance with this prohibition.

Commence an urgent review of all public contracts, to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territory and entrenching its unlawful presence.

Comply with obligations to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law, through robust, impartial and independent investigations and prosecutions at national or international levels, to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes.

Support universal jurisdiction mandates, as and where applicable in national legal frameworks and judiciaries, to ensure justice for victims of international crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

In addition, are you prepared to specifically support the enforcement of the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and forced starvation, in a war that has left more than 211,000 Palestinians, including many children, dead, maimed, or missing since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry? (That’s a figure that is approximately the entire population of Hamiton and Rotorua).

What then is the NZ government’s policy? Are we going to support International Law and call out the Israeli government’s acts of genocide in Gaza, or not?

Yours sincerely,

Bryan Bruce
Investigative documentary maker, journalist and podcaster.
Auckland.

Bryan Bruce is a New Zealand investigative journalist and documentary maker. Republished from Bruce’s substack page.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/22/gaza-an-open-question-for-nzs-foreign-minister-winston-peters/feed/ 0 545716 Gaza – an open question for NZ’s foreign minister Winston Peters https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/22/gaza-an-open-question-for-nzs-foreign-minister-winston-peters-2/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/22/gaza-an-open-question-for-nzs-foreign-minister-winston-peters-2/#respond Tue, 22 Jul 2025 23:48:33 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=117709 OPEN QUESTION: By Bryan Bruce

Dear Rt Hon Winston Peters,

There was a time when New Zealanders stood up for what was morally right. There are memorials around our country for those who died fighting fascism, we wrote parts of the UN Charter of Human Rights, we took an anti-nuclear stance in 1984, and three years prior to that, many of us stood against apartheid in South Africa by boycotting South African products and actively protesting against the 1981 Springbok Rugby Tour.

To call out the Israeli government for genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza is not to be antisemitic. Nor is it to be pro- Hamas. It is to simply to be pro-human.

While acknowledging the peace and humanitarian initiatives on the Foreign Affairs website, I note there is no calling out of the genocide and ethnic cleansing that cannot be denied is happening in Gaza.

The Israeli government is systematically demolishing whole towns and cities — including churches, mosques, even removing trees and vegetation — to deprive the Palestinian people the opportunity to return to their homeland; and there have been constant blocks to humanitarian aid as part of a policy forced starvation.

There is no doubt crimes against international law have been committed, which is why the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague has issued warrants for the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity.

So, my question to you is: why are you not pictured standing in this photograph (below) alongside the representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá?

The nations that took part in the Gaza emergency summit in were:

Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Algeria, Bangladesh, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Djibouti, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Lebanon, Libya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezuela.

representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá
Representatives from 33 nations at the July 16 2025 Gaza emergency conference in Bogotá. Image: bryanbruce.substack.com

Is your policy simply to fall in behind the USA denying there is genocide and ethnic cleansing happening in Gaza?

If not, are you prepared to endorse the six coordinated diplomatic, legal and economic measures already signed up to by 12 of the participating countries in the Bogetà summit, to restrain Israel’s assault on the Occupied Palestinian Territories and defend international law at large?

Remaining countries, which could still include New Zealand, have a deadline of September 20, to coincide with the 80th UN General Assembly, for additional states to join them.

The 6 agreed measures are:
Prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel.

Prevent the transit, docking, and servicing of vessels at any port
 in all cases where there is a clear risk of the vessel being used to carry arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel

Prevent the carriage of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel on vessels bearing our flag . . .  and ensure full accountability, including de-flagging, for non-compliance with this prohibition.

Commence an urgent review of all public contracts, to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territory and entrenching its unlawful presence.

Comply with obligations to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law, through robust, impartial and independent investigations and prosecutions at national or international levels, to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes.

Support universal jurisdiction mandates, as and where applicable in national legal frameworks and judiciaries, to ensure justice for victims of international crimes committed in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

In addition, are you prepared to specifically support the enforcement of the International Criminal Court arrest warrants issued last year for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza including murder and forced starvation, in a war that has left more than 211,000 Palestinians, including many children, dead, maimed, or missing since October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry? (That’s a figure that is approximately the entire population of Hamiton and Rotorua).

What then is the NZ government’s policy? Are we going to support International Law and call out the Israeli government’s acts of genocide in Gaza, or not?

Yours sincerely,

Bryan Bruce
Investigative documentary maker, journalist and podcaster.
Auckland.

Bryan Bruce is a New Zealand investigative journalist and documentary maker. Republished from Bruce’s substack page.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/22/gaza-an-open-question-for-nzs-foreign-minister-winston-peters-2/feed/ 0 545717 This Doctor Specializes in Diagnosing Child Abuse. Some of Her Conclusions Have Been Called Into Question. https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/01/this-doctor-specializes-in-diagnosing-child-abuse-some-of-her-conclusions-have-been-called-into-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/01/this-doctor-specializes-in-diagnosing-child-abuse-some-of-her-conclusions-have-been-called-into-question/#respond Tue, 01 Jul 2025 10:00:00 +0000 https://www.propublica.org/article/child-abuse-pediatrician-nancy-harper-minnesota-shaken-baby-syndrome by Jessica Lussenhop, and photography by Sarahbeth Maney

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.

In court, Dr. Nancy Harper comes across as professional and authoritative. Often she begins her testimony by explaining her subspeciality: child abuse pediatrics, which focuses on the diagnosis and documentation of signs of child abuse. Her role, she often reminds judges and juries, is solely medical. Whether or not to remove a child from their home, terminate the parent’s rights or, in the most serious cases, charge a caregiver criminally is not up to her.

According to Harper’s testimony, she and her team at the Otto Bremer Trust Center for Safe and Healthy Children in Minneapolis handle about 700 cases of suspected abuse each year. She has testified that 10% to 20% of those wind up confirmed for physical abuse, although it is difficult to determine if these figures are accurate since child protection cases are not public.

When Harper, the center’s director, and her team diagnose abuse, parents and caregivers often struggle to challenge those opinions. By Harper’s own estimation, she’s never been wrong.

“I don’t think I’ve ever had a case where I thought it was abusive head trauma and the other specialist didn’t,” Harper testified in 2023, in the case of a day care provider charged with the death of a child in her care.

The defense attorney in the case pressed her: “Have you ever incorrectly diagnosed a child with abusive head trauma?”

“Not currently to my recollection,” she answered.

But in a handful of cases, judges and juries have found day care providers and parents not guilty of crimes after Harper has testified that abuse occurred, though a verdict cannot necessarily be interpreted as a repudiation of Harper or any other expert witness’ determinations or credibility.

Additionally, two federal lawsuits filed recently accuse Harper of ignoring or even concealing alternative explanations for children’s injuries. And, more broadly, medical and legal experts are increasingly questioning a leading child abuse diagnosis, shaken baby syndrome, which is also known as abusive head trauma.

Harper did not respond to requests for comment. She has yet to respond to either lawsuit. In past court testimony, Harper has said that both shaken baby syndrome and abusive head trauma are considered scientifically valid diagnoses by the mainstream medical community. Any controversy, she has said, exists primarily in the legal world rather than the medical one.

Kathleen Pakes, a former prosecutor who now specializes in the forensics of child abuse cases for the Office of the Wisconsin State Public Defender, said Harper’s claim of never making an incorrect diagnosis strains credulity.

“There is no other specialty in medicine that has zero error rate. None,” she said.

Below are four cases in which Harper concluded there was abuse but courts or juries determined otherwise.

On July 12, 2017, an 11-month-old boy named Gabriel Cooper collapsed in his high chair at the day care that Sylwia Pawlak-Reynolds operated in South Minneapolis. Paramedics took him to Hennepin County Medical Center, where he was declared brain dead a day later.

Harper reviewed Cooper’s medical records and wrote that “in the absence of a well-documented consistent severe accidental injury, non-accidental trauma or abusive head trauma remains the primary diagnostic consideration.” The child, she wrote, was essentially shaken to death. Before any criminal charges were filed, Pawlak-Reynolds boarded a plane for her native Poland to care for her ailing father, according to her attorney. In February 2018, prosecutors charged Pawlak-Reynolds with two counts of second-degree murder, citing Harper’s diagnosis.

According to her husband, Will Reynolds, they did not realize Pawlak-Reynolds was pregnant when she boarded her flight to Poland. She remained there to give birth to their third child, who is now 6, while Reynolds remained in Minnesota with their two older children, who are now 13 and 16. Reynolds said he and his wife have no confidence that she will get a fair trial, and that she fears she will lose custody of their youngest child if she reenters the country. The family has now been separated for eight years.

Sylwia Pawlak-Reynolds’ husband, Will Reynolds, remains in Minnesota with their two older children.

Early in the case, Pawlak-Reynolds’ attorneys obtained the same copy of Cooper’s hospital records that had been provided to Minneapolis police, which included the paramedics’ report. The document had been printed out at a significantly reduced scale, shrinking the text to the point that some fields were illegible. Two years later, they obtained a second copy, printed at normal size, which revealed a possible alternate explanation for the injuries: “Mom recalls [patient] did fall 2 days ago, striking the back of his head.”

“That was the sort of proverbial silver-bullet evidence that we’re always looking for in every case and usually never find,” said Brock Hunter, Pawlak-Reynolds’ lawyer.

Polish courts, including an appeals court, have denied extradition requests from the U.S. three times, and the country’s minister of justice has affirmed the rulings. The denials are particularly critical of Harper’s assessment. Polish forensic experts evaluated the case records and took note of a finding by a neurology expert hired by Pawlak-Reynolds, who wrote that Cooper carried a gene tied to a blood clotting disorder.

The ambulance report, the Polish judges wrote, “was concealed from the defense.”

“Then, after the fact was made public, it did not affect the actions of the American authorities in any way,” a Polish district court judge wrote in 2022.

Hennepin Country Medical Center

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office certified Cooper’s manner of death as “undetermined” and the date and place of injury “unknown,” a tacit disagreement with Harper’s opinion that Cooper would have collapsed “shortly after infliction of the trauma.”

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office declined to comment.

Then in 2023, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty wrote to Pawlak-Reynolds’ attorneys after meeting with them: “We agree that to resolve the current impasse regarding Ms. Pawlak-Reynolds, the best course for all involved is to dismiss the pending charges without prejudice, and for her to return to the United States.”

But months later, Moriarty changed her mind.

In a statement to ProPublica, a spokesperson for the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office wrote that the office is completing a “final, thorough review” of the case that will include an evaluation of “concerns regarding the medical conclusions and the overall strength of the case.”

Gabriel’s parents, Joseph and Samantha Cooper, did not respond to requests for comment. In a television interview in June, they denied that Cooper struck the back of his head two days before his collapse. They said that they want justice for their son.

Pawlak-Reynolds declined to comment through her attorney. In late February, her husband filed a federal lawsuit against Harper that claims she “knowingly and intentionally falsified, modified and erased exculpatory information” from her evaluation of Cooper, and she diagnosed abusive head trauma to “promote her own personal, academic, reputational and financial needs.”

Harper has yet to respond to the lawsuit. A spokesperson for Hennepin Healthcare, which operates Hennepin County Medical Center, declined to comment on the case or the lawsuit.

“There is no oversight,” Reynolds said. “It’s the thing they’re most resistant against and the thing that is most necessary to stop this legacy of brutality, that results in kids being taken away from innocent caregivers and innocent caregivers going to prison.”

An old photograph shows Pawlak-Reynolds and one of her children

In August 2017, Kathryn Campbell called 911 after a 4-month-old girl at her day care seemed lethargic and was “breathing wrong.” First responders did not take the baby to the hospital, but her mother eventually did. At the hospital, MRI scans showed fluid in the baby’s brain and doctors noted small bruises.

Dr. Barbara Knox, a child abuse pediatrician then with the University of Wisconsin, told police it was “obvious child abuse.” The Dane County district attorney charged Campbell with physical abuse of a child. Campbell pleaded not guilty.

But before the 2021 trial, Knox left the University of Wisconsin after she was placed on leave for “unprofessional acts that may constitute retaliation” and intimidation of her own staff. A Wisconsin Watch investigation cast doubt on Knox’s judgment in several cases of alleged abuse.

Knox did not respond to the Wisconsin Watch series or to ProPublica’s requests for comment. After two families in Alaska sued her in 2022, alleging she had wrongly concluded their children had been abused, Knox wrote in an affidavit that she has no control over whether police and child protection services workers take children away from parents, that she did not “conspire” with police or anyone else on custody issues, and that she did not personally evaluate one of the children. The lawsuit was dismissed in 2024 after the families agreed to drop the matter.

Knox moved on to a job at the University of Florida. According to a spokesperson for the university, Knox resigned as a pediatrician with the Child Protective Team in late June, effective Aug. 15. He declined to comment on the circumstances.

At Campbell’s trial, Knox’s name was never mentioned. Instead, Harper stepped in as an expert witness. When Campbell heard Knox had been replaced, she was initially hopeful.

“I’m like, oh, great, new eyes,” Campbell said. “They’re going to look at it and go, ‘This is nuts, I don’t agree with this.’ And I definitely was wrong.”

Harper’s assessment affirmed Knox’s diagnosis of abuse. She told the jury that the bruises were likely caused by squeezing by an adult’s hand. A medical expert hired by Campbell’s defense argued that the child’s bleeding could not be precisely dated and that a preexisting medical condition could have caused it.

After just two hours of deliberation, the jury returned a not guilty verdict. Campbell said she is grateful to have the case concluded, though she said she is still haunted by the accusations against her.

“That was the hardest thing too, going home after this case was done, and being like, ‘Am I allowed to be alone with my children now?’” she said. “It’s all because of the quote-unquote experts not doing their due diligence and looking further into underlying issues that these kids could have.”

In a statement to ProPublica, Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne expressed confidence in both Harper and Knox, saying “their testimony had been consistent with many different medical professionals and experts in their own areas of practice.”

“It is important to note that a not guilty verdict by lay jurors hardly invalidates the widespread acceptance of abusive head trauma as a diagnosis in the medical community nor would it cause us to have concerns about Dr. Harper’s qualifications or knowledge in the field,” he added. “Jurors are not bound to accept any expert testimony as accurate.”

In the winter of 2022, a 4-month-old boy began breathing abnormally at his day care in Mineral Point, Wisconsin. His parents took him to a hospital, where he died days later. A police investigation determined that his day care provider, Joanna Ford, left him and several other children alone in her home for over an hour while she went to a tattoo and piercing parlor.

Prosecutors used Harper as an expert witness in the case. After evaluating the child’s medical records, she concluded that his injuries were “clinically diagnostic of abusive head trauma,” or, put another way, Ford shook the baby violently. She was charged with first-degree reckless homicide. Ford pleaded not guilty.

Ford’s defense lawyers successfully petitioned the judge in the case for a hearing to determine whether Harper’s expert witness testimony would be scientifically valid and admissible at trial. In response to questions, Harper explained why the child’s symptoms — brain swelling, blood under his skull, damage to his eyes — pointed to abuse, and why, despite the controversy surrounding it, the diagnosis of abusive head trauma was scientifically sound. She also explained that, because the baby was not walking or crawling, the fact that none of his caregivers could explain his injuries indicated abuse.

“People should know what happened,” she testified.

On cross examination by Ford’s lawyers, Harper said she couldn’t say for certain what time the abuse would have occurred, exactly how Ford had injured the baby and that there are no “great biomechanical models” for shaken baby syndrome.

A little over a month later, Judge Lisa McDougal delivered a highly critical ruling that barred Harper from telling the jury that the child died as the result of “abusive head trauma, non-accidental injury, child abuse or murder.” She also took issue with the idea that a lack of explanation for injuries is indicative of abuse, calling it a “leap in logic.”

“Offering a conclusive opinion as to how an injury may have occurred crosses a line and does not fit within the dictionary definition of what diagnosis is,” McDougal said. The judge also said that Harper views herself as an advocate, and that that casts doubt on her “fidelity to the scientific validation of abusive head trauma diagnoses, especially when it is a close call.”

The murder charge was dismissed. For leaving the children alone, Ford pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of neglect of a child where the consequence is death. She is serving a 10-year prison sentence. Ford, through her attorney, declined a request for an interview. The Iowa County district attorney also declined to comment.

On Feb. 4, 2022, Paul and Sarah Marshall hosted a dinner for her parents and a family friend at their home in Hudson, Wisconsin. Afterward, their 7-week-old son, Fox, became fussy. Paul Marshall carried him into the mother-in-law unit on the lower level of the house, which was cool and dark, to try to calm him. He emerged minutes later in a panic, yelling that the baby spit up and stopped breathing.

Paramedics rushed Fox to Children’s Minnesota, a hospital about 25 minutes across the state border in St. Paul. Doctors ran tests, and a scan showed Fox had a skull fracture with fluid pooling on both sides of his brain. He died days later.

Harper examined Fox, as well as his twin sister, Liana, and found “skull fractures, likely rib fractures, metaphyseal fractures.”

“This constellation of findings in a nonambulatory infant is clinically diagnostic of inflicted injury or child physical abuse likely occurring on more than one occasion,” she wrote.

But the Marshalls said that wasn’t true. They told Harper that Sarah Marshall had experienced a difficult pregnancy with gestational diabetes and severe anemia, and that Liana had a vacuum-assisted delivery. Both twins had been to their regular pediatrician over health concerns. While Liana’s health improved, Fox’s had not.

A spokesperson for Children’s Minnesota declined to comment on the case.

Because he was the last person alone with Fox before he stopped breathing, Paul Marshall was charged with first-degree reckless homicide. He was also charged with physical abuse of a child for hurting Liana. Sarah Marshall said there was no evidence that her soft-spoken husband had hurt their children.

“The state wanted to cast me as a naive idiot,” she said. “I chose not to believe it because of the logic and facts in my face. I had no reason to believe the accusation.”

At Paul Marshall’s 2023 trial, his defense lawyer, Aaron Nelson, cross-examined the other doctors who treated or evaluated Fox and Liana, and was able to highlight points of medical disagreement. A doctor who tested Liana for genetic disorders said she could not rule out rickets as a possible cause of her bone fractures. A neuropathologist did not agree with Harper that Fox had a trauma-induced blood clotting disorder. By Harper’s own admission on cross-examination, determining the age of the skull fractures in children Fox and Liana’s age was difficult. Nelson called six of his own medical experts to suggest that the difficult birth or a vitamin deficiency could explain the twins’ injuries.

“How many people have to be wrong for Dr. Harper to be right?” Nelson said in closing arguments.

After an 11-day trial, the jury found Marshall not guilty.

In a statement to ProPublica, St. Croix County District Attorney Karl Anderson pointed out that Harper was not the only treating physician who was concerned that Fox and Liana had been abused.

“A not guilty verdict does not mean that the jury concluded that the children were not abused,” Anderson said. “Rather, it means that they did not conclude that the State proved that Paul Marshall caused the death, beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Paul and Sarah Marshall with their children at home, which is decorated with memories of their son, Fox

Six weeks after the trial, the family moved three hours away into a century-old farmhouse that is far from the community that they felt wrongfully villainized by.

One of the cruelest impacts of the abuse diagnosis, they said, came after it was clear that Fox would die and the hospital staff began making preparations for his organs to be donated. Sarah Marshall said she had hoped to someday hear her son’s heart beating in another child’s chest. Instead, a court order put a halt to the procedure.

“They were already treating him as evidence,” she said.

The experience of going from a grieving parent to an accused murderer, her husband said, has given the couple post-traumatic stress. Paul Marshall said he is grateful to be with his wife and children, but what he calls a “broken system” has left them unsure whether or not to have another baby or even be left alone with one of their daughters.

“You get pregnant. You go to all of your appointments. You voice all of your concerns. You do everything you’re supposed to do as a parent and your child still dies. And the state tells you it’s your fault,” Sarah Marshall said. “I don’t understand why I live in a world like that.”

Mariam Elba contributed research.


This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by by Jessica Lussenhop, and photography by Sarahbeth Maney.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/07/01/this-doctor-specializes-in-diagnosing-child-abuse-some-of-her-conclusions-have-been-called-into-question/feed/ 0 542146 NYT Gave Green Light to Trump’s Iran Attack by Treating It as a Question of When https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/23/nyt-gave-green-light-to-trumps-iran-attack-by-treating-it-as-a-question-of-when/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/23/nyt-gave-green-light-to-trumps-iran-attack-by-treating-it-as-a-question-of-when/#respond Mon, 23 Jun 2025 21:16:24 +0000 https://fair.org/?p=9046157  

NYT: America Must Not Rush Into a War Against Iran

The New York Times (6/18/25) made clear that it wouldn’t mind an unprovoked attack on Iran—so long as it wasn’t done hastily.

In the wake of the US-supported Israeli attack on Iran, and days before the direct US bombing that followed, the New York Times editorial board (6/18/25) argued that “America Must Not Rush Into a War Against Iran.”

This language was as shifty as it was deliberate. Rather than oppose a policy of unprovoked aggression and mass murder, the Times editorialists suggested such a campaign was happening too hastily, and it should be preceded by more debate.

The opinion writers at the most important paper in the world were fully in favor of attacking Iran; they only worried that Trump would go about it the wrong way. In fact, the Times’ justification for war was identical to that of the Trump administration’s explanation after the fact.  It laid it out in the first paragraph:

A nuclear-armed Iran would make the world less safe. It would destabilize the already volatile Middle East. It could imperil Israel’s existence. It would encourage other nations to acquire their own nuclear weapons, with far-reaching geopolitical consequences.

The New York Times‘ echo of the standard Israeli and US propaganda line offers an opportunity to critically examine this most recent justification for aggressive war.

‘Iran is not building a nuclear weapon’

Responsible Statecraft: Tulsi said Iran not building nukes. One senator after another ignored her.

The Trump administration’s top intelligence official saying that “Iran is not building a nuclear weapon” (Responsible Statecraft, 6/8/25) did not prevent the New York Times from asserting that Iran “has made substantial progress toward acquiring a nuclear weapon.”

The premise here was that Iran is working to build a nuclear weapon, something that forms the backbone of the Israeli propaganda campaign justifying their actions. The only problem is that there is no evidence whatsoever for this position. Not only is there no evidence that Iran is building a nuclear weapon, there is no reason to think that if they did, they would be anything other than defensive weapons.

Nowhere in the Times analysis was there any reference to the fact that neither US intelligence agencies nor international monitoring organizations have found evidence of any Iranian intention to build a nuclear weapon. As recently as March 25, 2025, Tulsi Gabbard, the Trump administration’s director of national intelligence, told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the US intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003.”

While the International Atomic Energy Agency has been critical of steps Iran has taken to make its nuclear power program less transparent in the context of continual threats from Israel and the US to bomb that program, IAEA director Rafael Grossi emphasized in an interview with CNN (6/17/25; cited in Al Jazeera, 6/18/25), after those threats had become reality, “We did not have any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon.”

Unilaterally scrapped

NYT: Trump Abandons Iran Nuclear Deal He Long Scorned

“The Trump administration might well be able to achieve a stricter deal” than the one Obama negotiated in 2015, the Times advised—without mentioning that Trump’s unilateral repudiated the Obama deal (New York Times, 5/8/18).

While the Times editorial did make brief mention of the US’s Obama-era anti-nuclear treaty with Iran, it offered no analysis as to why the Trump administration unilaterally scrapped the deal, despite no violation on Iran’s part. Nor did the paper mention the Biden administration refusal to negotiate a return to the deal. There was no mention of the fact that as Israel launched its first strike against Iran, the Iranians had made it clear that they wished to make a deal with the Trump administration on its nuclear energy program, and were actively negotiating toward that end.

But the fact is that every country in the Middle East, including Iran, has been in favor of a nuclear weapons–free Middle East. Every country, that is, with the exception of Israel, whose illegal, undeclared and often unacknowledged stockpile of nuclear weapons are currently in the hands of a genocidal and messianic regime, hell-bent on attacking its neighbors and thwarting any opportunities for peace.

Despite all of the fearmongering about Iran’s alleged aggressive intent and destabilizing potential, the Times ignored ample analysis and evidence to the contrary. As eminent political scientist John Mearsheimer (PBS, 7/9/12) has argued, a nuclear armed Iran could make the region more stable, because of the deterrent power of nuclear weapons.

A 2009 US military–funded study from the RAND corporation (4/14/09) examined Iranian ”press statements, writings in military journals, and other glimpses into Iranian thinking,” and found that it was extremely unlikely that Iran would use nuclear weapons offensively against Israel. Contrary to the Times’ image of Iran as fanatical theocrats bent on Israel’s destruction at all costs, military planners in Iran are well aware of the danger of being wiped off the map by retaliatory US strikes, and plan accordingly. If the Islamic Republic was to get nuclear weapons, predicts RAND, they would be used to deter exactly the kind of unprovoked attack that the US and Israel have launched over the past several days. They would be defensive, not offensive, weapons.

‘A malevolent force in the world’ 

Common Dreams: How the US and Israel Used Rafael Grossi to Hijack the IAEA and Start a War on Iran

The IAEA statement cited by the New York Times was the product of intense lobbying by the US (Common Dreams, 6/23/25).

The editorial board explicitly avoided the question of what Congress should do on the question of war with Iran: “The separate question of whether the United States should join the conflict is not one that we are addressing here.” But they had no problem presenting their pros list:

We know the arguments in favor of doing so—namely, that Iran’s government is a malevolent force in the world, and that it has made substantial progress toward acquiring a nuclear weapon. Last week the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is part of the United Nations, declared that Iran was violating its nonproliferation obligations and apparently hiding evidence of its efforts.

And their cons list:

Given how much weaker Iran is today than it was then, thanks partly to Israel’s humbling of Iranian proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah, the Trump administration might well be able to achieve a stricter [Iran nuclear deal] today.

While the Times correctly pointed out that the IAEA found Iran to be in “noncompliance” with the nonproliferation treaty (NPT), the Times failed to point out that this came after an intense lobbying effort from Western officials just hours before Israeli strikes. They also ignore Iran’s detailed criticism of the IAEA finding, including its allegations that the findings were based in part on forged documents—a credible allegation, given Israel’s history of fabricating and forging evidence to justify aggression. Iran also noted that some of the “nonproliferation obligations” it had allegedly violated were not codified in the NPT, but instead were part of the agreement that the US unilaterally withdrew from. Nor did the Times make reference to the IAEA chief’s explicit insistence that the agency did not have proof Iran was trying to build a nuclear weapon.

‘Let this vital debate begin’ 

BBC: Trump speculates about regime change in Iran after US strikes

Shortly after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the bombing of Iran “was not and has not been about regime change” (BBC, 6/23/25), Trump posted, “Why wouldn’t there be a regime change???”

Instead of explaining this, the Times went straight to name-calling. One does not have to scrape the annals of the New York Times to predict that the phrase “malevolent force” has never been used to describe any of Washington’s ultra-violent allies, even the ones who have actually built and maintained an illegal stockpile of nuclear weapons. Certainly not Israel, the nation that has put an entire population under military apartheid for decades, and has slaughtered tens of thousands as part of what international rights organizations have labeled a genocide.

The US and Israel have made Iran the target of propaganda campaigns, terrorism, cyber attacks, assassinations, regime change operations and unprovoked attacks on its personnel and home soil. If the Times had included these facts, it would have inhibited the ultimate goal of the editorial: to promote the idea that war with Iran could potentially be desirable—and certainly justifiable. The Times seemed keen to act as a loyal opposition to Trump, while distancing themselves from the manner in which he might enact such a war.

Including the facts of America’s aggressive and provocative behavior against Iran would force them to conclude that the primary force destabilizing the region is not Iran, but the US and Israel. It isn’t Iran whose top papers are weighing the benefits of whether or not to launch a war of aggression against yet another nation. That honor goes to the New York Times, which said of this national discussion of mass murder policy: “Let this vital debate begin.”

After the strikes on Iran, the Trump administration and Israel have not announced full scale regime change war just yet, though there is every indication that such plans are in the works. As with Iraq in 2003, we have seen how easily false claims of weapons of mass destruction, and propaganda about a need to act, can morph into a years-long quagmire of senseless killing in the name of rebuilding a nation according to Washington’s designs. If such a war should be launched against Iran, the Times will have been one of its key supporters.

Research assistance: Emma Llano

ACTION ALERT: You can send a message to the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com or via Bluesky: @NYTimes.com. Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your message in the comments thread here.

 


This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Bryce Greene.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/23/nyt-gave-green-light-to-trumps-iran-attack-by-treating-it-as-a-question-of-when/feed/ 0 540695 CA senator Padilla dragged from immigration news conference when he tried to ask a question; House committee grills 3 Dem governors over “sanctuary state” policies – June 12, 2025 https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/12/ca-senator-padilla-dragged-from-immigration-news-conference-when-he-tried-to-ask-a-question-house-committee-grills-3-dem-governors-over-sanctuary-state-policies-june-12-2/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/12/ca-senator-padilla-dragged-from-immigration-news-conference-when-he-tried-to-ask-a-question-house-committee-grills-3-dem-governors-over-sanctuary-state-policies-june-12-2/#respond Thu, 12 Jun 2025 18:00:00 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=3f6c269677571444bb913afa6bd06133 Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

The post CA senator Padilla dragged from immigration news conference when he tried to ask a question; House committee grills 3 Dem governors over “sanctuary state” policies – June 12, 2025 appeared first on KPFA.


This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/12/ca-senator-padilla-dragged-from-immigration-news-conference-when-he-tried-to-ask-a-question-house-committee-grills-3-dem-governors-over-sanctuary-state-policies-june-12-2/feed/ 0 538452 Maricopa County’s Handling of Death Penalty Cases Puts Its Secretive Review Process in Question https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/09/maricopa-countys-handling-of-death-penalty-cases-puts-its-secretive-review-process-in-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/09/maricopa-countys-handling-of-death-penalty-cases-puts-its-secretive-review-process-in-question/#respond Mon, 09 Jun 2025 11:00:00 +0000 https://www.propublica.org/article/maricopa-county-death-penalty-arizona by Nicole Santa Cruz, ProPublica, and Dave Biscobing, ABC15 Arizona

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up for Dispatches, a newsletter that spotlights wrongdoing around the country, to receive our stories in your inbox every week.

Watch ABC15 Arizona's series "Seeking Death," based on our joint investigation into Maricopa County's handling of death penalty cases.

In 2010, Vikki Valencia’s 24-year-old brother, Triny Rey Lozano, died in an almost unimaginably brutal way. He was shot in the head multiple times, dumped on a remote road outside Phoenix and set on fire.

Valencia saw only one way prosecutors could bring her family justice: The killer should get the death penalty.

Maricopa County prosecutors built a capital murder case against the man they say killed Lozano, Victor Hernandez.

Valencia knew it would take a long time but believed it would be worth it. Over nearly 10 years, she visited the courthouse hundreds of times, frequently missing work to attend hearings where she revisited traumatic images of the crime scene.

“The death penalty was the thing that we wanted most because we thought it was going to give us justice,” she said in a recent interview.

During jury selection, the case stalled because of a potential conflict of interest involving a prosecutor who had previously represented Hernandez. Years later, a second trial followed. As that jury was deliberating, prosecutors dropped the death penalty. Nine years after he was charged with killing Lozano, Hernandez was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

Although the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has historically pursued the death penalty at high rates, its efforts rarely result in a death sentence.

ProPublica and ABC15 Arizona reviewed nearly 350 cases over a 20-year period in which Maricopa County prosecutors decided the crimes warranted the death penalty, and found that 13% ended in a death sentence. In most of the cases, defendants either pleaded guilty and received a lesser sentence or prosecutors changed course, ending their pursuit of the death penalty.

In 76 trials in which Maricopa County juries deliberated a death sentence, 41, or 54%, yielded one.

By comparison, an analysis of death penalty cases initiated in Harris County, Texas, from 2004 through 2023, found prosecutors took fewer cases, 24, to trial and were more successful, obtaining a death sentence 75% of the time, according to figures provided by a local advocacy group. Data over a longer time period also shows that federal prosecutors nationwide have obtained death sentences at a higher rate than in Maricopa County, according to the Federal Death Penalty Resource Counsel Project.

Pursuing the death penalty is among the most consequential decisions that prosecutors make. Each case can be litigated across the tenures of multiple county attorneys and can cost more than a million dollars. In the hundreds of Maricopa County death penalty cases that prosecutors have pursued since 2007, the cost of furnishing the accused with an adequate defense has totaled $289 million. But the outcomes in the county raise questions about the office’s judgment in its pursuit of the ultimate punishment, according to court records and interviews with more than three dozen people including lawyers, former prosecutors, family members of victims and defendants, jurors and experts.

Former County Attorney Rick Romley said there should be a review of capital charging decisions after ProPublica and ABC15 shared the newsrooms’ findings with him. Romley wondered whether prosecutors are seeking death “in the appropriate cases.”

“The jury is kind of a barometer of whether or not you’re doing a good job,” he said. “And quite frankly … if it was a school grade, that’s called an F.”

The office, now headed by Rachel Mitchell, a Republican, declined our request for an interview. A spokesperson responded to written questions, emphasizing that “only one” person in Maricopa County — Mitchell — makes the decision to seek the death penalty and that each case is reviewed throughout the process, as information changes.

Maricopa County’s and the state of Arizona’s handling of the death penalty have been questioned for years. A 2016 report by the now-defunct Fair Punishment Project, a legal and educational research group at Harvard University, cited the county, among other places, as having a history of “overzealous prosecutors, inadequate defense and a pattern of racial bias and exclusion.”

In addition, defense attorneys for a death row prisoner in 2018 petitioned unsuccessfully to the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming that Arizona’s statute was overly broad because almost every murder can be charged as a capital case. And two former prosecutors and appeals court judges wrote in a 2022 law journal article that state officials, rather than individual counties, should make all death penalty decisions to ensure the process is “less arbitrary.”

Maricopa County prosecutors’ handling of death penalty cases is newly relevant as Arizona has resumed executions after a two-year pause. The state, which has 111 people on death row, halted executions in 2014, after Joseph Wood was injected repeatedly over two hours, gasping more than 600 times before dying, according to a reporter’s account. The state executed three people in 2022 but paused after the newly elected Gov. Katie Hobbs ordered a review of the lethal injection process. Hobbs dismissed the retired federal magistrate she had appointed to conduct the review after he concluded there is no humane way to execute people.

Valencia and her family felt the case had put their lives on hold. Looking back, she said it seemed odd that the prosecution, which had pursued death for so long, decided not to once the outcome was close. (Prosecutors declined to comment on the case.)

But as Valencia learned, there’s little transparency around the process in Maricopa County. Although the final decision to seek death is made by the county attorney, each case is vetted by a little known panel, the Capital Review Committee. The county attorney’s office refused to disclose to ProPublica and ABC15 who sits on the panel, how they vote on the cases being considered for the death penalty or even which cases they review.

The office said in a statement that the process ends not with the county attorney’s office but with a trial, which is “all done in public, in an open courtroom.” The office also said that it is successful in prosecuting capital cases and comparisons to Harris County could be misleading because they ignore the “details and intricacies of individual cases.”

Establishing a committee is generally better than individual judgments, but the quality of the decisions depends on the individuals involved, said Robert Dunham, former director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a group that shares data and analysis on capital punishment and frequently highlights issues with the system.

“Anyone who says that they have a fair process and is unwilling to say what that process is, is somebody who doesn’t have a fair process,” Dunham said.

Vikki Valencia and her family waited nearly nine years for her brother’s killer to be convicted. Near the end, prosecutors stopped seeking the death penalty. (Ash Ponders for ProPublica) “I Have to Run It by The Man”

When Romley, a Republican, was first elected Maricopa County attorney in 1989, deputy prosecutors in one of the nation’s largest counties decided whether to seek the death penalty on their own.

Among the first changes Romley made was to foster more deliberation. He created the Capital Review Committee to evaluate cases and recommend whether to pursue the death penalty. He still had the final say, but he believed that a group of veteran prosecutors would apply the law more consistently and recommend only cases that warranted the ultimate punishment.

“Seeking the death penalty is a momentous decision that you’ve got to make,” Romley said. “I wanted to make sure that we were ferreting out all the facts, that we made sure that judgment wasn’t being skewed by personal biases.”

Romley served four terms and decided not to seek a fifth, leaving office in 2004. His successor was Andrew Thomas, a Republican attorney and author, who ran as a law-and-order conservative vowing to crack down on illegal immigration and impose tougher sentences. After two years, Thomas had nearly doubled the number of death penalty prosecutions, earning Maricopa County the distinction of seeking death more than almost any other jurisdiction in the nation.

Critics said Thomas sought the death penalty for crimes that didn’t warrant it — including a case of vehicular homicide. The defendant in that case, David Szymanski, had a blood-alcohol content nearly twice the legal limit and cocaine in his system when he drove the wrong way on a freeway and killed a 22-year-old man.

A police review found that officers had violated department policy while pursuing Szymanski. Thomas relented more than a year later, and the Capital Review Committee recommended the capital charge be withdrawn. Szymanski pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 22 years in prison.

The victim’s mother told the Arizona Republic, “We’ve never wanted the death penalty.”

Kenneth Everett, who was a defense attorney on capital cases for the Maricopa County Office of the Legal Advocate during Thomas’ tenure, told the American Bar Association’s ABA Journal in 2010 that it was clear decisions on the cases were made solely by Thomas. “When I begged for a deal, all of the prosecutors would say, ‘I have to run it by the man,’” he said. “Thomas certainly had the ultimate power. And if he said no, you were going to trial. And he usually said no.”

The Arizona Supreme Court convened a task force to address case delays amid a shortage of qualified capital defense attorneys.

Thomas responded to criticism of the delays by blaming defense attorneys for drawing out proceedings and the courts for failing to enforce speedy trial rules. He wrote in an Arizona Republic opinion piece, “I’ve sought the death penalty in appropriate cases knowing juries make the ultimate decision and believing they should have this option.”

Thomas won a second term but resigned in 2010 to pursue an unsuccessful bid for state attorney general. He was later disbarred for misconduct and political prosecutions of county officials. Thomas, who did not respond to requests for comment, said at the time that he was “working to fight corruption.”

After Thomas’ resignation, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors appointed Romley to serve out the term. Back in his old job, Romley reviewed the 120 capital cases the office was pursuing at the time. He decided not to seek the death penalty in 11 of them, including a case in which a 4-month-old child was found dead at an in-home day care. The medical examiner had concluded the child died of blunt force trauma, but Romley said he brought in medical experts who disputed that and found the injuries the child suffered could have been caused by an illness.

In court minutes of a hearing to drop the death penalty in the case, the Capital Review Committee is noted as having voted 8-0 to dismiss the case, which was never refiled. But the weight of the charge on the defendant, Lisa Randall, is evident in court documents. Over the three years she was in and out of jail, her marriage fell apart and she lost her house, according to court documents. Randall couldn’t be reached for comment.

“Once you allege death, the whole game changes,” Romley said. “So many more resources go into that particular case.”

Former County Attorney Rick Romley created the Capital Review Committee in the early 1990s to evaluate potential death penalty cases. (Gerard Watson/ABC15) “They Should Show Some of the Bravery That They Expect Us to Show”

Once a prosecutor decides to seek the death penalty, the stakes rise. The courts and victims’ families face a lengthier process, and jurors can face intense scrutiny.

The court appoints two defense lawyers, along with an investigator and a mitigation specialist. (In other cases, defendants have only one lawyer.) The defense is also given more time to prepare, to allow for an examination of the defendant’s background to find sympathetic factors that could mitigate a death sentence.

Capital trials consume more time because they consist of three parts: A jury first decides if the defendant is guilty; then jurors consider aggravating circumstances that could make the defendant eligible or ineligible for a death sentence. Finally, the jury decides if the sentence should be death or life in prison.

It’s unclear how much the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office spends prosecuting capital cases. When ProPublica and ABC15 asked the office for a breakdown, a spokesperson said that the office doesn’t track spending on death penalty cases.

But since 2007, the county has spent nearly $289 million on defense for capital cases. Last year, the county spent $26 million, more than any year since 2007, according to the Maricopa County Office of Public Defense Services.

In Oklahoma, a study released in 2017 found that capital cases cost, on average, three times more than noncapital cases.

Jodi Arias made headlines in 2013 when she was convicted of killing her ex-boyfriend. Prosecutors sought the death penalty twice, and jurors deadlocked both times. Arias was ultimately sentenced to life in prison. The two trials cost $3.2 million, including the defense and prosecution, according to officials at the time.

During the 20 years examined by ProPublica and ABC15, juries in 35 cases either voted for life, deadlocked, determined the cases didn’t qualify for death or found the defendant not guilty. In 41 cases, jurors recommended the death penalty.

Frank Baumgartner, a University of North Carolina political science professor, was surprised Maricopa County juries disagreed with prosecutors 46% of the time in capital cases. Prosecutors would save taxpayers money by exercising more discretion over which cases they pursue, Baumgartner said. They also appear to be out of step with public opinion in the county, given that juries disagree with them so frequently on the death penalty. “They’re not in sync with their local community,” he said.

People who served on capital juries in the county told ProPublica and ABC15 that they had traumatic experiences. During the selection process, potential jurors are asked personal questions in open court, making them feel vulnerable. Some have had their identities revealed by jurors who disagree with them.

A juror in a high-profile Maricopa County murder case who asked not to be named because of safety concerns called the experience “one of the worst of my life.” Once the juror learned it was a death penalty case, the stress triggered intense stomach pain. “It’s the highest penalty in the land, and I don’t think that it should be applied lightly,” the former juror said.

Given what jurors go though, prosecutors should be transparent about their decision-making, the juror said.

“They should show some of the bravery that they expect us to show,” the former juror said of the secretive committee. “You ask us to do this, to put our life on hold, to go through this, not share it with anybody. Then show some of the bravery that you hold us to, and be accountable like we would be accountable if we were caught not following any of the rules.”

In 2019, Myla Fairchild served as a juror in a case against the man accused of murdering Gilbert police Lt. Eric Shuhandler, who was killed after pulling over a pickup truck. Christopher Redondo, a passenger in the truck, shot Shuhandler in the face, setting off a 50-mile chase, prosecutors said. Fairchild said she voted against the death penalty because of Redondo’s mental capacity and long history of mental illness. Redondo was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Afterwards, frustrated jurors told the media Fairchild’s name.

She wasn’t afforded the same privacy as the prosecutors on the review committee who recommended the death penalty in the first place, she said.

“You’re not protected,” she said.

The Maricopa County Superior Court in downtown Phoenix where capital cases are tried (Gerard Watson/ABC15) “A Total Disservice”

ProPublica and ABC15 asked the largest prosecutorial offices in Arizona and across the nation how they decide whether to seek the death penalty. The newsrooms found that no two counties handle decision-making the same way, but Maricopa County is an outlier for obscuring nearly every aspect of its committee’s work.

The ACLU sued the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in 2019 for access to the committee’s membership and other records. Jared Keenan, the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona’s legal director, said the organization considered the records important to the public’s understanding of the death penalty.

“Prosecuting agencies have an incredible amount of power, and that power is at its height when they make life-and-death decisions,” Keenan said. “The public needs to know who is involved in making those decisions to be able to ensure that those decisions are made responsibly, constitutionally, ethically.”

The county opposed releasing the information. “They were fighting to keep this specific information from the public for years and years,” Keenan said. A judge did not order the county to release the committee records to the public.

At ProPublica and ABC15’s request, the county attorney’s office shared a policy document listing the composition of the Capital Review Committee but said the document is “significantly out of date.” It listed as committee members: the deputy chief of the Criminal Division; the division chiefs from the Capital Litigation Bureau, Major Offenders Division and Special Victims Division; and the Community Based Prosecution Division chiefs. The policy allows the county attorney to designate other committee members.

In a statement, the county attorney’s office reiterated that Mitchell makes the final decision after considering a wide range of information.

Still, the decision can feel opaque to victims’ family members.

Sherry Spooney visits the graves of her relatives in Phoenix. Spooney wondered why prosecutors sought the death penalty for their mother in the 2016 killings of the children. (Ash Ponders for ProPublica)

When prosecutors sought the death penalty against Octavia Rogers in the killing of her three young children in the summer of 2016, they went against the family’s wishes, according to Rogers’ aunt, Sherry Spooney. Spooney and her family had lost three young relatives in the killing and didn’t want to lose Rogers to the death penalty, too. “What would it solve? How would it help the situation?” she said.

Prosecutors never spoke to the family about how they arrived at their decision, Spooney said.

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said it reached out to the family.

Spooney called their secrecy “disheartening” and said it caused her to wonder if the office had its own agenda in pursuing the death penalty. “It’s a total disservice, to not just the family, but the victims of the family. And in this case, we’re both, we’re one and the same, and if they’re going to make decisions for someone else, it should be known.”

Last year, after Rogers was found incompetent to stand trial, she pleaded “guilty except insane,” meaning she did not know at the time of her crime that the act was wrong. Rogers is being held at the Arizona State Hospital.

Valencia recalled that when the case against her brother’s killer was delayed, she initially blamed defense attorneys for dragging out the proceedings, but the committee’s secrecy was also contributing to the delay. Attorneys for Hernandez, the defendant, had discovered a member of the Capital Review Committee had a potential conflict of interest: A former defense attorney for Hernandez in an unrelated case had since become a prosecutor and was on the committee that voted to reject a plea deal for Hernandez. (The plea deal included the noncapital case as well.)

Prosecutors fought for nearly three years to keep the committee’s membership and its votes secret in a case that reached the Arizona Supreme Court. A judge eventually determined there was no conflict of interest in the Hernandez case.

Years later, when prosecutors withdrew the death penalty charge against Hernandez, Valencia said she agreed with the decision even though she’d once thought it would be the only just outcome.

“It took such a toll on our family, at that point, I was just ready for it to be done,” she said.


This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by by Nicole Santa Cruz, ProPublica, and Dave Biscobing, ABC15 Arizona.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/06/09/maricopa-countys-handling-of-death-penalty-cases-puts-its-secretive-review-process-in-question/feed/ 0 537433 Environmentalists question Henry Puna’s role in deep sea mining firm https://www.radiofree.org/2025/05/19/environmentalists-question-henry-punas-role-in-deep-sea-mining-firm/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/05/19/environmentalists-question-henry-punas-role-in-deep-sea-mining-firm/#respond Mon, 19 May 2025 06:00:29 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=114910 By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

Environmentalists in the Cook Islands have criticised former Prime Minister and Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) head Henry Puna for joining the board of a deep sea mining company.

Puna, who finished his term as PIF secretary-general in May last year, played a pivotal part in the creation of multi-use marine park, Marae Moana, in 2017.

The marine protected area extends over the entire country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ), covering an area roughly the size of Mexico.

It prohibits large-scale commercial fishing and seabed mining within 50 nautical miles of each of the 15 islands.

Puna has now joined the board of deep sea mining company Cobalt Seabed Resources (CSR) — a joint venture between the Cook Islands government and the Belgian company Global Sea Mineral Resources.

CSR is currently undertaking exploration in the Cook Islands EEZ, along with two other companies. It also has an exploration licence in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, located in the high seas in the central Pacific Ocean.

Environmental advocates say Puna’s new role conflicts with his conservation work.

Simultaneously pushing for Marae Moana
The Te Ipukarea Society said Puna was interested in the deep sea mining industry while simultaneously pushing for the creation of Marae Moana during his time as Prime Minister.

“It is something to be wary about with his new role and maybe how he will go about green washing how the deep sea mining company operates within our waters and their actions,” the environmental charity’s director Alana Smith said.

While in Parliament, Puna was an MP for the Northern Group atoll Manihiki.

Manihiki resident Jean-Marie Williams said Puna was a good man

However, Williams believes the benefits of deep sea mining will not be seen on his island.

“We could make money out of it,” he said. “But who’s going to make money out of it? Definitely not the people of Manihiki.

“The corporat[ions] will make money out of it.”

‘First to know’
However, William Numanga, who previously worked for Puna as a policy analyst, does not view it like that.

“Remember, Henry lives on an atoll, up north, so if there is any effect on the environment, he would be first to know,” Numanga said.

“I do not think he will be putting aside a lot of the environmental concerns or challenges. He will be making sure that those environmental concerns are factored into this development process,” he added.

Henry Puna in Rarotonga. November 2023
Henry Puna ended his term as the PIF secretary general in May 2024 . . . a “passion for environmental protection”. Image: RNZ Pacific/Eleisha Foon

He believes Puna’s “passion for environmental protection”, coupled with his desire for economic development, makes him a good fit for the role.

Auckland doctoral student Liam Koka’ua said the company, which has the aim of extracting valuable minerals from the seabed, went against the purpose of Marae Moana.

“If you truly believe Marae Moana is a place that must be protected at all costs and protected for our sustained livelihood and future and be protected for generations to come, then I don’t think rushing into an experimental industry that could potentially have huge impacts is aligned with those intentions,” Koka’ua said.

RNZ Pacific has made multiple attempts to reach Puna for comment, but has yet to receive a response.

However, in a statement, he said CSR was “uniquely placed to make advances for the people of the Cook Islands”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/05/19/environmentalists-question-henry-punas-role-in-deep-sea-mining-firm/feed/ 0 533718 Israeli spokeswoman asked forbidden question about secret nukes https://www.radiofree.org/2025/04/27/israeli-spokeswoman-asked-forbidden-question-about-secret-nukes/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/04/27/israeli-spokeswoman-asked-forbidden-question-about-secret-nukes/#respond Sun, 27 Apr 2025 03:47:47 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=43f03e0dcb5dcdc2d4ee800940f08dda
This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/04/27/israeli-spokeswoman-asked-forbidden-question-about-secret-nukes/feed/ 0 529693 The $20 billion question hanging over America’s struggling farmers https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-20-billion-question-hanging-over-americas-struggling-farmers/ https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-20-billion-question-hanging-over-americas-struggling-farmers/#respond Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:30:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=661761 As Earth heats up, the growing frequency and intensity of disasters like catastrophic storms and heat waves are becoming a mounting problem for the people who grow the planet’s food. Warming is no longer solely eroding agricultural productivity and food security in distant nations or arid climates. It’s throttling production in the United States.

Farmers and ranchers across the country lost at least $20.3 billion in crops and rangeland to extreme weather last year, according to a new Farm Bureau report that crowned the 2024 hurricane season “one of the most destructive in U.S. history” and outlined a long list of other climate-fueled impacts. 

Texas experienced the highest losses for the third year in a row. Extreme drought, excessive heat, and high winds took out more than $3.4 billion worth of crops like cotton and wheat, and damaged rangeland. Flooding cost Minnesota some $1.45 billion in corn, soybeans, and forage, among other crops. California endured nearly all the same weather challenges as the south-central U.S. and the upper Midwest, costing its agricultural sector $1.4 billion.

And then there was the one-two punch of hurricanes Helene and Milton that tore through the Southeast. Georgia’s agricultural sector sustained over $459 million in losses as Helene wiped out crops like peanuts, pecans, and cotton. The same storm destroyed some $174 million worth of tobacco, blueberries, and apples in North Carolina. Florida’s ag industry lost nearly twice that to the two hurricanes, adding to the problems pummeling citrus production, all of them caused by previous storms, water scarcity, and disease.

Those tallies are but a snapshot of the economic impact of last year’s disasters on U.S. farm production, as they only account for damages wrought by major weather events such as billion-dollar disasters. They also don’t figure in most livestock or infrastructure losses following Helene and Milton, which significantly hike up total agricultural economic impacts for states like Georgia and Florida. 

By the end of the year, farmers from coast to coast were left with diminished income, unpaid bills, and little recourse. Those financial stressors were compounded by inflation, surging labor and production costs, disruptions to global supply and demand, and increased price volatility. So in December, Congress authorized nearly $31 billion in emergency assistance to help struggling producers. 

Last week, the USDA opened those disaster aid applications and said it was expediting disbursements. But there’s a catch: The funding pot the agency is gearing up to distribute makes up just a third of the assistance Congress approved.

That $10 billion is intended for farmers growing traditional commodities, such as corn, cotton, and soybeans, and is available to those who experienced most any kind of loss, not just those stemming from extreme weather. Payouts are determined by multiplying a flat commodity rate, based on calculated economic loss, with acres planted. It significantly limits eligibility, said Billy Hackett, policy analyst at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, and funnels help away from smaller farmers into the pockets of industrial-scale operations. Fewer than 6 percent of U.S. farms sold more than three-fourths of all agricultural products between 2017 and 2022. “[The program] works exceedingly well for the largest farms, but leaves behind smaller farms,” said Hackett.

The USDA has not yet said when or how the remaining $21 billion will be distributed. That funding was, in fact, allocated for producers impacted by weather-related disasters in 2023 and 2024. But unlike the package structured for commodity growers, which had a 90-day timeline for implementation, Hackett noted that the USDA doesn’t necessarily have to act quickly on it. The American Relief Act that authorized the funding gives the USDA 120 days to begin reporting on its implementation progress, but no hard deadline for actually disbursing money. That means the $21 billion program isn’t on the same ticking congressional clock. 

Ultimately, lawmakers did not provide clear reasoning for why they split the pot and crafted different disbursement mechanisms, with one measure of relief pushed through over the other. Hackett noted that it could be a reflection of who policymakers in Washington are hearing from most: “Who is the loudest? Who has the most meetings? It doesn’t always reflect who is in the most need.” 

That lack of a deadline also doesn’t mean the agency shouldn’t move quickly, said Hackett. The $21 billion program is primed to help many more farmers, he said, particularly those that are underserved and passed over by other federal programs such as crop insurance. Farms without crop insurance tend to be small and medium-sized, while the bulk of larger farms have coverage. Speciality crop farms — those producing fruits, vegetables, nuts, horticulture, and nursery crops — are also less likely to be covered than those that produce commodities. Just 15 percent were insured in 2022, compared to nearly two-thirds of oilseed and grain farms. 

Hackett worries that the application process may end up being unduly demanding or complicated, and that small or uninsured operators and historically excluded farmers that have faced issues with federal disaster relief eligibility and coverage in the past will be shut out. That has been the case with previous supplemental disaster relief programs, including the Wildfire, Hurricane, and Indemnity Program enacted in 2017 under the first Trump administration. 

In a briefing last week, Brooke Appleton, the deputy undersecretary for farm production and conservation, told reporters that more information on the $21 billion program should be “coming soon.” This followed remarks Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins made late last month when she noted the agency would hit the congressional deadline of March 21 for sending out the full $31 billion — despite that deadline not applying to two-thirds of the money. The USDA did not respond to Grist’s request for comment. 

Meanwhile, farmers like Daniel Spatz are left wondering what’s next. Last spring, he lost roughly $20,000 because “intense” rain waterlogged his central Arkansas fields, leaving him unable to plant 70 acres of rice. The year before, a prolonged drought cost him much more. Spatz is among the 13 percent or so of farmers with crop insurance, but recouped no more than $2,000 after the heavy rains. He’s unsure if he’s eligible for this disaster aid program, which he sees as another sign that the Trump administration is supporting large farmers “at the expense” of small operators like himself. Above all, he’s concerned about calamities yet to come. 

“It appears to me that we’re depending more and more on the government to bail us out of these climate-induced disasters,” he said. The USDA shelled out more than $16 billion to farmers from 2022 through 2024 for crops lost to extreme weather events alone. “My question to the Trump administration would be, ‘How much do we have to spend as a society, bailing out people, rebuilding and putting public funds into rescuing people, citizens? What does that price tag have to be before climate change is understood as real, and a public threat, a threat to our future?’” 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The $20 billion question hanging over America’s struggling farmers on Mar 28, 2025.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Ayurella Horn-Muller.

]]> https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-20-billion-question-hanging-over-americas-struggling-farmers/feed/ 0 522149 The $20 billion question hanging over America’s struggling farmers https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-20-billion-question-hanging-over-americas-struggling-farmers/ https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-20-billion-question-hanging-over-americas-struggling-farmers/#respond Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:30:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=661761 As Earth heats up, the growing frequency and intensity of disasters like catastrophic storms and heat waves are becoming a mounting problem for the people who grow the planet’s food. Warming is no longer solely eroding agricultural productivity and food security in distant nations or arid climates. It’s throttling production in the United States.

Farmers and ranchers across the country lost at least $20.3 billion in crops and rangeland to extreme weather last year, according to a new Farm Bureau report that crowned the 2024 hurricane season “one of the most destructive in U.S. history” and outlined a long list of other climate-fueled impacts. 

Texas experienced the highest losses for the third year in a row. Extreme drought, excessive heat, and high winds took out more than $3.4 billion worth of crops like cotton and wheat, and damaged rangeland. Flooding cost Minnesota some $1.45 billion in corn, soybeans, and forage, among other crops. California endured nearly all the same weather challenges as the south-central U.S. and the upper Midwest, costing its agricultural sector $1.4 billion.

And then there was the one-two punch of hurricanes Helene and Milton that tore through the Southeast. Georgia’s agricultural sector sustained over $459 million in losses as Helene wiped out crops like peanuts, pecans, and cotton. The same storm destroyed some $174 million worth of tobacco, blueberries, and apples in North Carolina. Florida’s ag industry lost nearly twice that to the two hurricanes, adding to the problems pummeling citrus production, all of them caused by previous storms, water scarcity, and disease.

Those tallies are but a snapshot of the economic impact of last year’s disasters on U.S. farm production, as they only account for damages wrought by major weather events such as billion-dollar disasters. They also don’t figure in most livestock or infrastructure losses following Helene and Milton, which significantly hike up total agricultural economic impacts for states like Georgia and Florida. 

By the end of the year, farmers from coast to coast were left with diminished income, unpaid bills, and little recourse. Those financial stressors were compounded by inflation, surging labor and production costs, disruptions to global supply and demand, and increased price volatility. So in December, Congress authorized nearly $31 billion in emergency assistance to help struggling producers. 

Last week, the USDA opened those disaster aid applications and said it was expediting disbursements. But there’s a catch: The funding pot the agency is gearing up to distribute makes up just a third of the assistance Congress approved.

That $10 billion is intended for farmers growing traditional commodities, such as corn, cotton, and soybeans, and is available to those who experienced most any kind of loss, not just those stemming from extreme weather. Payouts are determined by multiplying a flat commodity rate, based on calculated economic loss, with acres planted. It significantly limits eligibility, said Billy Hackett, policy analyst at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, and funnels help away from smaller farmers into the pockets of industrial-scale operations. Fewer than 6 percent of U.S. farms sold more than three-fourths of all agricultural products between 2017 and 2022. “[The program] works exceedingly well for the largest farms, but leaves behind smaller farms,” said Hackett.

The USDA has not yet said when or how the remaining $21 billion will be distributed. That funding was, in fact, allocated for producers impacted by weather-related disasters in 2023 and 2024. But unlike the package structured for commodity growers, which had a 90-day timeline for implementation, Hackett noted that the USDA doesn’t necessarily have to act quickly on it. The American Relief Act that authorized the funding gives the USDA 120 days to begin reporting on its implementation progress, but no hard deadline for actually disbursing money. That means the $21 billion program isn’t on the same ticking congressional clock. 

Ultimately, lawmakers did not provide clear reasoning for why they split the pot and crafted different disbursement mechanisms, with one measure of relief pushed through over the other. Hackett noted that it could be a reflection of who policymakers in Washington are hearing from most: “Who is the loudest? Who has the most meetings? It doesn’t always reflect who is in the most need.” 

That lack of a deadline also doesn’t mean the agency shouldn’t move quickly, said Hackett. The $21 billion program is primed to help many more farmers, he said, particularly those that are underserved and passed over by other federal programs such as crop insurance. Farms without crop insurance tend to be small and medium-sized, while the bulk of larger farms have coverage. Speciality crop farms — those producing fruits, vegetables, nuts, horticulture, and nursery crops — are also less likely to be covered than those that produce commodities. Just 15 percent were insured in 2022, compared to nearly two-thirds of oilseed and grain farms. 

Hackett worries that the application process may end up being unduly demanding or complicated, and that small or uninsured operators and historically excluded farmers that have faced issues with federal disaster relief eligibility and coverage in the past will be shut out. That has been the case with previous supplemental disaster relief programs, including the Wildfire, Hurricane, and Indemnity Program enacted in 2017 under the first Trump administration. 

In a briefing last week, Brooke Appleton, the deputy undersecretary for farm production and conservation, told reporters that more information on the $21 billion program should be “coming soon.” This followed remarks Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins made late last month when she noted the agency would hit the congressional deadline of March 21 for sending out the full $31 billion — despite that deadline not applying to two-thirds of the money. The USDA did not respond to Grist’s request for comment. 

Meanwhile, farmers like Daniel Spatz are left wondering what’s next. Last spring, he lost roughly $20,000 because “intense” rain waterlogged his central Arkansas fields, leaving him unable to plant 70 acres of rice. The year before, a prolonged drought cost him much more. Spatz is among the 13 percent or so of farmers with crop insurance, but recouped no more than $2,000 after the heavy rains. He’s unsure if he’s eligible for this disaster aid program, which he sees as another sign that the Trump administration is supporting large farmers “at the expense” of small operators like himself. Above all, he’s concerned about calamities yet to come. 

“It appears to me that we’re depending more and more on the government to bail us out of these climate-induced disasters,” he said. The USDA shelled out more than $16 billion to farmers from 2022 through 2024 for crops lost to extreme weather events alone. “My question to the Trump administration would be, ‘How much do we have to spend as a society, bailing out people, rebuilding and putting public funds into rescuing people, citizens? What does that price tag have to be before climate change is understood as real, and a public threat, a threat to our future?’” 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The $20 billion question hanging over America’s struggling farmers on Mar 28, 2025.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Ayurella Horn-Muller.

