China rushes to invest in Iran, a Middle East pivot, as the US stubbornly sticks to sanctions.

By Debalina Ghoshal*

Since the signing of the controversial Iranian nuclear deal that lifted most international sanctions, China has emerged as a principal beneficiary. This is as much a result of aggressive Chinese push as it is difficulties faced by the West. China has pursued opportunities in the Iranian nuclear energy market, increased investment and expanded influence, with what could be rightly called a Middle Eastern pivot.

The country predicted to become the world’s largest energy consumer by 2030, is wasting no time in availing itself of Iran’s energy resources. China’s demand for oil imports is expected to grow from 6 million barrels per day to 13 million by 2035, and Iran, ranked fourth in the world with proven oil reserves and second with reserves of natural gas, is considered a reliable supplier.

The West struggles to improve relations with Iran, a major market with 77 million people, as many hesitate to risk violating sanctions remaining in place. Despite the deal’s conclusion and sanctions being lifted, European countries find it hard to cooperate: European banks are reluctant to finance deals struck with Iran. Moreover, Europeans face difficulty in traveling to the United States if they have traveled to Iran under US visa regulations. The United States also limits business activity in Iran and the nation’s ability to use dollars.

Such hindrances, of course, give China an opening. Throughout the Iranian nuclear impasse and years of sanctions since 1979, China continued trade with Iran, as acknowledged by President Hassan Rouhani, “China has always stood by the side of the Iranian nation during hard days.” Cooperation on peaceful nuclear energy is a centerpiece in plans announced in January by Chinese President Xi Jinping and Rouhani for building economic ties worth up to $600 billion.

China’s interest in Iran goes beyond its energy resources. It has keen interest in Iran’s geostrategic location, bordering both the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf. The location enables China carry out the One Belt One Road agenda.

Iran stands as China’s most important ally in the Persian Gulf, and China may find it difficult to deepen cooperation with Gulf Cooperation Council countries, given their positive ties with the United States. Iran on the other hand, due to historic ties with China and longstanding suspicion of the United States, remains a trustworthy ally for China. As noted by analyst Jeffry S Payne, “the overland Silk Road cannot effectively connect the east to the west without Iran as an integrated part.”

China conducted joint naval exercises with Iran in 2014, and this may be a way to keep a check on growing naval cooperation between India and Iran – two countries that conducted joint naval exercises in 2003, 2006 and 2015.

Iran is also following in China’s footsteps to create an anti-US anti-access area denial strategy, or A2/AD, to reduce US military supremacy in the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea. China undoubtedly expects Tehran to play an integral part in Beijing’s string of pearls – building a string of naval facilities in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean to counter American influence.

Iran’s Atomic Energy Commission head, Ali Akbar Salehi, announced in early 2016 that Tehran plans to accept help from China for the construction of two nuclear power plants. Salehi and the head of China’s Atomic Energy Authority, Xu Dazhe, also decided on cooperation for reconfiguration of the Arak nuclear facility along with nuclear cooperation in economic, research and industrial areas.

During the negotiations for the Iran nuclear accord, criticism centered on the Arak heavy water reactors. Some analysts suggested that Iran’s plutonium could be diverted to develop nuclear weapons. The deal required Iran neutering the heavy water reactors, with assistance in redesign of the reactors from the United States and China. Tehran is already reported to have removed the core of the reactor while filling it with cement. Beijing has also started to establish cooperation in the fields of manufacturing, construction and transportation.

China may have a headstart, but it nevertheless faces stiff competition in the area of nuclear cooperation. China is competing with Japan, which also eyes crude oil from Iran and other Middle Eastern countries, and Russia has already agreed to build nuclear reactors in Bushehr as well as aid Iran to develop the Fordo enrichment plant to produce isotopes that are not capable of producing nuclear weapons

Iran has joined the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank while both China and Russia are pushing for Iran’s full membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

Middle East markets are essential for China’s One Belt One Road program of building a network of manufacturing and transportation centers in Central Asia and Europe. Beijing also looks beyond Iran – establishing nuclear cooperation with Saudi Arabia and in the process of building a relationship with other GCC countries. This could lead to reducing tensions between rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran by providing economic opportunities through the One Belt One Road initiative.

This requires balance on the part of Beijing. In January, Xi traveled to the Middle East, visiting Riyadh as well as Tehran probably to assure both and discourage misinterpretations that China supports one country over the other.

Reinventing itself as nuclear supplier rather than customer, China pursues opportunities on multiple fronts. China has sought to sign a memorandum of understanding with Egypt to cooperate on construction of nuclear power reactors and, in 2015, formed an agreement wth Jordan to strengthen nuclear cooperation. China also cooperates with Turkey for construction of nuclear power plants.

Iran Nuclear Deal

China-Iran nuclear cooperation is likely to strengthen as evident from a 25-year document outlining strategic relations. The relationship has held strong since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. China views Iran as an investment opportunity while Iran is grateful for China’s support, anticipating investments to play a role in reviving its economy stalled by the nuclear impasse.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on nuclear activities signed a year ago by Iran, China as well as France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States and implemented in January provides that civil nuclear cooperation projects will be “mutually determined by the participating states and will be consistent with the JCPOA and the national laws and regulations of the participating parties” and “may be undertaken in a variety of formats, with a variety of potential participants.” The plan of action notes that all parties may not necessarily participate in any project.

While the Western powers engaged in tough and lengthy negotiations with Iran to stop the nuclear weapons program, they may not have anticipated that the ensuing cooperation would help other countries more than themselves.

A network of cooperation with countries like China and Russia, as well as Iran’s growing inclusiveness with the international community, could blunt the West’s ability to re-impose sanctions on Iran should those become necessary, despite the framework’s provisions. While Washington congratulates itself for having staunched Iran’s weapons program, China may have the last laugh.

*Debalina Ghoshal is an independent consultant specializing in strategic affairs and nuclear, missile and missile-defense issues. Her articles have appeared in the Federation of American Scientists, Washington Quarterly, RUSI Newsbrief, the Diplomat, Atlantic Sentinel, Force and more.

A novel visualization method for exploring dynamic patterns in real-time Bitcoin transactional data can zoom in on individual transactions in large blocks of data and also detect meaningful associations between large numbers of transactions and recurring patterns such as money laundering.

The information and insights made possible by this top-down visualization of Bitcoin cryptocurrency transactions are described in an article in Big Data.

In the article “Visualizing Dynamic Bitcoin Transaction Patterns,” Dan McGinn, David Birch, David Akroyd, Miguel Molina-Solana, Yike Guo, and William Knottenbelt, Imperial College London, U.K., compare their visualization approach to previous bottom-up methods, which examine data from single-source transactions.

Top-down system-wide visualization enables pattern detection, and it is then possible to drill down into any particular transaction for more detailed information. The researchers describe the successful deployment of their visualization tool in a high-resolution 64-screen data observatory facility.

“This is a bold attempt at a comprehensive visualization of bitcoin transactions for a lay audience,” said Big Data Editor-in-Chief Vasant Dhar, Professor at the Stern School of Business and the Center for Data Science at New York University, “but should also be of great interest to regulators and bankers who are trying to make sense of blockchain and related methods that can work without a central trusted intermediary. There is a lot of confusion about these emerging methods and a real need for articles that cut through the clutter and explain them in simple terms. Visualization is a key to understanding them.”

Spain’s uptick in absenteeism, which began at the end of 2013, has become more pronounced — reaching a rate of 4.7 percent in 2015. As a result, the Spanish social security system lost 5.1 billion euros in direct costs, while its companies lost 3.9 billion. The estimated opportunity costs, in terms of the goods and services that ceased to be produced, are estimated to be 52.4 billion euros.

These are some of the numbers crunched in Adecco’s Report on Absenteeism, now in its fifth edition, prepared in collaboration with IESE, Garrigues, AMAT, FREMAP, University Carlos III of Madrid, and the Spanish government’s National Institute for Health and Safety in the Workplace.

The study also indicates that leaves from work due to minor ailments are almost five times more prevalent than those caused by work-related accidents. Moreover, women tended to be absent more often than men and, when they were, took more days of leave, on average.

The Balearic Islands, Madrid, Galicia, the Canary Islands, Cantabria, and Murcia are, in that order, the regions in Spain with the most hours actually worked.

Three diagnoses — those of musculoskeletal, psychological and trauma disorders — were cited as the cause of about 57 percent of leave days. As such, workers’ health programs in Spain should focus on addressing these ailments in order to reduce absenteeism effectively.

Changes Over Time

Absenteeism rates, estimated from Spain’s National Statistics Institute’s Quarterly Labor Cost Survey, rose from 3.7 percent in 2000 to a high of 4.9 percent in 2007.

The advent of the crisis caused absenteeism to drop slightly from 2008 to 2011 (to 4.7 percent). The downward trend became more apparent in 2012 (4.3 percent) and 2013 (4.1 percent).

The year 2014 was a turning point: absenteeism rose for the first time in six years. The upturn became more pronounced in 2015, reaching 4.7 percent.