]]> https://grist.org/food-and-agriculture/the-20-billion-question-hanging-over-americas-struggling-farmers/feed/ 0 522150 Remembering Aaron Bushnell: How He Inspired People in the Military to Question U.S. Empire https://www.radiofree.org/2025/03/04/remembering-aaron-bushnell-how-he-inspired-people-in-the-military-to-question-u-s-empire-2/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/03/04/remembering-aaron-bushnell-how-he-inspired-people-in-the-military-to-question-u-s-empire-2/#respond Tue, 04 Mar 2025 15:43:55 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=8f65bc57c4f0f3764b281d2b4b2a6988
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/03/04/remembering-aaron-bushnell-how-he-inspired-people-in-the-military-to-question-u-s-empire-2/feed/ 0 516095 Remembering Aaron Bushnell: How He Inspired People in the Military to Question U.S. Empire https://www.radiofree.org/2025/03/04/remembering-aaron-bushnell-how-he-inspired-people-in-the-military-to-question-u-s-empire/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/03/04/remembering-aaron-bushnell-how-he-inspired-people-in-the-military-to-question-u-s-empire/#respond Tue, 04 Mar 2025 13:49:07 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=541f64027506ba80345c5f252b15b176 Seg4 bushnell memorial

We remember Aaron Bushnell, the U.S. Air Force member who died last year in an act of protest outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C. On a live-streamed video, Bushnell said he could not be “complicit in genocide” while the United States continued to support Israel’s war on Gaza; he then set himself on fire, screaming “Free Palestine” until he collapsed. Now just a year after Bushnell’s fatal self-immolation, we speak with an active-duty Air Force lieutenant who says she is inspired by Bushnell to seek a discharge from the military as a conscientious objector over the genocide in Gaza. “Any kind of contribution to the U.S. military inherently helps this machine of warfare and imperialism and oppression continue,” says Joy Metzler, who says many people in uniform suffer “moral injury” from their service. We also speak with Levi Pierpont, a friend of Bushnell who says Bushnell’s death was “life-changing” for him. Pierpont has since visited Palestine and become a peace activist. “I went from being someone who had grown up Christian Zionist and was very sympathetic to Zionism to realizing how it’s interconnected with the American empire and realizing how we need to stand against it as Americans, because we’re implicated in it,” says Pierpont.


This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/03/04/remembering-aaron-bushnell-how-he-inspired-people-in-the-military-to-question-u-s-empire/feed/ 0 516093 Constitutional Crisis: Who Is Musk’s “DOGE Army,” Gutting Gov’t Agencies as Courts Question Legality? https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/10/constitutional-crisis-who-is-musks-doge-army-gutting-govt-agencies-as-courts-question-legality/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/10/constitutional-crisis-who-is-musks-doge-army-gutting-govt-agencies-as-courts-question-legality/#respond Mon, 10 Feb 2025 13:15:12 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=e98c211a3663069e73aef6c1414cbf70 Seg2 muskanddoge

We look at how Elon Musk’s executive branch agency, the Department of Government Efficiency, known as ”DOGE,” is wreaking havoc, with young male software engineers slashing government services and funding in what legal experts are saying could amount to a “constitutional crisis.” Most of the DOGE staffers are pulled from Musk-linked tech companies and have limited work and educational experience. “Even if these young men are very technically gifted … some of them seem to have questionable backgrounds,” says Wired reporter Vittoria Elliott, who has revealed key details about the staffers in a series of articles. One DOGE staffer, Marko Elez, resigned and was later reinstated after he was traced to racist social media posts. DOGE’s lack of oversight, training and transparency poses “an incredible risk,” adds Elliott, as its unvetted and underqualified staffers take control of the sensitive data of Americans.


This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/10/constitutional-crisis-who-is-musks-doge-army-gutting-govt-agencies-as-courts-question-legality/feed/ 0 513994 Trump’s Pardons and Purges Revive Old Question: Who Counts as a Terrorist? https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/10/trumps-pardons-and-purges-revive-old-question-who-counts-as-a-terrorist/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/10/trumps-pardons-and-purges-revive-old-question-who-counts-as-a-terrorist/#respond Mon, 10 Feb 2025 10:00:00 +0000 https://www.propublica.org/article/jan-6-pardons-trump-purges-domestic-terrorism-focus by Hannah Allam

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

The day after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, a surprise visitor joined the crowd outside the D.C. Jail, drawing double takes as people recognized his signature eyepatch: Stewart Rhodes, founder of the far-right Oath Keepers movement.

By the cold math of the justice system, Rhodes was not supposed to be there. He’d gone to sleep the night before in a Maryland prison cell, where he was serving 18 years as a convicted ringleader of the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The Yale-educated firebrand who once boasted a nationwide paramilitary network had seen his organization collapse under prosecution.

For the Justice Department, Rhodes’ seditious conspiracy conviction was bigger than crushing the Oath Keepers — it was a hard-won victory in the government’s efforts to reorient a creaky bureaucracy toward a rapidly evolving homegrown threat. On his first day in office, Trump erased that work by granting clemency to more than 1,500 Jan. 6 defendants, declaring an end to “a grave national injustice.”

Rhodes, sporting a Trump 2020 cap, was back in Washington with fellow “J6ers” within hours of his release in the early hours of Jan. 21, 2025 . In the frigid air outside “the gulag,” as the D.C. Jail is known in this crowd, he was swarmed by TV cameras and supporters offering congratulations. Nearby, far-right Proud Boys members puffed cigars. A speaker blared Bob Marley’s “Redemption Song.”

“It’s surreal,” Rhodes said, absorbing the scene.

Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, right, met supporters in the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill after his release from prison as part of President Donald Trump’s clemency for Jan. 6, 2021, defendants. (Kent Nishimura/Getty Images)

The shock of the moment has continued to reverberate far beyond the jailhouse parking lot.

Trump’s pardons immediately upended the biggest single prosecution in U.S. history and signaled a broader reversal that threatens to create a more permissive climate in which extremists could regroup, weaken the FBI’s independence and revive old debates about who counts as a terrorist, according to current and former federal law enforcement officials and national security experts.

In the whirlwind of the last three weeks, the Trump administration has purged federal law enforcement agencies of prosecutors and investigators who’d been pursuing homegrown far-right groups that the FBI lists as among the most dangerous threats to national security. The Biden administration’s 2021 domestic terrorism strategy — the nation’s first — was removed from the White House website. And some government-funded extremism-prevention programs were ordered to stop work.

“There’s no indication that he engaged in any kind of assessment or has even stopped to think, ‘What did I just unleash on America?’” Mary McCord, a former federal prosecutor who oversaw domestic terrorism cases as a senior Justice Department official, said of Trump’s actions.

Colin Clarke, an analyst at the nonpartisan security-focused Soufan Center, said “far right” and “domestic terrorism” are now “kind of dirty words with the current administration.”

Far-right movements that openly promote violence have suddenly been invigorated, he said. “Does this become a four-year period where these groups can really use the time to strengthen their organization, their command and control, stockpile weapons?” he said.

The scene outside of the Central Detention Facility, commonly known as the D.C. Jail, on Jan. 20 (top photo) and 21 (bottom photo) of this year. (Kayla Bartkowski and Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images) A Sudden Departure

The changes are a departure even from the first Trump White House, which ramped up attention on domestic terrorism in 2019 after attacks including the deadly white supremacist rampage that August targeting Latino shoppers in El Paso, Texas.

The next month, the Department of Homeland Security issued a report that described domestic terrorism as a “growing threat,” that had “too frequently struck our houses of worship, our schools, our workplaces, our festivals, and our shopping spaces.”

Joe Biden made violent extremism a central theme of his 2020 presidential campaign, saying that he’d been inspired to run for office by a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, that turned violent, leaving one person dead. His administration’s steps borrowed from previous campaigns to combat AIDS and framed radicalization as a public health priority. Biden also made efforts to address extremism in the ranks of the military and Department of Homeland Security.

Experts described the effort as modest, but the moves were welcomed among counterterrorism specialists as an overdue corrective to a disproportionate focus on Islamist militant groups whose threat to the United States has receded in the decades since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks by al-Qaida.

A failure of authorities to pivot to the homegrown threat was cited in the findings of a Senate panel that examined intelligence missteps ahead of the Capitol attack. The report called for a reevaluation of the government’s analysis of domestic threats, finding that, “Neither the FBI nor DHS deemed online posts calling for violence at the Capitol as credible.”

This Trump administration has shown no appetite for such measures. Instead, the White House pardons are nudging fringe movements deeper into the mainstream and closer to power, said Cynthia Miller-Idriss, who leads an extremism research lab at American University and has testified before Congress about the threat.

“It creates immediate national security risks from people who are pledging revenge and retribution and who have now been valorized,” Miller-Idriss said.

Within 24 hours of his release, Rhodes had embarked on a comeback blitz. He visited the Capitol and stopped by a Dunkin’ Donuts in the House office building. Three days later, he was in a crowd standing behind Trump at a rally in Las Vegas.

Rhodes was among 14 defendants whose charges were commuted rather than being pardoned. Though he didn’t enter the Capitol on Jan. 6, he was convicted of orchestrating the Oath Keepers’ violent actions that day. At trial, prosecutors played a recording of him saying, “My only regret is they should have brought rifles.”

At the Capitol after his release, he told reporters he plans to seek a full pardon.

Extremists Reconnect, Rejoice on X

Emboldened by the pardons and Trump’s laser focus on mass deportations, which is redirecting authorities’ attention, far-right extremists rejoiced at the idea of having more space to organize.

Chat forums filled with would-be MAGA vigilantes who fantasize about rounding up Democratic politicians or acting as bounty hunters to corral undocumented migrants. Researchers noted one Proud Boys chat group where users had posted the LinkedIn pages of corrections officers who purportedly oversaw Jan. 6 detainees.

Newly freed prisoners, no longer subject to orders to stay away from extremists and co-defendants, gathered for a virtual reunion, hosted on Elon Musk’s X platform the weekend after their release. For hours, they talked about what led them to the Capitol, how they were taken into custody and the harsh jail conditions they faced — a vivid, albeit one-sided, oral history of life at the center of what the Justice Department had hailed as a landmark domestic terrorism investigation.

The reunion on X offered a glimpse of men juggling the thrill of their vindication with the mundane logistics of reintegrating to society. One former defendant called in from a Florida shopping mall where he was buying sneakers with his mom. A Montana man who embraces the QAnon conspiracy theory said he was experiencing the most exciting time of his life.

Some were too flustered to articulate their thoughts beyond a deep gratitude for God and Trump. Others sounded fired up, ready to run for office, join a class-action lawsuit over their prosecution or find others ways to, as one pardoned rioter put it, “fight the hell out of this thing.”

Outside the D.C. Jail, pardoned defendants described the whiplash of their sudden status change from alleged and convicted criminals to freed patriots.

William Sarsfield III, a tall, gray-bearded man in a camouflage cap printed with “Biden Sucks,” sipped coffee outside the jail. Before dawn that morning, he’d been released from a Philadelphia detention center where he was awaiting sentencing on felony and misdemeanor convictions.

Court papers, backed by video evidence, describe Sarsfield as joining other Capitol rioters in trying to push through a police line with such force that “one officer could be heard screaming in agonizing pain as he was smashed between a shield and a metal door frame.” Sarsfield insists the charges were inflated, noting that he also helped officers escape the mob that day.

In the runup to Trump’s inauguration, rumors had swirled about an imminent pardon, though details were fuzzy. Sarsfield said his girlfriend was so certain Trump would deliver that she hopped in a truck and raced from Gun Barrel City, an hour southeast of Dallas, to the jail in Philadelphia, a 22-hour drive.

“She drove all the way from Texas on faith,” he said. “Because we both knew it was going to be right. A man’s word is what his word is.”

After his release, Sarsfield said, he headed straight to the D.C. “gulag” to make sure others were getting out, too. He still wore his jail uniform of sweats and orange slippers. The miracle of his freedom was just beginning to sink in.

“I got pardoned by a felon,” Sarsfield said with an incredulous chuckle, referring to Trump’s distinction as the only U.S. president to serve after a felony conviction.

Sarsfield said he planned to show his appreciation by helping Trump “clean up in local communities,” which he said meant working at the grassroots level to expose prosecutors and politicians he believes have corrupted the justice system.

“When people decide not to use the rule of law, that becomes tyrannical,” Sarsfield said. “And in our Constitution I’m pretty sure it says when tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.”

William Sarsfield was released from Philadelphia Federal Detention Center after Trump pardoned him for his role in the Jan. 6 attack. (Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images) An “Inflection Point” for Political Violence

The uncertainty of what comes next is nerve-wracking for longtime monitors of violent extremists. Even in their worst-case scenarios, they said, few foresaw the Trump administration sending hundreds of diehard election deniers back into their communities as aggrieved heroes.

“A lot of these people will have martyrdom or legendary status among extremist circles, and that is a very powerful recruiting tool,” said Kieran Doyle, North America research manager for the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, a global conflict monitoring group.

ACLED research shows extremist activity such as demonstrations and acts of political violence has declined since 2023, which saw a 35% reduction in mobilization compared to the previous year. Doyle and other monitors credit the drop in part to the chilling effect of the Justice Department’s post-Jan. 6 crackdown on anti-government and white supremacist movements.

Doyle cautioned that it’s too early to assess the ripple effect of Trump’s clemency on extremist activity. Their ability to regroup depends on several factors, including fear of FBI infiltration, which could subside now that hard-right Trump loyalists are overseeing the Justice Department.

“We’re at an inflection point,” Doyle said.

At the FBI, the Trump administration’s post-clemency vows of payback have sidelined a cohort of senior officials who oversaw the Jan. 6 portfolio of cases, resulting in the loss of some of the bureau’s most seasoned counterterrorism professionals.

Without that expertise, investigators run the risk of violating a suspect’s civil rights or, conversely, overlooking threats because they are assumed to be constitutionally protected, said a veteran FBI analyst who has worked on Jan. 6 cases.

“It has the potential to cut both ways,” the analyst said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution.

Many longtime monitors of extremist movements have themselves become targets of threats and violence from Jan. 6 defendants and their supporters, raising anxiety about their release from prison.

Megan Squire, a computer scientist who in 2017 was among the first academic researchers documenting the Proud Boys’ increasingly organized violence, said members are already “saber-rattling and reconstituting dead chapters.”

The group’s former leader, Enrique Tarrio, released from prison in Louisiana, told the far-right Infowars podcast: “Success is going to be retribution.”

Enrique Tarrio, former leader of the Proud Boys, center, walks in the Million MAGA March in Washington, D.C., in 2020. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg/Getty Images)

All five Proud Boys charged with seditious conspiracy in connection with the Capitol attack were in Squire’s original dataset. Another member who was a Jan. 6 defendant had previously blasted Squire on social media and posted her private information on Telegram.

Squire, who has since joined the civil rights-focused Southern Poverty Law Center, said she finds herself wondering, “Are they going to come after me now?”


This content originally appeared on ProPublica and was authored by by Hannah Allam.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/10/trumps-pardons-and-purges-revive-old-question-who-counts-as-a-terrorist/feed/ 0 513072 Hungarian authorities detain, charge 2 journalists seeking to question PM Orbán https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/03/hungarian-authorities-detain-charge-2-journalists-seeking-to-question-pm-orban/ https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/03/hungarian-authorities-detain-charge-2-journalists-seeking-to-question-pm-orban/#respond Mon, 03 Feb 2025 17:19:26 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=450367 Berlin, February 3, 2025—Hungarian authorities should immediately drop misdemeanor charges against two journalists who were arrested in a parking lot as they waited to question Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and detained for three hours, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Monday.

On January 30, police removed the independent online outlet Telex’s reporter Dániel Simor and camera operator Noémi Gombos from a car park outside a film studio in Fót, a city 15 miles north of the capital Budapest, before Orbán arrived to officially open it.

“Hungarian authorities should conduct a swift and transparent investigation into the detention of Telex journalists Dániel Simor and Noémi Gombos at an event attended by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán”, said Attila Mong, CPJ’s Europe representative. “It is unacceptable to use police force to obstruct reporters from asking questions of public officials. This marks a clear escalation of intimidatory tactics, previously unheard of in Hungary.”

Simor told CPJ that Telex was not allowed to ask Orbán questions during his annual end of year press conference in December, so they registered to cover the film studio opening and were waiting in the parking lot to ask Orbán some questions about healthcare.

Simor said that Counter Terrorism Centre agents told the journalists to move to a cordoned-off press area but they refused, saying they wanted to directly question the prime minister. He said Orbán’s press officer, Bertalan Havasi, then said that their press accreditation for the event had been revoked and they were taken to a police station where they were questioned for three hours.

Simor said the police then opened misdemeanor proceedings against them for resisting police orders, which carry a maximum penalty of a US$500 fine.

In a statement, Havasi described the journalists’ “clowning” as “pathetic and illegal.” CPJ’s email requesting comment from him received no reply.

Since Orbán returned to power in 2010, his right-wing government has systematically eroded protections for independent media. His landslide 2022 election victory has led to an even harsher media climate, with the introduction of a Russian-style law to clamp down on media outlets that receive foreign funding.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2025/02/03/hungarian-authorities-detain-charge-2-journalists-seeking-to-question-pm-orban/feed/ 0 512185 Hong Kong police question more members of pollster’s family https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/23/china-hong-kong-police-question-exiled-pollster-family/ https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/23/china-hong-kong-police-question-exiled-pollster-family/#respond Thu, 23 Jan 2025 17:33:05 +0000 https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/23/china-hong-kong-police-question-exiled-pollster-family/ Hong Kong national security police have taken away three family members of U.K.-based pollster and outspoken political commentator Chung Kim-wah, who has a bounty on his head amid a crackdown on dissent under two security laws.

Chung, 64, is a former deputy head of the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute and co-host of the weekly talk show “Voices Like Bells” for RFA Cantonese.

He left for the United Kingdom in April 2022 after being questioned amid a city-wide crackdown on public dissent and political opposition to the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

Officers took two of Chung’s brothers and a sister from their homes on Wednesday morning.

Chung’s second brother was taken to Tsuen Wan Police Station for questioning, his third sister to Central Police Station, and his fourth brother to Castle Peak Police station.

Chung is accused — alongside Carmen Lau, Tony Chung, Joseph Tay and Chloe Cheung — of “incitement to secession” after he “advocated independence” on social media and repeatedly called on foreign governments to impose sanctions on Beijing over the crackdown, according to a police announcement.

He told Radio Free Asia that the questioning of his family members came as “no surprise,” but said they had nothing to do with his professional activities.

“My brothers and sisters are all adults, so why should they be held responsible for what I do?” Chung told RFA Cantonese in an interview on Jan. 22. “They live in Hong Kong, and I’m in the U.K., so I never tell them anything.”

U.K.-based Hong Kong pollster Chung Kim-wah, who has a bounty on his head, in an undated file photo.
U.K.-based Hong Kong pollster Chung Kim-wah, who has a bounty on his head, in an undated file photo.
(RFA)

Chung said the move was likely an attempt to intimidate people carrying out independent public opinion research, which often involves negative views of the government.

“It seems that they don’t want to face up to public opinion, so they’re doing this to scare us, and ‘deal with’ the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute,” he said. “It’s kind of tedious.”

‘Long-arm’ law enforcement

Exiled Hong Kong democracy activists have called for an international effort to combat the threat of Beijing’s “long-arm” law enforcement beyond its borders, saying recent bounties on the heads of 19 people are deliberately intended to create a “chilling effect” on activists everywhere.

The move came after police questioned Chung’s wife and son and former colleague Robert Chung earlier this month, as part of a “national security police investigation.”

Chung announced he had left the city on April 24, 2022, to “live for a while in the U.K.”

In a Facebook post announcing his departure, Chung said he didn’t want to “desert” his home city, but “had no other option.”

He ran afoul of the authorities early in December 2021, ahead of the first-ever elections for the Legislative Council to exclude pro-democracy candidates in a system that ensures only “patriots” loyal to Beijing can stand.

RELATED STORIES

Hong Kong police question wife, son of wanted exiled pollster

Hong Kong offers bounties for 6 more democracy activists

EXPLAINED: What is the Article 23 security law in Hong Kong?

Chung was hauled in for questioning after pro-Beijing figures criticized him for including a question in a survey about whether voters intended to cast blank ballots in the election, which critics said could amount to “incitement” to subvert the voting system under the national security law.

Nineteen people now have HK$1 million (US$130,000) bounties on their heads following two previous announcements in July and December 2023.

‘Seditious intention’

Meanwhile, national security police said they had also arrested a 36-year-old man in Eastern District on Jan. 21 on suspicion of “knowingly publishing publications that had a seditious intent,” a charge under the Safeguarding National Security Law, known as Article 23.

The content of the publications had “provoked hatred towards the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Hong Kong Police Force and the Judiciary, as well as called for sanctions against government officials and inciting violence,” police said in a statement dated Jan. 22.

“Police remind members of the public that “knowingly publishing publications that had a seditious intention” is a serious crime,” the statement said, warning that offenders could face jail terms of seven years on their first conviction.

“Members of the public are urged not to defy the law,” it said.

More than 10,000 people have been arrested and at least 2,800 prosecuted in a citywide crackdown in the wake of the 2019 protest movement, mostly under public order charges.

Nearly 300 have been arrested under 2020 National Security Law, according to the online magazine ChinaFile.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Roseanne Gerin.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Lee Heung Yeung and Matthew Leung for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/23/china-hong-kong-police-question-exiled-pollster-family/feed/ 0 510824 Hong Kong police question wife, son of wanted exiled pollster https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/14/china-hong-kong-pollster-police-question-wife-son/ https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/14/china-hong-kong-pollster-police-question-wife-son/#respond Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:05:19 +0000 https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/14/china-hong-kong-pollster-police-question-wife-son/ Police in Hong Kong on Tuesday took away and questioned the wife and son of U.K.-based pollster and outspoken political commentator Chung Kim-wah, who has a bounty on his head amid an ongoing crackdown on dissent under two security laws.

Police took away Chung’s wife and son from their home on Tuesday morning “to assist in a national security police investigation,” according to multiple local media reports.

Chung, 64, a former researcher for the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute left for the U.K. in April 2022 after being questioned amid a city-wide crackdown on public dissent and political opposition to the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

He is accused -- alongside Carmen Lau, Tony Chung, Joseph Tay and Chloe Cheung -- of “incitement to secession” after he “advocated independence” on social media and repeatedly called on foreign governments to impose sanctions on Beijing over the crackdown, according to a police announcement.

“I don’t really know how to explain this -- I can’t read their minds,” he told RFA Cantonese in an interview on Tuesday, after his wife and son were questioned.

“Some say that maybe they’re sending some kind of a signal to intimidate us,” he said. “I don’t want to speculate on that.”

But he said a “capable and responsible” government should also be able to deal with public opinion research.

“[They] should understand that public opinion actually exists, regardless of how you deal with it,” he said. “A capable government should be able to face up that, and deal with it.”

The Institute has published a number of politically sensitive reports in recent years, including poor popularity scores for the city’s leaders, and people’s perceptions of disappearing press freedom.

Police announced a warrant for Chung Kim-wah’s arrest and a HK$1 million (US$128,400) bounty on his head in December, making him one of 19 overseas activists wanted by the Hong Kong government.

Since Beijing imposed two national security laws banning public opposition and dissent in the city, blaming “hostile foreign forces” for the protests, hundreds of thousands have voted with their feet amid plummeting human rights rankings, shrinking press freedom and widespread government propaganda in schools.

Some fled to the United Kingdom on the British National Overseas, or BNO, visa program. Others have made their homes anew in the United States, Canada, Australia and Germany.

Many are continuing their activism and lobbying activists, yet they struggle with exile in some way, worrying about loved ones back home while facing threats to their personal safety from supporters of Beijing overseas.

‘Intimidation’ tactics

The questioning of Chung’s family members came after national security police raided the home of the current head of the Institute, Robert Chung, to investigate whether he or the organization had provided any kind of assistance to Chung Kim-wah.

Chung Kim-wah told RFA Cantonese by text message that he hadn’t had any contact of any kind with Robert Chung since he left Hong Kong, other than a holiday greeting message.

He said the move could be a bid to intimidate the Institute ahead of its current research project on public opinion among Hong Kongers both in Hong Kong and overseas.

RELATED STORIES

Hong Kong pollster ‘had no choice’ but to leave city amid crackdown on dissent

Hong Kong offers bounties for 6 more democracy activists

EXPLAINED: What is the Article 23 security law in Hong Kong?

National security police also said they had “conducted a surprise search on Jan. 13 based on a court warrant at a residential building and a commercial building unit on Hong Kong Island.”

While police declined to identify the person, he is widely assumed to have been the Institute’s current CEO, Robert Chung.

“The investigation believes that someone is suspected of using his organization to assist a wanted person who has fled overseas to continue to engage in acts endangering national security,” they said in a statement on the Hong Kong government website.

Police seized a batch of evidence, including computers, tablet devices, mobile phones and bank documents, and also “invited” a director and two staff members of the Institute to the police station to assist in the investigation, the statement said.

No arrests have yet been made in the investigation.

Ongoing investigation

Secretary for Security Chris Tang told journalists on Tuesday: “Whether or not this person or his organization assisted absconders has nothing to do with the research conducted by that organization.”

“We will only discover the truth through investigation,” he said.

Asked if public opinion researchers should now be worried about prosecution under the city’s national security legislation, Hong Kong Chief Executive John Lee warned people not to “contact, help or support” anyone who commits “crimes endangering national security.”

“As long as they do their work professionally and realistically and do not have any intention of endangering national security, I believe they can carry on their daily activities with peace of mind,” he told journalists on Tuesday.

Robert Chung told journalists on Jan. 9 that he had considered shutting down the Institute, but decided that it was better to continue for as long as it was allowed.

“I think, as a scientist and an intellectual, that I should speak the truth ... so we should do that because we are allowed to continue to search for such truth as we can find,” he said.

He said he had had “little contact” with Chung Kim-wah since he left Hong Kong.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Eugene Whong.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Chen Zifei, Yam Chi Yau.

]]> https://rfa.org/english/china/2025/01/14/china-hong-kong-pollster-police-question-wife-son/feed/ 0 509843 "Do You Know What I mean by the Question Waking Up?" | George Monbiot | LBC Radio | November 2024 https://www.radiofree.org/2024/11/25/do-you-know-what-i-mean-by-the-question-waking-up-george-monbiot-lbc-radio-november-2024/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/11/25/do-you-know-what-i-mean-by-the-question-waking-up-george-monbiot-lbc-radio-november-2024/#respond Mon, 25 Nov 2024 21:22:55 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=c7631610b55178388a59995c011c82e4
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/11/25/do-you-know-what-i-mean-by-the-question-waking-up-george-monbiot-lbc-radio-november-2024/feed/ 0 504002 Donald Trump won the second term as the President of the United States. The question is, now what? https://www.radiofree.org/2024/11/18/donald-trump-won-the-second-term-as-the-president-of-the-united-states-the-question-is-now-what/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/11/18/donald-trump-won-the-second-term-as-the-president-of-the-united-states-the-question-is-now-what/#respond Mon, 18 Nov 2024 10:16:42 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=e1e60c4fc64dd6f47d2088faa0bad5c9
This content originally appeared on Human Rights Watch and was authored by Human Rights Watch.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/11/18/donald-trump-won-the-second-term-as-the-president-of-the-united-states-the-question-is-now-what/feed/ 0 502421 The question bringing COP29 to a halt: Who’s rich enough to pay for climate change? https://grist.org/international/cop29-finance-goal-developing-countries-aid/ https://grist.org/international/cop29-finance-goal-developing-countries-aid/#respond Fri, 15 Nov 2024 09:30:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=653019 The world’s governments have come to the United Nations’ climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, deadlocked on one ugly question. It’s been debated for years, but now they need to find an answer in a matter of weeks; trillions of dollars’ worth of international climate aid hang in the balance. This money could mean the difference between life and death for some of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people on the front lines of the climate crisis.

Everyone at the COP29 climate summit agrees that the world’s poorest and most climate-vulnerable countries need trillions of dollars to transition to clean energy and cope with climate-fueled disasters. And everyone agrees that rich countries, which are responsible for a disproportionate share of historic carbon pollution, have some responsibility to pay up for this. 

But the question nobody can seem to agree on is this: Which countries are rich?

As financial needs balloon, longtime wealthy nations in North America and Europe are clashing with newer global power players like China and Saudi Arabia over whether nations like the latter should be required to provide aid funding. The U.S. and the European Union are pushing for a strict standard that would commit large new economies like China to donating, reflecting how much richer those countries have gotten in recent decades, but a broad coalition of developing countries is fighting to keep such language out of the deal. 

World leaders spent the first few days of COP29 making dozens of grand speeches in which they stressed the need for ambitious action and global cooperation. But now negotiators are diving into tense, complex talks over the funding question, with the goal of coming to an agreement by the time COP29 wraps up at the end of next week. As of Friday, they were still working through a sprawling 33-page document that the U.N. negotiating leads assembled, which contains a mishmash of priorities from almost every country in the world. Multiple country representatives and advocates present at COP told Grist that these talks have been the most difficult since those that led to the landmark 2015 Paris Agreement, in which the world agreed to limit global warming to below 2 degrees Celsius.

“There’s no contention about the magnitude of the amounts required for the global community to transition,” said Ali Mohamed, the lead climate envoy for Kenya and head negotiator for a large group of African countries. “I think the big challenge is the attempt to redefine the commitments,” he added, referring to attempts by developed countries like the U.S. to offload some of their financing burden onto newly rich countries.

The battle lines were drawn more than three decades ago, in the 1992 agreement that first established COP as the forum for annual U.N. climate talks. That agreement divided the world’s countries into “developed country parties” and “developing country parties.” It stipulated that the former would “provide new and additional financial resources” to help poor countries decarbonize and also “assist … in meeting costs of adaptation” to climate change. The “developed” group comprised the richest few dozen countries in North America and Europe, as well as Japan and Australia, and the “developing” group comprised almost the entire rest of the planet.

The world has changed a great deal since then. China and India have become two of the world’s five largest economies and together make up almost a third of the world’s population. East Asian countries like Singapore and South Korea have become pillars of the global technology and manufacturing sectors — and grown phenomenally richer in the process. Persian Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have used money from their massive oil fields to build some of the world’s most eye-popping infrastructure and buy global influence. As a result of all this change, only 13 of the world’s 20 largest economies were considered “developed” at the time the U.N. convention first took effect.

For incumbent developed countries like the United States and Canada, which are facing calls to commit to sending a trillion dollars per year to poor nations, the key question in Baku is how to bring newly flush economies over to the donor side of the table. While many of the newcomers have already made voluntary contributions to international climate aid — China kicked off the conference by announcing it has provided more than $20 billion in climate finance to developing countries since 2016 — they have largely resisted any official recognition that they have a responsibility to contribute.

“You have countries now that are not part of the donor base, but that are contributing and helping countries in the [Global South],” said Steven Guilbeault, the Canadian minister for the environment, in an interview with Grist. “But I think one of the issues there is: What are the accountability mechanisms for that? What’s the transparency?” (China’s announcement didn’t include a detailed breakdown of its commitments.) 

In an addendum tacked on to the bottom of the most recent negotiating text, the Canadian and Swiss governments have proposed a blunt solution to this problem: a hard numerical standard that would determine which countries have to donate funds. There are two triggers that would make a country a required donor. The first is if the country is both among the top 10 annual emitters of greenhouse gases and has a gross national income of more than around $22,000 per capita, adjusted for purchasing power differences across currencies. The second is if a nation has cumulative carbon emissions of more than 250 metric tons per capita and a gross national income of more than $40,000 per capita.

This sounds somewhat arbitrary until you look at which countries become donors under each of the proposed standards. Among the top 10 annual greenhouse gas emitters, six are not already considered “developed.” In descending order of per capita income, according to the World Bank, they are Saudi Arabia, South Korea, China, Iran, Indonesia, and India. The income threshold in the Swiss-Canadian proposal would bump the first two from that list into the group of required donors. And while China is right below the income threshold, it could qualify as soon as next year. The last three countries, which are populous but less well-off, would be off the hook for the near future.

That captures the big fish. The second condition, which assesses income and emissions on a per capita basis, would rope in smaller developed countries with higher income levels, such as the United Arab Emirates, Singapore, and Israel. (The Swiss delegation did not respond to questions about their proposal in time for publication.)

But negotiators from around the world are lining up against this proposal, and many say they oppose any attempts whatsoever to broaden the donor base. The Persian Gulf states in particular have slammed the formula as a betrayal of responsibility by the United States and Europe, which are the largest emitters in historical terms — meaning their cumulative contributions to climate change are greater than even annual emissions figures suggest. The objectors also argue that these countries’ centuries-long head start on development, provided in part by their colonial history, should be a determining factor in who has to pay up.

In a statement at the last government dialogue on the goal, a few months before COP29, a representative for Saudi Arabia said that Arab states “firmly reject” what it called “attempts to walk back on our collective agreement.”

“The claim that changing economic realities necessitate an expansion of the donor base is unfounded,” the representative said at the time.

The Alliance of Small Island States, or AOSIS, an influential negotiating bloc that represents several nations facing existential risk from sea level rise, like the Marshall Islands, is also against the proposal. The group argues that such a change would compromise the original U.N. agreement to fight climate change, which called for legacy emitters to take the lead on climate finance.

“We really can’t entertain it,” said Michai Robertson, the island bloc’s lead negotiator on finance issues. “It’s a thread that you pull, and it may unravel the entire fabric of the Paris Agreement. It’s an unequivocal no.” He said that the text that all countries agreed to in Paris in 2015 already encourages developing countries to contribute financing if they can — and that countries such as China are already doing it.

There are also political considerations at play in the bloc’s opposition. In addition to vulnerable nations such as Fiji and the Marshall Islands, AOSIS also represents higher-income island states such as Singapore and the Bahamas. The latter would be expected to become contributors under the new proposal, which evaluates national income and emissions on a per capita basis.

The other big point of controversy is China, whose per capita income sits just on the threshold of the Swiss and Canadian proposals. One version of the Swiss-Canadian proposal sets the income cutoff at $20,000 per capita, which would include China, but another version sets it at $22,000, which would exclude China for at least a few years — an indication of just how delicate the question of the country’s inclusion might be. 

The opening day of COP29 saw negotiators stake out starkly different positions on the China question. Teresa Anderson, a climate advocate with the global anti-poverty organization ActionAid, said, “There is no metric by which China has a historic obligation,” calling it “geopolitical whataboutery” and “finger-pointing.” A few hours later, Germany’s lead climate negotiator, Jennifer Morgan, pointed out that China’s historical carbon emissions are now equal to those of the European Union.

The stark contrast in statements was evidence that, even after years of negotiation over the finance goal, the opposing sides of the debate have made almost no movement toward each other. The stalemate continued through the first days of the conference as developing countries rejected an early draft of the goal text, and U.N. supervisors released a massive new draft with a grab bag of priorities. Despite developing countries’ objections, the Swiss-Canadian proposal is still there, lurking at the bottom of the draft. 

Sandra Guzmán Luna, a former climate negotiator for the government of Mexico and the director of GFLAC, an organization that helps Latin American and Caribbean countries advocate for more climate money, said the road ahead was steep.

“It’s going to be very, very challenging, because there has not been a lot of movement,” she said.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The question bringing COP29 to a halt: Who’s rich enough to pay for climate change? on Nov 15, 2024.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Jake Bittle.

]]> https://grist.org/international/cop29-finance-goal-developing-countries-aid/feed/ 0 502048 Vietnamese ascetic’s followers question call to keep order, stop posting https://rfa.org/english/vietnam/2024/11/15/barefoot-monk-letter/ https://rfa.org/english/vietnam/2024/11/15/barefoot-monk-letter/#respond Fri, 15 Nov 2024 05:44:16 +0000 https://rfa.org/english/vietnam/2024/11/15/barefoot-monk-letter/ Read more on this topic in Vietnamese.

A Vietnamese man who became a social media sensation as he walked around the country promoting the virtues of an ascetic way of life, and earning the nickname the “barefoot monk,” has reappeared in public after disappearing four months ago.

But a request purportedly from the man, Thich Minh Tue, asking people not to gather in big crowds to greet him or post about him on social media has raised eyebrows among some of his followers who suspect the authorities don’t want another commotion around him.

Minh Tue, whose real name is Le Anh Tu, is a shavenheaded man who practices the 13 ascetic practices of Buddhism without actually being a monk in an order recognized by the Vietnamese government as a state-sanctioned religious group.

He has walked across Vietnam at least four times, the last time creating a storm of publicity that prompted the government to ask him to go into retreat in early June, when he disappeared from the public eye.

The Government Committee for Religious Affairs announced on its website at the time he had “voluntarily retired”.

Authorities in Vietnam are invariably wary of social movements outside of the control of the ruling Communist Party.

Minh Tue reappeared in his hometown of Gia Lai about 10 days ago, attracting many followers and YouTube vloggers.

Then on Wednesday, the Gia Lai Online newspaper published a photo of a handwritten letter, addressed to “agencies and organizations, families, individuals, and the whole of society,” and signed by “Minh Tue,” asking that he be allowed to beg for alms and pursue his studies in peace, and calling for action against people who post about him online without his permission.

“I hope everyone will not gather in large crowds to disrupt traffic and safety, not film, take photos or post my image on social networks, affecting my learning process,” said the letter dated Nov. 8. “I would like to request that authorities deal with those who post information about me on social networks without my permission.”

Another state-controlled news site, Tuoi Tre, quoted an anonymous source from Gia Lai Provincial Police on Thursday, talking about a letter with similar content.

Radio Free Asia cannot verify the letter’s authenticity and called the provincial police to ask about it. A person who answered declined to respond to questions over the phone, asking the reporter to visit police headquarters to get information.

Buddhist researcher Nguyen Thanh Huy questioned in a Facebook post whether the letter was really from Minh Tue, noting that the call to authorities to restrict people appeared to be in contradiction with his position of not trying to influence anyone, even the Devil.

“A person who once said he didn’t want to read the Great Compassion Mantra for fear of influencing the Devil can’t ask authorities to deal with human beings,” Huy said.

Huy said Minh Tue had in the past repeatedly told anyone who wanted to film or take pictures to do so as long as they felt happy, saying he “did not care about social media or anyone else’s judgment.”

RELATED STORIES

Facebook user fined in Vietnam for posts about barefoot Buddhist monk

Vietnam’s barefoot monk Thich Minh Tue leaves parents' home

How TikTok made a barefoot Vietnamese ‘monk’ go viral

Musician Nguyen Tuan Khanh said the letter could be a first step towards taking news about the monk out of the media in order to isolate him from the public.

“With Buddhism, practitioners never deny the crowd of believers that are considered blessings for them, but according to the writing, they consider them troublesome,” he wrote on Facebook, referring to the letter.

Translated by RFA Vietnamese. Edited by Mike Firn.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by RFA Vietnamese.

]]> https://rfa.org/english/vietnam/2024/11/15/barefoot-monk-letter/feed/ 0 502009 A Question for Women https://www.radiofree.org/2024/10/16/a-question-for-women/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/10/16/a-question-for-women/#respond Wed, 16 Oct 2024 14:29:44 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=154264 Dr. Frances Conley, 83, died recently. She was a professor at Stanford and one of the country’s only female neurosurgeons in the 1990s. For decades she dealt with male colleagues fondling her, propositioning her, and calling her “hon,” among other demeaning behavior—even in the operating room. She felt it was the cost of success in […]

The post A Question for Women first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]> Dr. Frances Conley, 83, died recently. She was a professor at Stanford and one of the country’s only female neurosurgeons in the 1990s. For decades she dealt with male colleagues fondling her, propositioning her, and calling her “hon,” among other demeaning behavior—even in the operating room. She felt it was the cost of success in a male-dominated field. But at age 50 she’d had enough of being told her opposing opinion was due to her PMS, and of never being taken seriously. She resigned from her position, and it made the news. Dr. Conley regretted not speaking out when she realized how many other women in the medical field were experiencing the same thing. So I ask you, women, why do we continue to allow misogyny in our society?

Case in point: Of all the ludicrous political ads this season, there is one I cannot stop thinking about. It is a video of Bernie Moreno, running to be Ohio’s senator. He is addressing an audience with women. He says that reproductive rights shouldn’t be an issue for women over 50—that it’s a bit crazy. Mr. Moreno is a 57 year-old man—so why is it an issue to him? There is laughing in the background at how crazy older women are.

He goes on to say that “you don’t get in pregnant in the checkout line at Krogers—you need to take personal responsibility.” I’d like to point out to Mr. Moreno that the only way a woman becomes pregnant is by a man. Yet, where are the laws requiring a man to take “personal responsibility” from the moment of conception? Where are the groups of women making laws for men and their rights?  Take the issue of reproductive rights out of this equation and think about how he disrespects women in his comments—how he, as a man, feels he can judge our feelings and decisions, and make it a joke.

Why are women still voting for misogynists? The VP nominee, J.D. Vance, has made it clear that women are only worthwhile if they have children. He has suggested tracking women’s menstrual cycles and that women should stay in violent relationships for the sake of children—in short, women have no value other than to please men.

The presidential nominee has called Kamala Harris retarded, even though she is far more qualified and experienced. He, of course, was elected after saying on tape that he could do anything he wanted to women because he was famous (and was found liable for sexual assault in a court of law). A elderly male senator recently said that hurricane survivors didn’t “give a function” about tampons, as if he’s an expert on women’s periods.

To be clear, this is certainly not all men. It’s a loud minority though, and it seems that it is acceptable to our society. Sexual harassment was brought to light during the #MeToo movement—so why are these men in position to run our country? Moreover, why are women voting for them?

When I was a young teen I developed large breasts. I did not want the type of attention it got me from boys and grown men. There were comments yelled as I walked home from school, and disgusting comments right to my face. Men unapologetically stared at my chest as if it was their right to do so. It deeply affected my self-esteem and body image for decades. I slouched and tried to cover myself when men were around. But men felt free to say whatever they wanted, letting me know that when they saw me all they really saw was my body. I did not have the self-assurance or temerity to fight back or express my discomfort. Like Dr. Conley, I thought that’s just the way it was then.

What happens when a society demeans the value of women? Look at Afghanistan. In the 70s women were wearing miniskirts and enjoying personal freedoms—now they are covered head to toe in burqas, banned from education, and not even allowed to look at men. That’s what happens.

Lilly Ledbetter just died, as well. She filed a suit against Goodyear after learning that she earned less than men doing the same job. The Supreme Court passed an act in her name in 2009—yes, only fifteen years ago. Until 1974 women could not have a credit card in their name without a husband signing off on it. Shall we go back to those good old days? In my mind, the constant disrespect from prominent men is heading in that direction.

Women, consider the lives of your daughters and granddaughters. This election is not just about reproductive rights, it is about respect and value for all of the female citizens of this country. I plead with you—it is up to us to vote discrimination and sexism out of office for good.

There are plenty of respectful men who could be leading this country, men who see women as equals and treat them as such. I know, I was raised by one, I am married to one, and I raised one myself

The post A Question for Women first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Diane Vogel Ferri.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/10/16/a-question-for-women/feed/ 0 497833 As Myanmar’s census draws to a close, observers question its accuracy https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/myanmar-census-accuracy-asean-10112024170140.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/myanmar-census-accuracy-asean-10112024170140.html#respond Fri, 11 Oct 2024 21:55:05 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/myanmar-census-accuracy-asean-10112024170140.html Read RFA coverage of this story in Burmese.

Officials are nearly done conducting a census in Myanmar ahead of planned elections next year, but observers say the data is inaccurate, as many residents have left the country, joined the armed opposition, or are in prison for opposing military rule.

The junta, which seized power in a 2021 coup, is holding a national census from Oct. 1-15 that will be used to draw up voter lists for an election they say will restore democratic rule – though opponents are doubtful.

Ethnic minority armies and rebel groups that have taken control of vast swaths of territory once held by the military oppose the election, saying it will be a sham and only serve to legitimize the junta’s control. 

They have urged residents not to cooperate with the census-takers.

Census enumerators ask questions to a man in Naypyitaw as Myanmar holds a national census to compile voter lists, Oct. 1, 2024. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)
Census enumerators ask questions to a man in Naypyitaw as Myanmar holds a national census to compile voter lists, Oct. 1, 2024. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)

The military regime insists that its census will ensure an accurate voter list, but analysts told RFA that the data is incomplete due to the ongoing civil war.

According to the Institute for Strategy and Policy-Myanmar, armed conflict is underway in 233 of Myanmar’s 330 townships.

“Myanmar is engulfed in civil war and many of its people have fled or are taking shelter in the jungles and border areas. Additionally, some families dare not disclose truthful information, so the data is likely inaccurate,” said San Aung, who is observing the junta’s census efforts. “A census should only be taken in peacetime and in a political environment in which every citizen can participate.”

The junta has announced that the census is being carried out by about 40,000 officials in more than 100,000 village tracts, targeting an estimated population of 56 million living in 13 million households.

The last census in Myanmar was conducted in 2014, covering an estimated 98% of the country, except in areas of instability.

RELATED STORIES

Myanmar junta launches census after blasts in Yangon

Myanmar’s junta presses ahead with census before proposed election

EXPLAINED: Why does Myanmar’s junta want to hold elections?

Myanmar junta collecting workers’ data for census

Bo Bo Oo, the vice chairman of Yangon region’s Sanchaung township for the deposed National League for Democracy party, told RFA that the data for this year’s census is unreliable.

“It is imperative to understand that a democratic election can only take place if the country is exercising democratic practices,” he said. “It’s ridiculous to hold an election while thousands of political prisoners are behind bars.”

Invasive questions

A census worker, who requested not to be named for security reasons, told RFA that the people do not want to take part in the census and are intentionally withholding personal information. 

“No one wants to answer these questions and some are deliberately responding incorrectly – we know this is the situation and we don’t blame them,” he said. “People are worried that their answers will be used to arrest them. Probably 90% of people aren’t sharing true information.”

A soldier provides security while census enumerators collect information in Naypyitaw, Oct. 1, 2024. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)
A soldier provides security while census enumerators collect information in Naypyitaw, Oct. 1, 2024. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)

A resident of Mandalay region’s Pyigyitagon township said that the questions are “highly personal.”

“The questions should focus only on general information, such as the occupations of family members and their ages,” he said. “However, they are asking things like what kind of toilets we have and whether they are the local style or western style, with a flushing system.”

Other residents said they had been asked what kind of rice they eat, how many rooms are in their home, and whether any of their family members are living abroad.

According to Myanmar’s Population and Households Census Law of 2013, “information shall not be used for any other administrative purposes at an individual level except for those matters related to the Census.”

Census enumerators prepare to collect information from the public in Naypyitaw, Oct. 1, 2024. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)
Census enumerators prepare to collect information from the public in Naypyitaw, Oct. 1, 2024. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)

The junta also announced that authorities would not take any action or make arrests based on information obtained through the census, but few people believe that is true.

While Myanmar’s 2014 census consisted of only 41 questions, the current census requires that households answer 68 questions and organizations answer 18.

Seeking recognition from ASEAN

The census in Myanmar is underway as the junta sent a representative to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, summit currently being held in the Lao capital Vientiane, in what observers say is a bid to secure international recognition of its planned election.

Aung Kyaw Moe, the junta’s permanent secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, joined the summit despite Myanmar’s downgrade within the bloc due to the junta’s continued use of violence against the opposition.

Myanmar's Permanent Secretary of Foreign Affairs Aung Kyaw Moe attends the 14th ASEAN-United Nations (UN) Summit at the National Convention Centre in Vientiane, Oct. 11, 2024. (Athit Perawongmetha/Reuters)
Myanmar's Permanent Secretary of Foreign Affairs Aung Kyaw Moe attends the 14th ASEAN-United Nations (UN) Summit at the National Convention Centre in Vientiane, Oct. 11, 2024. (Athit Perawongmetha/Reuters)

Kyaw Zaw, the spokesperson for the presidential office of Myanmar’s shadow National Unity Government, or NUG, suggested that the junta had sent a senior official to the summit after boycotting earlier meetings to “seek a way out of the current political crisis.”

“They didn’t join ASEAN meetings for more than three years because the junta chief and his foreign minister were banned from taking part,” he said. “All of a sudden they changed their approach because they are seeking a way to hold their fake and illegal election. To get out of the political crisis, the junta will lie to ASEAN.”

ASEAN has proposed a five-point peace plan for Myanmar, which the grouping calls a “consensus,” including a ceasefire and talks, but Myanmar’s generals have ignored it, battling on against a loose alliance of ethnic minority forces and pro-democracy fighters who have this year been making significant battlefield gains.

From left, Myanmar's Permanent Secretary of Foreign Affairs Aung Kyaw Moe, Philippines' President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, Singapore's Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, Thailand's Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Vietnam's Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh, and South Korea's President Yoon Suk Yeol pose for a group photo at the 25th ASEAN-South Korea Summit during the 44th and 45th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summits in Vientiane, Oct. 10, 2024. (Nhac Nguyen/AFP)
From left, Myanmar's Permanent Secretary of Foreign Affairs Aung Kyaw Moe, Philippines' President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, Singapore's Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, Thailand's Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, Vietnam's Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh, and South Korea's President Yoon Suk Yeol pose for a group photo at the 25th ASEAN-South Korea Summit during the 44th and 45th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Summits in Vientiane, Oct. 10, 2024. (Nhac Nguyen/AFP)

Sai Kyi Zin Soe, a political commentator, said that after more than three years, no one expects the ASEAN consensus on Myanmar will work.

“Amid this situation, the junta is preparing to hold elections to gain recognition from ASEAN,” he said.

Observers say that the longer ASEAN approaches the political crisis based on the interests of the bloc’s individual member countries, rather than prioritizing the wishes of the people of Myanmar, the longer the junta will remain in power.

Translated by Aung Naing. Edited by Joshua Lipes and Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Burmese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/myanmar-census-accuracy-asean-10112024170140.html/feed/ 0 497332 Several journalists flee Cuba after state agents question, pressure at least 8 https://www.radiofree.org/2024/10/11/several-journalists-flee-cuba-after-state-agents-question-pressure-at-least-8/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/10/11/several-journalists-flee-cuba-after-state-agents-question-pressure-at-least-8/#respond Fri, 11 Oct 2024 14:30:22 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=425321 Miami, October 11, 2024—CPJ is alarmed by reports that since mid-September, Cuban state security agents questioned at least eight journalists and media workers from non-state media outlets, many in connection to alleged crimes against the state, leading several to flee the country. 

“The Cuban government appears to be engaged in a campaign of harassment and intimidation against the country’s non-state media to force them into silence or exile,” said Katherine Jacobsen, CPJ’s U.S., Canada, and Caribbean program coordinator, from Washington, D.C. “CPJ calls on the Cuban authorities to respect the rights of journalists to freely express themselves and report the news.”

Cuban news website El Toque, which operates from exile, reported that the journalists were summoned as part of investigations into accusations that the journalists engaged in “mercenary” activities, including receiving foreign funding in violation of state security. If convicted, the journalists face prison sentences of 4-10 years.

CPJ confirmed eight cases of journalists being questioned and is investigating more than a dozen others. Four journalists publicly confirmed they were summoned and questioned by Cuban authorities:

  • Jorge Fernandez Era, a freelance writer and satirical columnist who works with El Toque, was summoned and questioned twice for an hour, reporting that authorities “expressed concern” about his writings in El Toque.
  • Maria Lucia Exposito, a freelance reporter, posted on a colleague’s social media that authorities questioned her for more than 6 hours and confiscated US$1,000 and her cell phone.
  • Alexander Hall, a freelance essayist who works with El Toque.
  • Katia Sanchez, a freelance communications strategist who has collaborated with El Toque and SembraMedia, a nonprofit that supports digital media entrepreneurs, was questioned and threatened with prosecution by representatives from the Ministry of the Interior for receiving a U.S. embassy grant to train journalists, she told CPJ. Sanchez subsequently left Cuba on September 13.

Several journalists questioned by Cuban state security work for exiled Cuban outlets — including El Toque, Periodismo de Barrio, Cubanet, Magazine AMPM, and Palenque Vision. Government officials told CPJ they consider these journalists and the media outlets to be subsidized by funding from foreign governments, in contravention of Article 143 of the Cuban penal code.

A representative of the Cuban government’s International Press Center (CPI) told CPJ by text message that he recommended investigating whether the U.S. government financed these media outlets and pointed to U.S. law that imposes a public disclosure obligation on persons representing foreign interests. “Investigate and you will find Hypocrisy,” he wrote.

In some cases, the questioning occurred in unofficial locations by plainclothes officers, who pressured the journalists to sign confessions admitting to “subversive” acts under threat of criminal proceedings, according to four journalists who spoke to CPJ. Two journalists told CPJ they faced intense psychological pressure to confess. 

Several journalists told CPJ that officers warned them to stop working as journalists outside of official state media and told them it was a crime to participate in foreign-funded training and support programs, or to receive grants from foreign governments.

One journalist told CPJ they were pressured to become a state security informant and spy on other media and foreign governments. In return, they would be free to continue work outside the state sector.

These acts come as a new social communication law, which bans independent media outlets in Cuba, went into effect on October 4. The new law was promulgated after anti-government demonstrations swept the island in July 2021, resulting in the prosecution of persons who reported or shared videos of the events online.

El Toque reported that between 2022 and 2024, at least 150 Cuban journalists went into exile due to harassment by state security agents.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by CPJ Staff.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/10/11/several-journalists-flee-cuba-after-state-agents-question-pressure-at-least-8/feed/ 0 497270 Police question students of shuttered Vietnamese education company https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html#respond Wed, 09 Oct 2024 20:41:18 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html Read this story in Vietnamese

A non-profit organization that offered courses aimed at fostering independent thinking among Vietnamese citizens still has the attention of government investigators almost a year after it was forced to shut down. 

Authorities have summoned some 50 students and teachers for questioning in the 10 months since FreeHub Education Solutions Company Ltd., or FreeHub, was closed, according to Nguyen Ho Nhat Thanh, the company’s founder.

FreeHub opened in 2022 with the goal of giving learners the ability to think from multiple perspectives and make sound decisions in their personal lives. It offered courses – both online and in person – in philosophy, psychology, sociology, economics, history, culture and art. 

Even though the classes didn’t discuss Vietnamese politics, authorities still viewed FreeHub as a threat, Thanh told Radio Free Asia on Monday.

“It worried security agencies, who accused us of having toppling schemes,” he said. “The current regime is an ideological dictatorship. Therefore, different thinking flows are seen as threats.”

02 FreeHub activist Vietnam learning education students.jpg
Students sit inside a stadium ahead of celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the 1954 Dien Bien Phu victory over French colonial forces in Dien Bien Phu city on May 7, 2024. (Nhac Nguyen/AFP)

Vietnamese courts have sentenced numerous journalists, boggers and activists over the last decade in an ongoing campaign to crush dissent. 

Additionally, more than 60 people have been convicted and jailed for long terms for suspected links to a self-proclaimed government-in-exile that was founded in the U.S. in 1991. The Ministry of Public Security listed the group – known as the Provisional National Government of Vietnam – as a terrorist organization in 2018. 

Summoned for questioning

Thanh, also known as Paulo Thanh Nguyen, said he closed FreeHub in late 2023 in response to police harassment of its students in several locations.

In the announcement posted on his personal Facebook page, Thanh wrote that trouble with authorities began after FreeHub offered a course on community development. Since then, FreeHub’s Facebook page has been taken down and its service provider has blocked access to its website.

Security forces have continued to target students anyway, going to their homes or summoning them to government offices where they have been told to write personal reflections or reports, Thanh said, citing discussions with students.

Security officers forced them to hand over their cellphones and laptops and to provide passwords, he added. 

“Teachers have also been summoned,” Thanh said. “Security officers said the program was run by a reactionary organization, distorting many things and warning them they were not allowed to continue participating.”

RELATED STORIES

Vietnamese Authorities Raid a Civil Society Training Class

Vietnamese Authorities Beat Dissident Bloggers on Human Rights Day

The Ministry of Public Security seems to want to make FreeHub into a major case by linking it with overseas organizations already labeled as “hostile forces,” Thanh added. 

Police have only summoned FreeHub students and teachers so far. Thanh said he believes authorities are collecting evidence for his eventual arrest.

RFA called the Ministry of Public Security’s Security Investigation Agency to seek comment on Thanh’s accusations. The officer who answered the phone suggested that RFA’s reporter come to headquarters in person or send in a written request in order to receive a response.

Thanh previously organized human rights events like “Human Rights Coffee” – a space for activists to meet following anti-China protests in Hanoi in 2014. He has also conducted training programs for young activists in various cities and provinces.

Translated by Anna Vu. Edited by Matt Reed and Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Vietnamese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html/feed/ 0 496975 Police question students of shuttered Vietnamese education company https://rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html https://rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html#respond Wed, 09 Oct 2024 20:41:18 +0000 https://rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html Read this story in Vietnamese

A non-profit organization that offered courses aimed at fostering independent thinking among Vietnamese citizens still has the attention of government investigators almost a year after it was forced to shut down.

Authorities have summoned some 50 students and teachers for questioning in the 10 months since FreeHub Education Solutions Company Ltd., or FreeHub, was closed, according to Nguyen Ho Nhat Thanh, the company’s founder.

FreeHub opened in 2022 with the goal of giving learners the ability to think from multiple perspectives and make sound decisions in their personal lives. It offered courses – both online and in person – in philosophy, psychology, sociology, economics, history, culture and art.

Even though the classes didn’t discuss Vietnamese politics, authorities still viewed FreeHub as a threat, Thanh told Radio Free Asia on Monday.

“It worried security agencies, who accused us of having toppling schemes,” he said. “The current regime is an ideological dictatorship. Therefore, different thinking flows are seen as threats.”

Students sit inside a stadium ahead of celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the 1954 Dien Bien Phu victory over French colonial forces in Dien Bien Phu city on May 7, 2024. (Nhac Nguyen/AFP)
Students sit inside a stadium ahead of celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the 1954 Dien Bien Phu victory over French colonial forces in Dien Bien Phu city on May 7, 2024. (Nhac Nguyen/AFP)

Vietnamese courts have sentenced numerous journalists, boggers and activists over the last decade in an ongoing campaign to crush dissent.

Additionally, more than 60 people have been convicted and jailed for long terms for suspected links to a self-proclaimed government-in-exile that was founded in the U.S. in 1991. The Ministry of Public Security listed the group – known as the Provisional National Government of Vietnam – as a terrorist organization in 2018.

Summoned for questioning

Thanh, also known as Paulo Thanh Nguyen, said he closed FreeHub in late 2023 in response to police harassment of its students in several locations.

In the announcement posted on his personal Facebook page, Thanh wrote that trouble with authorities began after FreeHub offered a course on community development. Since then, FreeHub’s Facebook page has been taken down and its service provider has blocked access to its website.

Security forces have continued to target students anyway, going to their homes or summoning them to government offices where they have been told to write personal reflections or reports, Thanh said, citing discussions with students.

Security officers forced them to hand over their cellphones and laptops and to provide passwords, he added.

“Teachers have also been summoned,” Thanh said. “Security officers said the program was run by a reactionary organization, distorting many things and warning them they were not allowed to continue participating.”

RELATED STORIES

Vietnamese Authorities Raid a Civil Society Training Class

Vietnamese Authorities Beat Dissident Bloggers on Human Rights Day

The Ministry of Public Security seems to want to make FreeHub into a major case by linking it with overseas organizations already labeled as “hostile forces,” Thanh added.

Police have only summoned FreeHub students and teachers so far. Thanh said he believes authorities are collecting evidence for his eventual arrest.

RFA called the Ministry of Public Security’s Security Investigation Agency to seek comment on Thanh’s accusations. The officer who answered the phone suggested that RFA’s reporter come to headquarters in person or send in a written request in order to receive a response.

Thanh previously organized human rights events like "Human Rights Coffee" – a space for activists to meet following anti-China protests in Hanoi in 2014. He has also conducted training programs for young activists in various cities and provinces.

Translated by Anna Vu. Edited by Matt Reed and Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Vietnamese.

]]> https://rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/freehub-education-organization-investigation-10092024163955.html/feed/ 0 499587 Climate was a top question at the VP debate. Both candidates actually answered — sort of. https://grist.org/politics/climate-was-a-top-question-at-the-vp-debate-both-candidates-actually-answered-sort-of/ https://grist.org/politics/climate-was-a-top-question-at-the-vp-debate-both-candidates-actually-answered-sort-of/#respond Wed, 02 Oct 2024 04:55:39 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=649875 Vice presidential hopefuls Tim Walz, the Democratic governor of Minnesota, and J.D. Vance, the junior Republican senator from Ohio, faced off Tuesday night in New York. It was the first time the two men have debated, and likely the last debate of this year’s race to the White House. The evening began with a decidedly less awkward handshake than the one that kicked off the presidential debate a month ago, and quickly moved into a foreign policy question. One unknown at the outset, however, was to what extent the moderators or the candidates would bring up climate change. 

At the presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump last month, the climate question didn’t come until the tail end of the candidates’ sparring session. This time it was the second question that moderators asked, and both candidates tacked notably to the political center, with Walz endorsing “an all above energy policy” and Vance seeking to sidestep the question of whether human-caused climate change is happening. 

The debate came amid a politically and climatically dramatic few months. Walz and Harris arrived to the race historically late and have been sprinting to make their views on a myriad of issues known, including climate change. And while climate ranks at the bottom of the list of voter concerns, climate change-fueled disasters have been battering the country, from flooding in Vermont to wildfires in California and, most recently, the tranches of devastation that Hurricane Helene wrought along the southeastern United States.

CBS News moderators Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan pegged their question to Helene and pointed to research showing that climate change makes hurricanes “larger, stronger, and more deadly,” as well as polling showing that 7 in 10 Americans favor taking steps to address climate change. 

Both candidates responded by expressing their condolences to the victims of the hurricane, with Vance calling it an “unbelievable, unspeakable human tragedy.” They differed, however, on both the causes and the solutions to the broader climate question. 

Vance, who answered first, endorsed a robust federal response to help disasters victims before turning to the bigger picture. He avoided acknowledging the reality of human-caused climate change, instead referring to “crazy weather patterns” and global warming as “weird science.” For the sake of argument, Vance started from the premise that carbon emissions drive climate change — “Let’s just say that’s true,” he said. Vance argued that bringing manufacturing back to the United States would reduce emissions, falsely claiming that America has “the cleanest economy in the entire world.” 

In regard to solutions, Vance derided the Biden administration’s incentivization of solar panels because, he said, their components often come from abroad. He alluded to the potential for building new nuclear energy facilities and explicitly called for more energy production domestically, without specifically mentioning oil or natural gas. 

A man with brown hair, a beard, and blue eyes, wearing a suit with a red tie, stands in front of a blue screen with his left arm extended
J.D. Vance, the Republican Senator from Ohio, at the vice presidential debate. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

If Vance hedged over the reality of climate change, Walz stated the problem emphatically. “Climate change is real. Reducing our impact is absolutely critical,” he said, touting the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act, the biggest clean energy spending bill in history, which he said “has created jobs across the country.” In an awkward turn of phrase, Walz said, “We are seeing us becoming an energy superpower for the future, not just the current.” 