A sector-by-sector analysis of recent years reveals that absenteeism increased sharply in the realm of services — from 4.2 percent in 2013 to 4.9 percent in 2015 (the peak was 5.1 percent back in 2007). Over the same period, the rate for the industrial sector rose from 4.1 to 4.6 percent (its peak was 5.5 percent, also in 2007). Meanwhile, construction’s rate inched up more modestly: from 3.0 to 3.2 percent.

Hours actually worked (per employee) fell by 8 percent between 2000 and 2014, with a particularly sharp drop of 2 percent in 2009. Whereas in the year 2000, workers logged 1,684 hours on the job, by 2014, that figure had dropped to just 1,550.

About 90 percent of Spanish companies control absenteeism by requiring a doctor’s note or other type of written justification for an employee’s excused absence or leave. Only 3 percent offer annualized hour schemes or flexible work hours — aka flex time — which are conducive to achieving a work-life balance.

These figures illustrate a pressing need to rationalize work schedules and to improve the systems and practices of flexible time on the job in order to encourage a tenable work-life balance.

Experts agree that the institutional framework establishing work leave (and the quantity of red tape required) is key to absenteeism rates. More generous leave and fewer bureaucratic hoops result in higher absenteeism rates. In fact, an international comparison suggests that absenteeism runs higher in those countries with more generous social protection systems and less red tape.

Specifically, the study compares data in Spain, Switzerland, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Australia, Canada and the United States. Of the group, Finland and Switzerland tend to have the highest levels of absenteeism, with Spain close behind.

Checking in on Presenteeism

The report also notes that presenteeism (being physically present in the workplace, yet spending this time on non-work-related matters) dropped from 2008 to 2011, but increased between 2012 and 2015. Two very different types of workers are the most likely to practice presenteeism: those that feel very secure in their jobs (and therefore unworried about the consequences of tending to personal matters on the clock) and those that feel very insecure in their jobs (and therefore avoid asking for an absence when necessary).

Spanish companies tend to counter absenteeism with controls and restrictions, which doesn’t encourage responsible behavior among workers. In fact, 88 percent of Spanish companies apply control methods to their employees’ work hours and only 34 percent offer flex time to at least a quarter of staff. This lack of flexibility is more pronounced in SMEs than it is in large companies.

Presenteeism rates depended most on the type of job and the type of contract (full-time regular employment vs. temporary or part-time). This leads the researchers to conclude that institutional factors predict rates of presenteeism much better than any individual characteristics, such as age or gender, which were found to barely matter.

Maryam is desperately worried about the eldest of her three sons, who has just turned 18.

“My son recently graduated from high school, and I’m afraid he will be drafted into the army. They say that young guys are beaten there by the older and stronger ones,” said Maryam (not her real name).

“If he does not enroll in a university, he will be taken to the army. I do not want to send him to [work in] Russia either, it is dangerous there. And the army is dangerous… I just don’t know what to do.”

According to Tajik law, every adult male citizen of Tajikistan must serve 12 to 24 months in the army. University students are allowed to defer and graduates also only have to serve for one year.

However, most young men do their best to avoid military service completely.

This is proving concerning for defence officials who want to boost the country’s forces in the face of growing regional threats.

Conscription campaigns take place twice a year, in the spring and in the autumn. That is the cue for thousands of young Tajiks to leave the country to find work abroad, sign up to further education courses so as to avoid the draft or to simply start moving from one district to another.

Human rights groups have long protested the Tajik army’s practice of recruiting soldiers through roundups, commonly referred to as oblava across the post-Soviet space.

Dilrabo Samadova heads the Office for Civil Liberties, a Tajik NGO that focuses on the rights of members of the armed forces.

She told IWPR that year hundreds of young Tajiks were forcefully enlisted each year through illegal methods.

“There were many complaints about last year’s autumn forced enlistment. We’ve already received many complaints this year as well,” Samadova said.

However, Tajik defence ministry spokesman Fariddun Mahmadaliev said that his office had received no complaints connected to the spring 2016 enlistment, which took place from April 1 to May 30 and was successfully completed ahead of schedule.

The Tajik law on military service entitles recruiters to search for and detain people eligible for service.

However, the law clearly states that these actions should be taken within the limits of jurisdiction, and President Emomali Rahmon has himself criticised such roundups.

The Tajik army has struggled in the past to source enough recruits, especially in certain parts of the country. Young people are extremely reluctant to serve, given grim conditions and allegations of widespread bullying.

“Young people do not want to serve because they are afraid of cold, hunger and other problems that occur [during military service]. There is bullying which includes cases of beatings of soldiers even with fatal consequences,” Samadova said.

Younger soldiers are routinely humiliated and tortured by officers and senior soldiers in a common rite-of-passage known locally as dedovshina.

“Every region and city must carry out their own plan [for each conscription campaign]. Not wanting to join the military, the majority of young people end up leaving the country as labour migrants, while some others hide at their relatives’ homes. For this reason, military commissioners use roundups to conscript citizens into the army,” Samadova said.

In recent years Tajik military officials have resorted to seizing young men on the streets and forcing them to enlist immediately.

One such case ended in a fatality, after 19-year-old Qiyomuddin Sharifov jumped into the Vakhsh river last April as he ran away from military personel chasing him in Rogun city, 75 kilometres east of Dushanbe.

His body was never found and a criminal investigation is ongoing.

“Every year [some] people do report to the military commissariat to enlist voluntarily in about first five days of the military call-ups,” Samadova told IWPR.

“But afterwards young men are brought in by force with the help of roundups.”

Young men who appear eligible for military service are stopped on the streets, at markets, as they wait at bus stops, or even in their own houses. Military recruiters usually work side by side with the police.

Dushanbe resident Nigora (not her real name) told IWPR how her son had been seized as he travelled on public transport.

“My 20-year-old son is a university student,” she said. “Once, he got pulled in during a roundup, when he was taking a bus from home to university. Despite him telling the officials he had a student card and an army deferral, they didn’t listen to him. He was taken to a collection point where there were many other young men,” Kayumova said.

After he managed to phone her, Nigora came to rescue her son.

“I had to use my connections as well as pay to get my son out,” she said.  “I heard some families sell their cars or livestock to bribe their way out of the army.”

HARD TIMES FOR TAJIK ARMY

The Tajik military has been under particular pressure due to the increasingly perilous security situation on its long, porous and mostly mountainous border with Afghanistan.

In late September 2015, Taliban fighters briefly seized control of the northern Afghan city of Kunduz.

The Tajik National Security Committee said in March that at least 5,000 armed militants were operating in northern Afghan provinces close to the Tajik border.

The Global Firepower (GFP) Index, which ranks the world’s military, estimated that the Tajik army’s had a permanent staff of 6,000 people at the end of 2015, with the potential to mobilise three million out of the country’s population of eight million.

In March 2016, Tajik president Emomali Rahmon’s announced he would be increasing the army’s permanent personnel to as many as 20,000 people, although it remains unclear when this decision might be enacted.

Training has certainly been stepped up, with two major exercises in as many months.

A joint Tajik-Russian army exercise in March was followed by an April training in which  defence intelligence units from members of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), a Moscow-backed regional security alliance, carried out maneuvers at the Lyaur and Magob bases near Dushanbe.

The poorest country in Central Asia, Tajikistan’s annual defence budget is 75 million US dollars, while the country’s international debt is over 2 billion dollars.

Its 2015 GFP ranking was 81 out of 126 countries, below its regional counterparts Uzbekistan, Kazakstan and Kyrgyzstan.

Qosimsho Iskandarov, conflict studies expert at Tajikistan’s Institute of Oriental Studies, said that Tajikistan could count on its fellow CSTO members as well as on Russia itself.

However, he stressed that Tajikistan definitely needed to increase its own defence capacity.

“What’s happening in neighbouring Afghanistan… is not only ours, but the whole world’s concern. Our country is right at the forefront – our border with Afghanistan is the longest [among Central Asian states], it’s more than 1,300 kilometres,” Iskandarov said.

Samadova suggested that more young men could be motivated to join up if terms were all shortened to 12 months, and older and younger recruits no longer served together. This might also help counter bullying.

However Mahdi Sobir, a Tajik military expert from the Centre for Strategic Studies think tank, said that a professional standing army should replace conscription.

“The Tajik army requires voluntary recruitment. Young men have no jobs. They would be keen to work for the army, if they were paid for it,” he said. “The army would be stronger, and it wouldn’t make sense to catch anyone [on the streets] then.”

This publication was produced under two IWPR projects: Empowering Media and Civil Society Activists to Support Democratic Reforms in Tajikistan, funded by the European Union, and Strengthening Capacities, Bridging Divides in Central Asia, funded by the Foreign Ministry of Norway. This article was published by IWPR at RCA 791

By David Vine*

One week after British voters decided to exit the European Union, the UK Supreme Court was set to decide the fate of a small group of British citizens who had no such vote when the UK and US governments forced the people to exit their homeland beginning in the late 1960s.

Tactics of minimisation have been central to Hillary Clinton’s political career. When stumbling takes place, go for the established book of deflective rules. When violations of the law take place, explain that it was normal at the time. Suggest that others had engaged in a form of conduct only subsequently frowned upon.