He did not take the opportunity to highlight his own climate record, which is remarkably lengthy. As governor of Minnesota, he signed legislation that reformed clean energy permitting and requires the state’s utilities to get 100 percent of their energy from clean sources by 2040. Walz also failed to mention his support of the expansion of the Line 3 oil pipeline that runs through Minnesota, which is having the same climate impact as 50 new coal-fired power plants. 

Ultimately, the climate consequences of this election could be enormous. It could, for instance, determine how close the U.S., which has emitted more greenhouse gases throughout history than any other country, comes to achieving the dramatic emissions cuts scientists say are needed to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. And even a casual debate viewer couldn’t miss the two candidates’ divergent views on America’s energy future. 

The Democratic ticket has framed combating the climate crisis as a matter of protecting freedom, and has urged the continued investment in clean energy. The official GOP platform, on the other hand, includes a rollback of rules encouraging the adoption of electric vehicles and calls for the United States to become the world leader in oil, gas, and coal production. Some researchers have estimated that a second Trump term could add an extra 4 billion metric tons of carbon to the atmosphere by 2030, compared to a Democratic presidency.

Vance returned to the theme of domestic energy production throughout the debate, at one point saying that one of the quickest ways to address the housing crisis is to “drill, baby, drill.” His closing statement included an anecdote about how when he was growing up, his grandmother didn’t always have enough money to turn on the heat — and he argued that Biden and Harris’ energy policies are making it harder for everyday Americans to afford energy. (The Inflation Reduction Act is expected to save Americans $38 billion in electricity bills by 2030.) Climate and energy did not come up in Walz’s closing statement.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Climate was a top question at the VP debate. Both candidates actually answered — sort of. on Oct 2, 2024.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Tik Root.

]]> https://grist.org/politics/climate-was-a-top-question-at-the-vp-debate-both-candidates-actually-answered-sort-of/feed/ 0 495912 Sheriff’s deputies question reporter at her home https://www.radiofree.org/2024/09/20/sheriffs-deputies-question-reporter-at-her-home/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/09/20/sheriffs-deputies-question-reporter-at-her-home/#respond Fri, 20 Sep 2024 15:21:19 +0000 https://pressfreedomtracker.us/all-incidents/sheriffs-deputies-question-reporter-at-her-home/

Aaron Leathley, a reporter for the Central California daily newspaper The Stockton Record, was visited at her Stockton home on Aug. 30, 2024, by San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office deputies, who questioned her about a court document she had reported on months earlier.

In November 2023, sheriff’s deputies searched the home of Stockton Unified School District board president AngelAnn Flores and the school board’s headquarters. Later that month, Leathley reported on various details from the search warrant, a copy of which the paper had obtained from the San Joaquin County Superior Court — including that deputies had searched Flores’ home and vehicles, questioned Flores and seized her phones, iPad and laptop to investigate her alleged misuse of a school district credit card, witness intimidation and other misconduct.

A day after the article published, the Record reported, a public information officer for the court emailed Leathley to tell her that the warrant had been released accidentally and ask her “to prevent any further dissemination of this document by copying, sharing, or using it for further publication.” The sheriff’s office also said at the time that the warrant should not have been released, according to the Record.

Flores was charged in May 2024 with making fraudulent insurance claims, embezzlement and theft of school district funds and pleaded not guilty. The criminal case against her is ongoing.

On Aug. 30, two sheriff’s deputies who identified themselves as members of the Agriculture, Gangs, and Narcotics Enforcement team under the sheriff’s Special Services Division arrived at Leathley’s door. One claimed that Leathley had been emailed a “cease-and-desist” about the warrant, according to the Record, and told her, “We just want to know what happened.” Leathley said it was unclear whether this was a reference to the warrant or the alleged cease-and-desist letter.

The Record reported that it has no records of a cease-and-desist letter and Sheriff’s Sgt. Daniel Lavine told the paper he wasn’t aware of one. A spokesperson for the sheriff’s office would not confirm to the paper whether it had sent a cease-and-desist letter to Leathley.

Freedom of the Press Foundation Director of Advocacy Seth Stern condemned the deputies’ “shenanigans,” saying, “Officials should never intimidate a journalist for possessing lawfully obtained records, whether through court cases or house calls.” The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker is a project of FPF.

When asked for an explanation of the deputies’ actions, a spokesperson for the sheriff’s department told the Tracker, “Because this is an ongoing investigation, I can’t answer those questions.”

Leathley did not respond to a request for comment from the Tracker.


This content originally appeared on U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database and was authored by U.S. Press Freedom Tracker: Incident Database.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/09/20/sheriffs-deputies-question-reporter-at-her-home/feed/ 0 494393 Iranian Police Question Women Without Hijabs During Ashura Procession https://www.radiofree.org/2024/07/17/iranian-police-question-women-who-marched-in-religious-festival-without-head-scarves/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/07/17/iranian-police-question-women-who-marched-in-religious-festival-without-head-scarves/#respond Wed, 17 Jul 2024 19:28:23 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=26fdc47ae8f67a8613aad584c7ccd158
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/07/17/iranian-police-question-women-who-marched-in-religious-festival-without-head-scarves/feed/ 0 484404 New UK government raises question of change in South China Sea policy https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/uk-labour-china-07122024035631.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/uk-labour-china-07122024035631.html#respond Fri, 12 Jul 2024 07:59:00 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/uk-labour-china-07122024035631.html Britain’s new ruling party has pledged a thorough audit of U.K.-China relations to establish a clearer long-term China policy, including its dealings with Beijing over the South China Sea and Taiwan, but analysts say little change is likely in the near future.

Keir Starmer’s Labour party won a landslide victory in last week’s general election, ending 14 years of Conservative government.

U.K. policy has been that it “takes no sides in the sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea, but we oppose any activity that undermines or threatens U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) authority – including attempts to legitimise incompatible maritime claims,” in the words of Anne-Marie Trevelyan, minister of state for Indo-Pacific under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.

Trevelyan reiterated that London’s commitment to the UNCLOS was “unwavering” as it played a leading role in setting the legal framework for the U.K.’s maritime activities.

“It's a standard position on upholding international law, freedom of navigation and the rules-based order,” said Ian Storey, fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, “This is not going to change.”

However, with China’s increased assertiveness and growing military might, upholding those principles in distant waters will be a challenge. Furthermore, there are Britain’s own interests in economics, security and geopolitics to be considered.

In 2021, the British government announced an overhaul in its foreign policy - Global Britain in a Competitive Age - which emphasized a “tilt to the Indo-Pacific” that, following in the  footsteps of the U.S., promised a bolder strategic presence in the region where China is looming large. In 2022, Britain released a new National Strategy for Maritime Security, with one of the main focuses being the South China Sea. 

UK US Japan.jpeg
The United Kingdom’s carrier strike group led by HMS Queen Elizabeth, and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Forces joined with U.S. Navy carrier strike groups led by flagships USS Ronald Reagan and USS Carl Vinson to conduct multiple carrier strike group operations in the Philippine Sea, Oct. 3, 2021. (U.S. Navy)

Yet there has not been any major British deployment in the region since 2021, and the Royal Navy did not send a warship to take part in the ongoing U.S.-led RIMPAC - the world's largest international maritime exercise.

It remains unclear how Britain will pursue its maritime ambitions in the Asia-Pacific, especially when overall policy towards China has been deemed inconsistent.

‘Clear steer’ in dealing with China

Labour’s promise to conduct both a defense review and an audit of China policy “leaves many questions unanswered,” said Gray Sergeant, research fellow at the Council on Geostrategy, a British think tank.

“Initially, Labour was skeptical about the 'tilt to the Indo-Pacific', however, they have supported measures which have stepped up Britain's defense role in the region,” Sergeant told RFA.

“It is very unlikely such advances will be reversed, the question is whether a Labour government will be inclined to build on these steps if, as it seems, attention is focused on enhancing the U.K.'s role in European security,” the analyst said.

RELATED STORIES

Not so hard: British scholar proposes fix for South China Sea disputes

US, UK aircraft carriers lead show of naval might around South China Sea

With eyes on Beijing, US and Japan pledge stronger ties

Another China expert, veteran diplomat Charles Parton, said that in the past Labour “has not said things which indicate that its China policy will be different from that of the Conservatives.”

“But the latter's strategy was never articulated, for which they came in for justified criticism,” said Parton, senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute. “The pressure now is on Labour to give a clear steer and to ensure consistent implementation across the various government departments whose interests involve dealing with China.”

The Conservative government recognized China as a “systemic challenge”’ that it sought to counter with a three-stranded strategy of “‘protect, align, engage.” Labour’s new foreign secretary, David Lammy, proposed a similar “three Cs” (compete, challenge, cooperate) in dealing with China.

“That signals continuity,” said Gray Sergeant. “The question is which of these three strands will take precedence?”

The analyst noted that Lammy put particular emphasis on cooperation and engagement, and seemed keen on more ministers visiting China, which was Britain’s fifth-largest trading partner in 2023, according to the U.K. Department for Business and Trade. 

Some activists, like Luke de Pulford from the U.K. Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China, said that the new British government was likely to champion trade over thorny issues that would cause discord.

“Labour needs to deliver on the economy and is scared that upsetting Beijing would jeopardize that goal,” de Pulford wrote in a recent opinion piece.

“Ministerial ambition, parliamentary trench warfare, media outrage or unavoidable circumstantial change can all shift policy, but outside of a serious escalation in the South China Sea, I don't see it happening,” the human rights activist wrote.

But another activist said that Labour's manifesto made clear “their intention to bring a long-term and strategic approach to managing relations with China.” 

“This could lead to a more robust stance on human rights abuses in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, and increased support for Taiwan's autonomy,” said Simon Cheng, a Hong Kong democracy activist in London.

“However, we must watch closely how these words translate into actions,” Cheng warned.

What does China say?

 China has been closely following developments in  U.K. politics, with  Premier Li Qiang sending a congratulatory message to  Starmer almost immediately after he became Britain’s prime minister on July 5.

Li said that China and Britain were both permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and cooperation between them “not only serves the interests of the two countries, but also is conducive to the unity of the international community in addressing global challenges.”

Starmer.jpeg
Keir Starmer, then U.K. Shadow Brexit Secretary, in a meeting with former Taiwanese vice president Chen Chien-jen in Taipei on Oct. 1, 2018. (Taiwan Presidential Office)

Starmer, as a member of parliament and shadow Brexit secretary, visited Taiwan in 2016 and 2018 to lobby against the death penalty. Observers say it’s very rare that any top British leader has had an experience of Taiwan, which Beijing considers a Chinese province that must be reunited with the mainland.

While the issue of Taiwan has not emerged in bilateral interactions, British politicians in the past have angered China over their statements about Hong Kong and the South China Sea.

A Foreign Office spokesperson’s statement criticizing the “unsafe and escalatory tactics deployed by Chinese vessels” against the Philippines in the South China Sea earned a rebuke from  Chinese diplomats in London, who said they “firmly oppose and strongly condemn the groundless accusation made by the U.K., and have lodged stern representations with the U.K. side on this.”

China maintains that almost all of the disputed South China Sea and its  islands  belong to it. China refused to accept a 2016 arbitral ruling that rejected all its claims in the South China Sea but it recognized that Britain’s stance of not taking sides in the South China Sea issue had changed.

Before 2016, the U.K. did not have a clear-cut South China Sea policy, wrote Chinese analyst Liu Jin in the China International Studies magazine.

Liu argued that Britain’s change in policy, as well as its stance in the South China Sea, were largely influenced by the United States.

“However, due to the security situation in its home waters, inadequacy of main surface combatants, and pressure of the defense budget, the U.K. will find it hard to expand the scale of Asia-Pacific navigation,” he said, adding that London also lacks the willingness to step up provocation against China.

Edited by Mike Firn.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Staff.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/uk-labour-china-07122024035631.html/feed/ 0 483530 Climate change got a question in the presidential debate. It didn’t get much of an answer. https://grist.org/politics/biden-trump-presidential-debate-climate-change-question-cnn-tapper-bash/ https://grist.org/politics/biden-trump-presidential-debate-climate-change-question-cnn-tapper-bash/#respond Fri, 28 Jun 2024 04:51:20 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=642056 Over more than an hour and a half of back-and-forth, climate change got just a couple minutes of airtime during a CNN-hosted debate between President Joe Biden and former president Donald Trump on Thursday.

It was the first time the men had faced each other on the debate stage since October 2020. Both candidates were reportedly eager for the confrontation, with Biden’s team seeking to warn voters about the increased radicalism that Trump is promising to bring to a second term, and Trump keen on digging into his rival’s alleged cognitive decline. 

Most of the discourse focused on hot-button issues like immigration and the economy. Biden spoke with a raspy voice and at times tripped over his words, while Trump took many wild discursions and uttered several falsehoods that moderators Dana Bash and Jake Tapper did little to rein in.

A little over halfway in, however, Bash asked whether the candidates would do anything as president to address the climate crisis. Neither candidate directly answered the question, but Biden pointed to policies his administration has implemented to encourage the development of clean energy technologies. Trump gave an incoherent nonanswer.

“I want absolutely immaculate clean water and absolutely clean air,” Trump said. “And we had it. We had H2O, we had the best numbers ever, and we were using all forms of energy, everything.” He said his presidency saw “the best environmental numbers ever,” a statistic he said his advisers had given him moments before he walked onto the stage. In truth, Trump rolled back more than 200 environmental policies during his four years in office.

Trump also took credit for pulling the country out of the Paris Agreement — a “ripoff” for the U.S., as he described it. He otherwise used his allotted climate time to talk about his support among police groups and Biden’s border policies, among other unrelated topics.

Biden, for his part, said he enacted “the most extensive climate change legislation in history,” a reference to the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which contained $369 billion in clean energy tax credits and funding for climate and energy programs. He also mentioned his administration’s creation of the American Climate Corps — a federal program to put young people to work on landscape restoration, renewable energy deployment, and other green projects — and reiterated the importance of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit).

In combination with preexisting policies, the Inflation Reduction Act is expected to cut the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by up to 42 percent by 2030, almost within reach of the country’s commitment under the Paris Agreement to halve emissions compared to 2005 values by the end of the decade. 

This is in marked contrast to projections about what could happen to the climate under a second Trump term. According to an analysis published in March by Carbon Brief, another Trump administration could add some 4 billion metric tons to U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, compared to a second Biden term. This increase could cause $900 billion in additional climate damages globally. The analysis predicted that, if Trump rolled back all of Biden’s key climate policies, the U.S. would be “all but guaranteed” to miss its 2030 climate target.

“Given the scale of U.S. emissions and its influence on the world, this makes the election crucial to hopes of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius,” Carbon Brief said.

Beyond the one question from Bash, the only other climate-related mentions during the debate came from Trump, who blamed the U.S.’s federal deficit on a failure to extract “the liquid gold right under our feet” — oil and gas — and referred to Biden’s climate policies as the “green new scam.” He also used the term “energy independent” to describe the nation on January 6, 2021, the day he told his supporters to launch an insurrection on the U.S. Capitol.

This is in line with some of the former president’s previous messaging about climate change, although it’s hard to parse what he actually believes from his history of erratic, conflicting statements. Sometimes he’s said climate change is a “hoax” orchestrated by China; other times he’s acknowledged its existence but questioned its connection to human activity.

More recently, Trump has downplayed the seriousness of the climate crisis. At a campaign rally in January, he called a youth climate protester “immature” and told her to “go home to mommy.” If elected, he has promised to “drill, baby, drill,” and reverse Biden administration climate policies like the Inflation Reduction Act.

Although expectations have never been particularly high about the prominence of climate change during a presidential debate, climate experts expressed disappointment in the brevity and shallowness of Thursday’s climate discussions. “More time discussing golf than climate. What a world we are living in,” tweeted Jeff Goodell, the author of The Heat Will Kill You First, referring to a bizarre exchange between the two candidates in which Biden challenged Trump to a round of golf. 

Other observers shared deeper concerns about Biden’s performance, which included mistakes that his opponent was quick to point out. 

“I hope he reviews his debate performance Thursday evening and withdraws from the race, throwing the choice of a Democratic nominee to the convention in August,” wrote the New York Times opinion columnist Nicholas Kristof.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Climate change got a question in the presidential debate. It didn’t get much of an answer. on Jun 28, 2024.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Joseph Winters.

]]> https://grist.org/politics/biden-trump-presidential-debate-climate-change-question-cnn-tapper-bash/feed/ 0 481543 Did The West Provoke The Ukraine War? Sorry, That Question Has Been Cancelled https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/26/did-the-west-provoke-the-ukraine-war-sorry-that-question-has-been-cancelled/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/26/did-the-west-provoke-the-ukraine-war-sorry-that-question-has-been-cancelled/#respond Wed, 26 Jun 2024 12:14:51 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=151458 Is it possible for an entire ‘mainstream’ media system – every newspaper, website, TV channel – to completely suppress one side of a crucial argument without anyone expressing outrage, or even noticing? Consider the following. In February 2022, Nigel Farage, former and future leader of the Reform UK party, tweeted that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine […]

The post Did The West Provoke The Ukraine War? Sorry, That Question Has Been Cancelled first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

Is it possible for an entire ‘mainstream’ media system – every newspaper, website, TV channel – to completely suppress one side of a crucial argument without anyone expressing outrage, or even noticing? Consider the following.

In February 2022, Nigel Farage, former and future leader of the Reform UK party, tweeted that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was:

‘A consequence of EU and NATO expansion, which came to a head in 2014. It made no sense to poke the Russian bear with a stick.’

In a recent interview, the BBC reminded Farage of this comment. He responded:

‘Why did I say that? It was obvious to me that the ever-eastward expansion of NATO and the European Union was giving this man [Putin] a reason to his Russian people to say they’re coming for us again, and to go to war.

‘We’ve provoked this war – of course it’s his fault – he’s used what we’ve done as an excuse.’

The BBC quickly made this a major news story by publishing a front page, top headline piece by BBC journalist Becky Morton who cited, and repeated, high-level sources attacking Farage. Morton wrote:

‘Former Conservative Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, who is not standing in the election, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme Mr Farage was like a “pub bore we’ve all met at the end of the bar”.’

And:

‘Conservative Home Secretary James Cleverly said Mr Farage was echoing Mr Putin’s “vile justification” for the war and Labour branded him “unfit” for any political office.’

Morton then repeated both criticisms:

‘Mr Wallace – who oversaw the UK’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 – said Mr Farage “is a bit like that pub bore we’ve all met at the end of the bar” and often presents “very simplistic answers” to complex problems.’

And:

‘Conservative Home Secretary James Cleverly said Mr Farage was “echoing Putin’s vile justification for the brutal invasion of Ukraine”.’

Morton piled on the pain:

‘Labour defence spokesman John Healey said Mr Farage’s comments made him “unfit for any political office in our country, let alone leading a serious party in Parliament”.

‘Former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson accused Mr Farage of “parroting the Kremlin Line” and “producing new excuses for the brutal, unprovoked attack”.’

Wallace, Cleverly, Healey and Robertson are all, of course, influential, high-profile figures; compiling their criticisms in this way sent a powerful message to BBC readers. Remarkably, one might think – given the BBC’s supposed devotion to presenting ‘both sides’ of an argument – Morton offered no source of any kind in support of Farage’s argument.

The BBC intensified its coverage by opening a ‘Live’ blog (reserved for top news stories, disasters and scandals) on the issue, titled:

‘Farage “won’t apologise” for Ukraine comments after Starmer and Sunak criticism’

The BBC reported:

‘Keir Starmer has called Nigel Farage’s comments on Ukraine “disgraceful” as Rishi Sunak says they play into Putin’s hands’

Again, nowhere in the ‘Live’ blog coverage did the BBC cite arguments in support of Farage’s argument. Is it because they don’t exist?

In June 2022, Ramzy Baroud interviewed Noam Chomsky:

‘Chomsky told us that it “should be clear that the (Russian) invasion of Ukraine has no (moral) justification.” He compared it to the US invasion of Iraq, seeing it as an example of “supreme international crime.” With this moral question settled, Chomsky believes that the main “background” of this war, a factor that is missing in mainstream media coverage, is “NATO expansion.”

‘”This is not just my opinion,” said Chomsky, “it is the opinion of every high-level US official in the diplomatic services who has any familiarity with Russia and Eastern Europe. This goes back to George Kennan and, in the 1990s, Reagan’s ambassador Jack Matlock, including the current director of the CIA; in fact, just everybody who knows anything has been warning Washington that it is reckless and provocative to ignore Russia’s very clear and explicit red lines. That goes way before (Vladimir) Putin, it has nothing to do with him; (Mikhail) Gorbachev, all said the same thing. Ukraine and Georgia cannot join NATO, this is the geostrategic heartland of Russia.”’

We know people are interested in Chomsky’s views on the Ukraine war because when we posted a comment from him on X it received 430,000 views and 7,000 likes (huge numbers by our standards).

In 2022, John Pilger commented:

‘The news from the war in Ukraine is mostly not news, but a one-sided litany of jingoism, distortion, omission.  I have reported a number of wars and have never known such blanket propaganda.

‘In February, Russia invaded Ukraine as a response to almost eight years of killing and criminal destruction in the Russian-speaking region of Donbass on their border.

‘In 2014, the United States had sponsored a coup in Kiev that got rid of Ukraine’s democratically elected, Russian-friendly president and installed a successor whom the Americans made clear was their man.’

Pilger added:

‘Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is wanton and inexcusable. It is a crime to invade a sovereign country. There are no “buts” – except one.

‘When did the present war in Ukraine begin and who started it? According to the United Nations, between 2014 and this year, some 14,000 people have been killed in the Kiev regime’s civil war on the Donbass. Many of the attacks were carried out by neo-Nazis.’

In May 2023, economist Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University wrote:

‘Regarding the Ukraine War, the Biden administration has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Ukraine War started with an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In fact, the war was provoked by the U.S. in ways that leading U.S. diplomats anticipated for decades in the lead-up to the war, meaning that the war could have been avoided and should now be stopped through negotiations.

‘Recognizing that the war was provoked helps us to understand how to stop it. It doesn’t justify Russia’s invasion.’ (Our emphasis)

Sachs has previously been presented as a credible source by the BBC on other issues. In 2007, Sachs gave five talks for the BBC’s Reith Lectures.

The New Yorker magazine described political scientist Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago as ‘one of the most famous critics of American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War’. Mearsheimer commented:

‘I think the evidence is clear that we did not think he [Putin] was an aggressor before February 22, 2014. This is a story that we invented so that we could blame him. My argument is that the West, especially the United States, is principally responsible for this disaster. But no American policymaker, and hardly anywhere in the American foreign-policy establishment, is going to want to acknowledge that line of argument…’

There are numerous other credible sources, including Benjamin Abelow, author of How The West Brought War to Ukraine (Siland Press, 2022) and Richard Sakwa, Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands (Yale University Press, 2022). Journalist Ian Sinclair, author of The March That Shook Blair (Peace News, 2013), published a collection of material titled:

‘Testimony from US government and military officials, and other experts, on the role of NATO expansion in creating the conditions for the Russian invasion of Ukraine’

Sinclair cited, for example, current CIA Director William Burns:

‘Sitting at the embassy in Moscow in the mid-nineties, it seemed to me that NATO expansion was premature at best and needlessly provocative at worst.’

And George F. Kennan, a leading US Cold War diplomat:

‘…something of the highest importance is at stake here. And perhaps it is not too late to advance a view that, I believe, is not only mine alone but is shared by a number of others with extensive and in most instances more recent experience in Russian matters. The view, bluntly stated, is that expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era’.

We can understand why the BBC might want to cite Sunak, Starmer, Wallace, Cleverly, Healey and Robertson, but we can’t understand why it would ignore the counterarguments and sources cited above.

It gets worse. A piece in the Daily Mail essentially repeated the BBC performance with endless vitriolic comments again cited from Sunak, Starmer, Cleverly, Healey, Robertson and several others. And again, no counterarguments.

A Reuter’s report quoted Sunak and Healey but no counterarguments.

ITV cited former prime minister Boris Johnson:

‘To try and spread the blame is morally repugnant and parroting Putin’s lies.’

No counterarguments were allowed, other than from Farage himself. At a recent rally, he held up a front-page headline from the i newspaper in 2016, which read, tragicomically:

‘Boris blames EU for war in Ukraine’

That about sums up the state of both Boris Johnson and UK politics generally.

The Telegraph cited Cleverly and other high-profile sources attacking Farage:

‘Tobias Ellwood, the former Tory defence minister, told The Telegraph: “Churchill will be turning in his grave. Putin, already enjoying how Farage is disrupting British politics, will be delighted to hear this talk of appeasement entering our election debate.”

‘Lord West of Spithead, the former chief of the naval staff, said: “Anyone who gives any seeming excuse to president Putin and his disgraceful attack … is standing into danger as regards their views on world affairs.” James Cleverly, the Home Secretary, wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “Just Farage echoing Putin’s vile justification for the brutal invasion of Ukraine.”

‘Liam Fox, the former Tory defence secretary, told The Telegraph: “The West did not ‘provoke this war’ in Ukraine and it is shocking that Nigel Farage should say so.”’ (Daily Telegraph, ‘Farage: West provoked Russia to attack Ukraine’, 22 June 2024)

Again, all alternative views were ignored as non-existent.

In the Independent, journalist Tom Watling packed his article with comments from Sunak, Starmer and Wallace. Again, no counterarguments were allowed.

The Guardian cited Sunak, Healey and Cleverly. Again, no counterarguments were included. (Peter Walker, ‘Nigel Farage claims Russia was provoked into Ukraine war’, The Guardian, 21 June 2024)

With such limited resources, it is difficult for us to wade through all mentions of this story, but we will stick our necks out and suggest that it is quite possible that no sources supporting Farage’s argument have been cited in any UK national newspaper.

By any rational accounting, this ‘mainstream’ coverage is actually a form of totalitarian propaganda. It has denied the British public the ability to even understand the criticisms. Most people reading these reports will simply not understand why Farage made the claim – it is a taboo subject in ‘mainstream’ coverage – and so they have no way of making sense of either his argument or the backlash. This is deep bias presented as ‘news’. It is fake news.

And this suppression of honest journalism in relation to one of the most dangerous and devastating wars of our time, in which our own country is deeply involved, is happening in the run up to what is supposed to be a democratic election.

None of the above is intended as a defence of Farage’s wider political stance. On the contrary, we agree with political journalist Peter Oborne:

‘Farage, a close ally of Donald Trump, who has supported Marine Le Pen in France and spoken at an AfD rally in Germany, fits naturally into the rancid politics of the far-right movements making ground across Europe and in the United States.’

Farage and his far-right views have been endlessly platformed by the BBC.

Needless to say, the Ukraine war is only one of many key issues that are off the agenda for our choice-as-no-choice political system. In a rare example of dissent, Owen Jones commented in the Guardian:

‘Is this a serious country or not? It is egregious enough that this general election campaign is so stripped of discussion about the defining issues facing us at home for the next half decade, whether that be public spending, the NHS or education. But it is especially shocking how quickly the butchery in Gaza – and the position of this imploding government and its successor – has been forgotten.’

Jones noted:

‘On Thursday night’s BBC Question Time leaders’ special, there was not a single question or answer on Gaza.

‘Seriously? Clearly this is an issue that matters to many Britons.’

Earlier this month, Professor Bill McGuire, Emeritus Professor of Geophysical and Climate Hazards at University College London commented:

‘The most astonishing thing about the UK election campaign is not what the leaders and parties are saying, but what they are NOT saying

‘It beggars belief that the #climate is simply not an issue and – as far as I have heard – has not been addressed by either leader

‘Just criminal’

It works like magic: two major political parties ostensibly representing the ‘left’ and ‘right’ of the political spectrum, but both actually serving the same establishment interests, naturally ignore issues that offend power. Establishment media can then also ignore these issues on the pretext that the party-political system covers the entire spectrum of thinkable thought, and that any ideas outside that ‘spectrum’ have no particular right to be heard at election time. Indeed, to venture beyond the carefully filtered bubble of party politics is seen as actually undemocratic. As one ITV journalist reported:

‘Outrage at Nigel Farage’s comments about the war in Ukraine has drawn criticism from all corners of British politics.’

Not quite. They drew criticism from the select few corners of British politics that are allowed to exist in our ‘managed democracy’.

The post Did The West Provoke The Ukraine War? Sorry, That Question Has Been Cancelled first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Media Lens.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/26/did-the-west-provoke-the-ukraine-war-sorry-that-question-has-been-cancelled/feed/ 0 481206 Did The West Provoke The Ukraine War? Sorry, That Question Has Been Cancelled https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/26/did-the-west-provoke-the-ukraine-war-sorry-that-question-has-been-cancelled/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/26/did-the-west-provoke-the-ukraine-war-sorry-that-question-has-been-cancelled/#respond Wed, 26 Jun 2024 12:14:51 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=151458 Is it possible for an entire ‘mainstream’ media system – every newspaper, website, TV channel – to completely suppress one side of a crucial argument without anyone expressing outrage, or even noticing? Consider the following. In February 2022, Nigel Farage, former and future leader of the Reform UK party, tweeted that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine […]

The post Did The West Provoke The Ukraine War? Sorry, That Question Has Been Cancelled first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

Is it possible for an entire ‘mainstream’ media system – every newspaper, website, TV channel – to completely suppress one side of a crucial argument without anyone expressing outrage, or even noticing? Consider the following.

In February 2022, Nigel Farage, former and future leader of the Reform UK party, tweeted that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was:

‘A consequence of EU and NATO expansion, which came to a head in 2014. It made no sense to poke the Russian bear with a stick.’

In a recent interview, the BBC reminded Farage of this comment. He responded:

‘Why did I say that? It was obvious to me that the ever-eastward expansion of NATO and the European Union was giving this man [Putin] a reason to his Russian people to say they’re coming for us again, and to go to war.

‘We’ve provoked this war – of course it’s his fault – he’s used what we’ve done as an excuse.’

The BBC quickly made this a major news story by publishing a front page, top headline piece by BBC journalist Becky Morton who cited, and repeated, high-level sources attacking Farage. Morton wrote:

‘Former Conservative Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, who is not standing in the election, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme Mr Farage was like a “pub bore we’ve all met at the end of the bar”.’

And:

‘Conservative Home Secretary James Cleverly said Mr Farage was echoing Mr Putin’s “vile justification” for the war and Labour branded him “unfit” for any political office.’

Morton then repeated both criticisms:

‘Mr Wallace – who oversaw the UK’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 – said Mr Farage “is a bit like that pub bore we’ve all met at the end of the bar” and often presents “very simplistic answers” to complex problems.’

And:

‘Conservative Home Secretary James Cleverly said Mr Farage was “echoing Putin’s vile justification for the brutal invasion of Ukraine”.’

Morton piled on the pain:

‘Labour defence spokesman John Healey said Mr Farage’s comments made him “unfit for any political office in our country, let alone leading a serious party in Parliament”.

‘Former Nato Secretary General Lord Robertson accused Mr Farage of “parroting the Kremlin Line” and “producing new excuses for the brutal, unprovoked attack”.’

Wallace, Cleverly, Healey and Robertson are all, of course, influential, high-profile figures; compiling their criticisms in this way sent a powerful message to BBC readers. Remarkably, one might think – given the BBC’s supposed devotion to presenting ‘both sides’ of an argument – Morton offered no source of any kind in support of Farage’s argument.

The BBC intensified its coverage by opening a ‘Live’ blog (reserved for top news stories, disasters and scandals) on the issue, titled:

‘Farage “won’t apologise” for Ukraine comments after Starmer and Sunak criticism’

The BBC reported:

‘Keir Starmer has called Nigel Farage’s comments on Ukraine “disgraceful” as Rishi Sunak says they play into Putin’s hands’

Again, nowhere in the ‘Live’ blog coverage did the BBC cite arguments in support of Farage’s argument. Is it because they don’t exist?

In June 2022, Ramzy Baroud interviewed Noam Chomsky:

‘Chomsky told us that it “should be clear that the (Russian) invasion of Ukraine has no (moral) justification.” He compared it to the US invasion of Iraq, seeing it as an example of “supreme international crime.” With this moral question settled, Chomsky believes that the main “background” of this war, a factor that is missing in mainstream media coverage, is “NATO expansion.”

‘”This is not just my opinion,” said Chomsky, “it is the opinion of every high-level US official in the diplomatic services who has any familiarity with Russia and Eastern Europe. This goes back to George Kennan and, in the 1990s, Reagan’s ambassador Jack Matlock, including the current director of the CIA; in fact, just everybody who knows anything has been warning Washington that it is reckless and provocative to ignore Russia’s very clear and explicit red lines. That goes way before (Vladimir) Putin, it has nothing to do with him; (Mikhail) Gorbachev, all said the same thing. Ukraine and Georgia cannot join NATO, this is the geostrategic heartland of Russia.”’

We know people are interested in Chomsky’s views on the Ukraine war because when we posted a comment from him on X it received 430,000 views and 7,000 likes (huge numbers by our standards).

In 2022, John Pilger commented:

‘The news from the war in Ukraine is mostly not news, but a one-sided litany of jingoism, distortion, omission.  I have reported a number of wars and have never known such blanket propaganda.

‘In February, Russia invaded Ukraine as a response to almost eight years of killing and criminal destruction in the Russian-speaking region of Donbass on their border.

‘In 2014, the United States had sponsored a coup in Kiev that got rid of Ukraine’s democratically elected, Russian-friendly president and installed a successor whom the Americans made clear was their man.’

Pilger added:

‘Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is wanton and inexcusable. It is a crime to invade a sovereign country. There are no “buts” – except one.

‘When did the present war in Ukraine begin and who started it? According to the United Nations, between 2014 and this year, some 14,000 people have been killed in the Kiev regime’s civil war on the Donbass. Many of the attacks were carried out by neo-Nazis.’

In May 2023, economist Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University wrote:

‘Regarding the Ukraine War, the Biden administration has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Ukraine War started with an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In fact, the war was provoked by the U.S. in ways that leading U.S. diplomats anticipated for decades in the lead-up to the war, meaning that the war could have been avoided and should now be stopped through negotiations.

‘Recognizing that the war was provoked helps us to understand how to stop it. It doesn’t justify Russia’s invasion.’ (Our emphasis)

Sachs has previously been presented as a credible source by the BBC on other issues. In 2007, Sachs gave five talks for the BBC’s Reith Lectures.

The New Yorker magazine described political scientist Professor John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago as ‘one of the most famous critics of American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War’. Mearsheimer commented:

‘I think the evidence is clear that we did not think he [Putin] was an aggressor before February 22, 2014. This is a story that we invented so that we could blame him. My argument is that the West, especially the United States, is principally responsible for this disaster. But no American policymaker, and hardly anywhere in the American foreign-policy establishment, is going to want to acknowledge that line of argument…’

There are numerous other credible sources, including Benjamin Abelow, author of How The West Brought War to Ukraine (Siland Press, 2022) and Richard Sakwa, Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands (Yale University Press, 2022). Journalist Ian Sinclair, author of The March That Shook Blair (Peace News, 2013), published a collection of material titled:

‘Testimony from US government and military officials, and other experts, on the role of NATO expansion in creating the conditions for the Russian invasion of Ukraine’

Sinclair cited, for example, current CIA Director William Burns:

‘Sitting at the embassy in Moscow in the mid-nineties, it seemed to me that NATO expansion was premature at best and needlessly provocative at worst.’

And George F. Kennan, a leading US Cold War diplomat:

‘…something of the highest importance is at stake here. And perhaps it is not too late to advance a view that, I believe, is not only mine alone but is shared by a number of others with extensive and in most instances more recent experience in Russian matters. The view, bluntly stated, is that expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era’.

We can understand why the BBC might want to cite Sunak, Starmer, Wallace, Cleverly, Healey and Robertson, but we can’t understand why it would ignore the counterarguments and sources cited above.

It gets worse. A piece in the Daily Mail essentially repeated the BBC performance with endless vitriolic comments again cited from Sunak, Starmer, Cleverly, Healey, Robertson and several others. And again, no counterarguments.

A Reuter’s report quoted Sunak and Healey but no counterarguments.

ITV cited former prime minister Boris Johnson:

‘To try and spread the blame is morally repugnant and parroting Putin’s lies.’

No counterarguments were allowed, other than from Farage himself. At a recent rally, he held up a front-page headline from the i newspaper in 2016, which read, tragicomically:

‘Boris blames EU for war in Ukraine’

That about sums up the state of both Boris Johnson and UK politics generally.

The Telegraph cited Cleverly and other high-profile sources attacking Farage:

‘Tobias Ellwood, the former Tory defence minister, told The Telegraph: “Churchill will be turning in his grave. Putin, already enjoying how Farage is disrupting British politics, will be delighted to hear this talk of appeasement entering our election debate.”

‘Lord West of Spithead, the former chief of the naval staff, said: “Anyone who gives any seeming excuse to president Putin and his disgraceful attack … is standing into danger as regards their views on world affairs.” James Cleverly, the Home Secretary, wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “Just Farage echoing Putin’s vile justification for the brutal invasion of Ukraine.”

‘Liam Fox, the former Tory defence secretary, told The Telegraph: “The West did not ‘provoke this war’ in Ukraine and it is shocking that Nigel Farage should say so.”’ (Daily Telegraph, ‘Farage: West provoked Russia to attack Ukraine’, 22 June 2024)

Again, all alternative views were ignored as non-existent.

In the Independent, journalist Tom Watling packed his article with comments from Sunak, Starmer and Wallace. Again, no counterarguments were allowed.

The Guardian cited Sunak, Healey and Cleverly. Again, no counterarguments were included. (Peter Walker, ‘Nigel Farage claims Russia was provoked into Ukraine war’, The Guardian, 21 June 2024)

With such limited resources, it is difficult for us to wade through all mentions of this story, but we will stick our necks out and suggest that it is quite possible that no sources supporting Farage’s argument have been cited in any UK national newspaper.

By any rational accounting, this ‘mainstream’ coverage is actually a form of totalitarian propaganda. It has denied the British public the ability to even understand the criticisms. Most people reading these reports will simply not understand why Farage made the claim – it is a taboo subject in ‘mainstream’ coverage – and so they have no way of making sense of either his argument or the backlash. This is deep bias presented as ‘news’. It is fake news.

And this suppression of honest journalism in relation to one of the most dangerous and devastating wars of our time, in which our own country is deeply involved, is happening in the run up to what is supposed to be a democratic election.

None of the above is intended as a defence of Farage’s wider political stance. On the contrary, we agree with political journalist Peter Oborne:

‘Farage, a close ally of Donald Trump, who has supported Marine Le Pen in France and spoken at an AfD rally in Germany, fits naturally into the rancid politics of the far-right movements making ground across Europe and in the United States.’

Farage and his far-right views have been endlessly platformed by the BBC.

Needless to say, the Ukraine war is only one of many key issues that are off the agenda for our choice-as-no-choice political system. In a rare example of dissent, Owen Jones commented in the Guardian:

‘Is this a serious country or not? It is egregious enough that this general election campaign is so stripped of discussion about the defining issues facing us at home for the next half decade, whether that be public spending, the NHS or education. But it is especially shocking how quickly the butchery in Gaza – and the position of this imploding government and its successor – has been forgotten.’

Jones noted:

‘On Thursday night’s BBC Question Time leaders’ special, there was not a single question or answer on Gaza.

‘Seriously? Clearly this is an issue that matters to many Britons.’

Earlier this month, Professor Bill McGuire, Emeritus Professor of Geophysical and Climate Hazards at University College London commented:

‘The most astonishing thing about the UK election campaign is not what the leaders and parties are saying, but what they are NOT saying

‘It beggars belief that the #climate is simply not an issue and – as far as I have heard – has not been addressed by either leader

‘Just criminal’

It works like magic: two major political parties ostensibly representing the ‘left’ and ‘right’ of the political spectrum, but both actually serving the same establishment interests, naturally ignore issues that offend power. Establishment media can then also ignore these issues on the pretext that the party-political system covers the entire spectrum of thinkable thought, and that any ideas outside that ‘spectrum’ have no particular right to be heard at election time. Indeed, to venture beyond the carefully filtered bubble of party politics is seen as actually undemocratic. As one ITV journalist reported:

‘Outrage at Nigel Farage’s comments about the war in Ukraine has drawn criticism from all corners of British politics.’

Not quite. They drew criticism from the select few corners of British politics that are allowed to exist in our ‘managed democracy’.

The post Did The West Provoke The Ukraine War? Sorry, That Question Has Been Cancelled first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Media Lens.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/26/did-the-west-provoke-the-ukraine-war-sorry-that-question-has-been-cancelled/feed/ 0 481207 One Question: What can people do to combat disinformation in the 2024 election season? https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/07/one-question-what-can-people-do-to-combat-disinformation-in-the-2024-election-season/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/07/one-question-what-can-people-do-to-combat-disinformation-in-the-2024-election-season/#respond Fri, 07 Jun 2024 00:34:20 +0000 https://progressive.org/magazine/what-can-people-do-to-combat-disinformation-in-the-2024-election-20240606/
This content originally appeared on The Progressive — A voice for peace, social justice, and the common good and was authored by The Progressive Magazine.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/07/one-question-what-can-people-do-to-combat-disinformation-in-the-2024-election-season/feed/ 0 478357 Little Ima puts a question to PM Marape for Mulitaka survivors https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/03/little-ima-puts-a-question-to-pm-marape-for-mulitaka-survivors/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/03/little-ima-puts-a-question-to-pm-marape-for-mulitaka-survivors/#respond Mon, 03 Jun 2024 05:24:35 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=102243 By Miriam Zarriga in Mulitaka, Papua New Guinea

Little Ima met Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape last Friday during the “haus krai” in Mulitaka, Enga, after the landslide disaster more than a week ago.

His meeting happened when Marape beckoned him to get water from him.

The action of the Prime Minister only moved the boy to be more courageous and in front of about 200 people at the site marked as a haus krai (traditional mourning), Ima did the unthinkable by walking up to the PM and asking him a question.

“Could my friends join me in meeting the Prime Minister?”

Within five minutes of asking, Marape said yes and suddenly the children came from all corners to sit with Marape and his colleagues who had come to see for themselves the devasting impact of the landslide.

Ima had a conversation with the Prime Minister and from the smiles of the PM, Ima had made a good impression on the man who has been faced with a barrage of criticism of late.

Walking into the “haus krai” site Marape choked back tears as he slowly made his way to the front.

Beside him was Minister for Defence Dr Billy Joseph and Enga Provincial Member Sir Peter Ipatas.

Highlighted children’s resilience
His meeting with Ima highlighted the resilience of the children who continue to smile despite the challenges and the changes in their life in the last few days.

Ima and the children have been the centre of attention as those who have come to help have doted on them.

On Thursday, the Queensland Fire Service officers had the children’s attention as the buzz of the drone caught the eye of everyone at Mulitaka.

As an officer with the Queensland fire service brought the drone over to show the children, it was a moment of mad scramble by the children and even adults to see the workings of a drone.

The officer showed Ima and the rest of the children and tried his best to explain what a drone does.

While many are still mourning the loss of loved ones, the smiles on the faces of the children was something a mother said she had not seen in a while.

‘Bringing peace’
In rapid Engan language, she said that “to see her son smile was bringing peace to her”.

Many of the women, girls and children have no clothes, basic necessities, blankets, or a shelter for the night.

Little Ima ended his week smiling after he was granted special access to the PM of this country.

However, for the rest of the children the Mulitaka Health Centre has been assisting providing health care for those who survived the landslide.

Amid the arrival of the Marape, women, girls and children continued to pour in seeking help for minor injuries and sickness.

RNZ Pacific reports that more than 7000 people have been evacuated and the PNG government believes more than 2000 people are buried under a landslip which is still moving, more than a week after the disaster.

Miriam Zarriga is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/06/03/little-ima-puts-a-question-to-pm-marape-for-mulitaka-survivors/feed/ 0 477696 How much do rich countries owe in climate aid? That’s the trillion-dollar question. https://grist.org/international/cop29-climate-finance-new-collective-quantified-goal-trillion-india-saudi-arabia/ https://grist.org/international/cop29-climate-finance-new-collective-quantified-goal-trillion-india-saudi-arabia/#respond Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:45:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=634655 Last year’s United Nations climate conference in the United Arab Emirates ended on a surprising high note as the world’s countries endorsed a landmark agreement to transition away from fossil fuels. After weeks of tense negotiation, the conference produced a slew of unprecedented commitments to ramp up the deployment of renewables, adapt to climate disasters, and move away from the use of coal, oil, and gas.

The question at this year’s COP29 conference in Baku, Azerbaijan, is just how much that massive effort will cost. After years of global debate over the scale of funding that developed countries owe less fortunate nations for decarbonization and disaster aid, negotiators have until the end of the conference in December to agree on a hard-fought financial target for climate assistance over the next few decades. This new target, referred to as the New Collective Quantified Goal by climate negotiators, is critical to upholding the 2015 Paris Agreement and addressing the harm of fossil fuel emissions from industrialized countries like the United States. Without funding, some of the poorest nations in Asia and Africa, which have contributed negligibly to the climate crisis, stand little chance of transitioning their economies away from fossil fuels and adapting to a warmer world. 

The last time the world set such a goal, it didn’t work out well. Back in 2009, wealthy countries agreed to send poorer countries $100 billion in climate finance every year by 2020. Though the figure was less than half of the annual global need, according to World Bank estimates, rich countries didn’t even come close to meeting their target until last year. Even then, some aid organizations like Oxfam contend that these countries have overstated or double-counted their aid by tens of billions of dollars. In the meantime, international estimates of total aid needs have ballooned into the trillions. As a result, the talks around climate finance are still marked by frustration and mistrust, and diplomats debating the goal over the past two years have made little progress toward consensus.

As dozens of negotiators head to Colombia later this month for the first in a series of pre-conference talks that will lay the groundwork for the new goal, developing countries are trying to use the failures of the $100 billion promise as leverage for a much bigger commitment. After years of advocacy from climate-vulnerable nations, the economic heavyweights of India and Saudi Arabia are making a formal demand for climate aid to reach $1 trillion per year, broaching a number that will send negotiations into uncharted territory. 

Increasing climate aid by more than tenfold could alter the life prospects of millions of people staring down imminent climate impacts in poor countries in Africa and Asia, but experts say the astronomical number will be a hard sell for many wealthy nations dealing with inflation and domestic turmoil. Plus, the commitment itself won’t mean much without strong safeguards to ensure the money reaches the vulnerable communities that most need it.

“It’s good that countries are using the t-word because that’s grappling with the scale of ambition that we need,” said Joe Thwaites, a climate finance expert at the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council. “But the key question is the political one of how you break that up.”

The world has known for years that the $100 billion goal was fundamentally flawed: The target number was far too low to match the mounting toll of climate change in the developing world, which one recent estimate pegged at around $2.4 trillion per year. And more than two-thirds of the aid from wealthy countries has been through loans rather than grants, forcing poor states to take on higher debt loads to respond to climate disasters. Some countries also tried to count aid to seaside hotels and gelato stores as climate assistance, exaggerating their contributions.

The slow pace of United Nations diplomacy has forced developing countries to wait more than a decade for the opportunity to hash out a new number with their counterparts in the United States and the European Union. Now that that chance has arrived, many of these countries are seeking to raise the floor for climate finance by scaling up their demands to a level that once would have sounded ludicrous. 

In a letter to fellow negotiators in February, India argued that “developed countries need to provide at least USD 1 trillion per year, composed primarily of grants and concessional finance,” or very low-interest loans. Saudi Arabia, writing on behalf of a group of countries in the Middle East, said just a few days later that “we set a [target] of USD 1.1 trillion from developed to developing countries,” plus arrears for the failure of the last goal. There are just 19 countries in the world whose economies are larger than $1 trillion, according to data from the International Monetary Fund.

The fact that India and Saudi Arabia have endorsed this number is significant. India is the world’s most populous country and one of its largest emitters, and it has significant political clout in climate talks as the largest country that still needs aid to finance its energy transition. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and it has faced immense pressure to join the United States and the European Union in sending aid to poorer countries. They are the only two countries to name a number so far.

Setting such an ambitious goal comes with pros and cons, experts say. On the one hand, shooting for the moon with a very high target provides poor countries with some cushion against the possibility that rich countries may fail to meet their promises. On the other hand, if voters and political leaders in wealthy countries don’t back the goal, the strategy might backfire and poor countries may end up receiving very little aid. 

The United States Congress, for instance, has fought for months over whether to send around $60 billion in new aid to Ukraine, and it’s a safe bet that many lawmakers would balk at helping with a trillion-dollar global commitment. Mobilizing climate aid in a divided Congress has proven to be a challenging endeavor in previous years. Endorsing a new goal could even become a liability for President Biden and other climate-forward leaders as they stare down an election year. 

Developed countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, and those within the European Union haven’t proposed a numerical target for the goal in their missives to fellow negotiators. Instead, they’ve urged a broader conversation about how to mobilize private money and how to ensure aid contributions are reaching the right communities, with Canada for instance advocating a “pragmatic approach to establishing a quantum [goal size].” The U.S. has shied away from discussion of the size, focusing in its letters on questions about which nations should contribute aid money and which nations should receive it.

“Although this [trillion] number better reflects the needs of developing countries, it will be a difficult outcome to achieve given the current constraints of developed countries — shifting geopolitics, energy security concerns, stagflation, and internal politics,” said Aman Srivatstava, a climate finance expert at the Centre for Policy Research, an India-based think tank.

But negotiators and climate advocates told Grist that the structure of the new goal matters just as much as the eventual size. The $100 billion goal was too low, but it was also too vague about what counts as “climate finance,” and many wealthy countries focused on doling out loans and private investment rather than no-strings-attached grants. These countries also tended to provide much more assistance for renewables and energy projects rather than the flood and drought aid that many countries have demanded. 

“We don’t need to talk only about the quantum in terms of the money, but also about the quality of the money,” said Sandra Guzmán Luna, the founder of the Climate Finance Group for Latin America and the Caribbean, which helps developing countries in the region track and access climate aid money. 

Herd boys pull out an ox stuck in the muddy waters of a drying reservoir in southern Zimbabwe. The county has declared a national emergency due to a drought caused by climate change and El Niño.
Herd boys pull out an ox stuck in the muddy waters of a drying reservoir in southern Zimbabwe. The county has declared a national emergency due to a drought caused by climate change and El Niño. Zinyange Auntony / AFP via Getty Images

The most likely outcome is a structure that some negotiators liken to an onion with multiple concentric layers. The United States, the European Union, and other wealthy countries would contribute a chunk of public funding in the form of grants for unprofitable projects like sea walls and drinking water systems. The other layers could include additional grants from new contributors like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which have ample wealth but have never donated much climate aid, or private loans from investors and banks. This approach would mimic the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, a 2022 agreement to protect nature and endangered species that also featured a “layered” set of commitments.

But creating such a complex structure for climate aid ahead of COP29 will be a Herculean task. Despite new endorsements for a $1 trillion goal, rich and poor countries still have huge disagreements about who should contribute to the goal, how much money should come from grants and loans, and how rich countries should be held accountable for their share. Rich countries are advocating a broader group of contributors that would include Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, as well as more flexibility to include private money in their aid contributions. Countries like China and Saudi Arabia, which have huge economies but account for a low share of carbon emissions historically, are pushing for the U.S. and the E.U. to bear the greatest burden.

With COP29 just seven months away, negotiators still haven’t even put their ideas to paper, and drafts of the potential text likely won’t appear until the summer. From there the world’s climate leaders will sprint to settle as many details as possible before the conference clock in Baku runs out. Thwaites likened the process to the puzzle game Rush Hour, where a player has to move several cars around on a grid in order to clear space for one car to escape.

“Even when you think that it’s a done deal, things can fall apart, so it’s hard to make predictions,” said Eleonora Cogo, a climate finance expert at ECCO, an Italian think tank. (Cogo has negotiated on behalf of the European Union in previous climate finance talks.) 

Given how far apart the sides are right now, Cogo says that she doubts countries will be able to work out all the details by the end of COP29. The most likely outcome is a basic agreement on “some core elements” like an approximate size and a promise to work the rest out later. This could produce any number of commitments — a strong promise from rich countries to scale up their grants, a weakened framework like the $100 billion goal, or something in between.

“The asks on the table are so different, and the points of departure are so far away,” said Cogo. “It’s all open.”

Editor’s note: The Natural Resources Defense Council is an advertiser with Grist. Advertisers have no role in Grist’s editorial decisions.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How much do rich countries owe in climate aid? That’s the trillion-dollar question. on Apr 12, 2024.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Jake Bittle.

]]> https://grist.org/international/cop29-climate-finance-new-collective-quantified-goal-trillion-india-saudi-arabia/feed/ 0 469520 What Biden and Netanyahu are Thinking is the Wrong Question https://www.radiofree.org/2024/04/05/what-biden-and-netanyahu-are-thinking-is-the-wrong-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/04/05/what-biden-and-netanyahu-are-thinking-is-the-wrong-question/#respond Fri, 05 Apr 2024 05:56:18 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=317864 A Tribute to Daniel Kahneman and Adversarial Collaboration “What is Biden thinking about Bibi?” Foreign Policy (FP) headlined in a recent issue. Indeed, one would like to ask President Biden as well as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu what they are thinking as the humanitarian catastrophe continues in Gaza with over 30,000 fatalities, over 70,000 More

The post What Biden and Netanyahu are Thinking is the Wrong Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

]]>


A Tribute to Daniel Kahneman and Adversarial Collaboration

“What is Biden thinking about Bibi?” Foreign Policy (FP) headlined in a recent issue. Indeed, one would like to ask President Biden as well as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu what they are thinking as the humanitarian catastrophe continues in Gaza with over 30,000 fatalities, over 70,000 wounded, and children and other vulnerable groups starving. But is questioning their thinking the right approach? Ever since René Descartes wrote “I think, therefore I am,” in his 1637 Discourse on the Method, people have assumed that thinking is the key to understanding human existence. Descartes’ first principle, je pense, donc je suis, became a foundation of Western thought. But contemporary work, such as that by the Nobel Prize-winning psychologist/economist Daniel Kahneman, might give us better answers to what is going on with Biden and Netanyahu. It might also give new avenues for finding solutions about what is to be done.

Kahneman was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002 for “contributions to understanding human judgment and decision-making under uncertainty.” While Descartes’ cogito, ergo sum has come to associate thinking with rationality – it was one of the pillars of the Enlightenment – Kahneman’s insights were a direct challenge to simplistic supply and demand curves. He was a leader of behavioral economics, a more complex, revolutionary way of understanding how the mind works than how traditional economics transformed human thinking into lines and curves plotted on two-dimensional graphs.

Rationally, both Biden and Netanyahu face political and legal consequences for the horrors unfolding. Both face domestic and foreign criticism. Netanyahu is facing rising protests within his country, potentially causing him to lose his power in an election, with an eventual corruption charge landing him in prison as well as international condemnation with possible criminal indictment for genocide. Biden is also facing growing protests in the United States, also potentially causing him to lose the 2024 election as well as a criminal accusation for complicity in genocide.

This is all very rational, but it has not changed their behavior. It does not explain what or how they are thinking.

Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein, one of the co-authors with Kahneman of Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment, wrote a moving tribute to Kahneman, who recently died: “Professor Kahneman, is best known for his pathbreaking explorations of human judgment and decision-making and of how people deviate from perfect rationality. He should also be remembered for a living and working philosophy that has never been more relevant: his enthusiasm for collaborating with his intellectual adversaries. This enthusiasm was deeply personal. He experienced real joy working with others to discover the truth, even if he learned that he was wrong (something that often delighted him).”

How to get Netanyahu and Biden to change? How to get Netanyahu, Biden, and Hamas into “adversarial collaboration” as Sunstein described Kahneman’s personal method. Instead of win-lose, Sunstein portrayed Kahneman’s method as “When people who disagree work together to test a hypothesis, they are involved in a common endeavor. They are trying not to win but to figure out what’s true. They might even become friends.”

That may be okay for science, but what about politics? What about political decisions affecting war or apartheid?

I had the opportunity to ask Robert McNamara and Frederik de Klerk why they changed positions, McNamara on the Vietnam War, and de Klerk about South African apartheid. McNamara said he was profoundly influenced by his daughter and her friends, more so than the millions marching in the streets protesting the war. When McNamara admitted “We were wrong, very wrong,” it seemed more a personal catharsis than a political, rational calculation.

McNamara’s revelation came in a book and interview almost three decades after the war ended. It had no influence on how the war was conducted. But it was still a reckoning. “I deeply regret that I did not force a probing debate about whether it would ever be possible to forge a winning military effort on a foundation of political quicksand,” he wrote in In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam.

De Klerk also told me it was a personal reckoning when he realized that apartheid was “just wrong.” De Klerk’s change occurred while he was in office. It had a profound influence on his government’s policy.

Helinna Ayalew wrote the following concerning de Klerk’s unexpected change in a 2010 article on political leadership and transformation: “Undoubtedly the most important moment of de Klerk’s political career came on February 2, 1990, when, in dramatic fashion, de Klerk delivered a speech at the opening of Parliament ―unbanning the ANC and thirty-one other organizations, as well as announcing the unconditional release of famed political prisoner Nelson Mandela. This speech set in motion a process of transferring power to majority vote on the principle of ―one-man, one-vote, which brought Mandela to power in 1994.”

She states quite clearly; “no one can dispute that under his watch, South Africa turned the historical corner and entered into a new era.”

What is disconcerting is that both transformations were personal. The question for us today is: What canwe do to change Biden and Netanyahu’s tragic policies? “What is to Be Done,” using Vladimir Lenin’s 1902 pamphlet’s title, is the better question to ask rather than what Biden and Netanyahu are thinking. Is there anything we can do to change Biden and Netanyahu?

Behavioral economics is just beginning. Sophisticated computer modelling still predominates economic studies. Behavioral politics is still playing a secondary role to game theory, prisoner’s dilemma, and mathematical models in political science. Kahneman’s behavioral economics has not yet gained traction in the study of politics.

The question concerning what Biden thinks about Bibi is outdated. With all due respect to Descartes and FP, thanks to Daniel Kahneman, new questions are being raised about the psychology behind decision-making, questions that go beyond traditional concepts of “thinking.” How to go from the rational, binary win-lose to “adversarial collaboration” is necessary and urgent as we move from intractable international state-centric problems to finding collaborative global solutions.

The post What Biden and Netanyahu are Thinking is the Wrong Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Daniel Warner.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/04/05/what-biden-and-netanyahu-are-thinking-is-the-wrong-question/feed/ 0 468585 One Question: What Would a Humane Border Policy Look Like? https://www.radiofree.org/2024/04/03/one-question-what-would-a-humane-border-policy-look-like/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/04/03/one-question-what-would-a-humane-border-policy-look-like/#respond Wed, 03 Apr 2024 22:39:21 +0000 https://progressive.org/magazine/what-would-a-humane-border-policy-look-like-20240403/
This content originally appeared on The Progressive — A voice for peace, social justice, and the common good and was authored by The Progressive Magazine.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/04/03/one-question-what-would-a-humane-border-policy-look-like/feed/ 0 467934 Sri Lanka: Govt-IMF Reach Agreement but Basic Question Remains https://www.radiofree.org/2024/03/28/sri-lanka-govt-imf-reach-agreement-but-basic-question-remains/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/03/28/sri-lanka-govt-imf-reach-agreement-but-basic-question-remains/#respond Thu, 28 Mar 2024 05:55:45 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=317256 The International Monetary Fund (IMF) announced on March 21, 2024, that it has reached a staff-level agreement with Sri Lanka regarding the next phase of financial assistance, granting access to $337 million from the previously approved $3 billion bailout allocated in 2023 for the financially strained nation. A staff-level agreement represents an initial consensus achieved More

The post Sri Lanka: Govt-IMF Reach Agreement but Basic Question Remains appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

]]>

Photograph Source: AntanO – CC BY-SA 4.0

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) announced on March 21, 2024, that it has reached a staff-level agreement with Sri Lanka regarding the next phase of financial assistance, granting access to $337 million from the previously approved $3 billion bailout allocated in 2023 for the financially strained nation. A staff-level agreement represents an initial consensus achieved between the personnel of the IMF and the governing authorities of a member nation concerning economic policies and reforms.

Over two weeks starting from March 7, a team from the IMF, led by senior mission chief Peter Breuer and deputy mission chief Katsiaryna Svirydzenka, conducted the second review of the bailout program in Colombo. The initial bailout, totaling $2.9 billion and spanning four years, was approved in March 2023. Two tranches of $330 million each were disbursed in March and December 2023.

Upon approval by IMF management and subsequent completion by the IMF executive board, Sri Lanka will now gain access to SDR 254 million (approximately $337 million) in financial assistance.

Sri Lanka had declared its first-ever sovereign default since gaining independence from Britain in 1948 in April 2022.

The Sri Lankan Uprising of 2022

The 2022 protests in Sri Lanka, popularly referred to as Aragalaya (The Struggle), began in March of that year as a response to the government’s policies. Criticisms were aimed at the government’s handling of the country’s economy, which had plunged into a severe crisis. The crisis, which sparked widespread unrest, was fueled by a combination of factors, including rampant inflation, frequent power cuts, and shortages of essential goods like fuel and domestic gas.

Massive protests culminated in a governmental collapse in Sri Lanka on July 13, 2022. A significant number of demonstrators had marched toward President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s residence asking for his resignation. Rajapaksa left the country for the Maldives, leaving Ranil Wickremesinghe to assume the role of acting president due to his position as prime minister. By evening, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe too had resigned, paving the way for the establishment of an all-party government.

Wickremesinghe, who had previously held the position of Prime Minister on six occasions and was serving as acting President, was elected as the eighth executive President of Sri Lanka following a parliamentary vote on July 20, 2022.

Crisis in the Sri Lankan Economy

Sri Lanka finds itself embroiled in a severe economic crisis, exacerbating the already pressing issue of food insecurity within the nation. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) reports that 6.2 million individuals, constituting 28 percent of the population, are somewhat food insecure, with an additional 66,000 facing severe food insecurity.

The crisis, fueled by soaring inflation and prolonged political turmoil, has reshaped the landscape of governance in Sri Lanka, disproportionately affecting its impoverished communities. Once spending 32 percent of their income on food in 2019, in 2022, the same figure was a staggering 75 percent. The brunt of this crisis is borne most acutely by informal sector workers, with 86 percent of households reducing food intake, and some even skipping meals.

The food security challenge in Sri Lanka has been compounded by a significant decline in food production, impacting the 26.41 percent of the population dependent on agriculture. The United Nations Office of the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs’s (OCHA) Needs Assessment Reporthighlighted a serious decline in domestic agricultural output stemming from an unsuccessful transition to organic farming. In April 2021, the former government had imposed a ban on importing chemical fertilizers, which, even after being lifted in November, led to a 40 to 50 percent reduction in agricultural outputs for both Maha and Yala monsoon seasons.

Two in three households adjusted their children’s eating habits during the crisis: over half of all children (54 percent) had to eat cheaper or lower quality food; over one-third (35 percent) had to reduce the quantity their children were eating; and about one in ten children (12 percent) had to reduce the frequency of their children’s food intake.

In 2022, the youth unemployment rate in Sri Lanka reached a staggering 24 percent, reflecting a concerning trend in the labor force ages 15 to 24. Poverty levels have been on the rise since 2019, increasing from 11.3 percent to 12.7 percent in 2020, which equates to over 300,000 new individuals falling below the poverty line during that period. This trend continued into 2021, with poverty rates doubling between 2021 and 2022, soaring from 13.1 percent to 25.0 percent. This sharp increase has pushed an additional 2.5 million people into poverty in 2022 alone. Households have been profoundly affected by this economic turmoil, facing multiple challenges such as a 46 percent increase in prices, a contraction in service and industry jobs (forcing workers into lower-paying agricultural roles), a decline in remittances, and negative impacts on agricultural incomes due to the ban on chemical fertilizers implemented in 2021.

Austerity Measures and the IMF

IMF packages in Sri Lanka have negatively impacted the people. Austerity measures and structural reforms have led to cuts in public spending, increased unemployment, and reduced access to essential services. Privatization and deregulation have resulted in higher costs of necessities, exacerbating poverty and inequality. While these packages offer short-term financial aid, their long-term effects deepen social hardships for the most vulnerable communities in Sri Lanka.

With the imposition of various bailout packages, the Sri Lankan government has also implemented a series of austerity measures, increasing the challenges faced by its citizens amidst the country’s severe economic crisis. These measures entail significant reductions in government expenditures across different sectors, including critical areas such as social protection measures, and essential public services like healthcare and education, further undermining the well-being of the population. Notably, each ministry’s annual budget has been slashed by 5 percent.

In addition to these detrimental cuts, Sri Lanka’s tax system has come under scrutiny for its regressive nature, characterized by a disproportionate reliance on indirect taxes such as the value-added tax (VAT), which accounts for 80 percent of tax revenue. This disproportionately affects lower-income individuals, who end up paying a larger share of their income in taxes compared to their higher-income counterparts.

Furthermore, the government’s decision to privatize state-owned enterprises as part of its austerity measures has had negative consequences for both employees and consumers, leading to job losses and reduced access to essential services. Similarly, recent economic policy initiatives promoting labor “flexibility” have resulted in the erosion of workers’ rights and welfare, exacerbating income disparities and labor exploitation.

Changes in pension regulations, such as the gradual reduction of pension gratuities for retirees, have further increased the financial insecurity faced by vulnerable segments of the population, particularly retirees relying on fixed incomes for their livelihoods.

The Central Bank of Sri Lanka’s adoption of a significantly tighter monetary policy stance, characterized by successive increases in policy interest rates has had adverse effects on borrowing costs of both industries and citizens and economic activity in terms of production and consumer expenditure.

This article was produced by Globetrotter.

The post Sri Lanka: Govt-IMF Reach Agreement but Basic Question Remains appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Pranjal Pandey.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/03/28/sri-lanka-govt-imf-reach-agreement-but-basic-question-remains/feed/ 0 466767 Question for PNG foreign minister Tkatchenko – what does the defence pact mean for West Papua? https://www.radiofree.org/2024/03/11/question-for-png-foreign-minister-tkatchenko-what-does-the-defence-pact-mean-for-west-papua/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/03/11/question-for-png-foreign-minister-tkatchenko-what-does-the-defence-pact-mean-for-west-papua/#respond Mon, 11 Mar 2024 03:19:54 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=98069 ANALYSIS: By Ali Mirin

Papua New Guinea and Indonesia have formally ratified a defence agreement a decade after its initial signing.

PNG’s Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko and the Indonesian ambassador to the Pacific nation, Andriana Supandy, convened a press briefing in Port Moresby on February 29 to declare the ratification.

The agreement enables an enhancement of military operations between the two countries, with a specific focus on strengthening patrols along the border between Papua New Guinea and Indonesia.

According to Tkatchenko as reported by RNZ Pacific citing Benar News, “The Joint border patrols and different types of defence cooperation between Indonesia and Papua New Guinea of course will be part of the ever-growing security mechanism.”

“It would be wonderful to witness the collaboration between Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, both now and in the future, as they work together side by side. Indonesia is a rising Southeast Asian power that reaches into the South Pacific region and dwarfs Papua New Guinea in population, economic size and military might,” added the minister.

In recent years, Indonesia has been asserting its own regional hegemony in the Pacific amid the rivalries of two superpowers — the United States and China.

Indonesia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Retno Marsudi reiterated Indonesia’s commitment to bolster collaboration with Pacific nations amid heightened geopolitical tensions in the Indo-Pacific region during the recent 2024 annual press statement held by the minister for foreign affairs at the Asian-African Conference in Bandung.

Diverse Indigenous states
The Pacific Islands are home to diverse sovereign Indigenous states and islands, and also home to two influential regional powers, Australia and New Zealand. This vast diverse region is increasingly becoming a pivotal strategic and political battleground for foreign powers — aiming to win the hearts and minds of the populations and governments in the region.

Numerous visible and hidden agreements, treaties, talks, and partnerships are being established among local, regional, and global stakeholders in the affairs of this vast region.

The Pacific region carries great importance for powerful military and economic entities such as China, the United States and its coalition, and Indonesia. For them, it serves as a crucial area for strategic bases, resource acquisition, food, and commercial routes.

For Indigenous islanders, states, and tribal communities, the primary concern is around the loss of their territories, islands, and other vital cultural aspects, such as languages and traditional wisdom.

The crumbling of Oceania, reminiscent of its past colonisation by various European powers, is now occurring. However, this time it is being orchestrated by foreign entities appointing their own influential local pawns.

With these local pawns in place, foreign monarchs, nobility, warlords, and miscreants are advancing to reshape the region’s fate.

The rejection by the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) to acknowledge the representation of West Papua by the United Liberation for West Papua (ULMWP) as a full member of the regional body in August 2023 highlights the diminishing influence of MSG leaders in decision-making processes concerning issues that are deemed crucial by the Papuan community as part of the “Melanesian family affairs”.

Suspicion over ‘external forces’
This raises suspicion of external forces at play within the Melanesian nations, manipulating their destinies. The question arises, who is orchestrating the fate of the Melanesian nations?

Is it Jakarta, Beijing, Washington, or Canberra?

In a world characterised by instability, safety and security emerges as a crucial prerequisite for fostering a peaceful coexistence, nurturing friendships, and enabling development.

The critical question at hand pertains to the nature of the threats that warrant such protective measures, the identities of both the endangered and the aggressors, and the underlying rationale and mechanisms involved. Whose safety hangs in the balance in this discourse?

And between whom does the spectre of threat loom?

If you are a realist in a world of policymaking, it is perhaps wise not to antagonise the big guy with the big weapon in the room. The Minister of Papua New Guinea may be attempting to underscore the importance of Indonesia in the Pacific region, as indicated by his statements.

If you are West Papuan, it makes little difference whether one leans towards realism or idealism. What truly matters is the survival of West Papuans, in the midst of the significant settler colonial presence of Asian Indonesians in their ancestral homeland.

West Papuan refugee camp
Two years ago, PNG’s minister stated the profound existential sentiments experienced by the West Papuans in 2022 while visiting a West Papuan refugee community in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea.

During the visit, the minister addressed the West Papuan refugees with the following words:

“The line on the map in middle of the island (New Guinea) is the product of colonial impact. These West Papuans are part of our family, part of our members and part of Papua New Guinea. They are not strangers.

“We are separated only by imaginary lines, which is why I am here. I did not come here to fight, to yell, to scream, to dictate, but to reach a common understanding — to respect the law of Papua New Guinea and the sovereignty of Indonesia.”

These types of ambiguous and opaque messages and rhetoric not only instil fake hope among the West Papuans, but also produce despair among displaced Papuans on their own soil.

The seemingly paradoxical language coupled with the significant recent security agreement with the entity — Indonesia — that has been oppressing the West Papuans under the pretext of sovereignty, signifies one ominous prospect:

Is PNG endorsing a “death decree” for the Indonesian security apparatus to hunt Papuans along the border and mountainous region of West Papua and Papua New Guinea?

Security for West Papua
Currently, the situation in West Papua is deteriorating steadily. Thousands of Indonesian military personnel have been deployed to various regions in West Papua, especially in the areas afflicted by conflict, such as Nduga, Yahukimo, Maybrat, Intan Jaya, Puncak, Puncak Jaya, Star Mountain, and along the border separating Papua New Guinea from West Papua.

On the 27 February 2024, Indonesian military personnel captured two teenage students and fatally shot a Papuan civilian in the Yahukimo district. They alleged that the deceased individual was affiliated with the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNB), although this assertion has yet to be verified by the TPNPB.

Such incidents are tragically a common occurrence throughout West Papua, as the Indonesian military continue to target and wrongfully accuse innocent West Papuans in conflict-ridden regions of being associated with the TPNPB.

Two West Papuan students who were arrested on the banks of Braza River
Two West Papuan students who were arrested on the banks of Braza River in Yahukimo . . . under the watch of two Indonesian military with heavy SS2 guns standing behind them. Image: Kompas.com

These deplorable acts transpired just prior to the ratification of a border operation agreement between the governments of the Papua New Guinea and Indonesia.

As the security agreement was being finalised, the Indonesian government announced a new military campaign in the highlands of West Papua. This operation, is named as “Habema” — meaning “must succeed to the maximum” — and was initiated in Jakarta on the 29 February 2024.

Agus Subiyanto, the Indonesian military command and police command stated during the announcement:

“My approach for Papua involves smart power, a blend of soft power, hard power, and military diplomacy. Establishing the Habema operational command is a key step in ensuring maximum success.”

Indonesian military commander General Agus Subiyanto
Indonesian military commander General Agus Subiyanto (left) with National Police chief Listyo Sigit Prabowo (centre) and Defence Minister Prabowo Subianto while checking defence equipment at the TNI headquarters in Jakarta last Wednesday. Prabowo (right) is expected to become President after his decisive victory in the elections last week. Image: Antara News.

The looming military operation in West Papua and its border regions, employing advanced smart weapon technology poised a profound danger for Papuans.

A looming humanitarian crisis in West Papua, PNG, broader Melanesia and the Pacific region is inevitable, as unmanned aerial drones discern targets indiscriminately, wreak havoc in homes, and villages of the Papuan communities.

The Indonesian security forces have increasingly employed such sophisticated technology in conflict zones since 2019, including regions like Intan Jaya, Yahukimo, Maybrat, Pegunungan Bintang, and other volatile regions in West Papua.

Consequently, villages have been razed to the ground, compelling inhabitants to flee to the jungle in search of sanctuary — an exodus that continues unabated as they remain displaced from their homes indefinitely.

On 5 April 2018, the Indonesian government announced a military operation known as Damai Cartenz, which remains active in conflict-ridden regions, such as Yahukimo, Pegunungan Bintang, Nduga, and Intan Jaya.

The Habema security initiative will further threaten Papuans residing in the conflict zones, particularly in the vicinity of the border shared by Papua New Guinea and West Papua.

There are already hundreds of people from the Star Mountains who have fled across to Tumolbil, in the Yapsie sub-district of the PNG province of West Sepik, situated on the border. They fled to PNG because of Indonesia’s military operation (RNZ 2021).

According to RNZ News, individuals fleeing military actions conducted by the Indonesian government, including helicopter raids that caused significant harm to approximately 14 villages, have left behind foot tracks.

The speaker explained that Papua New Guineans occasionally cross over to the Indonesian side, typically seeking improved access to basic services.

The PNG government has been placing refugees from West Papua in border camps, the biggest one being at East Awin in the Western Province for many decades, with assistance from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

How should PNG, UN respond?
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007, article 36, states that “Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation with their own members as well as other peoples across borders”.

Over the past six years, regional and international organisations, such as the Melanesian Spearheads groups (MSG), Pacific islands Forum (PIF), Africa, Caribbean and Pacific states (ACP), the UN’s human rights commissioner as well as dozens of countries and individual parliaments, lawyers, academics, and politicians have been asking the Indonesian government to allow the UN’s human rights commissioner to visit West Papua.

However, to date, no response has been received from the Indonesian government.

What does this security deal mean for West Papuans?
This is not just a simple security arrangement between Jakarta and Port Moresby to address border conflicts, but rather an issue of utmost importance for the people of Papua.

It concerns the sovereignty of a nation — West Papua — that has been unjustly seized by Indonesia, while the international community watched in silence, witnessing the unfurling and unparalleled destruction of human lives and the ecological system.

There is one noble thing the foreign minister of PNG and his government can do: ask why Jakarta is not responding to the request for a UN visit made by the international community, rather than endorsing an ‘illegal security pact’ with the illegal Indonesia colonial occupier over his supposed “family members separated only by imaginary lines”.

Ali Mirin is a West Papuan from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands that share a border with the Star Mountain region of Papua New Guinea. He graduated last year with a Master of Arts in International Relations from Flinders University in Adelaide, South Australia.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/03/11/question-for-png-foreign-minister-tkatchenko-what-does-the-defence-pact-mean-for-west-papua/feed/ 0 463246 Namah not happy with Marape’s reply over PNG ‘warlords’ question https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/22/namah-not-happy-with-marapes-reply-over-png-warlords-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/22/namah-not-happy-with-marapes-reply-over-png-warlords-question/#respond Thu, 22 Feb 2024 05:57:06 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=97245
By Gorethy Kenneth in Port Moresby

Papua New Guinea’s former opposition leader Belden Namah says Prime Minister James Marape never answered in detail the questions he asked in Parliament this week about the Enga massacre

Namah, the Vanimo Green MP, said he was dissatisfied with the response Marape presented in Parliament yesterday as the death toll from the Wapenamanda killings rose to about 70.

“He never answered any one of my questions,” he said angrily.

“I would have expected him to say, yes, we are putting together a special force from the police and the military to go in there and go after the warlords, go after the murderers.”

“We have funding allocated separately for that. We have the capacity, the policemen and women have enough uniforms, three sets of uniforms, they have allowance, these are the sort of preparedness I was looking for the PM to tell me when I was talking about combat readiness.

“We are sending the same old people, the soldiers and the police and they are fraternising with the tribal fighters, with the lot of people on the ground and not effecting any arrests.

“In fact, they are standing around with the warriors carrying their guns, soldiers and police carrying their guns, where are we heading?” he asked.

‘I wanted PM to go hard’
“I wanted the Prime Minister to come to the floor of Parliament and say my government is going to do this and do that, and go hard on these people.

“The death toll has gone up to 70, it’s not a small number, it’s hit news media everywhere in the world.

“It is not about this 70 only, it started in his electorate, in his province and I would have expected that he would put in place counter measures for this.

“He has not. Police have their own intelligence officers, military have their own intelligence, [and] the government has its own.

“They should be out there penetrating the tribal villages collecting information and then send in special forces — that’s what I mean by having the government ready to counter these kinds of activities.

“And if the force was in readiness, they would have put [it] forward.”

Namah said Marape’s response yesterday demonstrated that the government was not interested in sorting out the security issues in the Highlands-affected areas.

Police chief on notice
Prime Minister Marape told Parliament that Police Commissioner Davd Manning had been put on notice to ensure the country was secured.

Marape addressed the pressing issues of lawlessness raised during a parliamentary session this week, singling out that a plan to incorporate all suggestions by MPs –– including the Enga massacre and others.

Gorethy Kenneth is a senior Post-Courier journalist. Republished with permission.

 

 

 


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/22/namah-not-happy-with-marapes-reply-over-png-warlords-question/feed/ 0 459926 The Palestinian Resistance is Winning: the Movement Must Expose and Defeat Netanyahu’s “Final Solution” to the Palestinian Question https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/21/the-palestinian-resistance-is-winning-the-movement-must-expose-and-defeat-netanyahus-final-solution-to-the-palestinian-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/21/the-palestinian-resistance-is-winning-the-movement-must-expose-and-defeat-netanyahus-final-solution-to-the-palestinian-question/#respond Wed, 21 Feb 2024 06:58:40 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=313990 Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, facing worldwide condemnation, desperately tells his isolated supporters that Israel needs “absolute victory.” On Christmas Day 2023, the Wall Street Journal gave the Prime Minister a worldwide platform to assert his manifesto—“Our Three Prerequisites for Peace: We Must Destroy Hamas, Demilitarize Gaza, and De-radicalize the Whole of Palestinian Society.” Netanyahu makes his objectives clear. He wants a “final solution” to the Palestinian problem—the mass annihilation of the Palestinian people. His goal is a Palestine without any Palestinians so Israel can completely occupy all of Palestine once and for all. More

The post The Palestinian Resistance is Winning: the Movement Must Expose and Defeat Netanyahu’s “Final Solution” to the Palestinian Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

]]>

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, facing worldwide condemnation, desperately tells his isolated supporters that Israel needs “absolute victory.” On Christmas Day 2023, the Wall Street Journal gave the Prime Minister a worldwide platform to assert his manifesto—“Our Three Prerequisites for Peace: We Must Destroy Hamas, Demilitarize Gaza, and De-radicalize the Whole of Palestinian Society.” Netanyahu makes his objectives clear. He wants a “final solution” to the Palestinian problem—the mass annihilation of the Palestinian people. His goal is a Palestine without any Palestinians so Israel can completely occupy all of Palestine once and for all.

The Israel ruling class’ direct application of Hitler’s “Final Solution to the Jewish Question” warrants a brief historical reconstruction. By 1939, Adolph Hitler gave a speech calling for the “mass extermination of all the Jews in Europe.” The very term “extermination” is based on the dehumanization and vilification of the Jewish people. The “Final Solution to the Jewish Question” was the official code name for the murder of every Jew the Nazis could reach. This policy of deliberate and systematic mass murder in Germany and German-occupied Europe was formulated in procedural and geopolitical terms by Nazi leadership in January 1942 at the Wannsee Conference held near Berlin. It culminated in the Holocaust, which saw the murder of 90 percent of Polish Jews, and two-thirds of the Jewish population of Europe. Raul Hilberg, author of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote that in 1941 the first phase of the mass-murder of Jews, the mobile killing units began to pursue their victims across occupied eastern territories; in the second phase, stretching across all of German-occupied Europe, the Jewish victims were sent on death trains to centralized killing camps built for the purpose of systematic murder of Jews.

But why did the Nazis call it the “final solution?” Because every other form of oppression of the Jews did not solve the problem. Nazi Germany had so much hatred for the Jews that only their mass annihilation was the “solution” to their question—what can we do to eradicate the Jews as a people. The Nazis began with verbal abuse and physical beating. Then forcing Jews to wear a yellow star of David as they screamed epithets and threw rocks. Then the forced imprisonment in ghettos. Then widespread murder. Then a thought that perhaps the Jews could be dispersed. But to where?—as Germany wanted to control the world and the U.S., British and French sure didn’t want the Jews. Then, finally, the Final Solution.

From the conceptual and strategic formulation of Zionism in the 1880s to the Israeli mass slaughter and dispersal of more than 700,000 indigenous Palestinian people in 1947—that the Palestinians call The Nakba-the Catastrophe—Israel’s very existence was based on genocide. Genocide, the removal and mass murder of indigenous inhabitants is the central tactical imperative of white, European, settler imperialism. The UN Convention on Genocide of 1948 defines genocide as “any of five acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. These five acts include killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group.”

In the folklore of the white, Christian, European and now Jewish imperialist settlers, the land is always assumed to be vacant—or in their minds—pre-vacant. However, the proponents of Zionism in the 1880s well understood that the entire world was inhabited. As such, they required the support of the Imperialist Powers, in this case England, to displace the Palestinians over which the British had colonial control. That would be the land base of a new settler state run by Zionist Jews. In return, Israel promised to be a loyal agent of British, and later U.S. imperialism in the middle east—supporting anti-communism, counterrevolution, and the expansion of the colonial racist agenda. This was most grotesquely apparent in Israel’s deep strategic, ideological, and cultural alliance with the South African apartheid regime.

The Israeli tactical plan to carry out its genocide has proceeded methodically

It began with the systematic invasion of Jewish settlers into Palestine, as early as the 1880s, as conscious infiltrators and future conquerors.

Then there was the Nakba in 1947—a punitive Israeli military invasion of Palestine resulting in the forced removal of more than 700,000 Palestinians.

Then there was the Israeli occupation of Gaza in 1967—the arrests of 1 million Palestinians and the Israeli creation of a 2-million-person open-air concentration camp in Gaza— blocked from any humanitarian aid or the right to travel by land, water, and air.  Then, with the people of Gaza encircled, the Israelis inflicted a systematic reign of terror against them using the tactics of imprisonment, torture, kidnapping, and murder. The Israeli brutality and constant cultural abuse led to infant mortality, despair, depression, PTSD, and suicide among the indigenous Palestinians. This was a conscious plan by Israel to destroy the culture, integrity, and national identity of the Palestinian people.

Then, on October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a bold and effective tactical initiative for Palestinian national liberation. Imagine, that the Palestinian people and Hamas sought revenge, insurgency, and liberation against fascist occupation. The simple assertion of the humanity of the Palestinian people and their right, by any means necessary, to fight back has forced every nation in the world to pay great attention to the Palestinian cause and take a stand—which side are you on? While many of Israel’s traditional allies profess support, many are already formulating an exit strategy.

In response to the tactical initiatives of Hamas, Israel has formulated the most brutal of all responses—to destroy the Palestinian people as a people once and for all. What Netanyahu calls, “Total victory.” This was always the plan but it had to be implemented in steps. The concept of an armed Palestinian resistance movement is inconceivable and unacceptable to the Zionists—but inspiring, exhilarating, and liberating for the Palestinian people. The mass resistance of the oppressed, as Franz Fanon pointed out, is the great anti-depressant.

Netanyahu’s First Prerequisite:  Hamas must be destroyed. 

Netanyahu begins his manifesto:

First, Hamas, a key Iranian proxy, must be destroyed. The U.S., U.K., France, Germany and many other countries support Israel’s intention to demolish the terror group. To achieve that goal, its military capabilities must be dismantled and its political rule over Gaza must end. Hamas’s leaders have vowed to repeat the Oct. 7 massacre “again and again.” That is why their destruction is the only proportional response to prevent the repeat of such horrific atrocities. Anything less guarantees more war and more bloodshed. In destroying Hamas, Israel will continue to act in full compliance with international law.

Note that Netanyahu concedes “Hamas’ political rule over Gaza”—an acknowledgment of its overwhelming political support among the Palestinian people in Gaza.

Hamas is a popular political organization, with support throughout all of Palestine—with its strongest base in Gaza. Its goal is the national liberation of the Palestinian people. It is a guerrilla movement. In January 2006 when the Palestinian territories held what turned out to be their last parliamentary elections, Hamas, running as the Change and Reform Party, won the largest popular vote— 44 of the  total. This was compared to 41% for Fatah, the more moderate  Palestinian Authority. Under the parliamentary system Hamas won a strong majority of seats—74 for Hamas and 45 for Fatah.

This vote was an amazing upset since Israel detained 50 members of Hamas who were involved the elections as well as capturing and imprisoning 15 of its leaders. If that was not enough, the U.S. and Europe provided half of Fatah’s election budget with the U.S. contributing $2.3 million. Without Israeli, European, and U.S. intervention and aid, Hamas would have won in a landslide. But through this process, Hamas gained even greater political support and Fatah was discredited in the eyes of many in Gaza. So, Netanyahu and the vast majority of the Israeli political forces who agree with or concede to him,  have decided that  “the political rule” of Hamas must be destroyed. In practice, this means all Palestinians active in Hamas, friendly to Hamas, or even not opposed to Hamas must be destroyed.

Netanyahu’s use of the world “destroy” is an explicit call for the mass murder of Hamas and all Palestinians. The U.S., Europe, and Israel only use the term “destroy” in their war against Third World people. Note that during World War II, in U.S., English and Third World communists war against German, Italian, and Japanese fascists, the U.S. leaders never used the word “destroy.” While the U.S. realized that most German and Japanese people were enthusiastic Nazis and fascists, the U.S. had plans to re-integrate and “rehabilitate” them after World War II into its imperialist, anti-communist plan for world domination.  Thus, the U.S. wanted to create the myth that only a small number of Nazis leaders forced their people into unbearable crimes against humanity. Then, upon victory, the U.S. could  humanize the Nazis and fascists they intended to recruit to its cause. Even in the face of German genocide against the Jewish people, Roma people, and communists, “destroy” was never in the U.S. lexicon.

Proportional Response

Here is a documentation of the mass suffering caused by Israel’s “proportional response”:

In Gaza, according to Al Jazeera,

Killed: at least 27,947 people, including more than 12,150 children and 8,300 women

Injured: more than 67,459, including at least 8,663 children and 6,327 women

Missing: more than 7,000

More than half of Gaza’s homes – 360,000 residential units – have been destroyed or damaged. Including 390 educational facilities, 13 out of 35 hospitals are partially functioning. 122 ambulances, 267 places of worship destroyed by Israeli attacks.

Every hour in Gaza: 15 people are killed— six are children, 35 people are injured, 42 bombs are dropped, and 12 buildings are destroyed.

Netanyahu, with the full support of President Biden and the vast majority of the Democrats and Republicans made his plan for mass murder apparent. As he stated on October 7 reported in Al Jazeera,

We will take mighty vengeance for this black day,” the Israeli leader said in a televised address. “We will take revenge for all the young people who lost their lives. We will target all of Hamas’s positions. We will turn Gaza into a deserted island. To the citizens of Gaza, I say. You must leave now. We will target each and every corner of the strip.

Israel’s contempt for any international statutes and institutions that try to protect human rights  

Everyone in the world, or at least the Third World, knows that U.S, Europe, and Israel have contempt for international law.

On January 26, 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled on South Africa’s charges that Israel is committing acts of Genocide against the Palestinian people. As could be expected, the U.S., Germany, and Israel rejected the entire charge as “baseless.”  Nonetheless, under international pressure, Israel had to accept the authority of the court to rule on the charges because it decided it had to put forth a vigorous defense. The ICJ ruled against Israel and demanded that Israel cease and desist from many of its genocidal practices. Its decision stated,

In the court’s view, “at least some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the 1948 Genocide Convention.

Now, in a literal reading of this decision, it might appear that the Court ruling was not very strong. But the court’s language— “at least” “alleged” “”appear to be capable”— were carefully constructed to meet the legal standards of its interim decision and prevent Israel from claiming animus against it. But the main conclusion of the Court was that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people. This is a massive political defeat for Israel and a tremendous victory for the South African government and the people of Palestine.

Sadly, but not surprisingly one week after the decision The Conversation documented Israel’s contempt of court.

More than a week has passed since the International Court of Justice (ICJ) mandated provisional measures against Israel following South Africa’s accusation of genocide. The court’s demands were clear: Israel must take immediate steps to prevent genocidal actions in Gaza; prevent and punish incitement to genocide; allow access to humanitarian aid; and prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence of alleged crimes. It must also report back to the court within a month on the implementation of these measures. There’s little evidence Israel has changed course, despite these clear orders. In fact, reports from Gaza suggest escalated violence and increased civilian casualties each day.

Worse, as we read this, Israel, having driven the people of Gaza towards the Rafa border, is now planning an imminent ground mass murder against one million Gaza residents trapped by the IDF assault.

Netanyahu’s Second Prerequisite:  Hamas must be demilitarized.

Second, Gaza must be demilitarized.

Israel must ensure that the territory is never again used as a base to attack it. Among other things, this will require establishing a temporary security zone on the perimeter of Gaza and an inspection mechanism on the border between Gaza and Egypt that meets Israel’s security needs and prevents smuggling of weapons into the territory. The expectation that the Palestinian Authority will demilitarize Gaza is a pipe dream. It currently funds and glorifies terrorism in Judea and Samaria and educates Palestinian children to seek the destruction of Israel. Not surprisingly it has shown neither the capability nor the will to demilitarize Gaza. It failed to do so before Hamas booted it out of the territory in 2007, and it has failed to do so in the territories under its control today. For the foreseeable future Israel will have to retain overriding security responsibility over Gaza.

The Israeli objective to demilitarize Hamas is an explicit plan to create  an unarmed, defenseless Palestinian people subject to every form of Israeli barbarism without any hope, or capacity to retaliate.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), Israel has 169,500 active military personnel, 465,000 reserve forces, and 8,000 paramilitary personnel.  The entire apparatus is mandated by Israel’s financial system, which counts on more than $3.8 Billion of military aid a year from the U.S. The State of Israel has between 80 and 400 nuclear warheads. It can deliver them by aircraft, as submarine-launched cruise missiles, and via the Jericho series of intermediate to intercontinental range ballistic missiles.

By contrast, Haman’s armed forces are very small. But they are strategic, disciplined, focused, and effective. Hamas has a well-developed military structure with 15,000–16,000 potential combatants. The Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ armed wing, has an estimated 30,000–40,000 fighters.  Thank God they have a people’s army. Despite Hamas’ small force of armed resistance, they are winning the war of ideas and the war of political support in the world. The Palestinian people will never lay down their arms and will always resist the Israeli Holocaust.

Netanyahu’s Third Prerequisite: Gaza Must Be De-radicalized

Third, Gaza will have to be deradicalized. Schools must teach children to cherish life rather than death, and imams must cease to preach for the murder of Jews. Palestinian civil society needs to be transformed so that its people support fighting terrorism rather than funding it. That will likely require courageous and moral leadership. Successful deradicalization took place in Germany and Japan after the Allied victory in World War II. Today, both nations are great allies of the U.S. and promote peace, stability and prosperity in Europe and Asia. Such a cultural transformation will be possible in Gaza only among Palestinians who don’t seek the destruction of Israel.

Deradicalization is code for the Jakarta Method, documented by Vincent Bevins in which the U.S. and its allies use mass murder as the only successful form of counter-insurgency.

The Indigenous People of the America’s well understand that “deradicalization” led the Spanish invaders, the Portuguese, and later the English-Americans to murder more than 90 million indigenous people in one century—and then systematically murder the leaders of those who remained. The Black Panthers well understood that J. Edgar Hoover’s “COINTELPRO” program was designed to “expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit and otherwise neutralize” —that is, arrest, torture, and assassinate the leaders of the Black Liberation and civil rights movement. The U.S. worked to deradicalize the National Liberation Front of Vietnam my murdering 4 million Vietnamese people.

To apply the ideas of the great Martinican revolutionary Aimé Césaire in his Discourse on Colonialism,  the U.S., Europe, and Israel are indefensible.

Netanyahu concludes his discourse on genocide

Once Hamas is destroyed, Gaza is demilitarized and Palestinian society begins a deradicalization process, Gaza can be rebuilt and the prospects of a broader peace in the Middle East will become a reality.

It has become clear that Netanyahu’s brutal vision is shared by Israel’s willing executioners.

Two Israeli rappers have called for the murder of singer Dua Lipa, model Bella Hadid, and ex-porn star Mia Khalifa in a chart-topping song that has become an unofficial soundtrack for the Israel-Hamas war.

The drill rap by Israeli duo, Ness and Stilla, has exploded since it was released three months ago — with the music video since racking up a whopping 18.5 million views on YouTube. The Hebrew track — titled “Harbu Darbu” — features the rappers firing off an apparent kill list of those they hold accountable for the October 7 bloodshed inflicted by Hamas terrorists in southern Israel.

“Every dog will get what’s coming to them,” the duo sings in the clip after listing off the three celebrity names. Dua Lipa, the British-Albanian singer and Bella Hadid, the world-famous fashion model who is of Palestinian descent, have both called for a cease-fire amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Khalifa, meanwhile, sparked outrage after referring to Hamas as “freedom fighters” on social media in the days after the war broke out.

Meanwhile, the rappers also take aim at Mohammed Deif, the head of Hamas’ Al-Qassam brigades; Hamas’ political wing chair, Ismail Haniyeh; and Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah — chanting that the Israel Defense Forces will “rain a storm down on them.” Other lyrics featured in the rap translate to “we have brought the whole army against you and we swear there will be no forgiveness” and “get your a-s ready” for the IDF. It also featured heavily as background music on TikTok videos where young Israelis and soldiers filmed themselves lip-syncing and dancing to the song.

The Israeli crimes are not the ramblings of a mad man. They are deep in the heart and soul of the Israeli people. Young and old, reformed, conservative, and orthodox, agnostic, atheist, religious  or secular, square or hip—there is mass support among Israeli Jews for Netanyahu’s final solution. A recent public opinion poll at Tel Aviv University found that 40 percent of Jewish Israelis believed that the mass murders by the IDF were the right level of force, while 58 percent felt they were not brutal enough. One does not need to be a mathematician to see that among Israeli Jews—until there is a courageous and militant Jewish anti-Zionist resistance— there is a widespread and insatiable appetite for killing the Palestinian people.

In the U.S. we have seen, and worked to create, a meteoric rise of the Black, Jewish, and progressive support for the human rights of the Palestinian people. The immediate popular demands are to call for an immediate ceasefire, cutting of all aid to Israel, and a massive campaign for humanitarian aid. Others go further—to oppose Netanyahu’s genocidal plan, to save the lives of the Palestinian people as a prelude to the most extensive reparations and to bring U.S. officials including U.S. President Joe Biden up on charges of genocide in front of the International Criminal Court.

The 2024 U.S. presidential elections are a tremendous historical opportunity to bring international attention to the U.S. genocide against Palestine, and its continued genocide against the Indigenous and Black people trapped inside its territorial borders. The U.S. presidential elections, starting now, offer the movement the chance to convince many people of goodwill that the main “outcome of the election” is not which candidate will win but how can we help deliver a victory for the people of Palestine

The long history of the Black, civil rights, anti-war movements’ support for Palestine and the prominent role of anti-Zionist Jews in those movements offers hope for today.  In the summer of 1964, 60 years ago, 1,000 young white people came South at the request of the leadership of the Black Freedom Movement. They came “to be of use” as they were asked to “put their bodies on the line.” Of the 1000 white volunteers, 500 were Jews. That is statistically astounding but historically explainable. The young Jewish people, many of whom had family members who were Holocaust victims and survivors, were fiercely anti-Zionist in the secular liberal, humanist, socialist, and communist traditions of Jews all over the world. We saw the struggle of the Jewish people against German genocide reflected in the struggle of Black people against U.S. genocide. We saw the struggle of the Palestinians against Zionist occupation as the cutting edge of the ongoing anti-fascist united front.

 On June 21, 1964, the Ku Klux Klan, working with the Neshoba County Police, murdered CORE civil rights workers James Chaney, a native Mississippian, and Mickey Schwerner and Andrew Goodman, two Jews from New York in Philadelphia, Mississippi. The Black/Jewish connection was critical to the success of Freedom Summer and is an essential relationship in the struggle for Palestinian and Black rights today.

 I am a Jew from Brooklyn who has been in the Civil Rights and anti-imperialist movement for more than 50 years. In 1964, CORE, where I worked as a field secretary, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, and all of us in the civil rights movement saw the Black, Palestinian, and Black South African anti-apartheid struggles as national liberation movements against the U.S., Israeli and Afrikaner white settler states. In 1967, SNCC, led by its courageous communications director Ethel Minor, wrote Third World Round Up: The Palestine Problem, based on the work of the Palestine Research Center. SNCC concluded:

Comrades. It is clearly a question of right and wrong. In the Middle East, America has worked with and used the powerful Zionist movement to take over another people’s home and replace the Palestinian people with a partner that has well served America’s purpose, a partner that can help the United States and other white Western countries to exploit and control the nations of Africa, the Middle East and Africa. We have no choice but to resist.

The post The Palestinian Resistance is Winning: the Movement Must Expose and Defeat Netanyahu’s “Final Solution” to the Palestinian Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Eric Mann.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/21/the-palestinian-resistance-is-winning-the-movement-must-expose-and-defeat-netanyahus-final-solution-to-the-palestinian-question/feed/ 0 459844 One Question: Should Joe Biden Run for Re-Election? https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/09/one-question-should-joe-biden-run-for-re-election/ https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/09/one-question-should-joe-biden-run-for-re-election/#respond Fri, 09 Feb 2024 13:18:01 +0000 https://progressive.org/magazine/should-joe-biden-run-for-reelection-20240208/
This content originally appeared on The Progressive — A voice for peace, social justice, and the common good and was authored by The Progressive Magazine.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2024/02/09/one-question-should-joe-biden-run-for-re-election/feed/ 0 457789 Setbacks raise question of whether Myanmar’s leader can maintain control https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-leader-analysis-02022024163349.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-leader-analysis-02022024163349.html#respond Fri, 02 Feb 2024 21:36:00 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-leader-analysis-02022024163349.html Recent battlefield setbacks and little apparent public support are raising the question of whether the leader of Myanmar’s junta can expect to maintain influence within the military and his hold over the country, several observers told Radio Free Asia this week.

Myanmar’s two other post-independence military dictator generals – Than Shwe and Ne Win – ruled the country for decades following their own coup d’etats. 

But just three years after Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing and the military took control of the government in February 2021, the junta continues to be faced with regular reports of military officers and soldiers who have either surrendered to rebel groups or voluntarily switched sides.

“There aren’t many choices left for them,” said Jason Tower, country director for the Burma program at the United States Institute of Peace. “At some point, the Burmese military will have to surrender or find some way to escape from the current situation.”

Entire regiments and numerous senior military officers switched to the opposition in the months after the 2021 coup  – something that wasn’t true following the 1962 and 1988 military coups, both of which encountered some armed resistance.  

ENG_BUR_Dictator_02022024.2.JPG
Reports of junta forces surrendering to rebel groups, or switching sides, are not uncommon. Here, Myanmar soldiers perform during a ceremony marking the 75th anniversary of Independence Day in Naypyitaw, Jan. 4, 2023. (Aung Shine Oo/AP)

Since then, junta troops have abandoned more than 30 border towns and hundreds of military outposts, including several strategic regional headquarters. 

Junta battlefield losses have accelerated since the rebel ethnic armies that make up the Three Brotherhood Alliance launched a coordinated offensive in October.

In November, Min Aung Hlaing warned that the recent attacks – known as Operation 1027 – could “break Myanmar into pieces.” The comments at an emergency meeting of the National Defense and Security Council in the capital Naypyitaw seemed to be a plea for public support of the military for the sake of stability.

‘No public legitimacy’

But regular air force and artillery bombings of civilian populations that have killed thousands have pushed public opinion of the military to unprecedented lows.

Since the coup, nearly 80,000 homes have been burnt down or destroyed, more than 20,000 people have been arrested, and 2.5 million residents have fled their homes, according to the United Nations and human rights groups.

“The Burmese military has no public legitimacy. They have also lost international support,” Tower said. “And on every battlefield, they are facing losses.”

ENG_BUR_Dictator_02022024.3.JPEG
Under the leadership of Sen. General Min Aung Hlaing, the junta has faced battlefield losses. Here, Arakan Army troops stand in front of the captured Paletwa Township General Administration Department office after seizing Paletwa, Jan. 14, 2024. (AA Info Desk)

Discontent within the military is also driven by long standing corruption practices that the current regime has continued and in some cases even increased, according to Hla Kyaw Zaw, a political analyst based in China. 

“Min Aung Hlaing is different from Than Shwe and Ne Win,” he said. “He’s more notorious for his corruption.”

A soldier affiliated with the anti-junta Civil Disobedience Movement, or CDM, told RFA that every member of Myanmar’s junta is expected to contribute a certain portion of their salary to Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited, a fund managed by junta leaders. 

They also must pay a monthly fee to a life insurance company owned by top junta leaders under threats of punitive actions, the CDM soldier said.

‘The mood is so dark’

Much of Myanmar’s current turmoil and chaos could be blamed on Min Aung Hlaing’s ambition to be president, several observers told RFA.

He wasn’t content to just be the country’s top military leader, and apparently couldn’t accept the poor showing that the pro-military Union Solidarity and Development Party received in the 2020 election, said Win Htein, a senior aide to Aung San Suu Kyi, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison by the junta in 2021.

Suu Kyi is the former de facto leader of Myanmar and Nobel laureate who was also sentenced to prison by a junta court.

ENG_BUR_Dictator_02022024.4.JPG
In Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines, protestors attend a demonstration against the rule of Min Aung Hlaing on the third anniversary of Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, Feb. 1, 2024. (Jay Ereno/Reuters)

Junta leaders may have also been surprised by the response to the 2021 coup from ethnic armed organizations, anti-junta People’s Defense Forces and pro-democracy groups, said Ko Naung Roo, a member of the CDM military. 

“Without understanding the changes in the modern system, they went with the tradition of a coup d’état,” he said. “Min Aung Hlaing should be called the weakest dictator rather than the worst dictator.”

Attempts by RFA to contact a junta spokesperson for comment went unanswered this week.

Former lawmaker Tint Swe told RFA that if things get worse, Myanmar’s leader could face a fate similar to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, who was found guilty of crimes against humanity and executed in 2006, or Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, who was captured and killed in 2011.

“It is still difficult to predict how Gen. Min Aung Hlaing will end up,” he said. “But I do see that the entire military power and economic system is headed for collapse.”

Tun Kyi, a former political prisoner, predicted that Min Aung Hlaing will eventually be put on trial for war crimes.

“The last breath of dictators is ugly, and the mood is so dark for the country,” he said. “If you look at the world, from Hitler to Saddam Hussein, and so on, if you look at their essence, their paths are the same at the end of time."

Translated by Aung Khin. Edited by Matt Reed.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Burmese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/junta-leader-analysis-02022024163349.html/feed/ 0 456737 The big question behind Biden’s liquefied natural gas pause https://grist.org/energy/biden-liquefied-natural-gas-export-pause/ https://grist.org/energy/biden-liquefied-natural-gas-export-pause/#respond Fri, 26 Jan 2024 10:00:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=628297 Over the past decade, the United States has become the world’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas, or LNG. Since the fracking boom, gas companies have erected seven massive export terminals along the Gulf Coast, allowing them to sell fracked natural gas overseas for the first time. These terminals compress natural gas into a dense liquid so it can be loaded onto tanker ships and moved around the world like oil. 

The industry is poised for more massive growth: There are several other export projects awaiting approval from the Biden administration’s Department of Energy, and more in the pipeline beyond that. If approved, these facilities could almost double the nation’s export capacity by the end of the decade. The question of whether or not to approve this surge in exports has become one of the biggest climate issues President Biden faces as he begins his reelection campaign. 

The administration appeared to move toward answering that question this week. The Department of Energy announced on Friday that it would pause approvals for new LNG exports for several months while it reviews how it regulates them. The administration will develop a new approach over the coming year that will foreground the potential climate impacts of exporting natural gas, suspending approvals in the meantime. The decision doesn’t affect active export terminals.

“During this period, we will take a hard look at the impacts of LNG exports,” said President Joe Biden in a statement about the measure. “This pause on new LNG approvals sees the climate crisis for what it is: the existential threat of our time.” In a press call with reporters, senior administration officials noted that U.S. LNG export capacity has more than tripled since the Department of Energy first developed standards for deciding whether to ship gas overseas.

Environmental activists greeted the news of a pause as a victory for nearby residents and the climate. Roishetta Ozane, an activist in Louisiana who has organized to try to stop LNG terminals, said the news “shows that the government recognizes the need to protect the rights and well-being of [Gulf] communities.” Bill McKibben, the longtime climate activist who founded 350.org, said the decision meant Biden had “done more to check dirty energy … than any of his predecessors.”

But the ultimate outcome of the Biden administration’s pause on export approvals is far from certain. Gauging the public interest of new LNG exports is easier said than done, especially when it comes to how those exports affect the trajectory of global warming.

On the one hand, of course, natural gas is a fossil fuel, and burning it releases carbon dioxide. There’s no question that its use contributes to climate change — and that the raw emissions from U.S. LNG would be very large. Venture Global’s CP2 project in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, one of the largest proposed LNG terminals, could move enough gas to produce around 5.7 billion tons of carbon dioxide over its 30-year lifespan. That’s more than 20 times as much carbon as Alaska’s controversial Willow oil project, which Biden approved last year, according to an analysis by the Sierra Club.

However, each country that buys American LNG will be buying it to replace existing sources of energy. if the administration stops permitting new exports, the energy demand in Europe and Asia won’t go away—those countries will just use other sources to meet it. The ultimate impact of exporting gas on the world’s carbon budget — the fast-diminishing amount of carbon dioxide that can still be emitted if global warming is to be limited to internationally-agreed levels — depends on how exactly that substitution plays out. If, for example, the gas mostly replaces more carbon-intensive energy sources like coal, it might actually stretch that carbon budget further than it otherwise would have lasted.

“The reason these export terminals are interesting is because it’s a way that the U.S. government can maybe have an effect on international emissions,” said Sean Smillie, an energy researcher who studied the global LNG market as part of a doctoral project at Carnegie Mellon University. “But we’re not really sure which direction that would go.”

In the case of Lake Charles LNG, one of the largest terminals awaiting approval from the Department of Energy, the exported gas would have a few different destinations. The company behind the project, Energy Transfer, has signed six long-term contracts to supply gas to various buyers. Four of those contracts would send gas to Asian countries including China, and two of them would sell it to oil traders like Shell, which would flip it to the highest bidder. Venture Global’s CP2 project, meanwhile, has inked three long-term supply contracts in Europe, three in Asia, and three with speculative traders. In order to determine the total climate impacts of exporting LNG, the Biden administration will have to calculate how all these contracts balance against each other. (Neither Venture Global nor Energy Transfer could be immediately reached for comment.)

“The question we’re trying to answer is just completely muddled,” said Arvind Ravikumar, an associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin and a co-director of a research group focusing on energy policy. “The answer is, ‘it depends.’ You have to carefully consider what’s happening in other countries. What are they doing with LNG?” 

This looks different in every country. Some buyers like China use LNG to replace coal for heating, which has a beneficial effect on the climate, since coal creates more carbon dioxide than natural gas does to produce the same amount of energy. India uses it as a feedstock for fertilizer production. Other countries like Germany are buying it to replace Russian gas that they stopped buying after Russia invaded Ukraine and to avoid having to restart shuttered coal plants. 

“The industry might say that that’s true everywhere,” said Ravikumar. “They’d say anyone who buys U.S. LNG replaces coal or dirtier gas. I don’t think that’s true.”

Ravikumar points out that countries such as South Korea and Japan buy LNG to generate electricity, which they could also theoretically get from carbon-free sources if they invested in solar or wind farms, or even built nuclear power plants. In those cases, there’s a solid argument that LNG exports slow down the energy transition.

Nowhere is this dilemma more vexing than in Europe. The continent has been the leading purchaser of LNG from the United States over the past two years, as countries such as Germany race to replace lost Russian gas. This export surge has helped the continent break its previous energy dependence and disentangle itself from Vladimir Putin’s regime. For this reason, gas industry groups in the U.S. say LNG exports are critical for ensuring global energy security.

“U.S. LNG provides energy security to our allies in Europe and around the globe and has helped minimize the largest European energy crisis in recent history,” said Charlie Riedl, the head of the Center for LNG, a liquefied gas trade association, in a November press release. “Limiting U.S. LNG exports will only cause higher energy costs at home and in Europe.” The statement came as Democrats in Congress pressured the Biden administration to reject new export applications.

John Allaire, a retired fisherman, stands near Venture Global's LNG export terminal in Cameron, Louisiana. Allaire has been a vocal critic of the company's proposed CP2 facility.
John Allaire, a retired fisherman, stands near Venture Global’s LNG export terminal in Cameron, Louisiana. Allaire has been a vocal critic of the company’s proposed CP2 facility. François Picard / AFP

But some experts say that Europe doesn’t need any more gas from the United States. The continent’s political leadership recently poured billions of dollars into heat pumps and renewable energy — mitigating the need for natural gas for both home heating and electricity. As a result, most analysts expect that European gas demand will fall over the coming years. By the time new gas shipments start flowing from proposed export terminals in 2026 or 2027, Germany might not even need them. Indeed, some argue the widespread availability of new cheap gas might encourage increased energy consumption, adding more emissions to the global carbon ledger.

“There is no reason to believe that Europe’s energy security depends on further expansion of LNG export capacity that would only come online towards the end of this decade,” said Felix Heilmann, a policy analyst at the German think tank Dezernat Zukunft who has studied the LNG industry.

This matches projections from the International Energy Agency, or IEA, a global energy research institution. The IEA said in its annual energy outlook last year that it expects global gas demand to peak by 2030, meaning “there is little headroom remaining for either pipeline or LNG trade to grow beyond then.” 

The question of timing is critical, since the climate impacts of new export terminals will extend far beyond the end of the decade. These terminals cost billions of dollars to build, and companies need to operate them for decades in order to reap back their initial investments. The same goes for the import terminals that countries such as South Korea and Pakistan are building to take American gas. Environmental groups argue that building more LNG infrastructure now will “lock in” a dependence on gas in many countries, forcing them to keep burning fossil fuels even as renewables expand. In the call with reporters, a senior Biden administration official said the potential for this dependence was one of the administration’s concerns in the pause.

This might not be as much of a concern in Europe, since countries like Germany have invested in cheaper and more flexible floating import terminals that don’t need to operate for decades. In other parts of the world, though, there is a risk that LNG might slow down the adoption of solar in countries like Pakistan.

“If you build an LNG terminal today, it’s not like it’s going to operate for five years and then shut down,” said Ravikumar. “Between now and 2030, at the global level, on average, LNG might reduce global emissions compared to a counterfactual scenario, but 20 years from now, it might not.”

For Smillie, the researcher who studied LNG at Carnegie Mellon, that uncertainty will make the Biden administration’s analysis very difficult. The export question has become a divisive issue in climate politics, but the effects of a U.S. policy in either direction won’t be clear for years — and they depend largely on decisions in other countries besides the United States.

“A huge part of the story is other countries’ climate policies and climate laws,” he said. “At the end of the day, that’s what will determine whether these LNG terminals have a positive or negative effect on the climate. That’s not really something we can predict.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The big question behind Biden’s liquefied natural gas pause on Jan 26, 2024.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Jake Bittle.

]]> https://grist.org/energy/biden-liquefied-natural-gas-export-pause/feed/ 0 454917 Hong Kong police question relatives of wanted overseas activists https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-relatives-questioned-01112024145649.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-relatives-questioned-01112024145649.html#respond Thu, 11 Jan 2024 19:57:17 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-relatives-questioned-01112024145649.html A day after national security police in Hong Kong questioned the relatives of wanted U.K.-based activist and former consular employee Simon Cheng, news also emerged that the mother of U.S.-based wanted activist Frances Hui was also questioned last month.

National security police raided the home of Cheng’s parents and sisters and took them away for questioning on Wednesday, the London-based rights group Hong Kong Watch said in a statement on its website.

Police wanted to know whether the family were in contact with Cheng or had offered him financial support, and were later released without arrest, it said.

Meanwhile, a person familiar with the situation told Radio Free Asia that police last month also questioned the mother of Francis Hui, although Hui declined to comment when contacted by RFA on Thursday.

Hui's mother had been hauled in to a local police station for questioning a few days after police issued arrest warrants for Hui, Cheng, U.S. citizen and Hong Kong campaigner Joey Siu and overseas YouTube hosts Johnny Fok and Tony Choi on Dec. 15. They offered HK$1 million bounty for information leading to their arrests, the person said.

Hui said via social media on Thursday that she has a policy of not commenting on her family, and has reiterated that she is financially independent. She has previously hit out at the international community for enabling China's "long-arm" repression of overseas dissidents through inaction, and called for multilateral cooperation to address the issue.

Her mother's questioning was also reported by Hong Kong Watch, along with the questioning of relatives of exiled democracy activist Agnes Chow two weeks ago after she skipped bail and fled to Canada last month.

‘Incitement and secession’

Like the other wanted activists, Simon Cheng has been charged in absentia with "incitement to secession" and "collusion with foreign forces" in relation to his actions since he fled to the U.K., where he has been granted political asylum.

He and other fellow activists in exile have publicly cut off ties with their families back home since fleeing an ongoing crackdown on dissent under a draconian security law imposed by China in the wake of the 2019 protest movement.

ENG_CHN_HKActivistRelatives_01112024.2.JPG
The image of activist Frances Hui is displayed during a press conference on the issuance of arrest warrants for her and others in Hong Kong, Dec. 14, 2023. (Tyrone Siu/Reuters)

He said in a statement published by Hong Kong Watch: “My father swam to Hong Kong in his early years, living under others' roofs and once residing in the Kowloon Walled City… I remember my father saying that in that particular year, upon seeing the lights and soda cans reflected from Hong Kong, he swam across to the other side, a perilous journey."

"In pursuit of the dream of freedom, he navigated between the power gaps of two influential nations, a penniless young man carrying the burden of a fractured family separated between mainland China and Hong Kong," Cheng said.

“We are at different places now – struggling to survive in this harsh world… Though the broken mirror once reunited, the cracks persist, and now it shatters again," he said.

"My only hope is that my parents can enjoy a dignified, peaceful, and serene old age – until our next life when and where we may finally meet," Cheng wrote.

More like the mainland

Hong Kong Watch co-founder and Chief Executive Benedict Rogers said Hong Kong under the national security crackdown is "becoming increasingly like mainland China," where the families of activists are also targeted by the authorities.

“The Hong Kong authorities have no business questioning the family members of a brave Hong Kong activist who fled from Hong Kong to the UK more than three years ago," Rogers said. 

"It must be made immediately clear that the extraterritoriality of the National Security Law is not valid in Britain, and is in clear violation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration," he said, in a reference to the treaty governing the 1997 handover of Hong Kong to China.

"From the questioning of Simon Cheng’s family to the outrageous show trial of Jimmy Lai, the Hong Kong authorities’ actions which openly threaten activists in Hong Kong and abroad are completely unacceptable," Rogers said.

"The U.K. must stand up to the Chinese Communist Party, and stand alongside our courageous friends who continue to advocate for democracy and defend their homeland."

The Hong Kong authorities have made no public statement on the questioning of Cheng's relatives, which was reported by several media outlets in the city, including the Chinese-language Ming Pao newspaper.

But the authorities have repeatedly described the activists as "fugitives," vowing to pursue them 

for the rest of their lives, using "all practicable measures to bring them to justice."

Hui pointed out on her X account, formerly Twitter, on Thursday that wanted posters for 13 overseas activists were now on display at Hong Kong's International Airport.

"Taken at the #HongKong international airport ─ I now join the rest of the bounty list to have our faces and warrants all splashed around streets in Hong Kong," she wrote. 

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Amelia Loi for RFA Mandarin, Cheryl Tung for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-relatives-questioned-01112024145649.html/feed/ 0 451196 "Leave Fossil Fuels in the Ground" | BBC Question Time | 7 December 2023 | Just Stop Oil #shorts https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/09/leave-fossil-fuels-in-the-ground-bbc-question-time-7-december-2023-just-stop-oil-shorts/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/09/leave-fossil-fuels-in-the-ground-bbc-question-time-7-december-2023-just-stop-oil-shorts/#respond Sat, 09 Dec 2023 18:43:43 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=b31dd8bf0e18337ac22266db594e9dc4
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/09/leave-fossil-fuels-in-the-ground-bbc-question-time-7-december-2023-just-stop-oil-shorts/feed/ 0 444822 "It’s a Complete and Outright Lie" | Question Time | 7 December 2023 | Just Stop Oil #shorts https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/09/its-a-complete-and-outright-lie-question-time-7-december-2023-just-stop-oil-shorts/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/09/its-a-complete-and-outright-lie-question-time-7-december-2023-just-stop-oil-shorts/#respond Sat, 09 Dec 2023 17:30:16 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=11d9176ecd4212b42763fc8466624431
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/09/its-a-complete-and-outright-lie-question-time-7-december-2023-just-stop-oil-shorts/feed/ 0 446360 COP28: Amy Goodman Attempts to Question UAE Oil CEO Serving as President of U.N. Climate Talks https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/06/cop28-amy-goodman-attempts-to-question-uae-oil-ceo-serving-as-president-of-u-n-climate-talks/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/06/cop28-amy-goodman-attempts-to-question-uae-oil-ceo-serving-as-president-of-u-n-climate-talks/#respond Wed, 06 Dec 2023 16:02:45 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=6e87b5097b518bd56792961b5f043bc3
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/06/cop28-amy-goodman-attempts-to-question-uae-oil-ceo-serving-as-president-of-u-n-climate-talks/feed/ 0 444032 COP28: Amy Goodman Attempts to Question UAE Oil CEO Serving as President of U.N. Climate Talks in Dubai https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/06/cop28-amy-goodman-attempts-to-question-uae-oil-ceo-serving-as-president-of-u-n-climate-talks-in-dubai/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/06/cop28-amy-goodman-attempts-to-question-uae-oil-ceo-serving-as-president-of-u-n-climate-talks-in-dubai/#respond Wed, 06 Dec 2023 13:26:07 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=cec42e57288421e0158e84e9a937a3a6 Seg2 chase

As Democracy Now! broadcasts from the U.N. climate summit, Amy Goodman attempts to question the oil CEO presiding over the talks. COP28 president and United Arab Emirates oil CEO Sultan Al Jaber is facing criticism over the record number of fossil fuel lobbyists in attendance at the summit, and recently claimed there is “no science” to back up calls to phase out fossil fuels in order to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.


This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/12/06/cop28-amy-goodman-attempts-to-question-uae-oil-ceo-serving-as-president-of-u-n-climate-talks-in-dubai/feed/ 0 444105 Senators Question KPMG Role in Microsoft Profit-Shifting Scheme https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/30/senators-question-kpmg-role-in-microsoft-profit-shifting-scheme/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/30/senators-question-kpmg-role-in-microsoft-profit-shifting-scheme/#respond Thu, 30 Nov 2023 10:00:00 +0000 https://www.propublica.org/article/senators-question-kpmg-role-in-microsoft-profit-shifting-scheme by Paul Kiel

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Last month, Microsoft disclosed that the IRS had sent the company a bill for $28.9 billion in back taxes as part of an audit. The examination, which began more than a decade ago, is the largest in the agency’s history, and it’s far from over, as Microsoft has vowed to appeal the findings.

The centerpiece of the audit, as ProPublica detailed in an investigation nearly four years ago, is a 2005 transaction that moved tens of billions of Microsoft’s U.S. profits to Puerto Rico to help the software giant save billions in taxes. In a letter sent Wednesday, three senators, citing ProPublica’s reporting, focused attention on the company that helped Microsoft cook up that scheme: the mega-consultancy KPMG.

“KPMG’s role in Microsoft’s tax evasion is deeply disturbing, indicating that KPMG helped Microsoft reward shareholders and executives, while depriving the federal government of billions in tax revenue needed to pay for health care, environmental protection, infrastructure, and more,” says the letter, which was signed by Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders and Sheldon Whitehouse and sent to KPMG’s CEO. “You owe Congress an explanation for your firm’s actions.”

In 2004, Microsoft was considering closing a small factory in Puerto Rico where some 85 workers burned Windows and Office software onto CDs. The tax break that had led Microsoft to open the factory was expiring. But KPMG pitched Microsoft on an idea for a break that would be far more valuable.

Boasting about the firm’s experience in setting up similar deals for other huge companies, KPMG said it could help Microsoft save billions in taxes by transferring profits to the island. The little factory would buy the exclusive rights to Microsoft’s technology. Meanwhile, KPMG assured Microsoft that its San Juan partner had a long track record of negotiating “significant tax holidays for U.S. companies with the Puerto Rican government.”

At the time, as ProPublica’s reporting showed, KPMG took great pains to make Microsoft’s moves — which effectively increased the valuation of the Puerto Rican subsidiary from $0 to $30.4 billion over the space of 24 hours, according to the IRS — seem bona fide. “What can we do to make this thing real?” read the notes from one KPMG meeting.

After Microsoft agreed to the arrangement, KPMG helped the company complete the deal. Its economists generated complex models that justified the price the factory paid for Microsoft’s intellectual property rights.

Over a decade later, when the IRS fought to obtain KPMG documents as part of its audit, Microsoft objected that the material was protected by a privilege for tax advice. The IRS eventually won access to the documents when a federal judge agreed that KPMG had been promoting a tax shelter. “The Court finds itself unable to escape the conclusion that a significant purpose, if not the sole purpose, of Microsoft’s transactions was to avoid or evade federal income tax,” U.S. District Judge Ricardo Martinez wrote in his opinion. Martinez added that documents in the case showed KPMG had “promoted” the transactions.

Just as Microsoft was far from the only tech company to shift profits to tax havens, other Big Four consultancies also worked to enable those deals. But the Microsoft case provides a unique window into one of the largest deals, and the senators, in their questions, seek more detail about KPMG’s role in it, as well as the firm’s history assisting other profit-shifting transactions. Based on the evidence in the Microsoft case, they wrote, “KPMG clearly played a central role in the systematic offshoring of corporate profits, which has eroded the U.S. tax base.”

KPMG did not immediately respond to ProPublica’s inquiry about the letter. The firm declined to comment for our earlier story on the audit. (In a brief in the IRS case, KPMG wrote that it had “provided routine tax advice to its longstanding client, Microsoft, in response to Microsoft’s request for advice relating to a plan that Microsoft itself conceptualized — actions that do not, under any standard, qualify as the ‘promotion’ of a tax shelter.”)

In response to questions for ProPublica’s original article, Microsoft said it “follows the law and has always fully paid the taxes it owes.”


This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Paul Kiel.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/30/senators-question-kpmg-role-in-microsoft-profit-shifting-scheme/feed/ 0 442708 Two Solutions for the “Question of Palestine” https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/27/two-solutions-for-the-question-of-palestine/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/27/two-solutions-for-the-question-of-palestine/#respond Mon, 27 Nov 2023 06:55:10 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=305977 In these terrible times in the wake of October 7, there is one perception as to which the Israeli government and virtually all other governments now publicly profess to agree, sincerely and passionately in the Israeli case and at least rhetorically in the case of the Global West: The “Question of Palestine” can no longer More

The post Two Solutions for the “Question of Palestine” appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

]]>

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

In these terrible times in the wake of October 7, there is one perception as to which the Israeli government and virtually all other governments now publicly profess to agree, sincerely and passionately in the Israeli case and at least rhetorically in the case of the Global West: The “Question of Palestine” can no longer be ignored or “managed” but must, finally, be definitively resolved.

The Israeli government has clearly chosen and is actively pursuing a final solution consisting of genocide and ethnic cleansing on a massive scale.

Governments of the Global West are claiming that their preferred solution is a renewed and urgent effort toward eventually ending Israel’s 56-year-long occupation and implementing the venerable “two-state solution”.

If the Global West were, for the first time, genuinely interested in actually achieving a “two-state solution”, it has the power and means to do so, but doing so would require Western governments to take two steps promptly, while there are still Palestinians left in the Gaza Strip:

(1) Join the other 139 states, encompassing the overwhelming majority of mankind, which have extended diplomatic recognition to the State of Palestine, within its clearly defined and UN-recognized borders (all of that portion of historical Palestine which Israel has occupied since June 1967, nothing more and nothing less) even while its entire territory remains under Israeli occupation and without waiting for Israel’s prior permission.

(2) Enforce crippling UN Security Council-mandated sanctions against Israel “for as long as it takes” (to quote Joe Biden in another context) until Israel ends its illegal occupation (as ardently sought by Joe Biden in another context) and fully withdraws from the territory of the State of Palestine.

If the Global West is unwilling to take these steps and to do so promptly, it will be clear to all that the Global West is simply bleating yet more hot air in claiming to seek a “two-state solution” and, as between the two possible definitive solutions, genuinely prefers the final solution being pursued by Israel.

The Global Majority is unlikely to forget or forgive.

The post Two Solutions for the “Question of Palestine” appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by John Whitbeck.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/27/two-solutions-for-the-question-of-palestine/feed/ 0 441922 "We Can’t Just Stop using Oil & Gas Overnight" | BBC Question Time | Just Stop Oil #shortsfeed https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/10/we-cant-just-stop-using-oil-gas-overnight-bbc-question-time-just-stop-oil-shortsfeed/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/10/we-cant-just-stop-using-oil-gas-overnight-bbc-question-time-just-stop-oil-shortsfeed/#respond Fri, 10 Nov 2023 21:44:18 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=c6b1be24b5e7c5b92da704505fbc33b3
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/11/10/we-cant-just-stop-using-oil-gas-overnight-bbc-question-time-just-stop-oil-shortsfeed/feed/ 0 439829 One Question: What Is the Role of Colonialism in Climate-Driven Disasters? https://www.radiofree.org/2023/10/10/one-question-what-is-the-role-of-colonialism-in-climate-driven-disasters/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/10/10/one-question-what-is-the-role-of-colonialism-in-climate-driven-disasters/#respond Tue, 10 Oct 2023 13:00:00 +0000 https://progressive.org/magazine/what-is-the-role-of-colonialism-in-climate-driven-disasters-stith-20231010/
This content originally appeared on The Progressive — A voice for peace, social justice, and the common good and was authored by Michaela Stith.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/10/10/one-question-what-is-the-role-of-colonialism-in-climate-driven-disasters/feed/ 0 433159 Hong Kong police question relatives of exiled lawmaker Ted Hui https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html#respond Tue, 12 Sep 2023 19:21:32 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html Hong Kong police on Tuesday questioned three relatives of former pro-democracy lawmaker Ted Hui, one of eight overseas activists wanted under a security law, local media reported.

The three individuals, which included his parents-in-law, were taken to Castle Peak and Yuen Long police stations for questioning "to help with the authorities' investigation," the Standard newspaper quoted sources as saying.

The move comes after police questioned several relatives of others among the group of eight wanted activists, asking similar questions, throughout July and August.

The South China Morning Post also cited a source familiar with the case as saying that officers raided the Yuen Long home of Hui's in-laws and their son on Tuesday morning. Hui's father-in-law was seen leaving Castle Peak police station following the earlier release of his wife and son that day.

No arrests were made, according to the reports.

"The three were questioned by officers from the force’s National Security Department about whether they had contacted the former legislator and offered him any help, such as financial support," the Post said.

National security police will continue to investigate the Hong Kong-based contacts of the eight wanted activists and disrupt any help or funding for them, the Post quoted its source as saying.

ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_09122023.2.JPG
Chief Superintendent of Police (National Security) Li Kwai-wah speaks during a press conference to issue arrest warrants for eight activists and former lawmakers, in Hong Kong, July 3, 2023. Credit: Joyce Zhou/Reuters

Police issued arrest warrants and offered bounties for exiled former pro-democracy lawmakers Nathan Law, Ted Hui and Dennis Kwok, U.S.-based activist and political lobbyist Anna Kwok and legal scholar Kevin Yam, offering bounties of HK$1 million (US$127,700) for information that might lead to an arrest. 

U.K-based activists Finn Lau and Mung Siu-tat and U.S.-based businessman Elmer Yuen are also on the wanted list.

Punished for posters

As Hui's relatives were being questioned, a Hong Kong court handed down a six-month jail term to Zeng Yuxuan, a doctoral student from mainland China found in possession of posters depicting the banned "Pillar of Shame" sculpture commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

Zeng had pleaded guilty to conspiring with U.S.-based democracy activist Zhou Fengsuo to "commit acts with seditious intent" ahead of the June 4 massacre anniversary. Zhou has said he bears full responsibility for creating the banners bearing the image that were found in Zeng's possession.

Meanwhile, authorities in Macau have issued a one-year ban to a street performer known for performing the banned 2019 protest anthem "Glory to Hong Kong."

Busker Oliver Ma, 24, was taken away by police from the ruins of St Paul's, a popular tourist destination in the former Portuguese-run city, on Sept. 3, and held for several hours.

"I was arrested without warning and detained by the Public Security Police Force for over 13 hours before I was kicked out," Ma wrote on his Facebook page. "I felt as if I was treated like less of a tourist, let alone a human, and more like some terrorist."

"I answered each and every single one of their questions, and it was not until it reached these questions when I finally knew why they were so hostile to me: 'Have you sung #GlorytoHongKong in Hong Kong? Were you planning to sing it all the way here? What does the song mean?'" Ma wrote in an account of his ordeal on his Facebook page.

"It was not until 3:00 the next day when I was told I was banned in Macau for a year and escorted through the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge," Ma said, adding: "For all of my past experiences being arbitrarily arrested and detained for busking, this one has got to be the most dehumanizing one yet."

Ma's family were also detained for nearly two hours and forced to sign forms, while his phone was scanned by police, who refused to let him call his lawyer or give him food during an overnight stay in custody, he said.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Simon Lee, Ng Ting Hong and Gigi Lee for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html/feed/ 0 426669 Hong Kong police question relatives of exiled lawmaker Ted Hui https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html#respond Tue, 12 Sep 2023 19:21:32 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html Hong Kong police on Tuesday questioned three relatives of former pro-democracy lawmaker Ted Hui, one of eight overseas activists wanted under a security law, local media reported.

The three individuals, which included his parents-in-law, were taken to Castle Peak and Yuen Long police stations for questioning "to help with the authorities' investigation," the Standard newspaper quoted sources as saying.

The move comes after police questioned several relatives of others among the group of eight wanted activists, asking similar questions, throughout July and August.

The South China Morning Post also cited a source familiar with the case as saying that officers raided the Yuen Long home of Hui's in-laws and their son on Tuesday morning. Hui's father-in-law was seen leaving Castle Peak police station following the earlier release of his wife and son that day.

No arrests were made, according to the reports.

"The three were questioned by officers from the force’s National Security Department about whether they had contacted the former legislator and offered him any help, such as financial support," the Post said.

National security police will continue to investigate the Hong Kong-based contacts of the eight wanted activists and disrupt any help or funding for them, the Post quoted its source as saying.

ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_09122023.2.JPG
Chief Superintendent of Police (National Security) Li Kwai-wah speaks during a press conference to issue arrest warrants for eight activists and former lawmakers, in Hong Kong, July 3, 2023. Credit: Joyce Zhou/Reuters

Police issued arrest warrants and offered bounties for exiled former pro-democracy lawmakers Nathan Law, Ted Hui and Dennis Kwok, U.S.-based activist and political lobbyist Anna Kwok and legal scholar Kevin Yam, offering bounties of HK$1 million (US$127,700) for information that might lead to an arrest. 

U.K-based activists Finn Lau and Mung Siu-tat and U.S.-based businessman Elmer Yuen are also on the wanted list.

Punished for posters

As Hui's relatives were being questioned, a Hong Kong court handed down a six-month jail term to Zeng Yuxuan, a doctoral student from mainland China found in possession of posters depicting the banned "Pillar of Shame" sculpture commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

Zeng had pleaded guilty to conspiring with U.S.-based democracy activist Zhou Fengsuo to "commit acts with seditious intent" ahead of the June 4 massacre anniversary. Zhou has said he bears full responsibility for creating the banners bearing the image that were found in Zeng's possession.

Meanwhile, authorities in Macau have issued a one-year ban to a street performer known for performing the banned 2019 protest anthem "Glory to Hong Kong."

Busker Oliver Ma, 24, was taken away by police from the ruins of St Paul's, a popular tourist destination in the former Portuguese-run city, on Sept. 3, and held for several hours.

"I was arrested without warning and detained by the Public Security Police Force for over 13 hours before I was kicked out," Ma wrote on his Facebook page. "I felt as if I was treated like less of a tourist, let alone a human, and more like some terrorist."

"I answered each and every single one of their questions, and it was not until it reached these questions when I finally knew why they were so hostile to me: 'Have you sung #GlorytoHongKong in Hong Kong? Were you planning to sing it all the way here? What does the song mean?'" Ma wrote in an account of his ordeal on his Facebook page.

"It was not until 3:00 the next day when I was told I was banned in Macau for a year and escorted through the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge," Ma said, adding: "For all of my past experiences being arbitrarily arrested and detained for busking, this one has got to be the most dehumanizing one yet."

Ma's family were also detained for nearly two hours and forced to sign forms, while his phone was scanned by police, who refused to let him call his lawyer or give him food during an overnight stay in custody, he said.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Simon Lee, Ng Ting Hong and Gigi Lee for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hong-kong-security-09122023152108.html/feed/ 0 426670 US senators question defense sharing with Australia https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-export-control-09062023143639.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-export-control-09062023143639.html#respond Wed, 06 Sep 2023 18:44:00 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-export-control-09062023143639.html Australia and the United Kingdom need to adopt more stringent controls on the use of American military technology before the United States relaxes its export licensing requirements under the AUKUS pact, a State Department official told the Senate on Wednesday.

The AUKUS security arrangement between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States includes a long-term goal of creating a “seamless” defense industry across the three nations, but Australia has complained of a burdensome process for its companies to receive licenses to import U.S. military technology needed for innovation.

Democrats in the House have expressed concerns about the security implications of making exemptions to licensing requirements, even as Republicans have argued the two close allies should be trusted.

On Wednesday, Sen. Jim Risch, a Republican from Idaho who serves as his party’s ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee, noted Australia and the United Kingdom are trusted to receive intelligence, and so could be trusted with military technology.

“There is a very distinct difference between the way we treat allies in the intelligence field versus how we treat them on other things, like exports, and I think it probably would behoove State … to spend a little bit of time with the intelligence community,” Risch said.

ENG_CHN_AUKUS_09062023.2.jpg
Because Australia and the United Kingdom are already trusted with U.S. intelligence, they can be trusted with military technology too, says Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. (Evan Vucci/AP file photo)

He said the current requirements were “overly cumbersome.”

“We share incredibly, incredibly sensitive and important material with the Five Eyes,” he said. “I don’t have the concerns that some have.”

Public versus private

However, Sen. Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey who chairs the committee, said that there was a key difference between intelligence sharing and exempting countries from export controls.

“We share intelligence with government officials,” he said. “Export controls, however, control U.S. defense technology to non-government persons.” That required more careful oversight, he said.

He added Australia’s spy chief, Mike Burgess, recently “warned about the extent of Chinese espionage directed at Australia,” which he said should be weighed against the unwieldiness of licensing, given concerns that sensitive technology could end up in the wrong hands.

“The concerns are legitimate on both sides,” he said.

ENG_CHN_AUKUS_09062023.3.jpg
Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, drew a distinction between intelligence sharing and exempting countries from export controls. (Jose Luis Magana/AP file photo)

Jessica Lewis, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, told the committee that the State Department was “really focussed on getting Australia and the U.K. over the line” but said the process was complex given the high stakes involved in licensing matters.

“What we're talking about is license-free movement of these defense articles. That means that if you are on the list of companies or entities that can receive it, you don't have to come and ask permission to export [from the United States] a lethal weapon,” Lewis said.

“We want to make sure that if a country is trying to acquire a particular technology, it can't get around the system by going into a place where there's more room in their export controls,” she said. “It's common sense to work together to bring all of us to similar standards.”

Submarine deal

The viability of another part of AUKUS – the sale of nuclear-powered submarines to Australia – was also questioned during the hearing.

Sen. Bill Hagerty, a Republican from Tennessee, noted that the sale had been promised amid a massive backlog in American shipbuilding yards, with the U.S. Navy “25% short” of its goal of 66 submarines.

“The pace-of-making is, I've read, maybe 1.2 submarines a year,” Hagerty said. “By giving these submarines to Australia, that'll put us three-to-four years behind in our production process.”

“Looking at the Navy's most optimistic projection, they don't see realizing this goal of 66 attack subs until the year 2049 – that's before taking into account the submarines that we would send to Australia.”

But Sen. Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia, called it a “chicken or an egg” problem, with Australia also promising massive investments in the U.S. shipbuilding industry to secure the nuclear-powered subs.

“Australia is going to make a historic investment in the U.S. industrial base,” Kaine said, but only “if they know that during the 2030s, we will be willing to deliver to them three to five Virginia-class subs.”

“If they make that investment, it will help us increase our pace of production,” he said. “If they don't make that investment, it will be harder to increase the pace of production.”


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Alex Willemyns for RFA.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-export-control-09062023143639.html/feed/ 0 425467 One Question: What’s Behind the Politics of School Choice? https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/28/one-question-whats-behind-the-politics-of-school-choice/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/28/one-question-whats-behind-the-politics-of-school-choice/#respond Mon, 28 Aug 2023 13:00:00 +0000 https://progressive.org/magazine/what-s-behind-the-politics-of-school-choice-20230828/
This content originally appeared on The Progressive — A voice for peace, social justice, and the common good and was authored by The Progressive Magazine.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/28/one-question-whats-behind-the-politics-of-school-choice/feed/ 0 423167 Observers question US commitment to Southeast Asia as Biden to skip regional summit https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/southeastasia-usa-biden-08252023144923.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/southeastasia-usa-biden-08252023144923.html#respond Fri, 25 Aug 2023 19:09:31 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/southeastasia-usa-biden-08252023144923.html Observers are casting doubt on Washington’s repeated commitments to Southeast Asia after the White House announced that President Joe Biden would skip the ASEAN summit in Jakarta next month and send his vice president instead. 

Biden will be traveling to Asia in early September to attend the Group of Twenty (G20) meeting in New Delhi, but his missing the the Southeast Asian summit on Sept. 5-7 may signal the U.S. doesn’t believe that so-called “ASEAN centrality” helps counter China’s outsized influence in the region, some analysts said.

However, the American president may not be ignoring the region entirely, as the scuttlebutt in Washington is that he will very likely go to Hanoi instead to upgrade U.S. ties with Vietnam, a useful regional ally at a time of rising tensions with China.

But showing up at a gathering has its own merits and must not be underestimated, analysts said.

“Personal presence and relations among leaders and diplomats still matter in foreign policy,” Muhammad Waffaa Kharisma, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Jakarta, told BenarNews. 

“The U.S. commitment to Southeast Asia has been repeatedly questioned. People are contrasting Biden’s attendance at other forums or summits with close friends such as Japan and South Korea with his no-show at ASEAN.”

Muhammad Waffaa also noted that some countries such as the Philippines – a longtime ally of the U.S. – had received their own reassurances of Washington’s support.

The White House, for its part, defends Biden’s Southeast Asia engagement as more than robust.

The U.S. has built strong ties and alliances from Northeast Asia to the Philippines to Australia, and has partnered with India and worked with ASEAN, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said Tuesday. The president had also sent Vice President Kamala Harris to Southeast Asia twice, Sullivan noted.

“I would put our record of achievement and engagement in the Indo-Pacific up against any American president and any other country in the world in the past two and a half years,” he told reporters in a conference call.

Biden met with his Japanese and South Korean counterparts last week at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland, to expand security and economic ties. 

In a joint statement, the three leaders said they “wholeheartedly affirm ASEAN centrality and our support for the ASEAN-led regional architecture.”

They also noted “dangerous and aggressive behavior”  by China to support its “unlawful maritime claims” in the disputed South China Sea, and said they opposed actions that go against a rules-based international order.

Four of the 10 ASEAN members – Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam – have overlapping claims with those of China’s expansive ones in the South China Sea. Indonesia doesn’t regard itself as party to the South China Sea dispute, but Beijing claims historic rights to parts of that sea overlapping Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone.

United States President Joe Biden, then-Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen and United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres watch a cultural performance at a dinner during the ASEAN summit, in Phnom Penh, Nov. 12, 2022. Credit: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
United States President Joe Biden, then-Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen and United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres watch a cultural performance at a dinner during the ASEAN summit, in Phnom Penh, Nov. 12, 2022. Credit: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

Recognizing overlapping interests, Biden set out to alter predecessor Donald Trump’s Southeast Asian strategy – Trump only attended one ASEAN summit, in 2017 in Manila, during his time in office (2017-2021).

Biden attended the ASEAN-U.S. and East Asia summits in Phnom Penh last November, when Cambodia was the 2023 chair of the Southeast Asian bloc. He also attended the same annual summits virtually in 2021 amid the COVID-19 pandemic. And in May last year, the U.S. president hosted a U.S.-ASEAN Special Summit in Washington.

In addition, he unveiled the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework in an effort to counter Beijing’s gigantic economic influence in Southeast Asia, although the program has many detractors.

‘Just plain stupid’

Biden should have kept that momentum going, indicated Jeffrey D. Bean, of the Observer Research Foundation America, on the social media platform X, formerly called Twitter.

“Every time you think the Biden administration has it together on Asia policy, they go and do something like this. Just plain stupid for Biden to skip [the East Asia Summit] and the U.S.-ASEAN summit,” he said.

Skipping an event such as the ASEAN summit and the East Summit, which are held concurrently, will make it seem that Washington is saying one thing and doing another, wrote Zack Cooper, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, in a commentary for the Texas National Security Review. 

“If trends continue, foreign leaders could come to believe that public opposition to China is the litmus test for consequential U.S. engagement,” Copper said.

“U.S. leaders appear to have a two-tiered regional approach: ambitious engagement with countries that are openly balancing against China, but limited time for those countries that prefer to hedge. In short, Biden is investing in the balancers but not the hedgers.”

China is often accused of transactional relationships, and the U.S. should be careful to not appear to be doing the same, Cooper said.

Side trip to Hanoi?

Yet, Biden’s potential Vietnam trip would show quite the opposite, said Alexander Vuving, professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu, in a post on X.

“Biden’s absence from the ASEAN meeting raises questions about U.S. commitment to ASEAN (centrality) for sure, but [it] doesn’t mean the U.S. is less committed to Southeast Asia. Instead of going to Indonesia, he is planning to go to Vietnam, to raise bilateral ties to the strategic level,” he said.

The logo of the ASEAN Summit 2023 is displayed in Jakarta, Aug. 10, 2023. Credit: Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP
The logo of the ASEAN Summit 2023 is displayed in Jakarta, Aug. 10, 2023. Credit: Yasuyoshi Chiba/AFP

And as Peter Mumford of the geopolitical risk firm Eurasia Group noted, “Xi Jinping rarely attends ASEAN summits either, sending [his] premier instead.”

Biden isn’t ignoring Southeast Asia or the Asia-Pacific region, he is just not relying solely on ASEAN for his regional strategy, Vinsensio Dugis, the director of the ASEAN Studies Center at Airlangga University in Surabaya, pointed out.

Biden is using mechanisms such as AUKUS, a security pact with Australia and Britain; QUAD, a grouping of four democracies with India, Japan and Australia; and APEC, a forum for 21 economies bordering the Pacific Ocean, to pursue Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy, Vinsensio said.

Besides, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris, a person of Asian descent, could bring a different perspective to regional issues such as climate change, trade and security, he said.

“We still need to see what issues she brings and how she delivers them during the ASEAN summit,” he said.

Radio Free Asia (RFA) correspondent Alex Willemyns contributed to this report by BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated online news organization.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Tria Dianti and Shailaja Neelakantan for BenarNews.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/southeastasia-usa-biden-08252023144923.html/feed/ 0 422492 Lavrov Rudely Shuns Current Time Reporter’s Question On Prigozhin https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/24/lavrov-rudely-shuns-current-time-reporters-question-on-prigozhin/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/24/lavrov-rudely-shuns-current-time-reporters-question-on-prigozhin/#respond Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:05:56 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=4cf99fc6bd4221ff60dda64be6781a0d
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/24/lavrov-rudely-shuns-current-time-reporters-question-on-prigozhin/feed/ 0 421758 Time is running out to solve Moldova’s Transnistria question https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/23/time-is-running-out-to-solve-moldovas-transnistria-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/23/time-is-running-out-to-solve-moldovas-transnistria-question/#respond Wed, 23 Aug 2023 10:58:01 +0000 https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-war-moldova-transnistria-peace-plan/
This content originally appeared on openDemocracy RSS and was authored by Evghenii Ceban.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/23/time-is-running-out-to-solve-moldovas-transnistria-question/feed/ 0 421113 Hong Kong delays Jimmy Lai trial as police question woman linked to exiled lawmaker https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-jimmylai-trial-08212023145412.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-jimmylai-trial-08212023145412.html#respond Mon, 21 Aug 2023 18:54:30 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-jimmylai-trial-08212023145412.html A Hong Kong court has once more postponed the national security trial of pro-democracy media mogul Jimmy Lai for several months, while police questioned a woman with ties to exiled former lawmaker Nathan Law.

A panel of three High Court judges delayed Lai's trial until Dec. 18, the second delay since the original trial date was set for December 2022.

Lai, who founded the now-shuttered pro-democracy Apple Daily newspaper, faces two counts of "conspiracy to collude with foreign forces" and one count of "collusion with foreign forces" under a draconian security law imposed by Beijing in the wake of the 2019 protest movement, along with a charge relating to "seditious" publications. 

He was first arrested in August 2020 and is currently serving time for fraud in connection with the lease on his Next Digital media empire's headquarters.

Meanwhile, Hong Kong National Security Police questioned a woman with reported links to Law, one of the eight activists in exile with arrest warrants and bounties on their heads, the London-based rights group Hong Kong Watch reported.

The move comes after police detained and questioned the parents of fellow overseas activist Anna Kwok, who heads the Hong Kong Democracy Council, a U.S.-based lobby group.

ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_08212023.2.jpg
Hong Kong activist Nathan Law [center] takes part in a protest during the visit of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Berlin, Germany, Sept. 1, 2020. Credit: Markus Schreiber/AP

Kwok and Law are among eight prominent overseas Hong Kongers wanted by the authorities for "collusion with foreign forces" under the national security law, with a HK$1 million bounty on each of their heads, as the city authorities claim the right to "long-arm" enforcement of the law anywhere in the world.

Hong Kong leader John Lee has vowed to pursue the eight activists for the rest of their lives.

"This was the latest escalation in the application of the Hong Kong National Security Law against opposition figures, in particular since the announcement of arrest warrants and bounties against the eight activists in exile," Hong Kong Watch said in a brief statement.

Looking like the mainland

Former pro-democracy district councilor Sam Yip, who is currently studying in Tokyo, said Hong Kong's judicial system is looking increasingly like that of mainland China.

"It's very similar to the Chinese courts, where the prosecution and courts can extend an arrested person's time in detention at will," Yip said. "The courts and the entire judicial system in Hong Kong are nearly identical with those in mainland China, particularly where national security law cases are concerned."

"Those cases no longer follow the common law system, but instead follow the Chinese legal system."

He said the common law system once ensured a fair trial in Hong Kong, but no longer.

ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_08212023.3.jpg
Hong Kong's judicial system is looking increasingly like that of mainland China, says former pro-democracy district councilor Sam Yip, who is studying in Tokyo. Credit: Richard A. Brooks/AFP file photo

A former adviser to the Chinese Communist Party government in Beijing last week criticized the Hong Kong government over its plan to allow extradition to mainland China, which sparked the mass protests of 2019 and the ensuing crackdown on public dissent.

Former Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference standing committee member Charles Ho said he had tried to dissuade the city's current and former leaders from pressing ahead with the plans, which sparked months of mass popular protest that broadened from an anti-extradition campaign to include demands for fully democratic elections.

Ho told a radio show last week that then Chief Executive Carrie Lam's handling of the protest was "a man-made disaster."

"I explained to her that if she went ahead and implemented the amendment to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, it would lead to U.S. sanctions on Hong Kong," Ho said, adding that he had issued the same warning to then security chief and current chief executive John Lee.

"I was in the Jockey Club coffee shop with John Lee, and I told him I had advised Lam not to do this, because it would affect Hong Kong's [trading status] with the United States," he said.

Then-U.S. President Donald Trump signed the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act into law in November 2019 after months of pro-democracy protests, targeting officials responsible for the erosion of the city's promised freedoms and prompting mass celebrations by protesters.

When Beijing imposed the National Security Law on Hong Kong from July 1, 2020, Washington responded by declaring an end to the city's status as a separate trading entity from mainland China.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Gao Feng for RFA Mandarin, Jojo Man for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-jimmylai-trial-08212023145412.html/feed/ 0 420725 Hong Kong police question parents of US-based democracy campaigner Anna Kwok https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-activist-family-08082023095408.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-activist-family-08082023095408.html#respond Tue, 08 Aug 2023 14:37:15 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-activist-family-08082023095408.html Hong Kong police on Tuesday took the parents of U.S.-based democracy activist Anna Kwok for questioning, in the latest in a series of moves targeting the relatives of eight prominent overseas activists wanted under a draconian national security law, according to a London-based rights group.

"Today, the Hong Kong national security police detained the parents of US-based pro-democracy activist Anna Kwok ... for questioning over whether they had any contact with, or had sent money to, their daughter," Hong Kong Watch said in a statement on its website, citing local media reports.

Kwok, 26, is the executive director of the U.S.-based political lobby group, the Hong Kong Democracy Council, and is applying for political asylum in the United States.

She was among eight exiled activists listed as wanted by Hong Kong’s national security police, and is accused of "colluding with foreign forces" under the national security law, which bans criticism of the authorities.

Hong Kong leader John Lee has vowed to pursue the eight activists for the rest of their lives.

Kwok, who has a bounty of H.K.$1 million on her head, hadn't commented on her X account by 1000 GMT on Tuesday. 

Photos of eight activists who are sought by Hong Kong police are displayed during a press conference in Hong Kong, July 3, 2023. Credit: Joyce Zhou/Reuters
Photos of eight activists who are sought by Hong Kong police are displayed during a press conference in Hong Kong, July 3, 2023. Credit: Joyce Zhou/Reuters

Her parents' questioning comes after similar police action against the family members of the other seven activists on a "wanted" list announced in early July, along with bounties on the head of each activist.

The moves come as the ruling Chinese Communist Party takes more direct control over national security policy in Hong Kong, which was once the domain of China's cabinet, the State Council.

Adopting PRC tactics

So far, police have targeted the relatives of former pro-democracy lawmakers Nathan Law and Dennis Kwok, U.S.-based businessman Elmer Yuen and U.K.-based veteran labor activist Christopher Mung, also known as Mung Siu-tat. Australia-based former lawmaker Ted Hui and U.K.-based activist Finn Lau are also on the wanted list.

“This is yet another outrageous escalation since the issuing of arrest warrants and bounties against the eight activists over a month ago," Hong Kong Watch policy and advocacy director Sam Goodman said in a statement. “It is increasingly clear the Hong Kong government is adopting the tactics of the security apparatus in mainland China which targets family members to silence criticism overseas."

“We emphasize that the Hong Kong National Security Law has no jurisdiction abroad, and governments must protect the rights and freedoms of activists in exile," he said.

The group called on the international community to treat China's claims that the national security law is applicable to anyone, anywhere in the world, as illegal.

"Hong Kong Watch calls for the protection of anyone who is threatened by the National Security Law abroad," it said.

Last week, police took away Elmer Yuen's ex-wife Yuen Stephanie Downs and their daughter Yuen Mi-shu and son Yuen Mi-man, the Ming Pao newspaper reported, while government broadcaster Radio Television Hong Kong cited police sources as saying Yuen's ex-wife, son and daughter had been hauled in for questioning.

Earlier this month, national security police raided the home of trade unionist Mung Siu-tat's brother, taking away him, his wife and son for questioning -- also on suspicion of "assisting fugitives to continue to engage in acts that endanger national security."

Police also took away the parents, brother and sister-in-law of exiled former pro-democracy lawmaker Dennis Kwok and questioned them on suspicion of the same offense, a few days after similar treatment was meted out to Nathan Law’s parents and brother.

No arrests were made, and all of the activists' family members were released after questioning.


Translated with additional reporting by Luisetta Mudie.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Simon Lee for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-activist-family-08082023095408.html/feed/ 0 417732 What the Government Does When It Doesn’t Want to Answer a Question https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/03/what-the-government-does-when-it-doesnt-want-to-answer-a-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/03/what-the-government-does-when-it-doesnt-want-to-answer-a-question/#respond Thu, 03 Aug 2023 20:16:09 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=142776


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/03/what-the-government-does-when-it-doesnt-want-to-answer-a-question/feed/ 0 416756 Two Years after Afghan Fiasco, There’s a Key Question We Still Aren’t Asking https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/01/two-years-after-afghan-fiasco-theres-a-key-question-we-still-arent-asking/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/01/two-years-after-afghan-fiasco-theres-a-key-question-we-still-arent-asking/#respond Tue, 01 Aug 2023 05:50:47 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=290485 Two years ago this week Americans were shocked and dismayed at the incredibly rapid collapse of the US-backed government in Afghanistan. This despite the fact that over a 20-year period the US had suffered upwards of 40,000 casualties and spent $2.3 trillion dollars to support the government and to supply the Afghan National Security Forces More

The post Two Years after Afghan Fiasco, There’s a Key Question We Still Aren’t Asking appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Glenn Sacks.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/08/01/two-years-after-afghan-fiasco-theres-a-key-question-we-still-arent-asking/feed/ 0 416025 Democrats question proposed part of AUKUS deal https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-defense-industry-07262023154824.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-defense-industry-07262023154824.html#respond Wed, 26 Jul 2023 20:30:00 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-defense-industry-07262023154824.html A key part of the AUKUS security pact aiming to create a “seamless” defense industry across Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States appears at risk after congressional Democrats raised doubts about Canberra’s ability to protect U.S. military designs from China.

The concerns were raised during a session of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday, just days before U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin arrive in Brisbane, Australia, for talks with their Australian counterparts.

Democrats including Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the party’s ranking member on the committee, said that they opposed two bills introduced by the Republican majority to exempt Australia and the United Kingdom from the Arms Export Control Act of 1976.

The law created the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR, which forces foreign entities, except for those in Canada, to apply for licenses when importing sensitive U.S. defense technology. 

Meeks argued that Australia and the United Kingdom could seek exemptions from the State Department under the standing law, and said a blanket exemption would circumvent important checks.

“Prematurely lifting them risks compromising our national security by allowing unfettered transfers of our most sensitive defense technology including to private-sector foreign firms, which risk exposure to or theft by our most capable adversaries, especially China,” he said.

The former committee chair pointed to Australian intelligence chief Mike Burgess’s comments earlier this year that more Australians are being targeted by foreign spies, due in part to the AUKUS pact.

“The U.K. faces similar intelligence threats,” he said.

Roadblocks

Experts in Australia have warned that the U.S. arms-control laws are a roadblock to the so-called “pillar 2” of the AUKUS pact, which aims to create a “seamless” defense industry across the three countries and could be hampered by bureaucracy without a blanket exemption.

Those concerns have been echoed by top Australian officials.

Australia’s ambassador in Washington, Kevin Rudd, told a forum in Washington last month that the so-called “pillar 2” of AUKUS “could be even more revolutionary than the submarine project in itself” but said it had a “complex process” ahead of it to get through Congress.

ENG_CHN_AukusLegislation_07262023.2.jpg
Britain's Prime Minister Rishi Sunak [second right] walks during a meeting with U.S. President Joe Biden [second left] and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese [left] at Point Loma naval base in San Diego, Calif., on March 13, 2023, as part of AUKUS. (Stefan Rousseau/Pool via AP)

On Wednesday, Rep. Michael McCaul, a Republican from Texas who has served as chairman of the committee since the start of this year, said providing Australia and the United Kingdom similar exemptions as those given to Canada would cut “red tape” with minimal risks.

“This licensing exemption will add more submarine capabilities to the South China Sea as we see a more aggressive China on the march,” he said. “It also removes restrictions on innovation, and collaborating on quantum computing, autonomous vehicles and long range weapons.”

McCaul argued the 1976 law was “outdated” and from “a time when the U.S. dominated defense innovation in defense technology,” which he said was no longer. He noted the United States had “never denied a sale or license to Australia” after the lengthy approval process.

“Times have changed,” McCaul said, “and we now need to rely on our allies and partners, many of which out-innovate us in key areas.”

Five Eyes partner

Wearing a koala pin on her lapel, Rep. Young Kim, a Republican from California who introduced the bill for the exemption for Australia, said she could not understand the Democrats' reluctance.

Kim, who titled the bill the “Keeping Our Allies Leading in Advancement Act,” or KOALA Act, said Australia had already proven itself a trusted partner as part of the Five Eyes intelligence pact that also includes Canada, the United Kingdom and New Zealand.

“Australia is one of our closest allies and is one of our Five Eyes partners. We let the Australians have access to some of the most sensitive intelligence we have,” Kim said. “So why shouldn’t we expedite collaboration with them on sensitive technologies?” 

ENG_CHN_AukusLegislation_07262023.3.jpg
Rep. Young Kim says Australia has already proven itself a trusted partner of the United States as part of the Five Eyes intelligence pact. (Ken Cedeno/Pool via AP file photo)

It was disingenuous, the second-term lawmaker added, to “grant them access to some of our most sensitive intelligence but say we’re concerned that the Australians will let this technology fall into the hands of the CCP,” referring to the Communist Party of China.

Kim also tabled a July 24 letter in favor of “an expedited AUKUS process” that she said was signed by a number of Obama administration officials including former director of national intelligence James Clapper and former Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

McCaul summarized the letter as making the case “Australia has sufficient safeguards in place already” as a Five Eyes member, and dismissed the argument that Canberra and London can apply for Canada-like exemptions from the U.S. State Department.

“State will not issue the exemption,” he said. “State has shown it will never certify Australia or the U.K. for an exemption, because it does not want to give up its bureaucratic power over licensing.”

A State Department spokesperson declined to comment on the issue but pointed to May 24 testimony to the committee by Jessica Lewis, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, in which she suggested bulk approvals of AUKUS-related exemption requests.

“Every transfer between AUKUS partners will not be subject to case-by-case review, but will be pre-approved” if the case meets certain criteria laid out by the State Department, Lewis said at the time.

Charles Edel, the Australia chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Radio Free Asia he believed changes to the law were needed that protect U.S. defense secrets while also allowing Australian, American and British companies to collaborate easily.

He said the speed of the current approval process was the issue.

"The question surrounding export controls,” Edel said, “is not whether they work to exempt Australia and the United Kingdom from [licensing] key technologies, but whether they work fast enough or with enough certainty for businesses to make investments at scale.”

“Changes in legislation are needed to ensure that the U.S. can collaborate with our closest allies, while ensuring that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect our sensitive technology.”

Submarine deal safe

One rare area of agreement between Democrats and Republicans was on the deal to sell Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines to Australia by the end of the decade.

ENG_CHN_AukusLegislation_07262023.4.jpg
The Virginia-class fast-attack submarine USS Missouri departs Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Sept. 1, 2021. (Amanda R. Gray/U.S. Navy via AP)

There was bipartisan support for the AUKUS Submarine Transfer Authorization Act, which forms the substance of “pillar 1” of AUKUS for the United States and United Kingdom to help Australia obtain, and then build and maintain, its own fleet of nuclear submarines, starting with the purchase of three from U.S. shipyards.

The deal has proven controversial in Australia due to its price, which will run into the hundreds of billions of dollars, as well as in the United States, due to the huge submarine backlog at shipyards.

But Meeks of the Democratic Party said the Biden administration was committed to “ensuring there are no adverse impacts on our navy or shipbuilding capacity,” while McCaul said the sale to Australia would help to “stimulate investment in our defense industrial base.”

Rep. Bill Huizenga, a Republican from Michigan, added that passage of the bill would lead to “$3 billion of investments from the Australians into the submarine base,” which would “help ease the production and maintenance backlog that plagues our submarine forces.”

He said there should be no doubts that the submarines will be delivered to Australia on time, even if U.S. shipyards were now only building “approximately 1.3 Virginia-class submarines each year.”

“Currently, the indications that industrial industry can deliver two Virginia-classes by the late 2020s are promising,” Huizenga said, “and I have complete faith that they will hit that mark with our support coming out of the House of Representatives and the Senate.”


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by Alex Willemyns for RFA.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/aukus-defense-industry-07262023154824.html/feed/ 0 414868 Hong Kong national security police question family of US-based activist Elmer Yuen https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-usa-police-07242023144649.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-usa-police-07242023144649.html#respond Mon, 24 Jul 2023 18:52:32 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-usa-police-07242023144649.html National security police in Hong Kong on Monday took away three more family members of exiled pro-democracy activists wanted for "collusion with foreign forces" for campaigning against an ongoing crackdown on dissent in the city.

Police raided the homes of U.S.-based businessman Elmer Yuen's son, daughter-in-law and daughter on Monday, taking them away for questioning on suspicion of "assisting fugitives in continuing to engage in acts that endanger national security."

The raids came after similar actions against the family members of two other exiled pro-democracy activists who, like Yuen, are on a wanted list of eight prominent overseas activists with bounties on their heads.

Police confirmed to Radio Free Asia that they had taken away a man and two women for questioning on Hong Kong Island, but typically don't name those they detain or question.

Later in the day, pro-China lawmaker Eunice Yung told reporters in the Legislative Council that she and her husband Derek Yuen had been taken away for questioning by national security police, who searched their apartment and took away mobile phones and laptops.

"This morning, officers from the National Security Department produced a warrant and searched my home," Yung said. "My husband Derek Yuen and I were taken to the police station for questioning at 7.00 a.m."

Derek Yuen, son of Elmer Yuen, one of the eight overseas activists wanted by the police, leaves from the police station after being taken to the police station for investigation, in Hong Kong, Monday, July 24, 2023. Credit: Tyrone Siu/Reuters
Derek Yuen, son of Elmer Yuen, one of the eight overseas activists wanted by the police, leaves from the police station after being taken to the police station for investigation, in Hong Kong, Monday, July 24, 2023. Credit: Tyrone Siu/Reuters
W

hile Yung was released after an interrogation that lasted nearly three hours, she said her husband "is still under investigation and I don't know his situation."

Asked if she had told police where to find Elmer Yuen, Yung, who cut off ties with her father-in-law last year, said she didn't know his whereabouts.

"I can say frankly that I don't have any of his details, such as residential address, phone number or any of it," she said. "I fulfilled my civic responsibilities, and I support the national security law."

"I believe I am innocent," she said, adding that she believes her husband will also cooperate with the investigation.

Home raids and bounties

Derek Yuen was later released after around 10 hours of questioning.

Earlier this month, national security police raided the home of trade unionist Mung Siu-tat's brother, taking away him, his wife and son for questioning -- also on suspicion of "assisting fugitives to continue to engage in acts that endanger national security."

Police also took away the parents, brother and sister-in-law of exiled former pro-democracy lawmaker Dennis Kwok and questioned them on suspicion of the same offense. No arrests were made, and all of the activists' family members were released after questioning.

On July 3, national security police issued arrest warrants and offered bounties for U.K.-based Mung, Kwok, Law and five other exiled campaigners, saying they are wanted in connection with "serious crimes" under Hong Kong's national security law.

“The police aren't going to just take your word for it if you claim [you have severed ties]," says Executive Council member and barrister Ronny Tong. Credit: Bobby Yip/Reuters file photo
“The police aren't going to just take your word for it if you claim [you have severed ties]," says Executive Council member and barrister Ronny Tong. Credit: Bobby Yip/Reuters file photo

U.K.-based Finn Lau, Australia-based Ted Hui and Kevin Yam and U.S.-based Anna Kwok and Elmer Yuen are also on the wanted list, with bounties of HK$1 million (US$127,700) offered for information that might lead to an arrest.

The city's leader John Lee has vowed to pursue them "for life."

Executive Council member and barrister Ronny Tong said claims by activists that they have severed ties with family members back home were unlikely to offer much protection from national security police investigations.

"The relationship between you and the wanted suspect has to be investigated – the police aren't going to just take your word for it if you claim [you have severed ties]," Tong said. "A simple claim like that has no effect in law."

Escalation in use of law

But he added that being taken away for questioning doesn't mean somebody broke the law, and is part of a person's civic responsibilities, not an indicator that they have committed any crime.

He said police have a responsibility to fully investigate the cases of the eight overseas activists and try to bring them back to Hong Kong.

The London-based rights group Hong Kong Watch said police also questioned Yuen's daughter Mimi on Monday.

Elmer Yuen is accused of having encouraged foreign countries to impose sanctions on Hong Kong officials and judges, online from the US, and promoting Hong Kong’s self-determination, the group said.

"This is the latest escalation in the application of the Hong Kong National Security Law against opposition figures, in particular since the announcement of arrest warrants and bounties against the eight activists in exile," the group said in a statement in response to Monday's police action.

"This is a drastic escalation since the arrest warrants and bounties against the eight activists and the threats against the families of Nathan [Law], Christopher [Mung] and Dennis [Kwok], which were already outrageous and completely unacceptable," its chief executive Benedict Rogers said.

"The Hong Kong government is openly and increasingly threatening activists abroad, in an attempt to silence them and spread fear among the community. This situation is increasingly similar to that in Mainland China, and we are seeing Hong Kong plummet to this level in terms of human rights, particularly civil and political rights."

Rogers called on governments to protect the rights and freedoms of activists in exile.


Translated by Luisetta Mudie.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Gigi Lee for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-usa-police-07242023144649.html/feed/ 0 414182 Hong Kong police question more family members of exiled pro-democracy activists https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-families-harassed-07202023143544.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-families-harassed-07202023143544.html#respond Thu, 20 Jul 2023 18:36:00 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-families-harassed-07202023143544.html Hong Kong police on Thursday took away for questioning several family members of exiled pro-democracy activists wanted for "collusion with foreign forces" for campaigning against an ongoing crackdown on dissent in the city.

Police raided the home of trade unionist Mung Siu-tat's brother, taking him, his wife and their son for questioning on suspicion of "assisting fugitives to continue to engage in acts that endanger national security," a police spokesperson told Radio Free Asia.

Police also took away the parents, brother and sister-in-law of exiled former pro-democracy lawmaker Dennis Kwok and questioned them on suspicion of the same offense, the South China Morning Post and Standard newspapers reported.

No arrests were made, and all of the activists' family members were released after questioning, the reports said.

Eight bounties

The raids came after similar action against the family members of exiled former pro-democracy lawmaker Nathan Law, who is also on a wanted list of eight prominent overseas activists.

On July 3, national security police issued arrest warrants and offered bounties for U.K.-based Mung, Kwok, Law and five other exiled campaigners, saying they are wanted in connection with "serious crimes" under Hong Kong's national security law.

U.K.-based Finn Lau, Australia-based Ted Hui and Kevin Yam and U.S.-based Anna Kwok and Elmer Yuen are also on the wanted list, with bounties of HK$1 million (US$127,700) offered for information that might lead to an arrest.

A police spokesperson confirmed to Radio Free Asia that Mung's three relatives were questioned for "assisting fugitives," but declined to say why Kwok's relatives were questioned.

"This operation is still ongoing, and further law enforcement action, including arrests, cannot be ruled out," the spokesman said.

Instilling fear

Current affairs commentator Sang Pu said the raids, which have targeted 10 family members of the eight wanted activists to date, seemed calculated to create an atmosphere of fear.

"If there is evidence, then make an arrest," Sang said. "But what do they mean by taking people away for hours of interrogation without any evidence, then letting them go?"

"Is this a bid to ... create panic by banging on doors first thing in the morning?"

ENG_CHN_HKLongArm_07202023.2.jpg
People walk past the police notices for pro-democracy activists at Wah Fu Estate in Hong Kong on Thursday, July 20, 2023. Credit: Bertha Wang/AFP

Elmer Yuen's son Derek and daughter-in-law Eunice Yung – a pro-China lawmaker – haven't been interrogated yet.

Yong made a high-profile announcement last August that she was cutting off ties with Yuen, calling him to return to Hong Kong and turn himself in.

Derek Yuen said in a recent media interview that they had spoken briefly with Elmer Yuen during a recent trip overseas, but had avoided any financial transactions with him.

Sang said it was telling that the couple – whose pro-China credentials are fairly solid – haven't been questioned yet.

The London-based rights group Hong Kong Watch said the raids are the "latest escalation" in the crackdown on opposition figures.

"This is a drastic escalation since the arrest warrants and bounties against the eight activists and the threats against Nathan’s family, which were already outrageous and completely unacceptable," the group's chief executive Benedict Rogers said.

"The Hong Kong government is openly and increasingly threatening activists abroad, in an attempt to silence them and spread fear among the community," Rogers said in a statement on the group's website. 

"This situation is increasingly similar to that in mainland China, and we are seeing Hong Kong plummet to this level in terms of human rights, particularly civil and political rights," he said, calling on governments to protect the rights and freedoms of activists in exile.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Gigi Lee for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-families-harassed-07202023143544.html/feed/ 0 413281 Ilya Budraitskis on the Russian Left, Putin’s War on Lenin, and the Question of Russian Imperialism https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/17/ilya-budraitskis-on-the-russian-left-putins-war-on-lenin-and-the-question-of-russian-imperialism/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/17/ilya-budraitskis-on-the-russian-left-putins-war-on-lenin-and-the-question-of-russian-imperialism/#respond Mon, 17 Jul 2023 05:57:27 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=289078 July 17, 2023 by Eric Draitser

This time Eric chats with Ilya Budraitskis, a Russian historian, political activist, and author of “Dissidents among Dissidents: Ideology, Politics, and the Left in Post-Soviet Russia.” Ilya explains his decision to leave Russia in the days following the invasion of Ukraine, and provides an analysis of the early antiwar protests forcibly suppressed by the Kremlin. From there, Ilya provides an analysis of the Russian Left, including the reactionary Communist Party of Russia, and explains the various dynamics at play in Russia. The final portion of the discussion centers around the questions of Russian imperialism and the ideological war Putin has waged on the history and legacy of Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Eric Draitser.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/17/ilya-budraitskis-on-the-russian-left-putins-war-on-lenin-and-the-question-of-russian-imperialism/feed/ 0 412180 Hong Kong police question family of exiled activist Nathan Law https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-nathan-lam-family-07112023130047.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-nathan-lam-family-07112023130047.html#respond Tue, 11 Jul 2023 17:02:47 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-nathan-lam-family-07112023130047.html Hong Kong police on Tuesday questioned the family of exiled former pro-democracy lawmaker Nathan Law, who the city's leader has vowed to "pursue for life" under a national security law criminalizing public criticism of the authorities.

"Today, the Hong Kong national security police went to the apartments of Nathan Law’s parents and brother and took them away for questioning," advocacy group Hong Kong Watch said in a statement on its website. "They were later released without arrest."

The move came after national security police last week issued arrest warrants and bounties for eight prominent Hong Kong activists living in exile, accusing them of "collusion with foreign forces to endanger national security."

Law, who now lives in the United Kingdom, announced in 2020 that he had cut ties with his family back in Hong Kong in a bid to protect them.

But police raided his parents' home early Tuesday morning, taking away his parents and brother and questioning them about whether they had provided him with any financial support, or whether they were his "agents" in Hong Kong, according to multiple media reports.

"At around 6.00 a.m. today (July 11), the national security department [of the Hong Kong police force] searched two units in Yat Tung Estate, Tung Chung, where Nathan Law's parents and elder brother live, and took [the three of them] away to take their statements," the pro-Beijing Sing Tao Daily reported.

Police wanted to know if they had been providing financial assistance to Law or had acted on his behalf in Hong Kong, it said.

"After the three had made their statements, they were allowed to leave the police station," the report said, versions of which also appeared on iCable News and in the South China Morning Post.

Bounties on their heads

The July 3 warrants also listed former pro-democracy lawmakers Ted Hui, now in Australia, U.K.-based Dennis Kwok, U.S.-based activist and political lobbyist Anna Kwok and Australia-based legal scholar Kevin Yam among the wanted. 

U.K.-based activists Finn Lau and Mung Siu-tat and U.S.-based businessman Elmer Yuen are also on the wanted list.

Authorities have offered bounties of HK$1 million (US$127,700) for information that might lead to an arrest or a successful prosecution.

Those named face a slew of charges including "collusion with foreign powers" and "inciting subversion and secession" under a law imposed on Hong Kong by the Communist Party in the wake of the 2019 protest movement that effectively bans public dissent and peaceful political opposition.

ENG_CHN_HKNatSec_07112023.2 (1).jpg
Hong Kong police on Monday, July 3, 2023, issued arrest warrants and offered bounties for eight activists and former lawmakers who have fled the city. They are [clockwise from top left] Kevin Yam, Elmer Yuen, Anna Kwok, Dennis Kwok, Nathan Law, Finn Lau, Mung Siu-tat and Ted Hui. Credit: Screenshot from Reuters video

The warrants were quickly followed by five more arrests of former associates of Law and the now-disbanded pro-democracy party Demosisto that he co-founded in the wake of the 2014 Umbrella Movement, who were accused of using the "Punish MEE" pro-democracy crowd-funding app to bankroll overseas activists.

The escalating crackdown has sparked international criticism of the authorities' ongoing attempts at "long-arm" law enforcement overseas.

Hong Kong's three-year-old national security law bans public criticism of the authorities as “incitement of hatred,” and applies to speech or acts committed by people of any nationality, anywhere in the world.

More targeted

Meanwhile, Secretary for Justice Paul Lam has lodged complaints to the Hong Kong Bar Association and The Law Society of Hong Kong against two others on the "wanted" list: former lawmaker Dennis Kwok and solicitor Kevin Yam, for “professional misconduct," Hong Kong Watch said, adding that both could have their licenses to practice law in Hong Kong suspended.

“This is a drastic escalation since last week’s arrest warrants and bounties against the eight activists, which were already outrageous and completely unacceptable," the group's Chief Executive Benedict Rogers said.

The group called on British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly to summon the Chinese ambassador and ask him to explain why the authorities are targeting the families of Hong Kongers under the protection of the United Kingdom. Law has been granted political refugee status.

"The Hong Kong government is openly threatening activists abroad, in an attempt to silence them and spread fear among the community," the statement said.

It said the threats against Law's family showed that the situation in Hong Kong is increasingly similar to that of mainland China, and that any difference between the two systems of governance has been totally dismantled.

‘Rats crossing the street’

Chief Executive John Lee on Tuesday repeated his vow to "hunt down" Law and the other activists for the rest of their lives.

"I have said many times that we will hunt them down for the rest of their lives, and that we will use every means in our power to do so, including going after anyone providing them with financial or other kinds of assistance," Lee told reporters on Tuesday.

"We will also go after the forces behind the scenes, who may even be controlling them," he said, without elaborating on who those forces might be.

He likened the exiled activists to "rats crossing the street," to be shunned unless anyone has information leading to their arrest or prosecution, in which case a reward could be offered.

Former Security Secretary Regina Ip earlier told reporters that she believed that while "normal" family contact with overseas activists wasn't an issue, anyone sending funds to overseas activists who then used the money to lobby overseas parliaments to sanction Hong Kong "or other violations of the national security law," could face prosecution.

More than 260 people have been arrested under the national security law, including dozens of former opposition lawmakers and political activists and senior journalists including pro-democracy media magnate Jimmy Lai, who is a British citizen.

An estimated 10,000 have been prosecuted for "rioting" or public order offenses in the wake of the 2019 protest movement, which Beijing views as an attempt by "hostile foreign forces" to foment a "color revolution" in Hong Kong.

Translated by Luisetta Mudie. Edited by Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Simon Lee for RFA Cantonese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hk-nathan-lam-family-07112023130047.html/feed/ 0 410980 The Green Party Question https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/10/the-green-party-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/10/the-green-party-question/#respond Mon, 10 Jul 2023 05:56:39 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=288567 “We’re beings toward death, we’re featherless, two-legged, linguistically-conscious creatures born between urine and feces whose body will one day be the culinary delight of terrestrial worms. That’s us.” —Cornel West A third party run, if it is worth anything at all, is a spoiler and should be proud of it. The Green Party has usually More

The post The Green Party Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Nick Pemberton.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/10/the-green-party-question/feed/ 0 410521 ‘Has the Government Reduced its Commitment to Fight Climate Change?’ | BBC Question Time https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/06/has-the-government-reduced-its-commitment-to-fight-climate-change-bbc-question-time/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/06/has-the-government-reduced-its-commitment-to-fight-climate-change-bbc-question-time/#respond Thu, 06 Jul 2023 23:38:51 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=e29fcaa41eb6820bcbc15caa59ae4f64
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/06/has-the-government-reduced-its-commitment-to-fight-climate-change-bbc-question-time/feed/ 0 409949 The Palestine Question: Western Media and Long-Term Solution https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/05/the-palestine-question-western-media-and-long-term-solution/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/05/the-palestine-question-western-media-and-long-term-solution/#respond Wed, 05 Jul 2023 05:59:23 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=288130 Image of a border wall.

Image by Ash Hayes.

Picture the Western media’s outrage if a Russian helicopter gunship went into an occupied Crimean city neighborhood and began shooting missiles at civilian homes, claiming a militant lived in one. “War crime” would resound.

When this occurred in the Jenin refugee camp nearly two weeks ago, killing seven people, including a teenager, it was framed as a mere escalation between Israelis and the Palestinians. There was no mention of war crime or bringing Israel to the International Criminal Court as there would be for Russia. (This happened again on Monday, July 3rd, Israel launched another raid on Jenin, using missiles on an occupied civilian population, killing eight people.)

Following the Israeli war crime of attacking a civilian refugee camp with missiles in June, Palestinian militants responded by attacking illegal Israeli settlers in the West Bank. In turn, an Israeli settler lynch mob burned homes and cars in Turmus Ayya, killing at least one person, in a pogrom backed by the Israeli military. This was one of 570 violent attacks of Israeli settlers on Palestinians in the West Bank this year.

There was no media outrage, as this as this has always been a US-sponsored occupation, and land theft and oppression of Palestinians. Furthermore, unlike the white Ukrainians who receive heavy US support, both militarily and from the US public, Palestinians – like other forgotten, non-white people of the world who suffer war crimes and genocide, Yemenis and Rohingya, for instance – receive little sympathy and no real assistance.

However much independent media or Al Jazeera cover these stories and show detailed pictures of Israel human rights violations, seemingly nothing will change the US’s support for this brutal occupation. Nor will the far-right Israeli government’s eventual annexation of the West Bank likely draw more than a mild rebuke from the US administration.

China is rising fast and has no special interest in Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, as seen in its recent “strategic partnership” with the Palestinian Authority and its decades-long recognition of Palestine as a state. It remains to be seen how much changing world power will affect the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Even if China becomes the main world superpower, the US will maintain some degree of its global influence into the foreseeable future.

What is needed is a paradigm shift within Israel or in the US’s support for one of its closest client states. Such dynamics often happen spontaneously, such as the street vendor killed by Tunisian authorities that ignited the Arab Spring. This shift is more likely to happen if China becomes the sole world superpower or Israel commits even graver crimes than it has in recent history, which is a tough act to follow. The former will not likely occur in the near future and the latter would only further exacerbate Palestinian suffering.

What are other ways of ending the illegal occupation of Palestine and the US’s support of it? As admirable as BDS is, it hasn’t tilted the dial enough. Even as Jewish Americans become more partial to the Palestinians, devout evangelicals have turned increasingly towards Israel. While Israel would never allow one state to exist in contemporary Israel and the West Bank, a two-state solution is virtually impossible with approximately 683,000 settlers in occupied Palestine.

However, under the right political conditions, under a future a liberal Israeli prime minister and somewhat progressive US administration, a consociational solution could be the best possible answer. With a far-right, anti-Palestinian government in power, this plan is not actionable at the moment: the political timing has to be just right.

Outlined in this article, the plan would allow for increased power and protections for Palestinian citizens of Israel, a contiguous Palestine and some minority protections of Israel settlers in the West Bank. Avoiding horrors of the past, it would not consist of forced population transfers but would deal with the status quo. It may not be as ideal as the one-state solution, with equality and justice for justice for all. Yet it is likely far more realistic, given the power of Israel compared with Palestinians, and the US’s unmitigated support for its client state.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Peter Crowley.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/07/05/the-palestine-question-western-media-and-long-term-solution/feed/ 0 409407 An Important Question https://www.radiofree.org/2023/06/17/an-important-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/06/17/an-important-question/#respond Sat, 17 Jun 2023 15:32:09 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=141179


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/06/17/an-important-question/feed/ 0 404782 A Question about Censorship https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/29/a-question-about-censorship/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/29/a-question-about-censorship/#respond Mon, 29 May 2023 13:18:51 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=140633

If disinformation (i.e., lying) is a crime against peace and humanity, then why aren’t such lies censored?


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/29/a-question-about-censorship/feed/ 0 399190 Congressional Committee, Regulators Question Cigna System That Lets Its Doctors Deny Claims Without Reading Patient Files https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/16/congressional-committee-regulators-question-cigna-system-that-lets-its-doctors-deny-claims-without-reading-patient-files/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/16/congressional-committee-regulators-question-cigna-system-that-lets-its-doctors-deny-claims-without-reading-patient-files/#respond Tue, 16 May 2023 21:30:00 +0000 https://www.propublica.org/article/cigna-health-insurance-denials-pxdx-congress-investigation by Patrick Rucker, Maya Miller and David Armstrong

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

A key congressional committee asked insurance giant Cigna on Tuesday to provide corporate documents so that lawmakers can examine the company’s practice of denying health care claims without ever opening a patient file.

The House Committee on Energy and Commerce joined several state and federal regulators in scrutinizing the legality of Cigna rejecting the payment of certain claims using a system known as PXDX.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican from Washington who chairs the committee, noted that policyholders under Cigna’s Medicare Advantage plans appeal about one in five denials for requests for medical procedures, known as prior authorizations. Of those denials, about 80% are overturned.

“If these figures are at all illustrative of Cigna’s commercial appeal and reversal rates, it would suggest that the PXDX review process is leading to policyholders paying out-of-pocket for medical care that should be covered under their health insurance contract,” Rodgers wrote in a letter to Cigna.

The letter follows an investigation by ProPublica and The Capitol Forum that found Cigna doctors blocked payment for certain tests and procedures by automatically labeling them “not medically necessary.” In two months last year, Cigna doctors refused to pay for 300,000 claims in this way, spending an average of 1.2 seconds on each case, according to internal spreadsheets that tracked how fast they worked.

A Cigna spokesperson on Tuesday said that the company welcomes “the opportunity to fully explain our PxDx process to regulators and correct the many mischaracterizations and misleading perceptions ProPublica’s article created.” Cigna has not responded to the news organizations’ requests to detail what those might be.

In the past, Cigna has said the PXDX system was built to process claims more quickly.

But state insurance commissioners contacted in recent weeks criticized Cigna, with several saying that they wanted to more closely examine the company’s use of algorithms to deny claims.

Mike Kreidler, the insurance commissioner for Washington, said it is an “abhorrent” practice “to routinely deny just to enhance the bottom line.”

Kreidler said he and other state insurance regulators are reviewing their records for customer complaints that seem to describe an auto-denial process.

“I’m afraid it might be the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “We darn well better start paying attention to it.”

Industry sources there told the news organizations that other large insurers operate similar systems.

The investigation by ProPublica and The Capitol Forum has also raised red flags in California.

The California Department of Insurance said in a statement that it is “looking closely at health insurance companies’ handling of claims, while simultaneously exploring all options in coordination with other state regulators.”

Other state insurance commissions said they, too, were interested in a deeper examination of Cigna’s practices.

“Given your article, this will likely warrant a closer look,” said a spokesperson for the Delaware Department of Insurance.

The U.S. Department of Labor regulates a common kind of insurance held by many Americans: plans sponsored by employers that cover their own health care costs. Federal officials said they were alarmed by the auto-deny practices.

“This is very concerning,” said one senior Labor Department official who asked to remain anonymous in order to speak on a sensitive matter. “I don’t see a scenario where we’re not taking a hard look at these kinds of practices.”

Two organizations accredit health insurers to make sure plans are abiding by certain standards. Both of these groups, the Utilization Review Accreditation Commission and the National Committee for Quality Assurance, have opened investigations into the denials system. They did not immediately respond to detailed questions about the investigations.

The letter from the energy and commerce committee asked for the company to hand over “copies of all memoranda analyzing the legality of the PXDX review process.”

The records requested include details about the number of claims denied using PXDX, the number denied by individual medical directors employed by the insurer and details on how often those decisions were appealed and overturned.


This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Patrick Rucker, Maya Miller and David Armstrong.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/16/congressional-committee-regulators-question-cigna-system-that-lets-its-doctors-deny-claims-without-reading-patient-files/feed/ 0 395256 Erdoğan’s Hold on Power in Question as Votes Counted in Turkey https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/14/erdogans-hold-on-power-in-question-as-votes-counted-in-turkey/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/14/erdogans-hold-on-power-in-question-as-votes-counted-in-turkey/#respond Sun, 14 May 2023 22:08:50 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/news/erdogan-turkey-2023-presidential-election-results

Whether Turkey's authoritarian president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, maintains power remains an open question as officials continue to count votes following Sunday's presidential and parliamentary elections.

Tens of millions of people cast ballots in the pivotal election before polls closed at 5:00 pm local time. Preliminary results indicate that Erdoğan of the right-wing Justice and Development Party (AKP) holds a dwindling lead over Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, who heads the center-left Republican People's Party (CHP) and is the joint candidate of a six-party opposition coalition.

The state-run Anadolu news agency reports that Erdoğan is beating Kılıçdaroğlu by a margin of 49.56% to 44.71% with nearly 95% of votes counted. The private Anka news agency, meanwhile, reports that Erdoğan is ahead of Kılıçdaroğlu, 49.24% to 45.04%, with just over 98% of votes counted. Two other candidates have garnered support from a small percentage of voters.

As expected, the incumbent jumped out to an early lead as votes in his conservative central heartland were among the first counted, but his main challenger has gained ground as the tally proceeds in big cities and coastal areas. It may take up to three days for official results to be confirmed. If no candidate wins over 50% of first-round ballots, the top two vote-getters will compete again in a head-to-head runoff scheduled for May 28. Both Erdoğan and Kılıçdaroğlu's camps have acknowledged that this is an increasingly likely outcome.

Muharrem İnce, a former CHP member who dropped out of the contest just days ago, has received roughly 0.4% of the vote. Far-right nationalist candidate Sinan Oğan has secured about 5.3%, making him a potential kingmaker in the event the race goes to a second round.

Reporting of the results has proven controversial. Earlier on Sunday evening, when it was reported that Erdoğan had a substantial lead, opposition figures accused state-run media of deceiving the public and claimed that Kılıçdaroğlu is winning.

"Anadolu Agency is doing its traditional manipulation for the last time," said CHP spokesperson Faik Oztrak. "We ask our citizens to follow our statements."

Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, a CHP member who took office in 2019, also slammed the outlet. Citing similar actions in past elections, he said: "We are experiencing another Anadolu Agency case. The agency's reputation is below zero. They should not be trusted. Anadolu's data is null and void."

Imamoglu was echoed by Ankara Mayor Mansur Yavas, another CHP member elected in 2019, who said: "They mislead our nation by running the ballot boxes that work for them. They do not feel ashamed either. They have no credibility... According to the data we have, our President Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu is ahead."

Omer Celik, a spokesperson for the ruling AKP rebuked the opposition for criticizing Anadolu.

According to Progressive International: "AKP has challenged many votes in precincts where they are trailing all over the country. If these challenges are unfounded, it will delay the counting process several hours. This means we could see a late surge for opposition parties."

The group, which sent an election observation delegation to Turkey, sounded the alarm about possible dirty tricks being carried out on behalf of Erdoğan.

According toAl Jazeera correspondent Abdelazeem Mohammed, the election is "most likely heading to a second round."

"The opposition is saying that the ruling alliance... deliberately started the vote count in its strongholds," said Mohammed.

Al Jazeera's Hashem Ahelbarra, reporting from CHP headquarters in Ankara, said the party is feeling "more and more confident" as the additional ballots are tallied and Erdoğan's initial lead shrinks.

"CHP, along with the opposition coalition, is looking forward to increasing numbers in major cities, and that the numbers in Istanbul and Ankara could be [a] strong indication that they are going to go to a runoff," said Ahelbarra.

"In 2022, they put together this coalition from all walks of life with different affiliations," Ahelbarra explained. "The reason why they did this was to consolidate gains because they know that the AKP, with the leadership of Erdoğan for the past 20 years, makes it extremely difficult for them to win the elections."

Speaking from Istanbul, political analyst Cengiz Tomar toldAl Jazeera that "the results so far spell out a great failure for the opposition."

"The results so far do not align at all with the sociological make-up of the Turkish people, where 35% of them are religious, conservative, and on the right, and the remaining 65% are secular and Kurdish," he said.

Ahead of the election, polling data gave Kılıçdaroğlu a slight lead and also suggested that Erdoğan’s governing coalition, led by the AKP, could lose its majority in parliament.

In the run-up to Sunday, however, human rights groups warned that Erdoğan’s right-wing government would "exert considerable control over the digital ecosystem in an effort to undermine the outcome," and there is fresh reporting of "foul play" on the day of the election.

Erdoğan has ruled Turkey for the past two decades, first as prime minister from 2003 to 2014 and as president since 2014. Before he was reelected in 2018, Erdoğan convinced enough Turkish voters to approve constitutional changes that transformed the nation's parliamentary system into a highly centralized presidential regime with few checks and balances.

Erdoğan "fell behind in the polls as voters react to the results of 20 years of his rule, including a brutal economic crisis that caused the lira to devalue by half last year alone and soaring inflation," The Guardianreported Sunday. "Criticism of his government increased after a slow and patchy state response to deadly twin earthquakes in the country's southeast that killed more than 50,000 people and destroyed homes and infrastructure across 11 provinces."

Progressives have argued that a Kılıçdaroğlu victory is necessary to revive Turkey's economy, restore its democracy, and protect women's rights, among other goals.


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Kenny Stancil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/14/erdogans-hold-on-power-in-question-as-votes-counted-in-turkey/feed/ 0 394795 Why Can’t I Question Capitalism without Being Called a “Socialist”? https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/13/why-cant-i-question-capitalism-without-being-called-a-socialist/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/13/why-cant-i-question-capitalism-without-being-called-a-socialist/#respond Sat, 13 May 2023 14:10:59 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=140126

“The essence of capitalism is to turn nature into commodities and commodities into capital.” (Michael Parenti)

For as long as I’ve been writing, giving public talks, and all that, I have offered informed critiques of capitalism.

For as long as I’ve been offering informed critiques of capitalism, I get replies like this: “I suppose you think socialism is the answer.”

The paucity of imagination never ceases to disappoint me.

Breaking news: One can challenge capitalism — both its theoretical and practical versions — without being a fan of Castro or Lenin.

Side note to those in the “medical freedom movement”: Your frequent misuse of the words “communism” and “Marxism” does not serve you well.

A few snippets from stuff I’ve written over the years/decades:

Capitalism is an economic system based on perpetual growth and the relentless exploitation of what we’ve come to call “natural resources.”

Resources are finite. They cannot/will not be replicated in a laboratory by transhumanists. Exploiting, poisoning, and consuming the ecosystem alters the delicate and symbiotic balance of the natural world — which only leads to further devastation of our shared landbase.

By definition, such an approach is unsustainable and thus, anti-life.

To gain access to and control of these resources, capitalism requires brutal, sustained military interventions (or the threat thereof).

Military interventions (or the threat thereof) lead to wars, war crimes, the propping up of authoritarian regimes, poverty and repression, environmental devastation, and eventually: corporate dominion over resources.

Capitalism has resulted in a toxic, poisoned, and clear-cut planet ravaged by unremitting war, disease, inequality, repression, incarceration, and discrimination.

If the U.S. is the world’s shining light of “free market capitalism,” why then are its citizens left with no choice but to make desperate (and usually inept) attempts to defend human, environmental, civil, and animal rights?

Capitalism — in its predatory pursuit of profit — requires humans to dominate humans and humans to dominate the landscape — until there’s nothing left.

Capitalism requires constant consumption. Hence, humans are re-programmed into compliant, ill-informed pawns. Pervasive propaganda/public relations keep consumers consuming, workers working, and repressors repressing (thus explaining why middle-class cops pepper spray protestors instead of joining up with them).

To question capitalism is not the same as endorsing any other current “ism.”

To blindly accept capitalism is to ignore the reality that what we call capitalism survives due to the socializing of corporate costs and the privatizing of corporate profits.

To question capitalism is to look beyond the next fiscal quarter, beyond national boundaries, and beyond corporate propaganda.

To blindly accept capitalism is to pretend that technology is neutral, humans can “control” nature, and the playing field is even.

To question capitalism is to have a new vision for the future that extends well beyond today’s closing bell on Wall Street.

To blindly accept capitalism is to prize shareholders over solidarity and commodities over communities.

To question capitalism is to recognize that we can have prosperity and abundance without surrendering compassion and cooperation.

To blindly accept capitalism is to behave as if we are the last generation of humans.

Critiquing capitalism does not make you unAmerican, unpatriotic, communist, socialist, or Marxist. It makes you empathetic, open-minded, curious, and imaginative enough to say: None of the above.

Who knows how many better options can arise if we’d expand our vision and stop viewing capitalism as our god?

I say we find out.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Mickey Z..

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/05/13/why-cant-i-question-capitalism-without-being-called-a-socialist/feed/ 0 394627 Long game: political activism for a public voice at Parliament https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/23/long-game-political-activism-for-a-public-voice-at-parliament/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/23/long-game-political-activism-for-a-public-voice-at-parliament/#respond Sun, 23 Apr 2023 13:37:38 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=87409 THE HOUSE: By Johnny Blades, journalist

If elected representatives have their work cut out for them to create the slightest social or political change through Parliament, spare a thought for activists.

For the committed activist, in it for the long term, their work brings them inevitably to engage with the parliament system.

Protesting at Parliament, demonstrating, submitting to select committees, sending in petitions, or just being there to watch, activists are an important, if sometimes misunderstood, part of the system.

And we’re not talking about the agitators who talk about “hanging MPs”.

The House offers a look at four activists who have long participated in the Parliament space — from single or multiple issue campaigners to the lifelong activist who became an MP and got out the other side alive:

The Organiser

Anti-war and climate justice organiser Valerie Morse
Anti-war and climate justice organiser Valerie Morse . . . “Parliamentary security stopped me from coming to the grounds, and trespassed me from parliament for two years.” Image: Johnny Blades/VNP

Valerie Morse is a well established activist who has organised many campaigns in anti-war and climate justice spaces among others. Over the past 20 years, she’s been part of hundreds of protests to Parliament, and has made “dozens and dozens of submissions on everything from the environment to defence to the SIS to local body matters, everything under the sun”.

In order to get MPs to listen, Morse has sometimes used theatre in her activism. Some of the highlights include a naked protest on the forecourt in support of the genetic engineering moratorium, and entering a select committee hearing on  Security Intelligence Service legislation with a group who blew loud whistles to highlight the importance of whistle-blowing — to the dismay of the MPs.

There have been setbacks. In 2008, during an event to commemorate Vietnam War veterans, Morse attempted to enter Parliament with an A3-sized sign about then-prime minister Helen Clark and former foreign affairs minister Phil Goff’s anti-war activism during the Vietnam War being at odds with their subsequent support for the war in Afghanistan:

“Parliamentary security stopped me from coming to the grounds, and trespassed me from Parliament for two years,” Morse explained.

“Subsequently I challenged that by coming on to Parliament grounds at a protest around slashed funding for adult and community education in the John Key era. I came on to Parliament grounds with thousands of other people and was arrested by parliamentary security. I had to go all the way through the court system, and eventually, the speaker of the house at the time, Lockwood Smith, actually withdrew the trespass.”

There have been some wins too, such as when large protests against the Iraq war 20 years ago helped convince New Zealand’s government to not join it, as well as the work of Morse and others at the committee level to leverage some transparency from the intelligence services amidst heightened public interest in mass surveillance.

“Those processes are often very difficult to see very meaningful change in during the short term. Over the longer term, there’s been changes in the way those agencies operate, so there has been some greater openness.

“But particularly around submissions, unless you’re speaking to some very, very specific item that they (MPs) think is perhaps a mistake or a drafting error, they’re often hardened down party lines, so it can be really hard to make changes in that process.”

The Messenger

Activist Mike Smith
Activist Mike Smith . . . “I think it was here that we presented the petition to stop deep sea oil drilling after a ten-year campaign.” Image: Johnny Blades/VNP

To convey a message of activism means to demonstrate it, according to Mike Smith, a leading figure in numerous environmental campaigns. Smith’s activism has encompassed “all manner of things” and he has proven effective at getting his message noticed. Almost three decades ago he took a chainsaw to the great pine on One Tree Hill, or Maungakiekie, to raise attention to Māori rights and shortcomings in the Treaty Settlement process.

In recent times, Smith (Ngā Puhi and Ngāti Kuri) has been absorbed in legal action against major fossil fuel users and suppliers over their polluting activities. But as we sat by the statue of Richard Seddon on Parliament’s forecourt, Smith took stock of his various forays to Parliament, from protests to petitions. He recalled the Foreshore and Seabed hikoi, mobilisations over asset sales as well as protests related to the Treaty — occasions on which he has delivered a message to Parliament.

“I think it was here that we presented the petition to stop deep sea oil drilling after a ten-year campaign. The prime minister came out and greeted us. We handed her a petition to halt deep sea oil drilling. She went back to her office, and within about two weeks the announcement came through that the government had indeed decided to put a moratorium on issuing new exploration permits,” he recalled.

“I think politics and indeed the law should reflect the morality or mood of the society at any particular time. However there will be powerful voices and vested interests that pull against popular opinion. It’s important that there are opportunities for the public to express themselves.

“The word ’demonstration’ sort of sums it up. We’ve got to demonstrate what that feeling is amongst the public.”

The activist from the far north said Parliament should be receptive to the expression of widespread public sentiment, and that it is up to the public to hold politicians’ feet to the fire if they are not responding constructively, or conversely if they are being accountable, to reward them at the polls.

“Anybody can arrange a meeting with ministers and they may or may not be listened to or heard, but there’s something far more powerful about an expression of a substantive section of society. I’ve been on marches where 50, 60,000 people have mobilised in Auckland or Wellington particularly on climate issues or (issues) about mining on conservation land. I know that the politicians, when they see that amount of people, they really do take notice of that.”

The Outsider Insider

Catherine Delahunty
Former Green MP Catherine Delahunty . . . “There were some issues I’d been involved in over many years that I wanted to see if I could advance.” Image: Johnny Blades/VNP

Catherine Delahunty isn’t the only activist to have been a member of Parliament, but perhaps what marks her out is the seamlessness with which she has resumed her activism and maintained a critical voice to power forged during her three-term stint, which ended in 2017. If there was any motivation to enter Parliament, she said it was to advance various kaupapa of her many years of activism.

“There were some issues I’d been involved in over many years that I wanted to see if I could advance. For example, the sawmill workers who were poisoned in the Bay of Plenty to whom I’m still deeply connected to and (on their behalf) lobbying ACC for change. I thought well, if I can get into Parliament, maybe I can make some change. And I did actually manage to get the National government to set up a national register of toxic sites and things like that,” the former Green Party MP explained.

In a sense, Delahunty never ceased being an activist when she came to Parliament. She used her wide range of connections with interlocutors from grassroots communities to media to civil society and political leaders in order to advance causes such as sustainable forestry, opposition to mining on conservation land, highlighting human rights abuses and the West Papuan struggle for independence.

“I started by protest. Been on many, many protests here in my life. In fact when I was an MP I probably went to more protests, because you’d see them out the window so you’d just go out to join them,” she explained.

“What you find out of course when you get here is: yes, you can make a difference, and no, you can’t. So if there was any conclusion I came to as an activist after leaving Parliament it’s that we need constitutional transformation of this country based on Te Tiriti (o Waitangi) and He Whakaputanga. But having said that, I still engage with select committees and I still engage with the system to get small things done. But I’m not under any illusion that we’re changing the world.”

“I always felt the system was rotten, but actually when you’ve been inside it you do have more knowledge and more contact. So it’s easier for me to walk in the door here now and have a chat with somebody that I wouldn’t have known before. Whether I can have an impact is another matter, but the first thing is to get through the door.”

When asked about the difference between activists and lobbyists, Delahunty said “we don’t have a PR firm who work for us to massage our messages, we are activists who will take our truth to power. And I don’t think lobbying is necessarily about taking truth to power. It’s about vested interests that pay for their interests to be privileged inside the power system. That’s very different from activists challenging the power system to actually do something in the name of justice.”

The ‘Gallery Stalker’

Drug reform advocate Gary Chiles
Drug reform advocate Gary Chiles . . . “It was all a bit of an eye opener. But I decided that I needed to know how things worked inside Parliament if I wanted to make change happen.” Image: Johnny Blades/VNP

Gary Chiles was only 13 years old when the Misuse of Drugs Act was passed in 1975, and it remains a bugbear for him that it’s still law 50 years later and that people are being criminalised for cannabis use or association with it. Drug law reform is Chile’s singular focus when it comes to his long running activism at Parliament.

Another regular protester outside Parliament during the Key years, Chiles decided to start going to the House to soak up the action inside the chamber. He made it his mission to attend each Question Time — around 90 days in a typical sitting year.

“It was all a bit of an eye opener. But I decided that I needed to know how things worked inside Parliament if I wanted to make change happen,” he explained.

“You’re not allowed to wave signs or wear sloganed t-shirts and things in parliament. But I found out the dress code allowed me to get in there if I have a suit on, so I bought a cannabis suit.”

Chiles stands out clearly in his dark suit emblazoned with bright green cannabis leaves, worn each time he attends Question Time. There he sits up in the public gallery, on one side or another, moving around to stay visible to MPs across the divide. A silent, persistent reminder of the need for drug reform.

“I think of myself as being the gallery stalker. They all know I’m there whether they’re engaging with me or not, and they all know what I’m about because of what I’m wearing. And it’s about reminding them (about the need for drug reform). What are you going to do about it? Do we have to wait another 50 years, what’s going on?”

Attending Parliament has given Chiles a greater appreciation for the work of the various parts of the system. He said that it has also humanised MPs for him, and that what goes on in parliament is often quite different to what is portrayed in the news media. Getting angry at the news isn’t political engagement, he pointed out, adding that the access the public has to this country’s Parliament is something unique and to be treasured.

“My whole attitude to Parliament changed the day that there was a person who set themselves on fire on the forecourt, and the first people on the scene to try and deal with that were Parliament security. That made me reappraise my attitude to them, because they walk the fine line every day between allowing public access and maintaining security, and I think they do a really good job of it.”

Short-term thinking
The four activists all point to short-term thinking — the focus on retaining power in a quick electoral cycle — as something holding Parliament back from enabling systemic change. On the other hand, their own work to transform these views and inject a public voice into the deliberations of the lawmakers is very much long-term.

RNZ’s The House — parliamentary legislation, issues and insights — is made with funding from Parliament. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/23/long-game-political-activism-for-a-public-voice-at-parliament/feed/ 0 389809 Financial Crisis and the Question of Scale https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/21/financial-crisis-and-the-question-of-scale/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/21/financial-crisis-and-the-question-of-scale/#respond Fri, 21 Apr 2023 05:50:28 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=279763 Toward Sustainable, Local Systems of Money and Credit Judging by the actions of the economic authorities themselves, there seems to be no way out of the present economic malaise that is acceptable to the vested interests, but to restart the financialization process, i.e., the shift in the center of gravity of the economy from production More

The post Financial Crisis and the Question of Scale appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by David S. D’Amato.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/04/21/financial-crisis-and-the-question-of-scale/feed/ 0 389478 Trustees Report Shows Social Security Expansion a ‘Question of Values, Not Affordability’ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/31/trustees-report-shows-social-security-expansion-a-question-of-values-not-affordability/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/31/trustees-report-shows-social-security-expansion-a-question-of-values-not-affordability/#respond Fri, 31 Mar 2023 16:25:05 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/news/trustees-report-shows-social-security-expansion-a-question-of-values-not-affordability

The board of trustees for Medicare and Social Security released a report Friday showing the programs' trust funds will be able to cover all benefits and expenses until 2031 and 2034 respectively, findings welcomed by advocates as further confirmation that the key lifelines are strong and can be expanded.

Nancy Altman, president of the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works, argued in a statement that "the takeaway from this report is that whether to expand or cut Social Security's modest but vital benefits is a question of values, not affordability."

The board of trustees, which consists of top government officials including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su, estimated that even if Congress doesn't act, Medicare's trust fund would be able to pay 89% of total scheduled benefits after 2031.

The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund, meanwhile, would be able to pay 77% of scheduled benefits after 2033 in the absence of congressional action. The OASI Trust Fund had roughly $2.7 trillion in reserves at the end of 2022, according to the trustees report, while the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund had $118 billion in asset reserves.

If the OASI and DI trust funds are combined, the report notes, the resulting fund would be able to pay 100% of total scheduled Social Security benefits until 2034.

“Contrary to conservative claims, Social Security is not 'going bankrupt'; the program will always be able to pay benefits because of ongoing contributions from workers and employers," said Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. "This is yet another trustees report showing that Social Security remains strong in the face of turmoil in the rest of the economy. Its projected insolvency date has stayed roughly the same even after a global pandemic and recent economic upheavals."

Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, echoed that message, saying the trustees report proves the Social Security trust fund is "strong and solvent, with enough money to cover full benefits and expenses until 2033, one year earlier than reported last year."

"Further, the Medicare Part A Trust Fund for hospital care has sufficient funds to cover its obligations until 2031, three years later than reported last year," Fiesta added. "The trust funds are strong because most Americans contribute to them with every paycheck. They could be even stronger if the wealthiest Americans paid their fair share."

Richtman, Fiesta, and other advocates urged Congress to expand Social Security benefits by lifting the cap on income subject to payroll taxes.

The cap, which is $160,200 this year, allowed millionaires to stop paying into Social Security in late February, not even two full months into the year.

Skyrocketing inequality over the past several decades has meant that a larger share of earnings at the very top has been exempt from the payroll tax, costing the Social Security trust fund an estimated $1.4 trillion since 1983.

Last month, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced legislation that would subject all income above $250,000 a year to the 6.2% payroll tax, a move the lawmakers said could fund a $200-per-month benefit expansion for all Social Security recipients.

Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) said Friday that he will soon reintroduce separate Social Security expansion legislation.

"Now is the time to not merely protect but to also expand benefits that have not been addressed in over 50 years," Larson said in a statement.

Despite pressure from Sanders and other progressives, Biden did not include a Social Security expansion plan in his latest budget request, which did contain a proposal to shore up Medicare's trust fund by raising taxes on the rich.

Congressional Republicans, for their part, have floated unpopular proposals to slash Social Security benefits across the board by raising the retirement age and partially privatizing the program.

"Unfortunately, Republican politicians are not listening to their voters," Altman said Friday. "The most recent budget of the Republican Study Committee, which consists of about three-quarters of the House Republicans, includes deep cuts to both Social Security and Medicare. Other Republicans are trying to create fast-track commissions that operate behind closed doors, aimed at forcing cuts that would not be supported in the sunshine."

"To see the results of cutting earned retirement benefits through an undemocratic process, one only needs to look across the Atlantic Ocean, where the French people are rising up in anger," said Altman. "Congress should take action to expand Social Security and close the system's modest shortfall. Democrats have put their ideas on the table. Now, Republicans should do the same, so that Congress can debate Social Security's future in the light of day."


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Jake Johnson.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/31/trustees-report-shows-social-security-expansion-a-question-of-values-not-affordability/feed/ 0 384092 Cop City Coverage Fails to Question Narratives of Militarized Police https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/27/cop-city-coverage-fails-to-question-narratives-of-militarized-police/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/27/cop-city-coverage-fails-to-question-narratives-of-militarized-police/#respond Mon, 27 Mar 2023 21:07:16 +0000 https://fair.org/?p=9032817 Journalists should clearly present the evidence supporting protesters' and police narratives, given police’s well-documented record of lying.

The post Cop City Coverage Fails to Question Narratives of Militarized Police appeared first on FAIR.

]]>

Protests against the construction of an 85-acre police training facility—dubbed “Cop City”—in a suburban Atlanta forest turned deadly when police shot and killed a demonstrator occupying the area. The police mobilization against the occupation involved the Atlanta Police, DeKalb County Police, Georgia State Patrol, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) and the FBI (Guardian, 1/21/23). Manuel Esteban Paez Terán, a protester known by most as “Tortuguita,” was shot at least a dozen times.

Guardian: ‘Assassinated in cold blood’: activist killed protesting Georgia’s ‘Cop City’

After quoting the police justification for Tortuguita’s killing, the Guardian (1/21/23) added, “but they have produced no evidence for the claim”—an observation rarely made in US corporate media coverage of police violence.

Officers claimed they shot Tortuguita (who used gender-neutral they/them pronouns) in response to the protester’s shooting and injuring a Georgia State Patrol officer. A GBI investigation is still underway, and it remains unclear what occurred in the moments leading up to the shooting. The Georgia State Troopers responsible for Tortuguita’s death did not have body cameras. The Atlanta Police in the woods at the time captured the sound of gunshots, and officers speculating the trooper was shot by friendly fire, but no visuals of the shooting.

Tortuguita’s death was reported as the first police killing of an environmental protester in the country’s history. It propelled the “Stop Cop City” protests into broader national and corporate news coverage. Much of the reporting—especially by local and independent outlets—was commendable in its healthy skepticism of cops’ unsubstantiated claims. But other reporting on the shooting and subsequent protests was simply police-blotter regurgitation that took unproven police statements at face value, and demonized Tortuguita and others in the Stop Cop City movement.

Bodycam questions

NPR : Autopsy reveals anti-'Cop City' activist's hands were raised when shot and killed

Almost two months after the police killing of Tortuguita, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation was warning against “inappropriate release of evidence” (NPR, 3/11/23).

Anti–Cop City protests over the first weekend of March led to dozens of demonstrators being arrested and charged with domestic terrorism (Democracy Now!, 3/8/23). The following week, an independent autopsy revealed Tortuguita was likely seated in a cross-legged position with their hands raised when they were shot (NPR, 3/11/23; Democracy Now!, 3/14/23).

The GBI said a gun Tortuguita legally purchased in 2020 was found at the scene, and matched the bullet found in the wound of the officer (Fox5, 1/20/23). But accounts from other protesters, statements from Tortuguita’s family and friends (AP, 2/6/23), and Atlanta Police bodycam footage have cast doubt on the cops’ claims that Tortuguita shot the officer (Democracy Now!, 2/9/23).

ABC (2/9/23) described the video, which includes the voice of an officer seemingly responding to the shootout by saying, “You [expletive] your own officer up.” The Intercept (2/9/23) added that the same officer later walked up to others and asked, “They shoot their own man?”

Both outlets do their due diligence in clarifying that the officer was speculating, and that the GBI’s investigation is still underway.

Truthout (2/10/23) also included another quote from the bodycam footage in the moments after the shooting:

In one video, after gunshots ring out through the forest, an officer can be heard saying, “That sounded like suppressed gunfire,” implying the initial shots were consistent with the use of a law enforcement weapon, not the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9 mm the GBI alleges Tortuguita purchased and fired upon the trooper with, which did not have a suppressor.

The piece noted that the sound of a drone can be heard in the background, indicating there may be more footage of the incident that the GBI has not released. An article in the Georgia Voice (2/16/23) also mentions the suppressed gunshots referred to in the videos.

Trailing behind Fox

Blaze: 'This isn't protest. This is terrorism': Five Antifa extremists charged with domestic terrorism, pulled down from their treehouses

The Blaze (12/16/22) shows how to present people sitting in trees as a clear and present danger.

A Nexis search of  “Cop City” reveals that prior to Tortuguita’s killing, coverage of the protests, which have been going on since late 2021, had been relegated to mainly local outlets and newswire coverage. There were, however, a handful of notable exceptions, including the Daily Beast (8/26/21, 9/9/21, 12/14/22), Politico (10/28/21), Atlantic (5/26/22, 6/13/22), Guardian (6/16/22, 12/27/22), Rolling Stone (9/3/22) and Economist (9/27/22).

Right-wing outlets like Fox News (5/18/22, 5/20/22, 7/1/22, 12/16/22, 12/29/22, 12/29/22), Daily Mail (5/18/22, 12/15/22, 12/16/22, 12/17/22, 12/19/22), Blaze (12/16/22) and Daily Caller (12/15/22) all demonized the protesters, often referring to them as “violent” and affiliated with “Antifa” (which, for the record, is not an organized group, but an anti-fascist ideology).

In the first few days following Tortuguita’s January 18 shooting, coverage on major TV news channels and national papers was scant, with most centrist outlets trailing behind Fox in the volume of coverage. A Nexis search for the terms “Tortuguita,” “Terán” or “Cop City,” from the day of Tortuguita’s death (January 18) until the end of January, found that Fox covered the shooting and protest more than all the other national networks combined, dominating the conversation with a pro-cop spin. It raised the issue on eight shows, while CNN covered it four times, ABC and CBS once each, and NBC and MSNBC not at all. Meanwhile, USA Today offered no coverage and the New York Times ran two articles. A separate search of the Washington Post, which is not on Nexis, brings up three articles, one of which was an AP repost.

Beyond the police version 

Democracy Now!: Atlanta Police Kill Forest Defender at Protest Encampment Near Proposed “Cop City” Training Center

Kamau Franklin (Democracy Now!, 1/20/23): “The only version of events that’s really been released to the public has been the police version.”

Independent and local outlets generally led the way in reporting on Tortuguita’s killing. A couple days after the shooting, Democracy Now! (1/20/23) dedicated an entire segment to the murder and movement. Host Amy Goodman interviewed Atlanta organizer Kamau Franklin, who wrote an article headlined “MLK’s Vision Lives On in Atlanta’s Fight Against New Police Training Facility” (Truthout, 1/17/23) the day before Tortuguita was shot.

On Democracy Now!, Franklin said:

The only version of events that’s really been released to the public has been the police version, the police narrative, which we should say the corporate media has run away with. To our knowledge so far, we find it less than likely that the police version of events is what really happened…. As the little intel that we have, residents said that they heard a blast of gunshots all at once, and not one blast and then a return of fire. Also, there’s been no other information released. We don’t know how many times this young person was hit with bullets. We don’t know the areas in which this person was hit. We don’t know if this is potentially a friendly fire incident. All we know is what the version of the police have given.

Many other local and independent outlets also reported on Tortuguita’s death with a healthy dose of skepticism of police claims. Shortly after the killing, the Bitter Southerner published a piece by journalist David Peisner (1/20/23), who had been covering the Stop Cop City protests (12/23/22) and had spent extensive time interviewing the activist. Peisner’s article is essentially a eulogy for Tortuguita, vouching for their character and quoting pacifistic statements they made in interviews. Peisner wrote:

“The right kind of resistance is peaceful, because that’s where we win,” they told me. “We’re not going to beat [the police] at violence. They’re very, very good at violence. We’re not. We win through nonviolence. That’s really the only way we can win. We don’t want more people to die. We don’t want Atlanta to turn into a war zone.”

Piesner acknowledged the possibility that Tortuguita may have been disingenuously advocating peaceful protest, but made clear he saw no evidence of that.

A letter to the editor on Workers.org (2/8/23) pointed out how police’s unproven claims and charges of violence against Tortuguita served to dampen publicity and reduce sympathy for them. Julia Wright’s letter also called out the double standard in dozens of land defenders being charged with “terrorism,” unlike the Capitol insurrectionists, whose deadly riot sought to dismantle US democracy:

The postmortem image of Tortuguita has been twisted and exploited to make them look like a “terrorist,” whereas none of those who invaded the Capitol were charged with or sentenced for terrorism.

Local Atlanta news outlet 11Alive (2/6/23) reported that Tortuguita’s family was publicly questioning the police-driven narrative of their child’s death, and demanding more transparency from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. While outlining the official narrative, the outlet also offered significant space to those contesting it.

Claim becomes fact

Fox News: Democrats largely silent on anti-police violence in Atlanta after night of chaos, smashed windows

Fox News (1/22/23) condemned Democrats for not speaking out against broken windows in Atlanta.

Other outlets, however, were far less skeptical of the unsubstantiated law enforcement claims, whether presenting claims as facts or simply not challenging those claims.

In its report on the killing, Fox Special Report (1/20/23) played a soundbite from the GBI’s chief: “An individual, without warning, shot a Georgia state patrol trooper. Other law enforcement personnel returned fire in self-defense.” The segment went on to play a short soundbite of unidentified protesters urging people not to believe the police narrative, but correspondent Jonathan Serrie’s outro implied that he did believe it:

Top Georgia officials, including the governor and director of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, say they embrace the right to protest, but cannot stand by when protesters resort to violence and jeopardize innocent lives.

Just a few hours later on Fox (1/20/23), police claims had become fact, with a brief update beginning, “In Georgia, a protester shot a state trooper without warning.” There was no mention of the incomplete investigation underway, nor the protesters’ accounts.

After further protests, the Wall Street Journal editorial (3/7/23) accused the “left” of “justif[ying] a violent assault on a police-training site,” saying that “Cop City” was under siege from “Antifa radicals.”

The Journal relied entirely on official accounts of the protests, reporting only the police’s account of events that day:

Authorities say Terán refused to comply with officers’ commands and instead shot and injured a state patrol trooper. Officers returned fire, striking Terán, who died on the scene, according to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation. The investigation isn’t finished, but the bureau says the bullet “recovered from the trooper’s wound matches Terán’s handgun.”

As of this writing, even with the most recent autopsy results suggesting Tortuguita’s cross-legged, hands-up position at the time of their death, neither the police’s nor the activists’ accounts have been proven. Still, the Wall Street Journal has already made clear which narrative it finds newsworthy.

Vandalism as ‘violence’

A lack of skepticism of official accounts was not limited to right-wing media. The New York Times (1/27/23), reporting on Georgia’s governor calling in the National Guard amid the protests, wrote, “The authorities claim that Terán fired a gun at a state trooper during a ‘clearing operation’ in the woods before being killed by the police.” No sources were quoted who questioned that claim.

WaPo: Violent protests break out in Atlanta over fatal shooting of activist

The Washington Post headline (1/21/23) implied that protesters were violent—though the only attacks on people described in the piece were police tackling demonstrators.

Covering the protests after Tortuguita’s killing, the Washington Post (1/21/23) made the actions of protesters rather than police the issue, with the headline “Violent Protests Break Out in Atlanta Over Fatal Shooting of Activist.” While the headline implies that the protesters were violent, the only attacks on other humans described in the piece were police tackling protesters. The Post included no reports of protesters committing bodily harm, but parroted Atlanta’s mayor referring to property damage as “violence”—elevating vandalism over assaults on people. (FAIR—2/6/18—has documented that news media do not commonly refer to other, apolitical instances of property destruction—such as sports fans celebrating a win—as “violence.”)

Only toward the end of the article, below a featured image of a car on fire and descriptions of smashed bank windows, did the Post add that the Atlanta police chief “emphasized that those who caused property damage were a small subset among other peaceful demonstrators.”

The headline “In Atlanta, a Deadly Forest Protest Sparks Debate Over ‘Domestic Terrorism’” (Washington Post, 1/26/23) implies the protesters’ actions were deadly—but the only people who caused death were the police who shot Tortuguita.

Another Post piece (3/6/23) offered history on the construction of Cop City and the movement against it under the headline “What Is Cop City? Why Are There Violent Protests in an Atlanta Forest?,” but prioritized depicting the demonstrations as “violent” over describing the shooting that led to the backlash in the first place, using the adjective three additional times in the piece.

(It also referred to Tortuguita using he/him pronouns, though that has been corrected.)

“State authorities claimed self-defense and said that Paez Terán purchased the gun that shot a Georgia State Patrol officer, but the shooting is under investigation,” the article said, without mentioning the protesters’ claims, or the bodycam footage.

Holding back evidence

NYT: A New Front Line in the Debate Over Policing: A Forest Near Atlanta

A New York Times overview (3/4/23) gave a detailed account of how police say Tortuguita was killed—but not what protesters say happened.

Some coverage that did mention the doubts of Tortuguita’s family and supporters failed to explain the evidence that could back their claims. In a New York Times report (3/4/23) that attempted to put the protests in context, the only person quoted supporting Tortuguita’s innocence was their mother. The piece quoted Belkis Terán describing her child as a “pacifist,” and mentioning the first independent autopsy revealed 13 gunshot wounds—but made no mention of the bodycam evidence that suggested the officer may have been shot by friendly fire.

(The second autopsy’s results that indicated Tortuguita was likely sitting cross-legged with their hands up when they were shot were not available when this article was published. At the time of this article’s publication, the Times has not published any articles on the second autopsy’s results.)

The mourning mother’s grief adds emotion to the story and briefly paints Tortuguita in a sympathetic light, but her claims are not granted the same amount of authority and credibility as the cops’ assertions, which are offered in detail:

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation, which is looking into the shooting, has said that on January 18, as the police sought to clear the forest of protesters, Tortuguita fired first “without warning,” striking a trooper. Officers returned fire, according to the authorities.

Despite the investigation being incomplete, the police narrative is still able to stand alone, without any mentions of opposing allegations and evidence.

Ignoring recent history

NBC: Environmental protests have a long history in the U.S. Police had never killed an activist — until now.

To draw a sharp contrast between police treatment of  Cop City opponents and earlier environmental protests,  NBC (2/5/23) had to ignore precedents like police at Standing Rock sending two dozen Indigenous water defenders to the hospital in a single event (Guardian, 11/21/16).

Even after the GBI’s report comes out, journalists should clearly present the evidence supporting protesters’ and police narratives, given police’s well-documented record of lying in reports, affidavits and even on the witness stand (New York Times, 3/18/18; CNN, 6/6/20; Slate, 8/4/20).

In early February, NBC (2/5/23) reported that Tortuguita’s killing was the first of an environmental activist, but made this police killing seem like a fluke. “Police have often been important intermediaries in environmental protests,” the article’s subhead claimed. “In a forest outside Atlanta, they were opponents.”

If you read the story, though, a source acknowledges that “there’s a long history of law enforcement confronting direct-action environmentalist activists and those confrontations turning hostile.” Going back to the 1980s, activists who engaged in civil disobedience “were sometimes dragged away and thrown in vans, sometimes pepper-sprayed.”

To claim that the violence at Atlanta represents an “unprecedented” escalation, as the article argues, requires ignoring recent history like the suppression of the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline at Standing Rock. There police used water cannons, pepper spray, tasers, sound weapons and more against peaceful—mostly Indigenous—protesters, in one incident injuring 300 and putting 26 in the hospital (Guardian, 11/21/16).

Regardless of who shot the first bullet, the story of Tortuguita’s death is about protests against militarized policing being met with more militarized policing, which ultimately resulted in a fatal shooting. Unquestioningly spreading unproven police claims is not only irresponsible, it misses the story’s entire point.

The post Cop City Coverage Fails to Question Narratives of Militarized Police appeared first on FAIR.


This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Olivia Riggio.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/27/cop-city-coverage-fails-to-question-narratives-of-militarized-police/feed/ 0 382508 Keeping the flow – the use of te reo Māori at NZ’s Parliament https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/26/keeping-the-flow-the-use-of-te-reo-maori-at-nzs-parliament/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/26/keeping-the-flow-the-use-of-te-reo-maori-at-nzs-parliament/#respond Sun, 26 Mar 2023 11:51:46 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=86423 By Johnny Blades, RNZ The House journalist

An increased appetite to learn te reo Māori among members and staff from different parts of the Parliamentary system means the work of Parliament’s Māori Language Service is in demand more than ever.

Compared to several years ago there’s now also significantly more acknowledgement of and referral to Māori customs and protocols at Parliament. This is part of the reason why Nga Ratonga Reo Māori recently changed its name to Nga Ratonga Ao Māori, opening up the service’s scope to more than just the language.

“We’re asked for advice on a lot of things — very often — a few a day, several a week, from all parts of the Parliamentary Service and the Office of the Clerk, and they could be reo related, marae related, tikanga related, etc,” says Maika Te Amo, the man who heads the five-person unit.

“I still see my main role as supporting the House with Māori language services, primarily simultaneous interpretation of all sittings of the House and also sittings of the Māori Affairs Select Committee, at every sitting, but also any other committee that requests simultaneous interpretation.

“The other thing is translation — and that can be anything from communications through the Parliamentary Engagement team that go out on the website or the social media channels. A heavy part of our load comes from the Māori Affairs Select Committee — all of their reports are bilingual, so we translate all of those as well.”

From 1868 until 1920 Parliament had interpreters in the House. Then, for most of last century, Parliament didn’t even employ an interpreter to support MPs who spoke in Māori.

It wasn’t until this century, with the reintroduction of interpreters and Māori language services, that te reo began to flow significantly in the chamber again.

People who follow the action in the debating chamber these days will be familiar with numerous MPs fluently using te reo in speeches. If you’re watching the debate on Parliament TV you may see other MPs listening-in via an earpiece.

That is made possible because of simultaneous interpretation by Te Amo and his colleagues.

It is not only Māori MPs who use te reo in the chamber. Many MPs regularly pepper their speeches with the language, or use Māori for all their formal phrasings (e.g. asking for a supplementary question during Question Time).

Furthermore, Te Amo says there is a lot of interest in using the language among staff of the Parliamentary Service and the Office of the Clerk.

Labour MP Kiri Allan during the General Debate
Labour MP Kiritapu Allan debating in Māori in the chamber. Image: Phil Smith/VNP

There’s also ample evidence that Māori language and practices are being used throughout the Parliamentary system. In the annual reviews where government agencies front before various select committees to give a report on how their year has gone, their representatives often introduce themselves and give closing statements in te reo.

“There is an enormous hunger among our colleagues for the language and everything associated with the language, tikanga and traditional practices, traditional perspectives, metaphors, that kind of thing, and that is very encouraging,” says Te Amo.

“We’re a small team, so we will continue to do our best to support our colleagues with various different learning opportunities.”

Pacific challenge
The struggle to preserve Indigenous language and promote its use in Parliament is an acute challenge in the Pacific Islands.

This much was clear when Maika Te Amo gave the keynote speech at the Australasian and Pacific Hansard Editors Association conference at New Zealand’s Parliament in January. His speech left an impression on other delegates such as Papaterai William, the subeditor of debates in the Cook Islands.

“One statement I enjoyed when Maika was talking says ‘if the language is no more, the Māori people are no more’. Now I can actually rephrase that our Cook Islands people ‘if the language is no more, the Cook Islands Māori are no more’,” he said.

“Nowadays people are speaking English, and not many people are speaking our language, which is the Cook Islands Māori. We’re talking about a language that will fade in the future.

“That is one thing that we are wanting to retain to make sure that it is maintained properly, that it is taught properly, because language revitalisation I believe is important going forward for our Hansard department.”

Papaterai William, the sub-editor of debates in the Cook Islands
Papaterai William, the subeditor of debates in the Cook Islands during a pōwhiri at the Australasian and Pacific Hansard Editors Association conference hosted by New Zealand’s Parliament, January 2023. Image: Office of the Clerk

William tipped his hat to Tonga where in Parliament, unlike in the Cook Islands, proceedings are captured strictly in the Indigenous language, which he said helped keep the language alive for future generations.

Tonga’s Hansard editor, Susanna Heti Lui, was also at the conference, where she explained that the Kingdom’s Parliament felt the need to preserve and revive their Tongan language.

“Our language is the official language that is used in Parliament. That is compared to the government, it uses English as the official language used in the workplace,” she said.

Language must be active to stay alive
Te Amo points out that informal settings at Parliament are also opportunities for growth in the use of te reo, “where people can just bring whatever reo they’ve got and just speak that”.

“What I also hear a lot from members is that they’d also like to increase their knowledge and fluency in the language, and it’s very difficult to find ways of doing that which fit with their schedules which are absolutely hectic of course.

“One thing I’d love to see is members in particular being more comfortable with using their reo in the cafeteria or when you’re breezing through the halls,” he said.

“The only other things really is I wish our team of five was a team of 50 so we could offer to our colleagues everything that they’re asking for, as opposed to having to prioritise.”

Rawiri Waititi, the Member of Parliament for Waiariki, Te Paati Māori.
Rawiri Waititi, the MP for Waiariki, Te Paati Māori. Image: Johnny Blades/VNP

RNZ’s The House — parliamentary legislation, issues and insights — is made with funding from Parliament. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/26/keeping-the-flow-the-use-of-te-reo-maori-at-nzs-parliament/feed/ 0 382240 Israeli authorities shutter Voice of Palestine radio’s Israel operations, question 5 journalists https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/20/israeli-authorities-shutter-voice-of-palestine-radios-israel-operations-question-5-journalists/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/20/israeli-authorities-shutter-voice-of-palestine-radios-israel-operations-question-5-journalists/#respond Mon, 20 Mar 2023 19:25:38 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=270628 New York, March 20, 2023 – Israeli authorities should immediately reverse their order to shut down the Israeli operations of the Voice of Palestine radio station and should cease harassing members of the press, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Monday.

On Monday, March 20, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir ordered Voice of Palestine, the official broadcaster of the Palestinian Authority government, to be barred from operating within Israel, according to multiple news reports. After the order was issued, Israeli police officers arrived at the company’s offices in East Jerusalem and informed the staff about the ban, those reports said.

Later Monday, Israeli police summoned five Palestinian journalists based in East Jerusalem for questioning, according to news reports and journalists who spoke to CPJ.

“Israeli authorities must reverse their order to close the Voice of Palestine’s operations in Israel, which was issued without citing any specific problems with its coverage,” said CPJ Middle East and North Africa Program Coordinator Sherif Mansour. “Palestinian journalists should be able to do their jobs freely, without fear of being interrogated, harassed, or obstructed from doing their work.”

Ben-Gvir’s order bars Voice of Palestine from operating within Israel but does not stop the outlet from continuing its work in the West Bank or Gaza, according to those news reports. In his decree, Ben-Gvir did not specify any specific reason for blocking the station, but said “we will not allow incitement and support for terrorism and terrorists, neither by the Palestinian Authority nor by any other body.”

Later on Monday, Israeli police in East Jerusalem summoned Palestinian reporters Layali Eid and Lana Kamela, photographers Yazan Haddad and Walid Kamar, and camera operator Firas Handawi, according to news reports, social media posts, and Kamar, who spoke with CPJ via messaging app.

Amir Abbas, director of the Marcel production company, which works with the Voice of Palestine’s parent company the Palestinian Broadcasting Corporation among other outlets, told CPJ by phone that the five journalists had contributed to various local outlets including those operated by the PBC.

Kamar told CPJ that police interrogated him about his work with the PBC. He and Abbas said that police gave all five journalists a verbal warning to cease collaborating with the PBC from Jerusalem, and then released them without filing any formal charges. Abbas said authorities also summoned him, interrogated him for hours, and gave him a similar warning.

Israeli authorities closed the PBC’s Jerusalem office in 2018, according to news reports.

CPJ emailed the Israel Defense Forces for comment, and a representative referred CPJ to the National Security Ministry. CPJ emailed the ministry for comment but did not receive any reply.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/20/israeli-authorities-shutter-voice-of-palestine-radios-israel-operations-question-5-journalists/feed/ 0 380757 What Would The Sorting Hat Say About The Transgender Question? https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/16/what-would-the-sorting-hat-say-about-the-transgender-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/16/what-would-the-sorting-hat-say-about-the-transgender-question/#respond Thu, 16 Mar 2023 05:45:21 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=276807

J. K. Rowling has recently argued that transgender ideology should be interrogated because sex is real, or at least that it has real lived experiences. Sadly I have to admit I have made the same argument rather carelessly in the past. I think Rowling could learn from her own hit book series Harry Potter.

In the first installment of the seven-book series, Rowling sorts her protagonist (and his peers) into one of four houses. The heroes of the story are in Gryffindor (courage), with allied forces in Hufflepuff (kindness) and Ravenclaw (brains). The dark side is in Slytherin. The houses mirror Wizard of Oz, with the lion symbol of Gryffindor aligning with the cowardly lion, the tin man’s heart with Hufflepuff and the scarecrow’s brain with Ravenclaw.

When the sorting hat is put on Harry Potter’s head it thinks of him as a Slytherin. Harry was struck by a killing curse by the most powerful and evil wizard (Voldemort) and therefore he, biologically speaking, has a lot of connections to the dark side. For example, he can talk to snakes, something only usually the darkest of wizards can do. He can also see into Voldemort’s mind and part of him enjoys this.

Because of this connection to the dark side, many liberal wizards don’t trust him, ignorant that he is on the front lines. But the Sorting Hat isn’t into wizard politics. What changes the mind of the Sorting Hat is that Harry Potter does not want to be in Slytherin. He wants to be in Gryffindor.

It is a striking parallel to the transgender ideology. Those against the transgender community say that the body you are born into should determine your gender. They say what you want doesn’t matter. They don’t want free choice on this issue. They want to decide everyone’s gender.

But the issue with their need for control is that the definition of gender is an alienated one. No one really feels like a man or a woman. People latch onto these identities to form order in their own lives. This always is a conservative choice but certainly something we should be free to do.

The transgender community must be defended. We must defend not only the right to exist but the right to exist as transgender. Rowling is more successful than ever since she began using transgender people as a punching bag and this sort of behavior has effects on the ground as transgender people are being met with murder, such as the recent case on Lake Street light rail in Minneapolis.

Ilhan Omar argued: Trans women have become a central focus of the right-wing culture war, with many states moving to ban trans health care, to reduce the visibility of trans and queer people in public life, and even to outlaw being transgender…We must recognize that the legislative attacks on trans people are part of the same violence that led to nearly 90 trans people being killed in the United States over the last two years.”

The issue with Rowling, like most people who are too rich to have real problems, is that what started as a legitimate question about feminism quickly became a conversation about Rowling herself and how everyone hates her (not what her sales reflect). I do find the demonization of feminism unfortunate. I don’t buy into the existence of “TERF” (trans-exclusive radical feminists) being the thing we must resist. This is horseshoe theory in action. Just as anyone saying transgender people rather than men are a threat to women, the same formula must be used to say feminists are not a threat to trans rights.

This is the only gripe I have with the otherwise important term intersectionality. It’s like the people arguing over whether Malcolm X was a feminist. You’re going to cancel Malcolm X? Who would be left? Whenever I hear something isn’t intersectional enough it reminds me of Marxist debates that retreat from material reality with sectarianism.

All that aside I do think it is unfortunate that the magic of Harry Potter, once censored by the right for being a threat to religion, is now seen as a right-wing series. The truth lies somewhere in the middle as the best art is up for interpretation and intervenes at the human level, transforming us without us realizing it. Most art nowadays has such obvious and clumsy political markers that half the audience boycotts it before they see it and no one changes or enjoys as a result.

But the question of freedom remains. The right-wing will advocate for parents’ right to control the sexuality of their children. If a right winger can have one eye on protecting his property with a gun and one eye monitoring his child’s sex life, he is happy. If an area is polluted or occupied by police it is fine because it is probably dark and poor and this makes the right winger feel safer. But this isn’t a great life.

Harry Potter could be read as a right-wing story. His superpower comes from his mother’s willingness to die for him, something the political right aims for these days. But the difference between Harry Potter and the right-wing narrative is that the purpose isn’t the mother’s death but rather the child’s life.

Another point against the right-wing reading of Harry Potter is that there is a mirror in which when you look into it you see everything you want. Rather than solving all of the problems of wizards, it leads them into madness. This seems to be against the number one rule of the conservative movement today. The most important thing for them is to live outside of reality in a magical world where the free market solves every problem and the villain isn’t environmental catastrophe or those wielding power.

It is more comforting for the right wing to believe the most vulnerable are the enemy. Trans people are another example of this tendency and the left must stop making this issue more complex than it needs to be. Many leftists claim that the trans issue has gone too far and that we are force-feeding children a trans identity.

Even if this were true, which it is not, what would be the solution to this? “Save the children” is the excuse for every right-wing intervention and we must assert something more radical than that. We must assert freedom for the children. Children must be allowed to play, to imagine, to experiment, to question to make mistakes. Childhood is the time when we should learn how to fail. Gender, no matter its end, is a failure, and we must learn how to fail better at it.

Childhood should be the time when the stakes are low enough to fail. Because if you fail as an adult, you are on your own in America. By policing children we end up with the forever childhoods the right wing complains about.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Nick Pemberton.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/16/what-would-the-sorting-hat-say-about-the-transgender-question/feed/ 0 379740 Student Debt Relief in Jeopardy as Conservative Supreme Court Justices Question Biden’s Plan https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/01/student-debt-relief-in-jeopardy-as-conservative-supreme-court-justices-question-bidens-plan/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/01/student-debt-relief-in-jeopardy-as-conservative-supreme-court-justices-question-bidens-plan/#respond Wed, 01 Mar 2023 15:03:34 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=181741b55f94cc720905c37ebae81af7
This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/01/student-debt-relief-in-jeopardy-as-conservative-supreme-court-justices-question-bidens-plan/feed/ 0 376290 Student Debt Relief in Jeopardy as Conservative Supreme Court Justices Question Biden’s Plan https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/01/student-debt-relief-in-jeopardy-as-conservative-supreme-court-justices-question-bidens-plan-2/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/01/student-debt-relief-in-jeopardy-as-conservative-supreme-court-justices-question-bidens-plan-2/#respond Wed, 01 Mar 2023 13:30:53 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=1ab6b5481546e2d08ec291614daec070 Seg3 student debt

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Tuesday in two challenges to the Biden administration’s student debt relief plan, which could give tens of millions of federal borrowers up to $20,000 of relief. During arguments, several conservative justices expressed skepticism over the Biden administration’s student debt relief plan, while liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor blasted the Republican states who brought one of the lawsuits. We’re joined by Eleni Schirmer, who organizes with the Debt Collective and is a writer and postdoctoral fellow at Concordia University’s Social Justice Centre in Montreal. Her new piece in The New Yorker is headlined “How the Government Cancelled Betty Ann’s Debts.”


This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/03/01/student-debt-relief-in-jeopardy-as-conservative-supreme-court-justices-question-bidens-plan-2/feed/ 0 376306 ‘It’s Just Our Way of Life’: Manchin Brushes Off Question About Coal Conflict of Interest https://www.radiofree.org/2023/02/03/its-just-our-way-of-life-manchin-brushes-off-question-about-coal-conflict-of-interest/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/02/03/its-just-our-way-of-life-manchin-brushes-off-question-about-coal-conflict-of-interest/#respond Fri, 03 Feb 2023 20:14:11 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/news/manchin-coal-conflict

Sen. Joe Manchin on Thursday responded dismissively to a reporter's question about the glaring conflict of interest posed by his family's ownership of a business that is profiting from coal waste—a toxic energy source that the West Virginia Democrat is actively promoting in the Senate.

"It's just our way of life, OK?" Manchin (D-W.Va.) toldE&E News climate reporter Adam Aton.

"I mean, I live in coal country, so if you don't work in coal country, you don’t work in West Virginia, usually," Manchin added.

The senator's comments came after he used a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing to push Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk on why the Biden administration isn't devoting more federal resources toward expanding the use of coal waste, also known as gob—an acronym for "garbage of bituminous."

Manchin, who chairs the committee despite the myriad potential conflicts stemming from his close ties to the fossil fuel industry, accused the Biden administration of waging "war on coal."

"Will you all continue to support commercialization of innovative uses for coal, including both from newly-mined coal or from coal waste?" Manchin asked Turk during Thursday's hearing.

Turk responded by saying the energy agency has "been working as a department on this," pointing to "four smaller pilot projects out there" and adding that there are "plans to try to build from that."

E&E News noted that as chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Manchin "has used his influence to add hundreds of millions of dollars for minerals research to bipartisan infrastructure legislation—with a focus on coal waste that has boosted the coal industry."

Manchin has insisted for years that he doesn't have any influence over his family business—which is called Enersystems and run by the senator's son—and that he has set up a blind trust for his company holdings.

Enersystems provides gob, a leftover of coal mining, to West Virginia's Grant Town power plant—the only power plant in the state that burns the substance.

The Washington Postreported in December 2021 that "documents filed by the senator show the blind trust is much too small to account for all his reported earnings from the coal company."

According to the Post, "Manchin’s latest financial disclosure report says that the West Virginia family coal business that he helped found and run, Enersystems, paid him $492,000 in interest, dividends and other income in 2020, and that his share of the firm is worth between $1 million and $5 million. He signed a sworn statement saying he is aware of these earnings, underscoring that he is not blind to them."

"If Manchin's coal interests are not in a blind trust, ethics experts said, it calls into question the impartiality of a senator who in October forced Biden to drop the plan in his Build Back Better bill to phase out the same kinds of coal plants that are key to his family company's profitability," the Post added.

Manchin has wasted no time in the new Congress working to advance the interests of the fossil fuel industry, which donated more to the West Virginia Democrat than any other member of Congress during the last election cycle.

As Common Dreams reported this week, Manchin has teamed up with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) on a bill to shield pollution-spewing gas stoves and joined Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) in an effort to revive a fossil fuel-friendly permitting overhaul that the Senate repeatedly rejected last year.


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Jake Johnson.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/02/03/its-just-our-way-of-life-manchin-brushes-off-question-about-coal-conflict-of-interest/feed/ 0 369749 Chris Hipkins’ first question time as PM – will he ‘win the House’? https://www.radiofree.org/2023/02/01/chris-hipkins-first-question-time-as-pm-will-he-win-the-house/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/02/01/chris-hipkins-first-question-time-as-pm-will-he-win-the-house/#respond Wed, 01 Feb 2023 08:18:51 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=83917 ANALYSIS: By Peter Wilson, political commentator for RNZ News

Tuesday, February 7, at 2pm. That’s when New Zealand’s new Prime Minister Chris Hipkins’ parliamentary year begins and he faces National leader Christopher Luxon in the debating chamber for the first question time of 2023.

He needs to “Win the House”, as the saying goes. That means getting the better of the other side, and Hipkins has to show his caucus that he is up to it.

Hipkins is a vastly experienced parliamentarian, but there is nothing like being in the hot seat directly facing the leader of the opposition.

He can be expected to take it to Luxon and ACT leader David Seymour more aggressively than Jacinda Ardern did, he is more of a “take no prisoners” politician than she was and he needs to get some hits in early on.

Hipkins has had a great start with two opinion polls showing Labour has regained the ground it lost to National.

The 1News Kantar poll showed Labour up five points to 38 percent and National down one point to 37 percent.

Newshub’s Reid Research poll had Labour up 5.7 points to 38 percent and National down 4.1 points to 36.6 percent.

Hipkins slightly ahead
In the preferred prime minister stakes, Hipkins was slightly ahead of Luxon in both polls.

Stuff‘s political editor Luke Malpass said the polls showed what no Labour figures dared to consider a fortnight ago — that the party might have better prospects under a leader other than Jacinda Ardern.

“Hipkins, it now appears, could be that person,” he said.

“In other words, by the time Ardern left she might have been a drag on the party vote.”

Luxon dismissed the poll results, saying nothing had changed.

“It’s the same government, and a new leader who can’t deliver,” he said. “It’s going to be an incredibly tight race.”

The poll details, and what the results would mean in terms of seats if an election was held now, are on RNZ’s website.

Labour’s new champion
After settling in to his debating chamber role as Labour’s new champion, Hipkins has to get his next big agenda item off the blocks — ditching policies and programmes that are in the way of his pledge to totally focus on “bread and butter” issues that affect people, which means the cost of living.

This process was started by Ardern at the end of last year and Hipkins needs to get it done and dusted because there’s sure to be the usual cries of “U-turn, U-turn”.

Although Ardern and Hipkins have explained it as necessary to the new focus on dealing with inflation and the cost of living crisis, there Is also an obvious political need in election year.

Outgoing NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Incoming Labour leader and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins during Rātana celebrations
Former prime minister Jacinda Ardern and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins share a light moment at the Rātana celebrations on Ardern’s last day as leader. Image: Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images/RNZ News

Labour wants to get rid of liabilities, policies and programmes that are causing trouble and are easy targets for the opposition.

Hipkins needs what MPs call clear air to explain and implement policies Labour hopes will reset the party’s direction, entrench the lead over National and ACT, and deliver a platform for the election campaign.

The new prime minister may be in his honeymoon period but the media knows he has to deliver.

“He will have to show there is more on the tin than just a new sticker, and in pretty short order,” said Malpass.

“It won’t be enough to just chuck the odd media merger and dank old bits of legislation over the side: It will have to be replaced by some actions on the ‘bread and butter’ issues Chris Hipkins says he is concerned about.”

Plagued by troubles
The New Zealand Herald’s political editor Claire Trevett said Hipkins’ job was to convince voters that Labour was focused “on the various troubles plaguing them now — from potholes to hip ops to the price of bread”.

“The talk is one thing, the delivery is another. Hipkins has no real option but to deliver.”

There’s been speculation about which policies and programmes will get the chop or be put on the slow track, and Stuff published a list with the top three being the RNZ/TVNZ merger, the Income Insurance Scheme (which National calls a jobs tax) and Auckland Light Rail.

It said other lesser known projects could join the list.

Hipkins must also deal with Three Waters, which has given the government more problems than anything else.

That’s more difficult because the legislation has been passed, but Hipkins has acknowledged he has to do something about it.

“We are going to look closely at the Three Waters programme,” he told Trevett in an interview. “There’s no question there has to be change. I don’t think we can just sit back and say ‘this is not our problem, this is a council problem’.

“I don’t think that would be responsible. But we also need to bring people along with us and what we are doing.”

Policy clear-out
When it comes to the policy clear-out, Hipkins has much more freedom than Ardern would have had.

She would have faced ferocious opposition attacks for dumping policies she had supported, her words would have been thrown back at her.

But Hipkins is a new prime minister, doing things his way, just as Ardern told him when she said “you must do you”. She was giving him free rein to do it his way.

Did she know Labour was heading in the wrong direction under her leadership, and that it wouldn’t win the next election unless there was drastic change?

One commentator who thinks so is Matthew Hooton.

Writing in the Herald, Hooton said Ardern so badly wanted her government to win a third term that she was prepared to step down.

“Labour’s masterful transition was carefully planned before Christmas by Ardern and her closest allies, Grant Robertson and Chris Hipkins, and flawlessly executed,” he said.

Capturing the initiative
“Political strategists spend every December working out how to capture the initiative in January, especially in election year. None has ever succeeded like Labour over the last week.”

Christopher Luxon at a media standup in Papakura in Auckland
National Party leader Christopher Luxon . . . not a good run-up to the parliamentary year. Image: Nick Monro/RNZ News

Luxon hasn’t had a good run-up to the new parliamentary year.

Inevitably, he’s been eclipsed by Hipkins simply because he is the new prime minister but when Luxon has been able to get into the media he might have wished he hadn’t.

“National strategists seem dumbstruck,” Hooton said in his article. “Christopher Luxon was more incoherent than usual trying to explain where he stands on co-governance, the Māori seats, and whether women politicians receive worse abuse than males, pleasing neither the liberal nor conservative wings of his party.”

Stuff’s Andrea Vance said Luxon had actually helped ease Hipkins into the job “by being more mediocre than usual”.

“Somehow Luxon — whose one job last week was to stay on message — managed to drive down a co-governance cul-de-sac at`Rātana, and then spend the rest of the week doing bunny-hop u-turns to get out of it,” she said.

“And how did he manage to piss off women, again? The correct answer was ‘yes’, Christopher. Female politicians patently face more abuse than men.”

Abuse of women
She was referring to Luxon responding to a question about whether women politicians suffered more abuse than men by saying he wasn’t sure.

When Hipkins takes his seat in Parliament on Tuesday he’ll have his revamped front bench alongside him.

The cabinet reshuffle, as RNZ reported, means some of the government’s most contentious portfolios will have a fresh face.

One of the most interesting facets was Hipkins’ decision to appoint Michael Wood as Minister for Auckland.

Hipkins explained the need to “get Auckland pumping” after a difficult couple of years, but there’s a political imperative behind it as well which the Herald’s Trevett saw.

“It is aimed as a pre-emptive counter to the inevitable attacks from Auckland-based opposition leaders such as Christopher Luxon and David Seymour that the Wellington-based Hipkins is a beltway creation and out of touch with Auckland’s concerns,” she said.

“It sends a signal that Hipkins has his eye on Auckland and knows its importance.”

Peter Wilson is a life member of Parliament’s press gallery, 22 years as NZPA’s political editor and seven as parliamentary bureau chief for NZ Newswire. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/02/01/chris-hipkins-first-question-time-as-pm-will-he-win-the-house/feed/ 0 368815 Venezuelan authorities question 2 El Nacional employees, summon 3 others https://www.radiofree.org/2023/01/27/venezuelan-authorities-question-2-el-nacional-employees-summon-3-others/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/01/27/venezuelan-authorities-question-2-el-nacional-employees-summon-3-others/#respond Fri, 27 Jan 2023 18:34:21 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=257948 Bogotá, January 27, 2023 — Venezuelan authorities must drop their criminal investigation into two editors, three reporters, and an administrative employee of the El Nacional news website and allow them to continue their work free of intimidation, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Friday.

On Wednesday, January 25, officers of Venezuela’s investigative police unit detained El Nacional news editor José Gregorio Meza and human resources manager Virginia Nuñez, according to news reports and Miguel Enrique Otero, the president and editor of El Nacional, who spoke to CPJ via messaging app.

Officers brought them to the attorney general’s office in Caracas, where they were questioned about a recent article and released.

Authorities also sent citations to appear at the attorney general’s office to Otero and El Nacional reporters Carola Briceño, Hilda Lugo, and Ramón Hernández, all of whom are based outside of the country and do not plan to comply with the summonses, Otero said.

“Venezuelan authorities’ latest attempt to intimidate journalists at El Nacional by threatening them with criminal investigations is completely unacceptable,” said Carlos Martínez de la Serna, CPJ’s program director, in New York. “Authorities must drop their criminal investigations into the two editors, three reporters, and the human resources manager of the outlet, and allow them to practice journalism freely.”

The citation sent to Otero, dated January 17 and which CPJ reviewed, said he was to be formally charged but did not specify what crime he was alleged to have committed. Otero added that the other journalists were cited the same day.

Otero told CPJ that authorities have threatened Briceño and Hernández’s relatives in Venezuela in retaliation for their journalism.

Police questioned Meza and Nuñez about an article alleging that President Nicolás Maduro’s son, Nicolás Maduro Guerra, who is also a politician, was connected to two Venezuelans sanctioned in 2020 by the U.S. Treasury Department for their alleged involvement in illegal gold mining.

CPJ’s calls and text messages to the attorney general’s office and President Maduro’s press office were not answered. CPJ could not find contact information for the president’s son.

The criminal investigation is the latest move by Venezuela’s authoritarian government against El Nacional, founded 80 years ago in Caracas, which used to be one of the country’s largest-circulation and most influential newspapers. However, a newsprint shortage and government harassment, including fines, defamation lawsuits, and the seizure of its building and printing presses in 2021, forced El Nacional to become a web-only news operation with many journalists and editors living in exile.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/01/27/venezuelan-authorities-question-2-el-nacional-employees-summon-3-others/feed/ 0 367834 On the Question: Should Biden Run Again? https://www.radiofree.org/2023/01/23/on-the-question-should-biden-run-again/ https://www.radiofree.org/2023/01/23/on-the-question-should-biden-run-again/#respond Mon, 23 Jan 2023 17:45:16 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/should-joe-biden-run-again

Reports that Justice Department investigators on Friday seized more than a half-dozen documents, some of them classified, from President Biden’s residence in Wilmington, Delaware — including documents from his time as a senator and others from his time as vice president — have shaken Washington, worrying some Democrats about Biden’s viability as a candidate in 2024.

The imminent departure of Ron Klain, Biden’s chief of staff, is also being read as a sign that Biden and his administration are turning a corner — reviving questions about whether our 80-year-old president should run again.

But the discussion about Biden’s reelection conflates five different questions. Reporters, pollsters, and pundits continue to confuse them. A clear-eyed view requires that the five be addressed separately. Herewith:

(1) Has Biden done a good job so far? My answer is by and large, yes. He wasn’t able to achieve nearly everything he aimed for when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, but Democrats held only a razor’s edge majority against an increasingly rabid GOP, and Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema put up additional roadblocks. Biden’s accomplishments on the economy, climate, infrastructure, and defending democracy have been significant nonetheless — far more significant than his lapses on withdrawing from Afghanistan and mistakenly keeping some classified documents. While not a stirring speaker or a charismatic public presence, he has shown steadiness and resolve. And he has staffed his administration with highly capable and dedicated people.

(2) Should he run again if he wants to? Almost certainly. Unless a president commits such heinous acts in the first term that their party can’t possibly support their reelection, an incumbent president always has the prerogative of running for a second term. Of course, there’s no guarantee that they’ll get a free pass for the nomination (recall Senators Eugene McCarthy’s and Bobby Kennedy’s assaults on LBJ and Teddy Kennedy’s bid against Jimmy Carter). But I don’t see a serious Democratic opponent on the horizon. Biden should have a straight shot.

(3) If not Biden, who else? This is a trick question, because as long as Biden says he’ll be the Democratic nominee, other highly qualified Democrats are unlikely to identify themselves. There’s still time for them to do so if Biden steps aside. Two years before they were elected president, few people had heard of Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. But unless Biden announces within the next six months or so that he won’t be running again, it will be difficult for potentially attractive Democratic candidates to gain enough traction to have a good chance in 2024.

(4) Will Biden be the best candidate to beat Trump or whomever else Republicans are likely to nominate, given his age? This is a very tough call. Last year a New York Times/Siena College poll showed nearly two-thirds of Democrats didn’t want Biden to run again, and concerns about his age ranked at the top of the list. Younger people were even more adamant that Biden is too old. To be sure, he’s beaten Trump once, which would suggest he can do it again. And a sitting president has many advantages over a non-incumbent. But Trump will almost certainly frame the election just as Trump frames everything else — strength versus weakness — and will use Biden’s age against him (even though Trump is only four years younger). If the Republicans put up a younger candidate, the age issue will loom even larger.

(5) Would he be a capable leader of the United States when he’s in his mid-80s? I’ve had the privilege of working with four presidents, and I can tell you from my experience and observation that the job of the American presidency is physically and mentally grueling, even for people in their 40s, 50s, and 60s. If reelected, Biden would be 86 at the end of his second term (assuming he made it through to the end). That’s deeply worrying, given what we know about the natural decline of the human brain and body. This isn’t an “ageist” prejudice against those who have reached such withering heights so much as an understanding that people in their mid-80s do wither.

My bottom line: (1), yes. (2), yes. (3), we can’t know. (4), doubtful. (5), almost certainly no.

But don’t take my word for it. In the months ahead, each of these five questions needs to be thoroughly debated.


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams and was authored by Robert Reich.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2023/01/23/on-the-question-should-biden-run-again/feed/ 0 366556 North Korean farmers question prioritization of ‘cows over people’ https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/cows-12282022181455.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/cows-12282022181455.html#respond Sun, 08 Jan 2023 01:53:45 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/cows-12282022181455.html As another bitter winter grips North Korea, authorities are ensuring that its bullocks – working cows that pull plows and do other chores – are getting fed, even though it’s not doing the same for its citizens, sources in the country say.

Sources told RFA that caretakers are receiving plenty of feed for the bullocks on collective farms, while annual rations for farmers have been halved, owing to a poor harvest. The move seems to be aimed at boosting harvest production.

A source from South Pyongan province who declined to be named told Radio Free Asia that grain distribution for the winter at collective farms in Maengsan county ended in December. “This year's distribution received by the farmers is only about half a year's worth of food,” the source said.

“However, 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of corn kernel and corn stalks were supplied to the working cows of the cooperative farm,” he said. “As a result, farmers complained that cows were treated more favorably than people, and that cows are more important than people.”

Sources in North Korea say temperatures have dropped far below freezing in the country and, as food becomes more scarce, large numbers of people have gone missing, believed starved or frozen to death.

RFA received reports of homeless beggar children, known as kotebji, dying on the street, while even the employed have been deserting their homes to subsist on hunting and fishing in remote areas because they cannot afford to buy food.

Speaking on condition of anonymity citing fear of reprisal, a farmer in the province confirmed to RFA that local cadres delivered year-end feed rations last week for “working cows” at the 22 cooperative farms in Kimjongsuk county.

“I work in Team No. 4 of Agricultural Group No. 1 in Wondong village, and our team has 5 cows,” said the farmer. “Each working cow is raised in a barn adjacent to the house of the cow’s manager. The cow manager receives the food for the working cow.”

Each cooperative farm in Kimjongsuk employs 300-400 farmers in four to six work groups. Each work group is divided into five to six teams, each of which raises three to six working cows, the farmer said. While the size of collective farms varies in the county, each raises around 100 cows.

The farmer told RFA that at the end of this year, cow managers were provided 100 kilograms, or 100 days’ worth, of grain in addition to the year-end grain all farmers receive for their daily labor. 

A poor harvest this year saw regular farmers receive only half their grain, frustrating those who say the government prioritizes the nation’s cows over its people. “Due to the lack of harvest this year, farmers who went to work 365 days … only received 200 days worth of grain,” the farmer said.

North Korea stopped providing rations for cows at collective farms during the country’s economic crisis in the 1990s. The first source told RFA that, until this year, cow managers had been required to foot the bill for feed, in addition to medicine and shoes for hooves, forcing them to earn additional money as porters at train stations and in the marketplace.

“The fact that corn kernels and corn stalks were supplied as feed to working cows for the first time [since the 1990s] seems to be an attempt to increase food production by mobilizing all working cows for farming,” the source said. “But it remains to be seen whether working cows will increase grain production as a result.”

According to the “2022 North Korean Crop Production Estimate” recently announced by the Rural Development Administration, North Korea harvested 4.51 million tons of food this year, a decrease of 180,000 tons from 2021.

Translated by Claire Shinyoung Oh. Edited by Josh Lipes and Malcolm Foster.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Korean.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/korea/cows-12282022181455.html/feed/ 0 362869 Bulgarian authorities question reporter and editor about sources https://www.radiofree.org/2022/12/20/bulgarian-authorities-question-reporter-and-editor-about-sources/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/12/20/bulgarian-authorities-question-reporter-and-editor-about-sources/#respond Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:18:33 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=249557 Berlin, December 20, 2022—Bulgarian authorities must stop harassing journalists Alexei Lazarov and Desislava Nikolova, and cease attempting to investigate their sources, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Tuesday.

Prosecutors summoned Lazarov and Nikolova for questioning on December 12 regarding allegations of drug markups in state-owned hospitals that were published in the weekly newspaper Capital, according to Lazarov, the private outlet’s editor-in-chief, who spoke to CPJ by phone. Nikolova, a Capital editor and reporter who wrote the November 11 story, was asked about the source of an internal Ministry of Health report she had cited, Lazarov said. 

“Bulgarian authorities must stop pressuring Alexei Lazarov and Desislava Nikolova for information about the sources for their reporting,” said Attila Mong, CPJ’s Europe representative. “Journalists who investigate potential irregularities in public spending do their work in the interest of the public, and to subject them to questioning in this way is simply intimidation.”

The roughly 30-minute interview took place in Bulgaria’s capital Sofia, where the journalists are based, on behalf of the prosecutor’s office in Varna, a city in the northeast, which is in charge of the investigation, according to Lazarov. Police said they were considering a criminal investigation into the practices described in the article, but focused questions on where Capital got its information, he said.

Lazarov and Nikolova declined to answer, citing their journalistic right to protect their sources, and considered the questions “a form of pressure and harassment,” Lazarov told CPJ.  

CPJ emailed questions to the press office of prosecutors in Varna and Bulgaria’s Ministry of Health, but received no reply.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Madeline Earp.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/12/20/bulgarian-authorities-question-reporter-and-editor-about-sources/feed/ 0 359083 Public Health Leaders Question Whether Asbestos Facilities Should Be Exempt From Surprise Inspections https://www.radiofree.org/2022/12/09/public-health-leaders-question-whether-asbestos-facilities-should-be-exempt-from-surprise-inspections/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/12/09/public-health-leaders-question-whether-asbestos-facilities-should-be-exempt-from-surprise-inspections/#respond Fri, 09 Dec 2022 11:00:00 +0000 https://www.propublica.org/article/asbestos-poisoning-chemical-plant-osha-apha by Kathleen McGrory and Neil Bedi

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

As more workers speak up about being exposed to asbestos in chlorine plants, public health leaders are questioning whether these facilities should be allowed to be in a special program that shields them from scrutiny by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

OSHA’s Star Program, one of its so-called Voluntary Protection Programs, exempts plants with model safety systems from random, unannounced inspections. At least four of the eight chlorine factories that currently use asbestos are in the program, according to OSHA’s website.

“On its face, a company whose business model relies on using asbestos does not have an exceptional health and safety management system,” the American Public Health Association’s Occupational Health and Safety Section wrote in a letter to OSHA last week. “There are alternative processes available and used by (chlorine) plants in the U.S. and in other nations.”

Asbestos has long been known to cause deadly cancers and a chronic lung disease called asbestosis. Its tiny fibers are extremely potent; public health experts say there is no safe level of exposure.

While the vast majority of industries that once used the carcinogen no longer do, two chemical companies, OxyChem and Olin Corp., continue to import hundreds of tons annually for use in their oldest chlorine plants. They use the material as a protective coating on large metal screens that separate volatile chemicals.

The companies say they use asbestos under strict controls and that workers are rarely, if ever, exposed. But workers at an OxyChem plant in Niagara Falls, New York, told ProPublica that asbestos dust hung in the air and accumulated in some places until it was inches thick. Workers at an Olin plant near Mobile, Alabama, said they had scraped dry asbestos off the beams and floors without any protective gear. Workers at three other plants said they, too, were concerned about the potential for asbestos exposure at their workplaces.

The Niagara Falls facility was part of OSHA’s Star Program from 1996 until its closure late last year, government records show. The plant outside of Mobile participated from 2001 until 2015.

In its letter to OSHA, the public health association said it was “alarming for us to read the testimony from former workers about the magnitude of asbestos exposure” at the site in Niagara Falls.

The group also raised concerns about the plant’s management using its status in the Star Program “to game the system.” Plants in the program know when most OSHA inspections will take place. Former employees at the Niagara Falls plant told ProPublica they spent months preparing for such visits, and that work in certain parts of the plant came to a halt when OSHA inspectors were on campus. (Even still, inspectors found asbestos on the floor and covering equipment in 2011, records show.)

The letter, which included a request for a meeting, was signed by three members of the public health association’s leadership team: Angela Laramie, an epidemiologist with expertise in occupational health; Celeste Monforton, a lecturer in public health at Texas State University who previously worked for OSHA; and Mary Miller, an occupational health nurse who retired from the Washington state Department of Labor and Industries.

OSHA told ProPublica it was reviewing the correspondence but declined to comment further.

OxyChem has repeatedly said it complies with federal regulations. “Dating back to the early 1970s, there have been no violations issued by OSHA related to our handling and use of asbestos in any of our chlor-alkali production operations,” the company said in a statement, which it has provided to ProPublica several times.

Olin has not returned calls or emails from ProPublica.

Jordan Barab, a former deputy assistant secretary of labor, said it was unlikely OSHA would remove certain chlorine plants from the Star Program strictly because they use asbestos-dependent technology. “There are a lot of companies that handle dangerous materials,” he said.

But Barab said OSHA had the power to drop in on plants where workers had complained or even develop a special program to look at hazards specific to the chlorine industry.

“OSHA should be looking at these (plants), without a doubt,” he said. “They should have been doing it before, but especially now.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat who has been working on legislation that would ban asbestos, echoed that sentiment. “None of this is a one-off safety lapse,” he said in a statement. “It’s systemic throughout the industry and it’s time for OSHA and safety regulators to step up so not one more American falls victim to this preventable hazard.”

OSHA declined to say whether it would investigate any of the plants that use asbestos in response to ProPublica’s reporting.


This content originally appeared on Articles and Investigations - ProPublica and was authored by by Kathleen McGrory and Neil Bedi.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/12/09/public-health-leaders-question-whether-asbestos-facilities-should-be-exempt-from-surprise-inspections/feed/ 0 356508 Serious Question: Is Twitter Worth Saving? https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/29/serious-question-is-twitter-worth-saving/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/29/serious-question-is-twitter-worth-saving/#respond Tue, 29 Nov 2022 16:43:43 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/node/341339

Twitter is unraveling at the speed of a SpaceX rocket. Things have gotten so bad under the erratic reign of Elon Musk that the future of the social-media company is in question. What, if anything, should be done to pull Twitter from the brink?

From the moment Musk walked through the door, he’s sought to impose his unique brand of creative destruction on Twitter. But the results have been less than brilliant, and far more damaging.

Musk’s takeover deal itself saddled him and his investors with a $13-billion debt load that could force Twitter to default on payment as early as next April, with the possibility of banks forcing the company into bankruptcy. 

Bad financing was only the beginning. To help service his debt Musk drastically slashed costs, including laying off half of Twitter’s staff, thousands of the company’s outside contractors, and forcing more than a thousand others to walk off the job. He decimated Twitter’s trust and safety and human-rights teams, making it all but impossible for the company to uphold and enforce critical user safeguards and content-moderation standards.

His on-again-off-again plans to implement a blue-check subscription service were on and off again last week, but not before Twitter’s chief privacy, information security and compliance officers resigned, reportedly out of concern about the plan’s potential risk to user privacy.

On Thanksgiving, Musk granted a “general amnesty,” effectively inviting back on the platform some of the most dangerous purveyors of hate and disinformation. This impulsive decision-making has played poorly with advertisers. Half of Twitter’s 100 top advertisers have pulled their placements since Musk took over, costing the company tens of millions of dollars in monthly revenues. Several told the #StopToxicTwitter campaign that the platform’s weakened content-moderation had increased the risks of their brands appearing adjacent to some of the most toxic content.

The real value of social media

In the midst of all this wreckage one thing is obvious: If Twitter is going to be saved, Musk isn’t the person to do the job. Instead, the company needs to be run by someone who understands that the real value of any social-media venture lies in its ability to attract, keep and serve users.

It turns out that most people go online to find information and news, stay in touch with friends and family, and research how to do things. These users aren’t visiting social media to be harassed or to harass others, or to be scammed by those seeking to make a buck or a billion by selling dubious verification services. Content moderation is a way to give people what they say that they want. As businesses that still rely on advertising, companies like Twitter need to enforce community standards to ensure brand and user safety.

But saving Twitter might require even more: that we recognize the public goods of social networking and put in place additional measures that protect these values.

Some of us have been around the internet long enough to remember the euphoria that accompanied the early days of the Arab Spring, when activists from Tunisia to Iran took to social media to organize pro-democratic street protests. “If you want to liberate a society,” Egyptian activist Wael Ghonim said at the time, “just give them the Internet.” 

In retrospect, the sentiment seems naive: The internet was never much of a safe haven for women, communities of color, activists, dissidents or other marginalized communities. And yet many of these same groups have leveraged social media’s global reach to organize and engage more people in the struggle for a more equitable and democratic world.

Rebuilding the public square

So simply giving people the internet is not enough. We need access to an internet that is free from blocking, throttling and other forms of discrimination imposed by internet providers like AT&T and Comcast (a principle known as Net Neutrality). And we need legal assurances that these providers—along with online platforms—won’t conspire with unscrupulous government authorities and data brokers to violate user privacy and subject us to economic and civil injustice.

People need social-media companies to prevent their algorithms from promoting the most incendiary content, to protect all users from disinformation regardless of the languages they speak, and to be transparent about their business models, AI and moderation practices.

We also need to work together to build online spaces that are free from predatory commercial influences, spaces that capture what was good about Twitter or any other commercial platform, without succumbing to profit incentives that often push malicious, sensationalist or just plain false content, while downranking valuable news and information.

For Twitter to survive, its leadership must understand that the company’s success is intertwined with its public-service obligation. For Musk that concept is likely too high a hill to climb, but it’s one he or his successor can’t afford to ignore. Twitter’s ultimate value is tied up in its users and their ability to connect and communicate for the benefit of each other and everyone else.

Twitter may be beyond saving, but the idea of a public-interest social network is something worth fighting for, with or without Elon Musk.


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Tim Karr.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/29/serious-question-is-twitter-worth-saving/feed/ 0 354125 BBC Question Time discuss COP27 and the Just Stop Oil Protests | Wells, Somerset | 10 November 2022 https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/11/bbc-question-time-discuss-cop27-and-the-just-stop-oil-protests-wells-somerset-10-november-2022/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/11/bbc-question-time-discuss-cop27-and-the-just-stop-oil-protests-wells-somerset-10-november-2022/#respond Fri, 11 Nov 2022 12:35:56 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=4ba1ce9d8b2bad1caaca729c3de1ef18
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/11/bbc-question-time-discuss-cop27-and-the-just-stop-oil-protests-wells-somerset-10-november-2022/feed/ 0 350063 Powell Wasn’t Asked a Single Question About Corporate Profits Driving Inflation https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/03/powell-wasnt-asked-a-single-question-about-corporate-profits-driving-inflation/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/03/powell-wasnt-asked-a-single-question-about-corporate-profits-driving-inflation/#respond Thu, 03 Nov 2022 09:28:17 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/node/340800

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell fielded questions for around 40 minutes on Wednesday following the central bank's decision to impose another large interest rate hike, but not a single reporter asked about the extent to which record-high corporate profits are fueling inflation even as companies openly boast about their pricing power.

Progressive economists have estimated that corporate profits are to blame for at least 40% of price increases during the recovery from the pandemic-induced downturn, a disproportionate contribution to the stubbornly high inflation that is eating away at workers' wages. Some have put the number at over 50%.

"Ignoring the role of profits makes inflation analyses a lot weaker."

The notion that corporate price hikes are putting upward pressure on inflation—which has myriad causes—is hardly fringe. Lael Brainard, the Fed's vice chair, acknowledged in a speech last month that "since the pandemic, significant supply and demand imbalances have coincided with large increases in retail trade margins in several sectors."

"In some sectors, the increase in the retail trade margin exceeds the contemporaneous increase in wages paid to the workers engaged in retail trade, although this is not true in food and apparel," Brainard said. "The return of retail margins to more normal levels could meaningfully help reduce inflationary pressures in some consumer goods, considering that gross retail margins are about 30 percent of total sales dollars overall."

But corporations' conscious decisions to raise consumer prices well beyond the actual costs of their goods and services didn't receive any attention during Powell's press conference.

Instead, the Fed chair and reporters from corporate outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, Fox Business, The Washington Post, and The New York Times focused on workers' wages and the labor market, which Powell is explicitly trying to weaken. Reporters also pushed Powell on the risks of recession, which he admitted are growing, and the stock market's reaction to the Fed's latest announcement.

"Despite the slowdown in growth, the labor market remains extremely tight, with the unemployment rate at a 50-year low, job vacancies still very high, and wage growth elevated," the Fed chair said during his opening statement. "Although job vacancies have moved below their highs and the pace of job gains has slowed from earlier in the year, the labor market continues to be out of balance, with demand substantially exceeding the supply of available workers."

While Powell—who has previously said one of his objectives is to "get wages down"—conceded Wednesday that he doesn't see recent wage growth as the "principal story of why prices are going up," he and other Fed officials continue to enact aggressive rate hikes that will ultimately have the effect of cutting wages and potentially throwing millions out of work.

During his remarks Wednesday, Powell made clear that the Fed intends to raise interest rates further in the coming months and keep them elevated for the foreseeable future. Any talk of pausing the rate hikes to assess their impact on the economy, Powell said, would be "very premature."

The Fed's sixth interest rate increase of the year—the fastest pace of hikes since the Volcker era—heightened already widespread concerns that the central bank is pushing the U.S. and potentially the global economy into a terrible downturn.

"The Federal Reserve's decision today to raise interest rates by 0.75% will have a direct and harmful impact on working people and our families," said Liz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO. "The Fed's actions will not address the underlying causes of inflation—the war in Ukraine, climate change's effect on harvests, and corporate profits."

"Working people should not be the target of lowering inflation—it should be corporations that are earning record profits," Shuler added.

In recent weeks, despite the lack of attention to corporate profits during Powell's Wednesday press conference and his previous appearances, mainstream media outlets and newspapers have increasingly highlighted the link between company price hikes and inflation that progressive publications and lawmakers have been emphasizing for months.

Earlier this week, The New York Times ran a story noting that major food companies and restaurants "have continued to raise prices on consumers even after their own inflation-related costs have been covered."

"Although food companies are prominent examples of how rapid inflation is being passed from producers to consumers, the trend is evident across a wide variety of industries," the Times observed. "Executives from banks, airlines, hotels, consumer goods companies, and other firms have said they are finding that customers have money to spend and can tolerate higher prices."

Previously, when it wasn't being ignored or waved away, the connection between high corporate profits and inflation was mocked as a fantasy. In the op-ed pages of the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, columnist Catherine Rampell called the idea that corporate greed is pushing up prices a "conspiracy theory."

But as the Economic Policy Institute's Josh Bivens argued in response to Rampell's May column, "Ignoring the role of profits makes inflation analyses a lot weaker."

"As a simple matter of fact," Bivens wrote, "the rise in profits has been historic and has explained far, far more of the rise in prices over the past year than labor costs or import tariffs, and this makes it odd indeed to label calls to address this as 'conspiracy theories.'"


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Jake Johnson.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/03/powell-wasnt-asked-a-single-question-about-corporate-profits-driving-inflation/feed/ 0 347573 Powell Wasn’t Asked a Single Question About Corporate Profits Driving Inflation https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/03/powell-wasnt-asked-a-single-question-about-corporate-profits-driving-inflation/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/03/powell-wasnt-asked-a-single-question-about-corporate-profits-driving-inflation/#respond Thu, 03 Nov 2022 09:28:17 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/node/340800

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell fielded questions for around 40 minutes on Wednesday following the central bank's decision to impose another large interest rate hike, but not a single reporter asked about the extent to which record-high corporate profits are fueling inflation even as companies openly boast about their pricing power.

Progressive economists have estimated that corporate profits are to blame for at least 40% of price increases during the recovery from the pandemic-induced downturn, a disproportionate contribution to the stubbornly high inflation that is eating away at workers' wages. Some have put the number at over 50%.

"Ignoring the role of profits makes inflation analyses a lot weaker."

The notion that corporate price hikes are putting upward pressure on inflation—which has myriad causes—is hardly fringe. Lael Brainard, the Fed's vice chair, acknowledged in a speech last month that "since the pandemic, significant supply and demand imbalances have coincided with large increases in retail trade margins in several sectors."

"In some sectors, the increase in the retail trade margin exceeds the contemporaneous increase in wages paid to the workers engaged in retail trade, although this is not true in food and apparel," Brainard said. "The return of retail margins to more normal levels could meaningfully help reduce inflationary pressures in some consumer goods, considering that gross retail margins are about 30 percent of total sales dollars overall."

But corporations' conscious decisions to raise consumer prices well beyond the actual costs of their goods and services didn't receive any attention during Powell's press conference.

Instead, the Fed chair and reporters from corporate outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, Fox Business, The Washington Post, and The New York Times focused on workers' wages and the labor market, which Powell is explicitly trying to weaken. Reporters also pushed Powell on the risks of recession, which he admitted are growing, and the stock market's reaction to the Fed's latest announcement.

"Despite the slowdown in growth, the labor market remains extremely tight, with the unemployment rate at a 50-year low, job vacancies still very high, and wage growth elevated," the Fed chair said during his opening statement. "Although job vacancies have moved below their highs and the pace of job gains has slowed from earlier in the year, the labor market continues to be out of balance, with demand substantially exceeding the supply of available workers."

While Powell—who has previously said one of his objectives is to "get wages down"—conceded Wednesday that he doesn't see recent wage growth as the "principal story of why prices are going up," he and other Fed officials continue to enact aggressive rate hikes that will ultimately have the effect of cutting wages and potentially throwing millions out of work.

During his remarks Wednesday, Powell made clear that the Fed intends to raise interest rates further in the coming months and keep them elevated for the foreseeable future. Any talk of pausing the rate hikes to assess their impact on the economy, Powell said, would be "very premature."

The Fed's sixth interest rate increase of the year—the fastest pace of hikes since the Volcker era—heightened already widespread concerns that the central bank is pushing the U.S. and potentially the global economy into a terrible downturn.

"The Federal Reserve's decision today to raise interest rates by 0.75% will have a direct and harmful impact on working people and our families," said Liz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO. "The Fed's actions will not address the underlying causes of inflation—the war in Ukraine, climate change's effect on harvests, and corporate profits."

"Working people should not be the target of lowering inflation—it should be corporations that are earning record profits," Shuler added.

In recent weeks, despite the lack of attention to corporate profits during Powell's Wednesday press conference and his previous appearances, mainstream media outlets and newspapers have increasingly highlighted the link between company price hikes and inflation that progressive publications and lawmakers have been emphasizing for months.

Earlier this week, The New York Times ran a story noting that major food companies and restaurants "have continued to raise prices on consumers even after their own inflation-related costs have been covered."

"Although food companies are prominent examples of how rapid inflation is being passed from producers to consumers, the trend is evident across a wide variety of industries," the Times observed. "Executives from banks, airlines, hotels, consumer goods companies, and other firms have said they are finding that customers have money to spend and can tolerate higher prices."

Previously, when it wasn't being ignored or waved away, the connection between high corporate profits and inflation was mocked as a fantasy. In the op-ed pages of the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, columnist Catherine Rampell called the idea that corporate greed is pushing up prices a "conspiracy theory."

But as the Economic Policy Institute's Josh Bivens argued in response to Rampell's May column, "Ignoring the role of profits makes inflation analyses a lot weaker."

"As a simple matter of fact," Bivens wrote, "the rise in profits has been historic and has explained far, far more of the rise in prices over the past year than labor costs or import tariffs, and this makes it odd indeed to label calls to address this as 'conspiracy theories.'"


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Jake Johnson.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/11/03/powell-wasnt-asked-a-single-question-about-corporate-profits-driving-inflation/feed/ 0 347574 The Question Still Bubbles: Who Blew up the Nordstream Pipeline? https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/29/the-question-still-bubbles-who-blew-up-the-nordstream-pipeline/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/29/the-question-still-bubbles-who-blew-up-the-nordstream-pipeline/#respond Sat, 29 Oct 2022 11:32:48 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/node/340682

Two stunning explosions deep below the Baltic Sea last month set off one of the greatest whodunits in the long history of US-Russia hostility. 

The sabotage of Nord Stream is just the latest and most spectacular example of how vital pipelines are to the political and economic security of many nations.

The explosion ruptured a pipeline that was built to bring liquid natural gas from Russia to Germany. That is likely to reshape European life. It will drive up energy prices as winter begins while removing an instrument Russia has used to influence European governments. The attack also illustrates the profound but little-understood importance of pipelines in modern geopolitics. This is the first major sabotage of an important international pipeline. Now that a precedent has been set, it may not be the last.

The pipeline that was attacked, called Nord Stream 2, was a joint Russian-German project that the United States opposed from the start. In February President Biden promised that if Russia invaded Ukraine, "there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."  When asked how that would be possible, he replied, "I promise you, we would be able to do that."  After the September 26 attack, Secretary of State Antony Blinken called it "a tremendous opportunity once and for all to remove the dependence on Russian energy…We're now the leading supplier of LNG to Europe."

Germany and other countries that planned to use liquid natural gas from Russia may now have to buy it from the United States. Hours after the explosion, former Polish defense minister Radek Sikorski tweeted a picture of the methane bubble rising from the Baltic with the caption "Thank you USA." In a second tweet he elaborated: "Nord Stream's only logic was for Putin to be able to blackmail or wage war on Eastern Europe with impunity."

The pipeline is heavily armored, with layers of concrete surrounding tubes made from metal alloys. Most who have studied the attack agree that it could only have been carried out by a "state actor." The United States, Britain, Russia, and possible Germany, Sweden, and Denmark, are thought to be the only countries with the undersea power to carry it off. Once accomplished, the action removed the most important tool Russia had to pressure Germany—and perhaps assured that Germany will not stray from the US policy of arming Ukraine. Circumstantial evidence suggests that this could have been an American operation.

Journalists and other professional skeptics, however, realize that some things that seem obvious and just plain common sense are actually not true. Russia may not have undersea commandos able to plant powerful explosives along the pipeline, but it could have been blown up from inside. Russia, which controls access to the pipeline, could have carried out the attack that way. Why would it blow up its own pipeline?  According to those who support this theory, the motive would be to drive gas prices higher and push Europeans into freezing darkness so they would press their leaders to stop supporting Ukraine.

The executive director of the International Energy Agency, Fatih Birol, asserted soon after the sabotage attack that it was "very obvious" who did it, but refused to say more. Sweden is investigating but will not reveal what it discovers because, according to a Swedish official, "that is subject to confidentiality directly linked to national security." A member of the German parliament asked what Germany's government knows, and the government reportedly replied that it could not answer because "even the slight risk of disclosure cannot be accepted."

This mystery will probably not be resolved soon, or perhaps ever. The sabotage of Nord Stream is just the latest and most spectacular example of how vital pipelines are to the political and economic security of many nations.

Conflict over a pipeline led the CIA to participate in its first regime-change operation. In 1949 the first president of independent Syria, Shukri al-Quwatli, refused to allow a consortium of American oil companies to run the Trans-Arabian Pipeline across his country. That defiance led the CIA to promote a military coup that deposed Quwatli and installed a military-led government that quickly approved the pipeline. Syria never returned to democracy.

In the 1990s, the United States exercised intense pressure to assure that new pipelines from rich fields in the former Soviet Union would not run through Iran or other unfriendly countries. Russia has periodically raised or lowered the price of gas from its pipelines according to whether particular governments are friendly or hostile. China is using pipelines as part of its ambitious Belt and Road initiative that seeks to bind Eurasia together under Chinese influence. In 2014, after Russia's annexation of Crimea, the European Union blocked a proposed pipeline that would have carried Russian gas to Austria and Italy.

Most pipelines are vulnerable. One candidate for future sabotage might be Turkstream, designed to carry gas from Russia to Turkey and then on to Bulgaria, Hungary and Serbia—all countries that have been reluctant to support Ukraine. A "pipeline war" could lie ahead.

So who blew up the Nord Stream pipeline? Thousands of unexploded mines from World Wars I and II still litter the Baltic. Blaming one of those mines would be most convenient. That would allow all to believe that this was an unfortunate accident, not an act of international vandalism. There's no hard evidence to support that theory, but neither is there any to support the charge that the culprit was the United States or Russia. That may keep speculation bubbling like the methane gas that exploded from under the Baltic last month.


This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Stephen Kinzer.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/29/the-question-still-bubbles-who-blew-up-the-nordstream-pipeline/feed/ 0 346354 BBC Question Time discusses Just Stop Oil’s Latest Protests | 27 October 2022 https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/27/bbc-question-time-discusses-just-stop-oil-27-october-2022-just-stop-oil/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/27/bbc-question-time-discusses-just-stop-oil-27-october-2022-just-stop-oil/#respond Thu, 27 Oct 2022 22:43:18 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=f03675f4743b8cad8c899e9b0ab36ee1
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/27/bbc-question-time-discusses-just-stop-oil-27-october-2022-just-stop-oil/feed/ 0 345810 House of Lords | Oral Question on Fracking | 12 October 2022 | Just Stop Oil https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/13/house-of-lords-oral-question-on-fracking-12-october-2022-just-stop-oil/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/13/house-of-lords-oral-question-on-fracking-12-october-2022-just-stop-oil/#respond Thu, 13 Oct 2022 17:23:50 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=5b686cda2e8c33620298b7d25880c78e
This content originally appeared on Just Stop Oil and was authored by Just Stop Oil.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/10/13/house-of-lords-oral-question-on-fracking-12-october-2022-just-stop-oil/feed/ 0 342296 To Question or Not https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/28/to-question-or-not/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/28/to-question-or-not/#respond Wed, 28 Sep 2022 15:48:40 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=133738 Is questioning a question a question?

The post To Question or Not first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

The post To Question or Not first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/28/to-question-or-not/feed/ 0 336941 The Right to Question the Narrative https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/22/the-right-to-question-the-narrative/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/22/the-right-to-question-the-narrative/#respond Thu, 22 Sep 2022 17:36:52 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=133448 If you support freedom of speech, then it goes both ways. With the exception of disinformation, freedom of speech must be protected just as much for views you oppose as for those you support.

The post The Right to Question the Narrative first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

The post The Right to Question the Narrative first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/22/the-right-to-question-the-narrative/feed/ 0 335518 Don’t Question Authority! https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/16/dont-question-authority/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/16/dont-question-authority/#respond Fri, 16 Sep 2022 12:30:38 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=133435 Open-minded skepticism is unknown to a gullible section of humanity.

The post Don’t Question Authority! first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

The post Don’t Question Authority! first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Allen Forrest.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/16/dont-question-authority/feed/ 0 333763 Another Noble Dream: AP African American Studies and the Objectivity Question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/16/another-noble-dream-ap-african-american-studies-and-the-objectivity-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/16/another-noble-dream-ap-african-american-studies-and-the-objectivity-question/#respond Fri, 16 Sep 2022 05:56:33 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=255170

Image by Emmanuel Ikwuegbu.

AP African American Studies will be piloted as the latest program developed by the College Board and will soon be made available for secondary-level high school students in the United States. While the pre-pilot program (2017-2020) was featured in roughly ten schools, for this coming Fall, the course will be presented to a few dozen schools followed by nearly 200 schools by 2023. The course will be formally rolled out and introduced to a national and global set of schools by 2024. The Course Overview is compelling and incredibly interesting and includes, Origins of the African Diaspora, Freedom, Enslavement and Resistance, Practice of Freedom, and Movements, while covering an enormous time span of the 8th century to the present. The course and learning objectives were very carefully constructed by experts and leading researchers in the field of black history and included luminaries such as Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham and Skip Gates.

The reasons for AP African American Studies and its benefits seem obvious enough. First, by mainstreaming an achievement course in black history, schools show some semblance of seriousness in presenting a balanced playing field. Secondly, the course could attract more people of color into the field of teaching who most likely observed the dearth of black historical figures in their own education. Thirdly, the course has the potential to offset the vicious right-wing drive to pass “anti-woke” legislation. This group would like to permanently remove revisionist history and reinstall the nineteenth-century “great man theory.” Lastly, and oddly enough, the course could reveal unsavory truths about the American educational system and its considerable issues with race and class, perhaps ushering an end to APs once and for all.

Northwestern Professor of African American Studies Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor recently asked:

“Will high school students take AP instead of the college course because they have tested out with some blue book essays and a bubble sheet? Will these AP credits undermine collegiate African American Studies and departments?”

The data on APs across the board says yes on both matters but the two questions posed rhetorically are powerful enough.

On the one-hand, Advanced Placement courses have improved because of the resources available, so a course on African Americans enters at the right time. On the other hand, and in addition to the concerns raised by Taylor, is the fact that the course is not meant to rock the boat at all. Gates in Time Magazine stated that the subject is basically a mainstream course that provides a rich and deep history that has existed long before places like Howard University. This is a valid and completely understandable part of black historiography and historians have told us why we revere people of color that achieve and overcome. Historian John Ernest, the author of Liberation Historiography: African American Writers and the Challenge of History, 1794-1861, wrote about how the question of subjectivity came early for black writers and arrived much later for white writers who started with objectivity. David Walker, W.E.B. DuBois, and Harriet Jacobs – all obviously operated with a limited and at times nonexistent archive because of structural racism. They depended on composite studies that included a “moral imagination” to unread “white nationalist history,” argues Ernest.

Starting with subjectivity (which tends to be more progressive) and working towards objectivity (which tends to be more conservative) creates a double edge sword regarding the trajectory of institutionalizing black history. An interesting component of liberation historiography’s legacy is the question of objectivity and the search or result of a more conservative proverbial “greatness.” AP African American Studies brings the content closer to objectivity, institutionalization and standardization, but as Howard Zinn once remarked “is objectivity either possible or desirable?” There is no question that representation and inclusion is helpful in secondary schools and research has shown that children feel safer and more confident in academic settings when they can see themselves in the curriculum. The jury is still out, however, on how effective the AP course will be in accomplishing and furthering authentic liberation in terms of the sentiments outlined by Taylor.

What are the problems with the course and APs in general? First, Advanced Placement courses have often been places for achievement-oriented students that were aspirational and ‘good at school’ but not always as interested in the subject matter when compared to the desire to seek college credit. Second, is the question of readiness. Are APs really getting students ready for college courses? College professors tend to maintain skepticism on this. Third is the question of academic achievement in which the data points to mixed results. Of course, many of the AP teachers and students are outstanding in all subjects and would be in AP African American Studies as well. The problem is the number of students who enroll in AP that would benefit equally or even more in non-AP courses.

This raises the question; is an AP African American Studies course automatically better than a non-AP course that deals with black history? First and foremost, there is the question of what constitutes black history. When taught correctly, almost every subject in the humanities requires the teacher and student to encounter and synthesize the black past. If you had only fifteen minutes to explain standard American history to someone, the most practical way of distilling it might be to briefly summarize Dred Scott (1857), Homer Plessy (1896) and the Brown Family (1954). Any US history course that failed to cover these events and their extensive legacies would not be credible or legitimate.

Secondly, can we be so certain to conclude that students that survive the rigor of the AP course are more critical readers, writers, thinkers, and public speakers? What is to say for the richness of students who wish to study black history without timed tests and a formulaic pre-packaged curriculum?

Just as many students in the history of humankind are content with choosing the path of least resistance, there are students that desire to seek and find primary source material on their own and choose to read portions of texts in full. Does AP allow for this? Does AP allow for the advanced inquiry level and the prospects for it, that Taylor addresses and encompasses in her Tweet? Furthermore, should black history be associated more with enrichment and non-traditional methodologies in education and less with achievement, competitiveness, and conventional approaches? In some regards, the quest for historically marginalized subject matter to enter the establishment is following the path outlined in Aesop’s fable, The Goose that Laid the Golden Eggs.

I would never be so harsh as to discount any and every Advanced Placement class unconditionally, especially the potentially emancipatory African American course. At best the course would further shape the goals of a more rigorous AP, ignite interest in secondary school course selection, serve historically underserved communities, and attract more people of color to teaching that have been turned off, or outright denied, by a culture of white supremacy. At worst, the course could serve to undermine higher education’s black history offerings while continuing the trend that AP has already posed for post-secondary educators. Will this course aim higher and emphasize writing, interdisciplinary research, and historicize the value of source material? Or will it simply offer a class that dovetails all too nicely with the existing conservative test prep orthodoxy and cater to predictable socio-economic groupings?

Perhaps, the balanced, fair, and correct assessment is to cheer on the AP African American Studies course because it is the only thing we can do. There is nothing that says that this course cannot be an agent for change in other areas of schooling. If the emergence of any one AP course could cause a groundswell in education, it is the hope of many to be this one. Certain schools have abandoned Advanced Placement courses for the issues and questions discussed here but by no means are they likely to go away. Just as identity in America is a very complicated topic, so is the potential value of this course. There is no question that regardless of its successes or failures, AP African American Studies is a humane, appropriate, and just idea and has the capacity to empower many people across the educational landscape.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Daniel Falcone.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/16/another-noble-dream-ap-african-american-studies-and-the-objectivity-question/feed/ 0 333692 To Renew or Not to Renew the 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement, That is the Question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/02/to-renew-or-not-to-renew-the-2015-iran-nuclear-agreement-that-is-the-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/02/to-renew-or-not-to-renew-the-2015-iran-nuclear-agreement-that-is-the-question/#respond Fri, 02 Sep 2022 06:04:28 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=254057 In the drawn-out Vienna negotiations on restoring the agreement the U.S. has been under pressure from Israel    and the Gulf monarchies to extract concessions from Iran bearing on matters outside the scope of the nuclear agreement. It would seem more plausible to be confronted by demands from Iran for reparations for the harm   experienced by the bad faith behavior of the U.S., which sets a terrible precedent for   the reliability of non-treaty international commitments. The fact that Iran has been prepared to go along with such a one-sided negotiating format undoubtedly reflects a  motivation to gain relief from sanctions, and may also reflect the sincerity of Iran’s declared  intention never to acquire nuclear weapons. More

The post To Renew or Not to Renew the 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement, That is the Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Richard Falk.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/09/02/to-renew-or-not-to-renew-the-2015-iran-nuclear-agreement-that-is-the-question/feed/ 0 328798 Russian authorities in Kazan question, search homes of 7 RFE/RL freelance journalists and contributors https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/29/russian-authorities-in-kazan-question-search-homes-of-7-rfe-rl-freelance-journalists-and-contributors/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/29/russian-authorities-in-kazan-question-search-homes-of-7-rfe-rl-freelance-journalists-and-contributors/#respond Mon, 29 Aug 2022 18:07:14 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=226197 Paris, August 29, 2022—Russian authorities should stop intimidating journalists and contributors to U.S. Congress-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and let the media work freely, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Monday.

On August 17, police in Kazan, the capital of Russia’s Tatarstan republic, searched the homes of Nelya Biktimirova, AysiluKadyrova, Alsu Kiyamova, and Aliya Sabirova—four freelance journalists who contribute to RFE/RL’s Tatar-Bashkir service—seized their phones, computers, and passports, and took them for questioning, according to multiple news reports and an editor for Idel.Realii, a project of the Tatar-Bashkir service, who spoke to CPJ via email on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal.

In addition, the Idel.Realii editor told CPJ that three others affiliated with RFE/RL—Elza Nabiullina, a teacher and contributor to the RFE/RL’s educational Tatar language project; Iskander Yasaveyev, a sociologist and a RFE/RL columnist; and Marina Yudkevich, a retired journalist and a RFE/RL columnist—had their homes searched and were taken for questioning on August 17.

All seven were released “after hours of interrogation” at the Investigative Committee for the Republic of Tatarstan and the Ministry of Internal Affairs’ Center for Combating Extremism, the Idel.Realii editor said.

“The main purpose of these mass detentions and searches in Kazan is to intimidate independent journalists and stifle critical voices in Russia’s Tatarstan republic,” said Carlos Martinez de la Serna, CPJ’s program director, in New York. “Russian authorities must stop harassing independent journalists by ensnaring them in legal cases and allow them to work freely.”

Authorities made all seven witnesses in a case of “justifying terrorism and violence against representatives of the authorities” and claimed that on May 11, “unidentified journalists of the Tatar-Bashkir service of Radio Liberty” published on the YouTube channel Objectiv-TV, a video showing the Russian ambassador to Poland doused with red paint on May 9 in Warsaw, which allegedly contained “statements aimed at justifying violence,”  the Idel.Realii editor told CPJ.

“These insulting accusations against independent journalists and commentators are ridiculous,” said RFE/RL President Jamie Fly.

The Idel.Realii editor told CPJ that the journalists and columnists were interrogated about the workflow in the Tatar-Bashkir service, means of communication with editors, and their connection to that video.

None of the journalists or columnists had seen the video, which had “no connection” to the Tatar-Bashkir service, according to the Idel.Realii editor. The Idel.Realii editor also said that the journalists did not get their computers, phones, and passports back as of August 26, “so they will stay in Kazan.”  

The RFE/RL Tatar-Bashkir service regularly covers the war in Ukraine and Russian authorities’ crackdown on the country’s civil society.

On August 23, Yasaveyev published a column about the August 17 searches and claimed they were “devoid of any specific purpose or meaning.”

“The repressive machine needs to work, it needs raw material in the form of those persecuted. Who is to be persecuted? Former and current employees of Idel.Realii have long been on the radar of the siloviki (law enforcement and security agents). Independent journalists and columnists can be easily portrayed as a threat, agents of alien values and interests,” he wrote.

CPJ emailed the Investigative Committee for the Republic of Tatarstan but did not receive any response. When CPJ called the Ministry of Internal Affairs’ Center for Combating Extremism for the Republic of Tatarstan, the person who answered the phone said they could not give any comment, claimed that “the wrong place” was called, and hung up.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/29/russian-authorities-in-kazan-question-search-homes-of-7-rfe-rl-freelance-journalists-and-contributors/feed/ 0 327428 ‘Bizarre Decisions From Facebook Call Into Question Moderation Systems’ – CounterSpin interview with Jon Lloyd on Facebook disinformation https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/26/bizarre-decisions-from-facebook-call-into-question-moderation-systems-counterspin-interview-with-jon-lloyd-on-facebook-disinformation/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/26/bizarre-decisions-from-facebook-call-into-question-moderation-systems-counterspin-interview-with-jon-lloyd-on-facebook-disinformation/#respond Fri, 26 Aug 2022 21:45:29 +0000 https://fair.org/?p=9030027 Janine Jackson interviewed Global Witness’s Jon Lloyd about Facebook disinformation for the August 19, 2022, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.   Janine Jackson: Social media platforms’ role in shaping the sharing and fomenting of ideas that they purport to merely facilitate is a widely diagnosed concern. As with any kind of […]

The post ‘Bizarre Decisions From Facebook Call Into Question Moderation Systems’ appeared first on FAIR.

]]> Janine Jackson interviewed Global Witness’s Jon Lloyd about Facebook disinformation for the August 19, 2022, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

      CounterSpin220819Lloyd.mp3

 

Janine Jackson: Social media platforms’ role in shaping the sharing and fomenting of ideas that they purport to merely facilitate is a widely diagnosed concern. As with any kind of media criticism, it’s important to look at broad patterns of societal impact and to track and unpack the distortions of these media in real time, as they have important real-time, real-world effects.

Our next guest’s recent work does both, really. Global Witness has been monitoring Facebook‘s failure to check outright disinformation in the run-up to elections in Brazil. Jon Lloyd is senior advisor at Global Witness. He joins us now by phone from London. Welcome to CounterSpin, Jon Lloyd.

Jon Lloyd: Thanks for having me.

JJ: Before we talk about what you found, let me ask you why you chose to conduct the inquiry. What were the questions or concerns that drove your investigation into Facebook‘s role in Brazilian elections?

JL: The reason that we chose Brazil is we’ve realized that the choices of the world’s major tech companies have had a big impact online, before and after high-stakes elections around the world. And all eyes are on Brazil this year.

Guardian: WhatsApp fake news during Brazil election 'factored Bolsonaro'

The London Guardian (10/30/19) reported that during the 2018 Brazilian presidential election, 42% of viral right-wing messages on Facebook-owned WhatsApp contained false information, versus less than 3% of viral left-wing messages.

The reason being is that disinformation featured heavily in the 2018 election, and this year’s election has already been marred by reports of widespread disinformation spread from the very top. The president, Bolsonaro, right now is already seeding doubt about the legitimacy of the election results, and that’s leading to some fears in Brazil of a January 6–style, “Stop the Steal” kind of coup attempt.

In addition to that, we’ve also done some research into Facebook‘s ability to detect hate speech in other areas which it’s called “priority countries,” so Myanmar, Ethiopia and Kenya. And what we found in those investigations was that, well, they didn’t detect any of it, and really with no explanation.

So we thought Brazil was a good opportunity to see if they’re putting their money where their mouth is, so to speak. They have highlighted that as a priority country when it comes to elections, and really, outside of the US midterms, there is no bigger election this year.

JJ: Well, then, tell us about the investigation itself. What did you do exactly, and what did it tell us?

JL: We sourced, firstly, ten examples of election-related disinformation. Some of those are real-life examples, and others we had pulled from the Brazilian Superior Electoral Court’s Counter Disinformation Program. The Superior Electoral Court has said that they’ve been working with social media companies, in terms of helping identify and do a bit of debunking of some common election disinformation.

So we chose examples that largely fell into two categories. The first thing we did, outright false election information. So [ads] that had the wrong voting day, different things about how to vote—for example, instructions on how to vote by mail, which is banned in Brazil.

And then we had a second category of ads, which was content aimed to delegitimize the election result. It was specifically about Brazil’s voting machines, which they’ve used without incident since 1996. So we created those ads, and then we set them up with an account which should have gone through their ad authorizations process—that’s where an account posting political, social-issue or election-related content has to be verified.

Global Witness: Facebook fails to tackle election disinformation ads ahead of tense Brazilian election

Global Witness’s investigation (8/15/22) found Facebook consistently approved ads from an unauthorized account with election disinformation, including ones advertising the wrong election day.

Really, we broke all the rules when it came to setting up that account: We set it up outside of Brazil; we used a non-Brazilian payment method; we posted ads while I was in Nairobi, and then back here in London, which is not allowed. And, of course, I’m not Brazilian—you need to be a Brazilian and present ID.

So there were lots of opportunities for Meta to detect that this was an inauthentic account. We created that account, and then we submitted our examples of disinformation. And all of them were accepted.

JJ: All of them. All of them, including the ones that said the wrong day on which you should vote.

JL: Yes! And actually, initially, one of the ads that we submitted was rejected under Facebook‘s ads about social issues, elections or politics policy, but just six days later, without any intervention from us, the ad was approved, again without any explanation.

So this bizarre sequence of decisions from Facebook really seriously calls into question the integrity of its content-moderation systems—especially, I think, because that was another opportunity for some sort of additional review, both of the authenticity of our account—we weren’t supposed to be allowed to post any political content—and then also to review the other ads that we posted. So it was quite confusing, and quite concerning, too.

JJ: Absolutely, and disheartening.

You have stated that you’ve also looked at Myanmar, Ethiopia and Kenya. So this isn’t just out of the blue; this is something that you chose to look at, Brazil, because there have been pre-existing problems and issues with this content-moderation process. So in other words, you would think that Facebook would be being extra-vigilant at this point, having already been called out on this in the past.

Jon Lloyd

Jon Lloyd: “Facebook will tout the ability of its content-moderation systems to pick this stuff up. And we just bypass it so easily.”

JL: Absolutely. And it’s really part of a trend, which is, Facebook will tout the ability of its content-moderation systems to pick this stuff up. And we just bypass it so easily.

And one thing that I’ll just say, that is important to note, is the reason that we choose ads is because we can schedule those ads in the future, and they still go through that same content-moderation process, but nobody ever ends up actually seeing the content. We can see that the ads go through the content moderation process and are approved, but then we take them down before the scheduled launch date of those ads.

But as far as we know, the content-moderation process is exactly the same for that organic content that people just post on Facebook, and for ads as well. And if anything, for election-related content, it sounds like for ads, it’s even stricter.

JJ: I appreciate that clarification.

You have stated that Facebook knows very well that its platform is used to spread election disinformation and undermine democracy around the world.

I’ve not read the very latest “shocked, simply shocked” corporate response, but it doesn’t matter, because we judge them by their actions and not by their press releases. So what are you at Global Witness, and I know others as well, calling for at this point? What needs to change from Facebook, and then maybe in terms of public understanding of or reckoning with Facebook?

JL: Yeah, we’re asking Facebook, really, to take this seriously. It has to consider all of this, putting our safety as a priority, as a cost of doing business. And with the US midterms around the corner, they have to get it right, and right now.

Our recommendations fall into two main categories. One is around resourcing and the other is around transparency. So we want to make sure that they properly resource the content-moderation and the ad-account verification processes, just getting all of that up to scratch.

But then on the transparency side, crucially, we need them to show their work. It’s not enough to dazzle us with statistics that have no base of reference. We don’t know what the common denominator is, so saying that they’ve removed 1,000 accounts or 100,000 accounts, I don’t know if that’s good or bad. Same with the amount of posts, because there’s nothing to compare it to.

But the one thing that we do know is that our content that we tested from my computer here in London all got through. So ultimately, it falls down to resourcing its content-moderation capabilities, and those integrity systems deployed on the platform globally as well, not just in countries that it thinks are more important.

And then we want them to publish their risk assessments that they do for each country as well. We know that they’re likely to have done one for Brazil, and, really, we want to make sure that in languages that aren’t English, and in countries that aren’t the United States, that they’re actually doing what they say they’re going to do.

So perhaps that means some verified, independent third-party auditing, so that Meta can be held accountable for what they say they’re doing, and aren’t just left to mark their own homework.

Then when it comes to people like me and you, there’s a real opportunity to be a bit skeptical about what you’re seeing online, and even things like the “paid for” disclaimers—we weren’t required to put one of them on any of our content, because we bypassed the political-ad authorization process.

So even things like that, I think it’s maybe doing a little bit of additional research if you’re seeing something and it’s shocking, probably designed to be a bit shocking. So you want to verify that from trusted sources.

JJ: All right, then. Well, thank you very much. We’ve been speaking with Jon Lloyd. He’s senior advisor at Global Witness. You can find their work online at GlobalWitness.org. Thank you so much, Jon Lloyd, for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

JL: Thank you for having me. Cheers.

 

The post ‘Bizarre Decisions From Facebook Call Into Question Moderation Systems’ appeared first on FAIR.


This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Janine Jackson.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/26/bizarre-decisions-from-facebook-call-into-question-moderation-systems-counterspin-interview-with-jon-lloyd-on-facebook-disinformation/feed/ 0 326937 ‘A Dangerous Bet’: Analysts Question Manchin Bill’s Carbon Capture Promises https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/11/a-dangerous-bet-analysts-question-manchin-bills-carbon-capture-promises/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/11/a-dangerous-bet-analysts-question-manchin-bills-carbon-capture-promises/#respond Thu, 11 Aug 2022 15:39:47 +0000 https://www.commondreams.org/node/338957
This content originally appeared on Common Dreams - Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community and was authored by Jake Johnson.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/11/a-dangerous-bet-analysts-question-manchin-bills-carbon-capture-promises/feed/ 0 322737 The Unvaccinated Question (Revisited) https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/08/the-unvaccinated-question-revisited/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/08/the-unvaccinated-question-revisited/#respond Mon, 08 Aug 2022 04:36:48 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=132279 On 1 September, 1941, Chief of Reich Security Reinhard Heydrich, one of the most fanatical, mass-murdering Nazis, issued a now notorious decree ordering Jews above the age of six to wear an identifying badge in public. The Jewish Badge, a yellow Star of David with the word “Jew” inscribed inside the star, was meant to […]

The post The Unvaccinated Question (Revisited) first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]>

On 1 September, 1941, Chief of Reich Security Reinhard Heydrich, one of the most fanatical, mass-murdering Nazis, issued a now notorious decree ordering Jews above the age of six to wear an identifying badge in public. The Jewish Badge, a yellow Star of David with the word “Jew” inscribed inside the star, was meant to stigmatize and humiliate the Jews and was also used to segregate them and monitor and control their movements.

Nothing like that is happening currently, especially not in New Normal Germany.

What is happening currently in New Normal Germany is the fascist fanatics in control of the government are rewriting the “Infection Protection Act,” again — as they have been doing repeatedly for the last two years — in order to allow themselves to continue to violate the German constitution (the “Grundgesetz“) and rule the nation by arbitrary decree under the guise of “protecting the public health.”

This repeatedly revised “Infection Protection Act” — which has granted the government of New Normal Germany the authority to order lockdowns, curfews, the outlawing of protests against the New Normal, the mandatory wearing of medical-looking masks, the segregation and persecution of “the Unvaccinated“, etc. — is, of course. in no way remotely comparable to the “Enabling Act of 1933,” which granted the government of Nazi Germany the authority to issue whatever decrees it wanted under the guise of “remedying the distress of the people.”

There is absolutely no similarity whatsoever between these two pieces of legislation.

I mean, look at this “Autumn/Winter Plan” for the new revision of the “Infection Protection Act,” which will remain in effect from October until Easter, and which government officials and state propagandists (a/k/a the German media) are likening to “snow chain ordinances.”

There is absolutely nothing creepily fascistic or remotely Nazi about this plan.

Sorry, it’s in German. Allow me to translate.

On planes and trains and at the airports and train stations, everyone will be forced to wear doggy-snout masks — i.e., FFP2 “Filtering Face Pieces” as defined by the EN 149 standard — except for the staff of the airports and train stations, and the flight attendants, conductors, etc., who will only be forced to wear “medical-looking masks.” In hospitals, clinics, doctors’ offices, nursing homes and other healthcare facilities, everyone, including the staff, will not only be forced to wear the dog-snout masks but they will also be forced to submit to testing, unless they can provide proof of “vaccination” (or recovery, which also means being tested) within the previous three-month period. On the premises of private companies; i.e., offices, factories, warehouses, and so on, the previously rescinded Arbeitsschutzverordnung (“Corona Occupational Safety Ordinance”) — masks, tests, forced “vaccinations,” “social distancing,” plastic barriers, etc. — will go back into effect in October and will remain in effect until the Easter holidays.

The individual federal states will be empowered to impose other senseless “restrictions,” like general mask mandates in shops, restaurants, and every other type of “interior spaces,” limits on the number of people who can gather publicly or in their homes, and mandatory masks for kids in schools and testing in kindergartens and daycare facilities. In restaurants, bars, theaters, museums, sports facilities, and pretty much everywhere else in society, the federal states can demand that people show proof of recent “vaccination” or recovery to be exempted from having to wear a mask.

OK, allow me to translate again.

What that last part means is that anyone who refuses to submit to repeated “vaccination” or testing will be forced to wear a mask in public to identify themselves as “Unvaccinated” (i.e., the New Normal Reich’s official “Untermenschen”).

So, OK, maybe it’s a little creepily fascistic and not as non-Nazi as I suggested above. I put it this way in a recent tweet …

Needless to say, this could get confusing, as the New Normals are extremely attached to their masks, which they’ve been wearing — like Nazis wore swastika lapel pins — to publicly signal their “solidarity” (i.e., mindless conformity to the new official ideology) for going on the last two and half years. And now the masks will function like the “Jewish Badges” with the Star of David that the Nazis forced the Jews to wear, except on public transportation, and planes and trains, unless the federal states decide to force everyone to wear masks everywhere, in which case … well, you get the general idea.

Still, the fact that everyone will have to present their “vaccination papers” (or their “recovery papers”) to enter a restaurant, or a bar, or go to the cinema or the theater, and, basically, to do anything else in society, should make up for the mask confusion. I mean, what kind of a fascist society would it be if you didn’t have to show your “papers” to some beady-eyed goon to get a cup of coffee?

Now, before you report me to the BfV; i.e., Germany’s federal domestic intelligence agency, for “relativizing the Holocaust” and “delegitimizing the democratic state,” both of which are crimes here in Germany, I want to say, again, for the record, that I do not advocate using the yellow Star of David to protest the New Normal (as in the photo in the tweet above). I think it is foolish, and counterproductive. The New Normal has nothing to do with the Holocaust, or the Jews, or even Nazism, per se.

But let’s be clear about what’s happening in Germany.

What is happening is, a new official ideology is being imposed on society. It is being imposed on society by force. And now, those of us who refuse to conform to it will be ordered to walk around in public wearing visible symbols of our non-conformity.

I’m sorry, but the parallels are undeniable.

This new official ideology has nothing to do with a respiratory virus or any other public health threat.  At this point, I do not have to repeat this argument.  The majority of countries around the world have finally rescinded their “emergency measures” and acknowledged the facts that we “conspiracy theorists” have been citing for the past two and a half years, and that we have been relentlessly demonized and censored for citing.

Not even Germany’s recent independent evaluation of its “Corona Measures” could produce any evidence supporting their effectiveness. Seriously, the New Normal German authorities are basing their claim for the efficacy of mask mandates on “the Golden Syrian Hamster Model.” (You probably think I’m joking, but I’m not.) And Karl Lauterbach, the fanatical Minister of Health, has openly stated that forcing “the Unvaccinated” to wear masks in public is a “motivation” tactic to harass them into following orders and submitting to a “vaccination” that even the German government now admits has killed or seriously injured tens of thousands of people, at minimum, in Germany.

No, this new official ideology, the New Normal — which is still very much in effect in places like Germany, China, Canada, Australia, New York, California, etc. — is nakedly, undeniably, purely ideological. It is based, not on facts, but belief. It is a belief system, as is every other ideology. It is essentially no different than an official religion … one which demonizes and persecutes all other religions, and non-religions, and all other belief systems.

According to this new official belief system, those of us who maintain different beliefs, and refuse to convert to the new official beliefs (or pretend to convert to the new official beliefs), are dangerous, foreign elements in society. And thus, from now on, in New Normal Germany, we will be forced to wear a visible symbol of our different beliefs (our “otherness”) in public, so that the authorities and the Good German masses will be able to identify us.

Is any of this sounding vaguely familiar?

I’m fairly certain that someone will read this (and see the tweets I included above) and report me for “relativizing the Holocaust.” For the record, I am not “relativizing the Holocaust.” I’m comparing one totalitarian system to another. Yes, Nazi Germany and New Normal Germany are two very different totalitarian systems, and I have outlined their essential differences and similarities, but, come on, this is not that fucking hard. In Nazi Germany, the Jews were the scapegoats. In New Normal Germany, it’s “the Unvaccinated.”

How much more blatant does it have to get before people stop pretending that this isn’t what it is? Do the authorities have to literally put us in camps? How many more people have to die or be seriously injured by “vaccinations” they did not need but were forced to submit to? I’m not talking to the New Normals now, nor to the people who have been fighting this all along. I’m talking to the people who see what is happening, and are horrified by what is happening, but, for whatever reasons, have refused to speak out … and, yes, I know there are very good reasons. Some of you have families to support, and careers to protect, and, seriously, I get it. But how far does it have to go? At what point do you feel you have to speak out regardless of the personal and professional consequences?

Maybe take some time and meditate on that.

Oh, and here’s a little visual aid that might help folks with their meditations. It’s some graffiti that someone painted on the wall of a courtyard here in New Normal Germany, in the Autumn of 2021, I think. I posted it back then, but it didn’t make much of an impression. Perhaps it will make one now.

I’ll translate. It reads “GAS THE UNVACCINATED.”

The post The Unvaccinated Question (Revisited) first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by C.J. Hopkins.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/08/08/the-unvaccinated-question-revisited/feed/ 0 321535 Senior figures question Fiji government’s close links with ‘doomsday’ cult https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/29/senior-figures-question-fiji-governments-close-links-with-doomsday-cult/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/29/senior-figures-question-fiji-governments-close-links-with-doomsday-cult/#respond Fri, 29 Jul 2022 04:45:45 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=77089 RNZ Pacific

Former prime ministers, an opposition leader, and an ex-central bank governor have added their voices to a growing chorus of concerns about the Fiji government’s “close association” with a Korean doomsday Christian cult that has reportedly benefited from millions of dollars from a state-backed institution.

Award-winning investigative journalism organisations, the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and the Korean Centre for Investigative Journalists (KCIJ), published a major exposé this week, that zeros in on the rapid expansion of the controversial Grace Road Church business empire through Prime Minister Voreqe  Bainimarama’s FijiFirst government’s help.

The two groups have revealed that Grace Road, whose leader Ok-joo Shin is in a Korean prison for “assault, child abuse, and imprisoning church members” and whose top executives remain under international police warrants, has received at least FJ$8.5 million (NZ$6.1m) in loans from the Fiji Development Bank (FDB) since 2015.

The FDB is a government-backed institution established to develop the country’s economy by providing finance to local small and medium agricultural enterprises. But Grace Road, which established as a foreign investor in 2014, started getting FDB loans just a year after it began operations.

According to the OCCRP-KCIJ, that money has helped the sect propel itself into a major entity in the Fijian economy, spreading its footprint throughout the main island of Viti Levu, with plans to develop further.

“The sect now operates the country’s largest chain of restaurants, controls roughly 400 hectares of farmland, owns eight supermarkets and mini marts, and runs five Mobil petrol stations. Its businesses also provide services such as dentistry, events catering, heavy construction, and Korean beauty treatments,” the two investigative groups report.

This map shows Grace Road's expansion
This graphic shows Grace Road’s expansion. Image: OCCRP-KCIJ

‘Red carpet treatment’
The investigations also uncovered Fijian police’s failure to investigate and charge the top leaders of the sect who were arrested four years ago on allegations of human rights abuses of its followers, but were released soon after when “a local court temporarily blocked their deportation”.

“The South Korean police said that the Fijian police had released the Grace Road members after a high-level meeting that included Fiji’s late immigration chief, the prime minister’s personal private secretary, the solicitor-general, and the country’s top prosecutor,” according to OCCRP-KJIC.

OCCRP’s Pacific editor, Aubrey Belford, told RNZ Pacific the core issue with Grace Road in Fiji was the perception it had been given the red carpet treatment by the government.

“They showed up in the country less than 10 years ago and in that time they have managed to build what is now one of the biggest business empires in the country,” Belford said.

“We counted 54 business establishments currently running in the country — 55 If you count the huge farm they have in Navua. They’re really everywhere.”

He said the OCCRP was able to uncover “that no one knew” that FDB provided Grace Road millions of dollars in loans to finance its business aspirations.

Belford said the police investigation into the alleged abuses of its members in Fiji had been ongoing for several years but had “gone nowhere” despite Fijian police officers travelling to Seoul to collect victim statements from key witnesses.

Former church member Yoon-jae Lee with two Fijian police officers
Former church member Yoon-jae Lee with two Fiji police officers. Image: Yoon-jae Lee/RNZ

Former church member Yoon-jae Lee with two Fiji police officers. Image: Yoon-jae Lee

Government dismisses claims
“There is no conspiracy or cover-up here,” Fiji’s Director of Public Prosecution Christopher Pryde told OCCRP-KCIJ.

OCCRP-KCIJ said the South Korean Embassy in Suva declined to be interviewed, citing “the sensitive issues of the matter on Grace Road Church and ongoing Korean-Fijian law enforcement cooperation”.

Fijian authorities have remained quiet about the claims made in the report, but Attorney-General and Economy Minister Aiyaz Sayed-Kahiyum deflected media questions on Tuesday, telling reporters the investigations were “done by some organisation who we have never heard about”.

RNZ Pacific has contacted Grace Road for comment.

But with an election looming, Fijian political leaders are calling for Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum to “come clean” about their dealings with the Korean group.

Former prime ministers Sitiveni Rabuka and Mahendra Chaudhry, who lead the People’s Alliance and the Labour Party respectively; the leader of the major opposition SODELPA, Viliame Gavoka; as well as former Reserve Bank of Fiji Governor Savenaca Narube are all calling for an official inquiry.

Rabuka has labelled the close links between the government and Grace Road a “disgrace”.

“It is a disgrace that this foreign sect whose founder is serving jail time in Korea for abusing its adherents has been given the red carpet treatment by the FijiFirst government,” Rabuka said.

“What equity did they bring as part of the deals to justify the $8.5m lending?” he asked, adding: “It seems that this government will willingly leave Fijians behind for the sake of assisting their own rich foreign friends.”

Cover graphic for the Grace Road cult investigation
Cover graphic for the Grace Road cult investigation by the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and the Korean Centre for Investigative Journalists (KCIJ). Image: OCCRP-KCIJ

Rabuka said his People’s Alliance would launch an investigation into the operations of Grace Road Church if the alliance formed a government after the 2022 election.

Chaudhry said he hoped the findings uncovered by OCCRP would “bring out the truth”.

“Many here have questioned whether the Fiji police investigations into the complaints against the group have been hamstrung by political interference,” Chaudhry said.

“It is believed that a number of powerful people may have personally benefited from the activities of the Grace Road group in return for favours extended to it.”

Chaudhry said the Fiji police investigation was “just a joke”.

“We have raised this issue many times before but without results, because the group appears to have the backing of the government top brass who have not hesitated to defend them even in Parliament,” the Labour leader added.

‘Gravely concerned’
SODELPA’s Gavoka said he was “gravely concerned with revelations” of the investigations.

“There have been unspoken concerns among our people with respect to the fast-growing expansion of the Grace Road business in Fiji, while many are aware of past reports alleging gross abuse of human rights and workers’ rights,” he said.

“SODELPA demands the FijiFirst Government and local authorities act and come clean; and put all these to an end.”

Gavoka is calling on Bainimarama’s government to “declare its interest on Grace Road”.

“We cannot allow such incidences on allegations of criminal conduct on gross violations of human and workers’ rights on our land.”

Former Reserve Bank of Fiji governor and leader of the Unity Fiji party Narube said they had “watched with great concern” the friendly relations between the Bainimarama government and the sect.

“We have seen the rapid expansion of Grace Road into sectors that are reserved for the Fiji citizens and companies,” Narube said.

“We have been informed of the rapid processing of their business applications compared to others. We have seen many foreign workers in jobs that would be easily filled by locals. We are concerned about the allegations of physical and mental abuses within the sect.”

With a general election looming, Narube said a Unity Fiji government would apply the laws fairly and uniformly.

“A Unity Fiji government would therefore investigate the ties between the government and Grace Road to clear all the allegations and perceptions.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A Grace Road-owned supermarket in the town of Navua
A Grace Road-owned supermarket in the town of Navua. Image: OCCRP


This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/29/senior-figures-question-fiji-governments-close-links-with-doomsday-cult/feed/ 0 319299 International Accountability: Myanmar, the ICJ and the Genocide Question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/26/international-accountability-myanmar-the-icj-and-the-genocide-question-2/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/26/international-accountability-myanmar-the-icj-and-the-genocide-question-2/#respond Tue, 26 Jul 2022 05:58:52 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=250373 The indomitable spirit of Raphael Lemkin, bibliophile, assiduous documenter of humanity’s dark deeds and inexecrable conduct, is bound to be an unsettled one.  This brilliant, committed and peculiarly dedicated creature took years to come up with what would, in time, become a word so horrifying as to transfix judges of international law.  The amalgam word More

The post International Accountability: Myanmar, the ICJ and the Genocide Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/26/international-accountability-myanmar-the-icj-and-the-genocide-question-2/feed/ 0 318172 International Accountability: Myanmar, the ICJ and the Genocide Question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/25/international-accountability-myanmar-the-icj-and-the-genocide-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/25/international-accountability-myanmar-the-icj-and-the-genocide-question/#respond Mon, 25 Jul 2022 09:43:51 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=131807 The indomitable spirit of Raphael Lemkin, bibliophile, assiduous documenter of humanity’s dark deeds and inexecrable conduct, is bound to be an unsettled one.  This brilliant, committed and peculiarly dedicated creature took years to come up with what would, in time, become a word so horrifying as to transfix judges of international law.  The amalgam word […]

The post International Accountability: Myanmar, the ICJ and the Genocide Question first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]> The indomitable spirit of Raphael Lemkin, bibliophile, assiduous documenter of humanity’s dark deeds and inexecrable conduct, is bound to be an unsettled one.  This brilliant, committed and peculiarly dedicated creature took years to come up with what would, in time, become a word so horrifying as to transfix judges of international law.  The amalgam word of genocide stalks the conscience of state leaders, commanders and politicians, an insidious reminder of the inner prejudice that becomes a murderous plan, a design, a means of ridding one of enemies and counterparts.

Given the nature of international institutions, often weak and onerously bureaucratic, there are other aspects to the system of holding the genocidaire-types to account: inadvertent immunity for the perpetrators; the obstructions and impediments of governments; and the reluctance of even using the term to describe abuses.

The military regime in Myanmar will have been hoping for all three aspects to aid their case.  But in the International Court of Justice, such expectations may have to be revised.  For one thing, the Myanmar junta would have been taken aback by The Gambia’s proceedings against their country alleging genocide.  But in November 2019, this West African country, with the support of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) filed a case alleging that Myanmar’s military had been responsible for genocidal acts resulting in “killing, causing serious bodily and mental harm, inflicting conditions that are calculated to bring about physical destruction, imposing measures to prevent births, and forcible transfers … intended to destroy the Rohingya group in whole or in part.”

The UN Genocide Convention (UNGC) permits the ICJ, Under Article 9, to hear “[d]isputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the [UNGC], including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or any of the acts enumerated in Article III”.

The Gambia’s case involved a request for provisional protective measures for members of the Rohingya remaining in Myanmar.   (In 2019, that number was put by the International Independent Fact-Finding Mission in Myanmar at 600,000.)  These measures required the military regime to prevent all genocidal acts against Rohingya, ensure that the security forces not commit acts of genocide, and take steps to preserve evidence related to the case.

In January 2020, the ICJ voiced agreement with the request.  The Hague-based body further gave Myanmar a timeline of four months to report on the country’s implementation of the order, followed by six-month deadlines to monitor performance.

Myanmar responded with a number of objections, all rejected by the judges by a vote of 15 to 1 on July 22.  These included the claim that the Court lacked jurisdiction, or, alternatively, that the genuine applicant in the proceedings was the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.  Judge Xue Hanqin was the only judge to accept the latter argument: that “The Gambia was tasked and appointed by the OIC to institute proceedings against Myanmar in the Court.”

According to the bench, “the applicant in this case is The Gambia”; the case involved an existing “dispute relating to the interpretation, application and fulfillment of the Genocide Convention” when the filing was made and “The Gambia, as state party to the Genocide Convention, has standing to involve the responsibility of Myanmar for the alleged breaches of its obligations under Articles 1, III, IV, and IV of the Convention.”

In an illuminating, if logical development in the case, the judgment favoured a salient reading of the Genocide Convention, one binding all State signatories in a solemn act of deterring, preventing and punishing a crime considered ius cogens in international law and the community in general.  The judgment quoted the reasoning of the Court’s 1951 Advisory Opinion regarding reservations to the Genocide Convention: “In such a convention the contracting States do not have any interests of their own; they merely have, one and all, a common interest, namely, the accomplishment of those high purposes which are the raison d’être of the convention.”

It therefore followed that, “All the States parties to the Genocide Convention thus have a common interest to ensure the prevention, suppression and punishment of genocide, by committing themselves to fulfilling the obligations contained in the Convention.”

Human Rights Watch, alongside other human rights organisations such as Fortify Rights, have also argued that other countries throw in their weight in supporting Gambia’s efforts.  The ICJ Statute also notes that that court’s order for provision measures is relayed to the UN Security Council, where further pressure might be brought to bear.

While many an action goes to the Security Council to wither, the use of the ICJ in assessing state responsibility for grave human rights violations can only be cheered by advocates of that often nebulous idea known as the rule of law.  The effectiveness of such processes must be seen alongside the work of prosecutors from the International Criminal Court, which has jurisdiction to try individuals.

Individual lawsuits are also being filed against the regime, building on the principle of universal jurisdiction.  The Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK), for instance, convinced the Argentinian judiciary in November 2021 to open a case against the Myanmar military, with specific reference to various senior figures of the junta, including Min Aung Hlaing.  The Second Chamber of the Appeal Court reaffirmed that “the gravity of the facts and the violation of ius cogens norms permit that those facts are investigated in our country”.

Sadly, the ICJ proceeding is bound to take years of cautious and lengthy deliberations, by which time the military sadists may well have achieved their venal goal of ridding the country of the Rohingya.  In the words of a protest banner being sported outside the Peace Palace in The Hague, “The genocide survivors can’t wait for generations.”

The post International Accountability: Myanmar, the ICJ and the Genocide Question first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Binoy Kampmark.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/07/25/international-accountability-myanmar-the-icj-and-the-genocide-question/feed/ 0 317941 Tajikistan authorities detain, question relatives of exiled journalist Anora Sarkorova https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/29/tajikistan-authorities-detain-question-relatives-of-exiled-journalist-anora-sarkorova/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/29/tajikistan-authorities-detain-question-relatives-of-exiled-journalist-anora-sarkorova/#respond Wed, 29 Jun 2022 20:05:42 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=204718 Stockholm, June 29, 2022 – Tajikistan authorities must stop harassing relatives of exiled independent journalist Anora Sarkorova, and should allow members of the press to cover sensitive issues freely, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Wednesday.

On the morning of Monday, June 27, officers from the Tajik Interior Ministry’s Department for Combatting Organized Crime detained Sarkorova’s mother and brother at their home in the capital, Dushanbe, according to news reports and Sarkorova, who spoke to CPJ via messaging app and wrote about the incident on Facebook.

Officers brought the journalist’s relatives to the department’s headquarters, where they questioned them about Sarkorova’s sources for her reporting and also asked Sarkorova’s mother to tell the journalist that they knew about her two children, which Sarkorova told CPJ she believed was a veiled threat.

The officers released her relatives without charge after about four hours, according to Sarkorova and those reports. Several days earlier, authorities in the eastern Badakhshan region also questioned Sarkorova’s uncle, aunt, and cousin about her work, she said.

Sarkorova has recently covered security forces’ suppression of protests in the country’s ethnically and culturally distinct Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region, and is among a small number of journalists covering alleged human rights abuses in that region, according to the journalist and reports. Last month, Tajik authorities threatened to shutter the independent outlet Asia Plus over its coverage of protests in Gorno-Badakhshan, as CPJ documented at the time.

“Tajik authorities’ harassment of exiled journalist Anora Sarkorova’s relatives and attempts to pressure them into revealing her sources are another worrying step in their campaign to stifle independent coverage of events in Gorno-Badakhshan,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, in New York. “Instead of threatening journalists and outlets who dare to cover the region, authorities should allow members of the press to freely investigate alleged rights violations.”

Since the outbreak of unrest in Gorno-Badakhshan in November 2021, Sarkorova has covered authorities’ alleged abuses through information sent to her by local sources in the region, where her family is originally from, she told CPJ.

Sarkorova worked as a correspondent for the BBC’s Russian service until 2018, when Tajik authorities withdrew her accreditation due to her critical reporting and enforced an unofficial ban on her working as a journalist, she told CPJ. She left the country in 2021 and since then has published reporting on her Facebook page and Telegram channel, each of which have about 2,500 followers.

Her work includes a list of local residents in Gorno-Badakhshan’s Rushan district allegedly killed by security forces, as well as reports on individual victims, which have been cited by foreign media outlets.

Sarkorova told CPJ that police and State Committee for National Security officers questioned her uncle, aunt, and cousin at their homes twice last week, asking them about who she was in contact with and where she gets her information.

She said the officers took the names, addresses, and photos of her uncle and aunt’s sons and threatened to arrest them or create “problems” for them if Sarkorova did not stop her reporting.

During her coverage of events in Badakhshan, Sarkorova has regularly been subjected to threats, trolling, and attempts to discredit her, she told CPJ. She said that social media accounts that she believed were tied to government authorities recently stated that a criminal case has been opened against her for her work.

CPJ emailed Interior Ministry of Tajikistan for comment, but did not receive any reply. Authorities in Gorno-Badakhshan have previously denied running one social media account rumored to be tied to the government.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/29/tajikistan-authorities-detain-question-relatives-of-exiled-journalist-anora-sarkorova/feed/ 0 311164 Guinean police detain, question journalist Mamadou Sagnane https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/28/guinean-police-detain-question-journalist-mamadou-sagnane/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/28/guinean-police-detain-question-journalist-mamadou-sagnane/#respond Tue, 28 Jun 2022 17:13:23 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=204301 Dakar, June 28, 2022 — Guinean authorities should drop any ongoing investigation into journalist Mamadou Sagnane and ensure that the press can work freely, the Committee to Protect Journalists said Tuesday.

On June 15, police in the north-central town of Dinguiraye summoned Sagnane, a reporter with the community broadcaster Dinguiraye Rural Radio, according to the journalist, who spoke to CPJ by phone, and a statement by the local journalist association Presse Solidaire.

Police held Sagnane at the Dinguiraye Court of First Instance, seized his phone, and refused to let him contact anyone while they questioned him about a broadcast he aired on June 8, according to those sources. After about six hours, authorities released Sagnane and told him to go home, saying they would contact him “as soon as they needed me,” the journalist said.

“Guinean journalist Mamadou Sagnane should not have been detained over his work, and authorities must ensure he does not face legal repercussions for doing his job,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa program coordinator, in Johannesburg, South Africa. “Journalists in Guinea should be able to distribute news of public interest without fear.”

In that June 8 broadcast, Sagnane told CPJ that he read a press release calling for a rally over the recent killing of a young man at a gendarmerie roadblock. When police asked Sagnane why he read that press release, he said that a local association had sent it to the director of Dinguiraye Rural Radio, who saw that it contained no calls for violence and then asked him to read it on-air.

He said he referred the officers to the station’s director for further questions.

The rally mentioned in the press release did not take place as scheduled on June 9, but protesters angered over the killing attacked a local gendarmerie office and police station, according to Sagnane and news reports. Sagnane said that the police alleged that those attacks were linked to his airing of the press release, even though it did not call for such actions.

Dinguiraye government representative Karamoko Oumar Boké Camara told CPJ via messaging app that he said he could comment on the case because he did not have permission from his superiors. CPJ called the Guinean judicial police and contacted them via messaging app for comment, but did not receive any replies.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Erik Crouch.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/28/guinean-police-detain-question-journalist-mamadou-sagnane/feed/ 0 310756 Vietnamese citizens question legality of COVID letter of accountability https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/vietnamese-citizens-question-legality-of-covid-letter-of-accountability-06282022003346.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/vietnamese-citizens-question-legality-of-covid-letter-of-accountability-06282022003346.html#respond Tue, 28 Jun 2022 04:40:00 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/vietnamese-citizens-question-legality-of-covid-letter-of-accountability-06282022003346.html A Vietnamese government ruling that people who refuse a COVID vaccine booster need to write a letter of accountability has received either a negative response or ‘no comment’ from people contacted by RFA.

The Ministry of Health issued the regulation, which states that people who do not want a fourth shot need to agree to take responsibility if they later get infected and spread the virus. Many people who spoke to RFA said the ruling had no legal basis.

A representative of Ho Chi Minh City’s Center for Disease Control explained to the Thanh Nien newspaper that the request is in line with the Ministry of Health’s assessment of the risks but, so far, the ministry has not explained how people should take responsibility.

Radio Free Asia asked Facebook users and human rights activists for their views. Of the 18 people interviewed, seven objected to the request while the remainder declined to comment.

Hanoi-based law graduate Bui Quang Thang said there were no legal grounds to insist on another booster shot:

“Clause 1, Article 29 of the Law on Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases stipulates: Persons at risk of contracting an infectious disease in an epidemic area and traveling to an epidemic area must be vaccinated and take medicines for diseases to which vaccines and medical biological products are available for their prevention.”

“Point A, Clause 2, Article 30 of the law above stipulates: The Minister of Health is responsible for promulgating the list of infectious diseases subject to compulsory vaccination and use of medical biological products specified in Clause 1, Article 29 of this law.”

“The list of infectious diseases … does not include COVID-19. Therefore, COVID-19 is not an infectious disease that requires vaccination.”

Blogger Nguyen Quang Vinh said the decision to refuse a vaccination is up to the individual.

“It is not possible to force people to sign a pledge so this government can wash its hands when people have the misfortune to be infected with COVID,” he said, adding that he had received two shots of COVID vaccine but had no intention of getting another because he believed he would not be infected.

Social activist Phuong Ngo said the Vietnamese Constitution stipulates the right to inviolability of one’s body, especially in the situation that the whole country has natural herd immunity. Therefore, she believed the ministry’s request was not reasonable.

According to statistics website Our World in Data, as of June 25 Vietnam had administered 230 million doses of Coronavirus vaccine, of which more than 80 million people had received two shots, accounting for nearly 83% of the country's population.

Facebook user Do The Dang, a member of the Hanoi No-U football team, said:

“This is a very subtle abdication of responsibility because people have rights and making the pledge is a waiver of the government's responsibility. As for me, I refuse to sign.”

The Lao Dong newspaper ran an article on Monday headlined "Signing a commitment if you don't get the third and fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccine: Needs specific regulations." It carried comments from people in Thu Duc city, who agreed with the health ministry’s request. However, it said there should be "specific instructions on the issue of how to proceed, presented in a way that people can understand."

According to Monday’s edition of the Tuoi Tre online newspaper, many people who disagreed with the fourth injection had agreed to sign the commitment.

The newspaper also quoted a ward leader in Ho Chi Minh City as saying: "signing the pledge can only be done by a few people and not everyone agrees to sign," and if people don't want to get the fourth shot and don't sign the commitment medical staff have no choice but to treat them.

The official also said most people supported the first two injections and one booster shot, but only a few people supported the fourth shot.

Phan Trong Lan, Director of the Department of Preventive Medicine at the Ministry of Health confirmed to the press on Monday that the government considered the booster to be necessary due to the unpredictability of the SARS-COV-2 virus and possible mutations.

Another official said that, while there are about 15 million shots of COVID vaccine in the country’s stockpile with expiry dates from July to October this year, the push for people to get the booster is not due to a surplus.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By RFA Vietnamese.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/vietnam/vietnamese-citizens-question-legality-of-covid-letter-of-accountability-06282022003346.html/feed/ 0 310533 The Peace Question and Imperialism https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/08/the-peace-question-and-imperialism/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/08/the-peace-question-and-imperialism/#respond Wed, 08 Jun 2022 14:55:17 +0000 https://dissidentvoice.org/?p=130329 The war in Ukraine is a propaganda war, with all of the belligerents, sponsors, and their allies churning out — through an abjectly subservient media — masses of lies and disinformation. In this regard, they resemble other wars, but with an added dose of shamelessness. For that reason, it is difficult to discern how the […]

The post The Peace Question and Imperialism first appeared on Dissident Voice.]]> The war in Ukraine is a propaganda war, with all of the belligerents, sponsors, and their allies churning out — through an abjectly subservient media — masses of lies and disinformation. In this regard, they resemble other wars, but with an added dose of shamelessness.

For that reason, it is difficult to discern how the war is being conducted or who has the military advantage at any time. Like all modern wars, atrocity stories abound and losses are wildly exaggerated.

But what separates this war from wars in the recent and not-so-recent past is the near-absence of an organized anti-war movement. It is more than a curious oddity that there are few actions in the streets or campaigns of influence or resistance to stop the mayhem of this brutal war. Sure, there are generic appeals to cut military budgets or oppose war philosophically, but little action to stop this particular war. In spite of the so-called “fog” of war, everyone knows that soldiers and civilians alike are dying in significant numbers, that bodies are ripped apart, homes destroyed, and people dislodged from their homes. No amount of “fog” can hide this.

Of course, there are a few prominent voices — Pope Francis, even Henry Kissinger — who have called for a cessation of fighting and negotiations. And Communists and trade unionists in Italy, Greece, and Turkey have blocked NATO weapons shipments, staged demonstrations, and picketed embassies.

But in most cities, states, and countries, there are few actions directed against the war in Ukraine. And most surprisingly, the leftists in Europe and the Americas, usually leading the way against war, are largely silent. They haven’t even minimally demanded that their own countries stay out of this war.

Instead, they have tacitly or openly sided with one belligerent or another. I have written and spoken on different occasions against taking sides in the conflict. Moreover, I have sought to place the war in the context of classical imperialism and suggested that the left’s support of either belligerent or its sponsors is misplaced, akin to the collapse of left opposition at the beginning of World War I. In that case, the left succumbed to narrow nationalist appeals. In this case, the left is succumbing to a muddled concept of imperialism and anti-imperialism.

Rather than repeat the argument, it might be useful to look at how and why leftists justify their support for one side or the other and refrain from adding their voice to the cause of peace in Ukraine.

It is easy to dismiss those who uncritically support Ukraine. Apart from the rabid nationalists of the “Glory to Ukraine” crowd, who welcome the conflict and hope to draw the Western capitalist countries into a crusade against Russia, there are those who simplistically see the war as a naked aggression with no back story. From ignorance of the post-Soviet Ukrainian history of corruption, reaction, Western meddling and aggression, or from willful collaboration with US and NATO intrigue, these new Cold Warriors seek a Russian defeat and have no interest in an immediate peaceful settlement or concern about the mayhem.

Against them are the more measured comrades who, remembering the Cold War standoff between the US and its allies and the Soviet Union and its allies, conflate today’s Russia with the Soviet Union. They recognize how the Soviet Union constituted a pole of resistance that countered and sometimes reversed the Cold War imperialist alliance’s designs on the world. US imperialism, the dominant imperialist power at the time, was effectively checked by the Soviet Union from 1945 until the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991. These anti-imperialists see Russia, in its war on Ukraine, as a similar emerging pole against US imperialism and see Russia’s invasion as an expression of a break-up of the absolute military and economic US dominance of the world established after the departure of the Soviet Union. For them, a multipolar world is in birth.

There are shards of truth in this view, but Russia is not the Soviet Union. It does not share its ideology; rather, its motives replace Soviet internationalism with an aspiring great power nationalism. While it exploits cracks in US global hegemony, it does not offer an alternative vision or unconditional assistance to the victims of capitalism and imperialism. In that regard, Russia is no Cuba, either.

Russia’s foreign policy is capitalist opportunism: friends with Turkey or Israel one moment, in conflict the next moment. Russia aligns with Saudi Arabia when it’s economically profitable, while fighting Saudi proxies in Syria. There are no consistent principles guiding it. Nor can there be for a country that rejected socialism for capitalism. Those who see Russian foreign policy and alliances as progressive are very selective in their examples.

Russia’s leaders readily embrace the capitalist ethos and reject the Soviet project, though they appeal, when needed, to Soviet symbols and traditions when useful.

It may be true that the Russian invasion ultimately will achieve the goals sought by its ruling class. And it may be true that these gains will come at the expense of US imperialism and its ruling class, but how does that move us any closer to a world of peace and social justice? The rivalries remain, the goals of the respective ruling classes remain uncertain and unstable, despite their claims of peace-loving and democracy-seeking; and the danger of conflict remains high or even higher.

There are others who envision the war — insofar as Russia is challenging US power — as a blow for those on the bottom of what we might envision as the imperialist “pyramid” — the developing countries. Jenny Clegg, for example, writing in the Morning Star, sees the development of “competitors” to US dominance as establishing the first steps toward a multipolar world. She correctly notes that multipolarity “is not a policy but an emerging objective trend…”

Further, she sees unequal exchange between the highly developed countries and the developing countries as the principal contradiction — the contradiction defining imperialism and anti-imperialism.

While this center-periphery distinction was popular and influential among independent Western “Marxists” in the era when the working classes in the center — the West — were generally tamed by social democratic opportunism, it was neither particularly insightful nor of continued relevance. Marx went to great lengths to show that exchange, under capitalist relations of production, was not generally unequal — values exchange for values. But those same relations of production always produce and reproduce inequality. The locus of inequality — capitalist exploitation — is embedded in the capitalist system, not in the thievery of unequal exchange.

As Lenin elaborated, uneven development is a feature of relations between people, social institutions, firms in the same industry, between industries, and between countries, and even continents. It is not unequal exchange that accounts for the uneven development, but differences in the pace of development, cultural and social practices, political and other institutions, and most importantly, especially in the epoch of imperialism, the stunting effects of colonialism, neo-colonialism, and their legacy.

In the last half-century, technological developments have freed capitalists to move, access, and service the material productive forces — factories, transportation networks, resources — in order to gain access to formerly inaccessible labor markets, cheapening labor in general. At the same time, this development created rising living standards in some developing countries, while lowering them in some advanced capitalist countries.

Consequently, some capitalist countries — like India, Turkey, Brazil, Indonesia — have become powerful rivals to the late-twentieth-century great powers.

The concept of “unequal” exchange as an explanation for the inequality between developed and developing countries (and for the difference between imperialism and anti-imperialism) fails because it implies that should exchanges become equal, that same inequality between states would evaporate. Even more importantly, it suggests that equal exchange — and not an end of capitalism — would signal the demise of imperialism.

To understand imperialism as a conflict between advancing and lagging development based upon the unequal terms of economic activity — a kind of organized thievery — is to misunderstand the nature of exploitation under capitalism. Intense competition between players — big and small — for markets, resources, labor, and capital are the essence of capitalism and imperialism. There is no sharp line between this competition and war.

Clegg wants us to believe that in a multipolar world, with US power diminished, establishing equal exchange will bring forth a period of civil, well-behaved, respectful competition. She insists that this contrast with today’s dangerous world is captured by the distinction between competition and rivalry, a distinction that I think few will find satisfying. In an aside, she explains: “competition is not the same as rivalry — think competing in a race as opposed to deliberately tripping over your rival in that race.” To think that sporting competition doesn’t evolve commonly into no-holds-barred conflict and into violence is surely out of touch with the history of both sports and international politics in the twentieth century.

From the reliance on the now intellectually fashionable and prominent rational choice or game theory to the behavior of capitalist enterprises, from the constant haggling over borders, sea lanes and territorial waters to establishment of military and economic alliances, there is little evidence that capitalist countries are striving for a fair economic playing field with fixed, transparent, and respected rules. “Win-win” is not part of the capitalist vocabulary.

Clegg writes of “the old — US hegemonic power” as having “been in relative decline” and the “new — a more equal distribution of wealth and power” as developing, albeit slowly. While one might happily concede that aspects of US power and influence have been challenged and dampened, while one might add that the US shows many signs of economic, political, and social decline, it does not follow, nor is it likely, that any “new distribution of wealth and power” will be more equitable or just. And most importantly, even if wealth and power were more equitably distributed between countries, there is little reason to believe it would be more equitably distributed within those countries. Clegg’s multipolarity can make no such promises to the working classes.

Finally, there are those on the left who have carried on a lifelong struggle against US imperialism and can only see an enemy of our enemy as our friend. There are few people on the righteous left now alive who can remember a time when the US was not the leading great power and the anchor for the capitalist alliance against socialism, socialism as a legitimate political current, as a rival to global capitalism, and as a pole rallying the forces of anti-imperialism.

Therefore, it is hard to envision the world not benefitting from the defanging of US imperialism, from its fall as a great power. No great power in our time has caused more deadly mischief. But that surely displays a weak understanding of capitalism and its stages of development.

There were nationalist leaders in various countries under the boot of British imperialism in the interwar period who welcomed the rise of Hitler and Tojo, greeting them as possible saviors from hundreds of years of suppression by the British Empire, the leading imperialist of the time.

Subhas Chandra Bose, for example, an Indian nationalist leader who was once president of the Indian National Congress, was so deeply committed to overthrowing British rule in India that he actively and unapologetically collaborated with the Nazis and Japanese in World War II. This myopia is an extreme version of the blinders worn by many anti-imperialists who fail to understand the logic of imperialism and its unbreakable link to capitalism.

Chandra Bose demonstrates the hollowness of narrow nationalism and obsessive self-regard over viewing the world through the lens of class and class solidarity.

The struggle against US imperialism, like the struggle against its predecessor, the British Empire, will ultimately be resolved at home when the people finally refuse to continue paying the price for their rulers’ grand designs. Of course, those oppressed by imperialism play an equally important role, that of resisters; though imperialism like rust, never sleeps. It is an imperative, a demand made by capitalist accumulation — if it is defeated in one place, it will surely find another place to satisfy its lust. This dynamic only finally ends when our world finds socialism. The wishful thinking of a benign capitalism with all participants peacefully on an even playing field is just that — a wishful thought.

Multipolarity — a notion first discussed by bourgeois academics looking for tools to understand the dynamics of global relations — has been adopted by a segment of the anti-imperialist left. While it assuredly describes an actual trend emerging, as Jenny Clegg acknowledges, it has often been presented as an anti-imperialist stage shifting the world balance of forces in the direction of a better world.

I have argued that this is a retreat from classical imperialism as understood by VI Lenin and his followers. In the context of an unstable world in ideological disorder and suffering untold crises, there are no guarantees that the poles that emerge or challenge the post-Cold War super-pole are a step forward or a step back simply because they are alternative poles. Undoubtedly, any resistance that weakens the asymmetry of power that the US holds should be welcome. But we should not presume that every opponent will become a force for stability, justice, and peace. Knowing what we know about the history of capitalism from its first expansionist era accumulating involuntary human capital to exploit the riches of the new world should chasten our expectations about new rivals to US imperialism.

With the fall of the Soviet Union as a backdrop and the uncertainty left in its wake, we should be cautious about anointing any new candidates for the role of arch-rival not only to US imperialism, but to all imperialism as well as its genesis, capitalism.

While the left futilely disputes the victim and the victimizer, working people are dying unnecessarily, suffering horrific wounds, homelessness, and despair — all the products of modern war. Working class lives should not be proxies in ideological debates. Events will decide who has the correct understanding of imperialism, but history will not be kind to those who failed, in the meantime, to oppose the war and to seek a peaceful solution.

The post The Peace Question and Imperialism first appeared on Dissident Voice.


This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Greg Godels.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/06/08/the-peace-question-and-imperialism/feed/ 0 305126 The ugly produce industry faces an ugly question. Now it’s trying to solve it. https://grist.org/food/ugly-produce-industry-faces-an-ugly-question-full-harvest-verified-resuced/ https://grist.org/food/ugly-produce-industry-faces-an-ugly-question-full-harvest-verified-resuced/#respond Tue, 31 May 2022 10:45:00 +0000 https://grist.org/?p=571652 A batch of companies has been trying to take the mountains of “ugly” fruits and vegetables passed over by supermarkets and find new homes for all that produce. They aim to turn a profit while also curbing the massive problem of food waste.

But they have run into a thorny problem. How do you know whether the oranges and lettuce a company says it “saves” would have been wasted otherwise? It’s a question with implications for the climate, since decomposing food, which releases methane, is responsible for about 10 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Knowing how much waste is actually being averted is key to calculating these companies’ effects on the environment.

At first, “everyone just simplified it and said, ‘Oh, if it’s surplus or imperfect, it’s reducing food waste. And it’s just not,’” said Christine Moseley, the founder and CEO of Full Harvest, a company that connects farms to businesses that can use their ugly and imperfect produce. Moseley explained that there were already markets for off-grade produce — turning inferior-looking apples into applesauce, for example — meaning there was always a chance the apples you thought you rescued might have been sold to someone else. “There was no standard, and not a lot of data.” 

Sensing an appetite for clarity, Full Harvest recently developed the world’s first “verified rescued produce” certification label. The trademarked seal now appears on Danone’s Greek yogurt and Mondelez’s air-dried vegetable crisps, assuring buyers that the lemons and zucchini inside the package have been saved from the scrap heap. 

Certification reflects a step forward in the field, a sign that companies are getting serious about calculating their impact and that people are hungry to buy more sustainable products. But it’s a field potentially littered with landmines. Some experts have criticized Full Harvest for the lack of transparency around its proprietary certification process. And the tricky problem of verifying whether produce was truly “rescued” will sound familiar to those working on projects to offset carbon dioxide on farms and forests, which have been struggling with similar verification issues — with consequences for the ever-heating planet.

The farm-to-table carbon math

Moseley wants to stop the food waste that happens at farms — the unsold spinach, the outer leaves of romaine that get thrown out in favor of the perfect-looking hearts. Farmers often have to pay to get rid of this waste by sending it off to a landfill. Sometimes they turn it into compost or cattle feed or donate it to food banks. “It’s a very inefficient supply chain, and that’s why so much gets wasted,” Moseley said.

There’s some debate around how much food waste comes from farms, with recent research suggesting it might be larger than previously estimated. Somewhere between 20 and 50 percent of the total food that goes uneaten is lost on farms. The rest is lost in manufacturing, at restaurants, at the grocery store, and in people’s homes, where produce rots on countertops and in crisper drawers.

A hand points at rotting cucumbers lying in the dirt.
A farmer in Mount Dora, Florida, points at a field of rotting cucumbers that he was unable to harvest due to lack of demand during the pandemic, April 30, 2020. Joe Raedle / Getty Images

Dana Gunders, the executive director of the food waste nonprofit ReFED, said that from a greenhouse gas perspective, farms are a smaller piece of the problem because emissions build up after food leaves the farm, when it’s transported, refrigerated, and cooked. “Sometimes people say an early loss is a good loss,” she said. ReFED estimates that the burgeoning surplus produce industry could avert an annual 273,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, roughly the amount emitted by 59,000 cars a year.

Imperfect Foods, one of the companies that sells boxes of ugly produce, claims it has diverted more than 139 million pounds of food since 2015, avoiding more than 35,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. Imperfect’s competitor, Misfits Market, says it’s saved 225 million pounds of food from 2018 until last fall, nearly three-quarters of which otherwise have gone to waste. Neither company responded to Grist’s request for comment.

Any company trying to turn a profit off an inconsistent and sometimes spontaneous supply of uneaten food is going to run into challenges. “It’s not entirely fair to expect a business that is working to solve some of those problems to only sell rescues,” Gunders said. Even Full Harvest doesn’t claim all the surplus and imperfect produce it sold would have gone to waste — just its verified rescued ones.

What does it mean to ‘rescue’ produce?

There’s a gray area when it comes to defining what counts as waste, Gunders says. What if corn was previously going to animal feed, but now ends up on your plate instead? What if that carrot was going to get juiced, but now you’re using the whole product, fiber and all?

Imperfect Foods focuses on avoiding these kinds of “lesser outcomes” for its food products, like getting left in the field or being sent to a landfill. This thinking is backed up by the Environmental Protection Agency’s rankings for different strategies to manage food waste, which prioritizes the solutions that provide the most benefits to society. The best option is simply producing less food to begin with, followed by using the surplus to feed hungry people, feeding animals, industrial uses, and composting.

Full Harvest’s website doesn’t define exactly what it means by “waste” or offer details on how its third-party “verified rescued” program works. Moseley said the methods of the program were trade secrets that the company had spent six years developing. Broadly, she said, the proprietary process has two parts: First, working directly with growers to save produce that was previously going to waste, and second, extensive surveys, audits, and affidavits to confirm each order would have been wasted otherwise. “We work with some of the largest food companies in the world who have vetted our process and hold it at the highest level of integrity or else they would not work with us,” Moseley said.

Some experts would like to see more details. “Generally speaking, certifications are pretty transparent about their methods and their criteria,” Gunders said. Austin Whitman, the CEO of the certification company Climate Neutral, said he thought Full Harvest’s methods should be explained and open for scrutiny. “If someone can’t explain to you, soup to nuts, what the requirements are of certification, then it would feel like it’s maybe missing the point,” he said.

To Whitman, the messy question of verifying whether produce was truly rescued reminded him of what’s known as “additionality,” whether an intervention — such as a carbon offset project — has an effect compared to a baseline. For instance, what if a program that’s supposed to incentivize farmers to use better soil practices to store carbon only ends up paying farmers who were already doing it? Climate Neutral, which has certified about 300 companies, uses third parties to verify carbon offsets and make sure new interventions pass an additionality test. It also has an advisory committee that reevaluates its list of standards each year.

The explosion of eco-labels

Demand for environmentally friendly products is growing: A survey from earlier this year found 68 percent of people were willing to pay more for sustainable products. “The trends around sustainability are massive,” according to Moseley, who said companies could be left out in the coming years if they don’t sell sustainable products.

Surbhi Martin, a vice president at Danone North America, oversees the company’s “Good Save” line, which sells yogurts made with Meyer lemons, pumpkins, and mandarin oranges marked by Full Harvest’s verified rescued seal. Martin said that the Good Save yogurts have been “excellent performers,” with sales increasing 383 percent in the first quarter of this year compared to the same quarter last year. To date, she said, the company has helped rescue more than 500,000 pounds of fruit since its Good Save line started in 2021, “with the goal of inspiring a movement” that will encourage others to use verified rescued produce.

Danone is one of many companies that are turning their sustainability cred into a selling point. Consider Avocado, a mattress company that proudly lists its more than a dozen certifications verifying that its products are organic and vegan, that the wool and other textiles it uses are sustainable, and that the company is “carbon negative,” meaning that it takes more CO2 out of the atmosphere than it emits. Gunders says that people trust certifications more than just declarations, but that she’s starting to see “certification fatigue.”

Environmentally-friendly labels can be a double-edged sword. “There’s no kind of indisputable truth that all eco-labels work, because they don’t,” Whitman said. He founded Climate Neutral because he saw companies starting to claim they were carbon neutral while only analyzing a small, lower-emitting part of their operations, and he wanted to make sure there were a set of rules that were more meaningful. “We’ve certainly seen a lot of cases where industry capture has kind of weakened or watered down eco-labels to a point where they become more a reflection of current corporate practices as opposed to a standard that raises the bar for corporate practices,” he said.

As for the ugly produce industry, Gunders says that it provides a useful service, but shouldn’t be used as an excuse for grocery stores and restaurants to keep rejecting produce that’s perfectly fine to eat. “I just don’t think we’re going to entirely solve this problem with side channels,” she said. “If the produce is edible, why is it not just sold on the shelf?”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The ugly produce industry faces an ugly question. Now it’s trying to solve it. on May 31, 2022.


This content originally appeared on Grist and was authored by Kate Yoder.

]]> https://grist.org/food/ugly-produce-industry-faces-an-ugly-question-full-harvest-verified-resuced/feed/ 0 303071 We’re Asking the Wrong Question on Roe https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/24/were-asking-the-wrong-question-on-roe/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/24/were-asking-the-wrong-question-on-roe/#respond Tue, 24 May 2022 17:30:15 +0000 https://progressive.org/op-eds/wrong-question-on-roe-cotton-hill-220524/
This content originally appeared on The Progressive — A voice for peace, social justice, and the common good and was authored by Kendra Cotton.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/24/were-asking-the-wrong-question-on-roe/feed/ 0 301387 President Biden condemns “replacement theory” in Buffalo speech; Republican Mitch McConnell sidesteps the question; Oakland wants to be abortion sanctuary – May 17, 2022 https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/17/president-biden-condemns-replacement-theory-in-buffalo-speech-republican-mitch-mcconnell-sidesteps-the-question-oakland-wants-to-be-abortion-sanctuary-may-17-2022/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/17/president-biden-condemns-replacement-theory-in-buffalo-speech-republican-mitch-mcconnell-sidesteps-the-question-oakland-wants-to-be-abortion-sanctuary-may-17-2022/#respond Tue, 17 May 2022 18:00:00 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=d6fb1a803a40a4e209180bdbd42a7f76
This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/17/president-biden-condemns-replacement-theory-in-buffalo-speech-republican-mitch-mcconnell-sidesteps-the-question-oakland-wants-to-be-abortion-sanctuary-may-17-2022/feed/ 0 299609 The Enduring Land Question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/13/the-enduring-land-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/13/the-enduring-land-question/#respond Fri, 13 May 2022 08:48:35 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=242928 In 1881, Henry George, already famous for his most well-known work, Progress and Poverty, published The Irish Land Question. In the book, he argued that if all people have “the same equal right to life, it follows that they must all have the same equal right to the land.” For George, the liberal notions of More

The post The Enduring Land Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by David D’Amato.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/05/13/the-enduring-land-question/feed/ 0 298625 Hong Kong TV station apologizes for reporter’s question about medical complaints https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-media-03182022083215.html https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-media-03182022083215.html#respond Fri, 18 Mar 2022 12:47:08 +0000 https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-media-03182022083215.html Journalists in Hong Kong have hit out at criticism of a colleague in the pro-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) press after she asked a question about complaints procedures following a medical accident involving staff from mainland China.

The NowTV reporter asked the question about how the public can complain about medical malpractice by healthcare workers from mainland China at a news conference on March 16, prompting the pro-CCP Ta Kung Pao newspaper to denounce her as "spreading hatred," claiming "public outrage" at her question.

"The Hong Kong Journalists' Association (HKJA) deeply regrets this criticism of journalists who are just doing their job, and expresses concern about the phenomenon," the HKJA said in a statement on its website on Thursday.

It linked the incident to an increasingly harsh climate for press freedom after the CCP imposed a draconian national security law from July 1, 2020 banning public criticism of the government.

"In the post-national security era, the Hong Kong media is in crisis -- even when it comes to asking questions of officials," the organization said. "The HKJA would like to remind all sectors of the community not to ... speculate on journalists' motives or political stances without evidence."

It said the point of journalists' questions is to enable officials to better explain their policies to the public, and noted that the Hospital Authority had addressed the question not just once but twice i their replies.

"[Their] answers were clear and direct, affirming the value of the question," it said. "The ability of journalists to ask questions on issues of social concern without fear is an important basis upon which the media plays the role of the fourth estate."

It said the apology by NowTV had muddied the waters, and "regretted" that it had been issued.

NowTV's statement said the station was "deeply sorry" for any unhappiness caused by its reporter's question, which had also been asked by members of the city's Legislative Council on the same day.

"We are very grateful for the selfless support of the central government ... as the pandemic enters its fifth wave," it said. "We will continue to humbly accept monitoring and criticism from the public."

Ronson Chan, chairman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, standing outside his office in Hong Kong, Jan. 7, 2022. Credit: AFP
Ronson Chan, chairman of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, standing outside his office in Hong Kong, Jan. 7, 2022. Credit: AFP
The opposite of journalism

HKJA chairman Ronson Chan said NowTV's apology had complicated matters.

"Hong Kong has changed," he said. "It's not what it used to be."

"I can't speculate whether the TV station was put under huge pressure to make that statement ... or whether it genuine thought it was supporting medical assistance from mainland China, and really did believe its reporter behaved inappropriately."

"If the latter is true, that it's the opposite of what we think journalism should be," Chan said.

NowTV's apology came days after Hong Kong national security police threaten Hong Kong Watch, a London-based rights group, with prosecution for calling for sanctions against Chinese and Hong Kong officials, and tried to order it to take down its website.

The police said in a letter to Benedict Rogers that he should "immediately cease engaging in any acts and activities in contravention of the national security law or any other laws of Hong Kong."

The group has been highly critical of the CCP's rights record in Hong Kong, particularly following a city-wide crackdown on pro-democracy activists, opposition politicians and journalists under the national security law.

In January 2022, security chief Chris Tang said the law would clamp down on media outlets deemed to have played an "inflammatory" role, citing the now-shuttered pro-democracy Apple Daily newspaper, which is now subject to an investigation under the national security law, with several of its top journalists and founder Jimmy Lai awaiting trial for "collusion with a foreign power."

Tang said the paper's closure had made Hong Kong "more democratic," accusing it of fomenting a "color revolution" during the protest movement of 2019, which began as a mass popular protest against plans to allow extradition to mainland China, and broadened into demands for fully democratic elections and greater official accountability.

Tang and other officials have claimed that the protests meant that "targeted measures" are now needed to combat "fake news."

Translated and edited by Luisetta Mudie.


This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Lee Yuk Yue.

]]> https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/hongkong-media-03182022083215.html/feed/ 0 282999 Vladimir Putin and the Grand Question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/18/vladimir-putin-and-the-grand-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/18/vladimir-putin-and-the-grand-question/#respond Fri, 18 Mar 2022 08:45:58 +0000 https://www.counterpunch.org/?p=237265 For Russia, the grand question the last thirty years has been what happened between 1917 and 1989. Was Communist rule an anomaly or a continuation of Russian history? For Germany, the grand question has been what happened between 1933 and 1945. Was National Socialism an anomaly or a continuation of German history? Today, the grand More

The post Vladimir Putin and the Grand Question appeared first on CounterPunch.org.


This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Daniel Warner.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/18/vladimir-putin-and-the-grand-question/feed/ 0 282997 No, Uganda cop did not hit journalist with slingshot for asking ‘irrelevant’ question https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/14/no-uganda-cop-did-not-hit-journalist-with-slingshot-for-asking-irrelevant-question/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/14/no-uganda-cop-did-not-hit-journalist-with-slingshot-for-asking-irrelevant-question/#respond Mon, 14 Mar 2022 15:52:07 +0000 https://www.altnews.in/?p=113736 An image that shows a cop aiming a slingshot during a press conference is viral with the claim that a Uganda police spokesman hit a journalist for asking an “irrelevant”...

The post No, Uganda cop did not hit journalist with slingshot for asking ‘irrelevant’ question appeared first on Alt News.

]]> An image that shows a cop aiming a slingshot during a press conference is viral with the claim that a Uganda police spokesman hit a journalist for asking an “irrelevant” question.

The former Dutch ambassador to India, Fons Stoelinga, shared the image with the same claim. (Archived link)

Twitter user @_Sir_CharlesR shared this image and garnered over 25,000 likes and close to 7,000 retweets at the time of writing this article. (Archived link)

Several other users have also shared the image with the same claim.

This image is also massively viral on Facebook.

FACT CHECK

Through reverse-image search, Alt News found that this image is from a press conference held on April 12, 2021, by the Uganda police force where the official spokesperson for the Uganda police Fred Enanga was demonstrating the use of a catapult.

The press conference was about the Directorate of Crime Intelligence confiscating several factory-made catapults during its intelligence operations, that had been imported by “anti-social elements” as tools of violence. The catapults were capable of firing metallic projectiles or bearings and thus posed a serious danger to the safety and security of Ugandans. The police had urged citizens to be vigilant against such acts of violence.

One can find the official press release by the Uganda police here.

Prominent Ugandan news broadcaster UBC Television Uganda also covered this news.

Thus, an image of the official police spokesperson of Uganda, Fred Enanga, conducting a press conference regarding the use of catapults by “anti-social elements” was circulated with the false claim that he hit a journalist for asking an “irrelevant question”.

The post No, Uganda cop did not hit journalist with slingshot for asking ‘irrelevant’ question appeared first on Alt News.


This content originally appeared on Alt News and was authored by Shinjinee Majumder.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/14/no-uganda-cop-did-not-hit-journalist-with-slingshot-for-asking-irrelevant-question/feed/ 0 281765 Sri Lankan police harass, question journalists Selvakumar Nilanthan, Punniyamoorthy Sasikaran https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/08/sri-lankan-police-harass-question-journalists-selvakumar-nilanthan-punniyamoorthy-sasikaran/ https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/08/sri-lankan-police-harass-question-journalists-selvakumar-nilanthan-punniyamoorthy-sasikaran/#respond Tue, 08 Mar 2022 15:20:21 +0000 https://cpj.org/?p=174047 On February 9, 2022, officers with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), a branch of the Sri Lanka police, questioned Selvakumar Nilanthan, a freelance Tamil journalist and secretary of the Batticaloa District Tamil Journalists Association, for two hours at a police station in the town of Eravur in the eastern Batticaloa district, according to Tamil Guardian, a tweet by local press freedom group Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka, and the journalist, who spoke to CPJ by phone.

Two CID officers had visited Nilanthan’s home on February 7 and February 8 and demanded that he appear at the Eravur police station for questioning, according to those sources. Nilanthan told CPJ that he believes authorities have subjected him to repeated harassment in retaliation for his journalism and his association with the Batticaloa District Tamil Journalists Association.

During the questioning, three officers asked Nilanthan about his biographical history; connections to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, a banned group in Sri Lanka; his relationship with diaspora news organizations; and his work with the Batticaloa District Tamil Journalists Association, according to those sources.

Nilanthan was questioned about similar topics on July 12, 2021, when officers with the Batticaloa District’s Terrorism Investigation Division, another branch of the Sri Lanka police, demanded the login details of his Facebook, WhatsApp, email, and bank accounts, as CPJ documented at the time.

Separately, at around 6 a.m. on February 4, 2022, police visited the home of freelance Tamil journalist Punniyamoorthy Sasikaran in Batticaloa city and presented a court order banning an non-existent protest march, according to a report by Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka, a copy of the order, and the journalist, who spoke to CPJ by phone.

Police told his parents, who had opened the door, that the journalist could be arrested without providing further details, in what Sasikaran told CPJ he believed to be an intimidation tactic. Sasikaran also serves as treasurer of the Batticaloa District Tamil Journalists Association.

According to the copy of the order, which was issued by the Batticaloa magistrate court, police received “credible intelligence” that Tamil political parties and local organizations would hold a protest march opposing the celebration of the national Independence Day.

Sasikaran said that he told the police that no such protest would occur and asked why he was receiving the order, as he is a journalist. The officers said that the information was based on “credible intelligence,” and that the head of the Batticaloa police had requested the order, according to Sasikaran.

Previously, police visited Sasikaran’s home on February 1 and 2, 2021, and served him a court order restraining organizers from moving forward with a Tamil-led protest march, which he said he planned to cover as a reporter, as CPJ documented.

On August 23, 2021, officers from the Batticaloa police’s Special Crime Branch questioned Sasikaran and accused him of organizing a January 2021 ceremony that paid tribute to Indian fishermen who died in Sri Lanka waters, which he said he merely covered as a journalist, as CPJ documented at the time.

In January 2020, unidentified people circulated leaflets in Batticaloa that said Nilanthan, Sasikaran, and five other journalists would be “given death punishment” for writing critically about the Sri Lankan government, according to Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka. Nilanthan and Sasikaran told CPJ that police did not take steps to protect their safety, and failed to identify who was behind the threats.

Sri Lanka police spokesperson Nihal Thalduwa did not respond to CPJ’s request for comment sent via messaging app.


This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2022/03/08/sri-lankan-police-harass-question-journalists-selvakumar-nilanthan-punniyamoorthy-sasikaran/feed/ 0 280039 A light at the end of the tunnel: Vice President Mike Pence and Surgeon General Jerome Adams get vaccinated publicly; Watchdogs question why North Dakota is using CARES Act money for fracking grants https://www.radiofree.org/2020/12/18/a-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-vice-president-mike-pence-and-surgeon-general-jerome-adams-get-vaccinated-publicly-watchdogs-question-why-north-dakota-is-using-cares-act-money-for-fracking-grants/ https://www.radiofree.org/2020/12/18/a-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-vice-president-mike-pence-and-surgeon-general-jerome-adams-get-vaccinated-publicly-watchdogs-question-why-north-dakota-is-using-cares-act-money-for-fracking-grants/#respond Fri, 18 Dec 2020 18:00:00 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=2c3da648b08160c8c397f287a1ca8033 Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

The post A light at the end of the tunnel: Vice President Mike Pence and Surgeon General Jerome Adams get vaccinated publicly; Watchdogs question why North Dakota is using CARES Act money for fracking grants appeared first on KPFA.


This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2020/12/18/a-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel-vice-president-mike-pence-and-surgeon-general-jerome-adams-get-vaccinated-publicly-watchdogs-question-why-north-dakota-is-using-cares-act-money-for-fracking-grants/feed/ 0 422317 As President Donald Trump calls into question the election, congressional hearing looks at electoral integrity; California to allow some schools to resume in-person instruction; Senate hearing on violent protests looks at “leftists,” not white supremacists https://www.radiofree.org/2020/08/04/as-president-donald-trump-calls-into-question-the-election-congressional-hearing-looks-at-electoral-integrity-california-to-allow-some-schools-to-resume-in-person-instruction-senate-hearing-on-viol/ https://www.radiofree.org/2020/08/04/as-president-donald-trump-calls-into-question-the-election-congressional-hearing-looks-at-electoral-integrity-california-to-allow-some-schools-to-resume-in-person-instruction-senate-hearing-on-viol/#respond Tue, 04 Aug 2020 18:00:00 +0000 http://www.radiofree.org/?guid=494fa1af7fcf3d67e9ec02110630407d Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

The post As President Donald Trump calls into question the election, congressional hearing looks at electoral integrity; California to allow some schools to resume in-person instruction; Senate hearing on violent protests looks at “leftists,” not white supremacists appeared first on KPFA.


This content originally appeared on KPFA - The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

]]> https://www.radiofree.org/2020/08/04/as-president-donald-trump-calls-into-question-the-election-congressional-hearing-looks-at-electoral-integrity-california-to-allow-some-schools-to-resume-in-person-instruction-senate-hearing-on-viol/feed/ 0 422748