Such tactics should be kept in the dustbin of history. For the Clintons, they have consistently worked, giving that particular not so holy family a particularly nasty sense of political entitlement. They remain the ghouls of the US political establishment, paying (or rather withholding) tribute to the dead ideas of liberalism.

Evidently, the inappropriate use of a private server to conduct what were classified communications and potentially accessible to third-parties, did not seem grave enough a breach to warrant criminal charges.

That was the preliminary finding by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which is concluding its investigation into Clinton’s use of a personal email system during her time as Secretary of State. The Bureau had received the referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General seeking answers on whether classified information had been transmitted on that personal system during her time in office.

The statement by its director, James B. Comey, is worth noting, as it shows the extent the former First Lady and Secretary of State has managed to escape yet another pickle of systematic indiscretion.[1] It also shows the degree of singularity Comey was offering his own statement.

He claimed, for instance, to have “not coordinated or reviewed this statement in any way with the Department of Justice or any other part of the government. They do not know what I am about to say.”

A rum sort of thing, especially given the prior remark that “the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest”. The only assumption one can draw from Comey here is that the FBI preferred to go it alone in this venture, bringing out the gory details less to inculpate the former Secretary than exonerate her.

There was a potentially two-pronged trap for Clinton: a felonious violation of a federal law on the subject of mishandling classified information either intentionally or a grossly negligent way; or the misdemeanour of knowingly removing classified information from “appropriate systems or storage facilities.” Investigations into possible intrusions were also made.

Comey’s statement describes a mess. As Secretary of State, she used several email servers and relevant administrators, along with a host of mobile devices to view and convey emails via personal domains.

During the course of her stewardship at the Department, processes of replacement, storage and decommissioning took place. This compounded the problem, rendering the trail of messages fuzzy. The decommissioning in 2013 of one of the original servers, for instance, saw the removal of email software that was “like removing the frame from a huge finished jigsaw puzzle and dumping and pieces on the floor.” Hardly a picture of well drawn propriety on the part of the Secretary.

As for the emails Clinton proudly claimed she supplied to the Bureau for perusal – roughly 30,000 or so – 110 in 52 chains were “determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.” Additional emails were also uncovered from the ether of deletions and archived email accounts of former employees, though these were generally deemed less significant.

The Bureau suggested that there was no clear evidence that Clinton or her aides “intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence they were extremely careless in their handling of very extensive, highly classified information.”

Comey speaks of his concern that many of the emails “should have been on any kind of unclassified system” a point made even graver by the fact that they “were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the US Government – or even with a commercial service like Gmail.”

Taking a snipe at another government organisation, the FBI also found that the State Department was distinctly lacking in a “security culture” of which use of unclassified email systems was symptomatic. As to the issue of intrusion into the personal domains by “hostile actors,” a frank admission followed. While no evidence was detected, “we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.”

The final assertion is interesting, if only because it shows how the FBI has an inherently soft view about Clinton’s conduct. This may not be surprising: the Clintons have been regular subjects of investigations by Comey’s outfit. The failed Arkansas real estate deal which became Whitewater and the Presidential pardons in January 2001 remain key events.

Evidence of potential violations of the relevant statutes may well exist, but in the view of the Bureau, “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.” There was, in the view of the investigators, no instance of wilful mishandling or clear intent in dealing with classified information, or exposure on a scale suggesting “inference of intentional misconduct”.

Officials have lost their jobs for less. Administrative and legal sanctions, as admitted by Comey, have been levelled in similar circumstances. State bureaucracies, as Max Weber reminds us with solemn gravity, guard secrets and their use with fanatical intensity.

Not, it would seem, on this occasion. Clinton was spared, even if the FBI recommendation remains just that. It was a textbook outcome pointing to the failures of consistent approaches all too familiar to that of her husband. Yet again, this eel of history escapes the realms of legality with institutional dispensation.

Notes:
[1] https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Global per capita fish consumption has risen to above 20 kilograms a year for the first time, thanks to stronger aquaculture supply and firm demand, record hauls for some key species and reduced wastage, according to a new FAO report published Thursday.

Yet despite notable progress in some areas, the state of the world’s marine resources has not improved, the latest edition of the UN agency’s The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA) says that almost a third of commercial fish stocks are now fished at biologically unsustainable levels, triple the level of 1974.

Global total capture fishery production in 2014 was 93.4 million tonnes, including output from inland waters, up slightly over the previous two years. Alaska pollock was the top species, replacing anchoveta for the first time since 1998 and offering evidence that effective resource management practices have worked well. Record catches for four highly valuable groups – tunas, lobsters, shrimps and cephalopods – were reported in 2014.

There were around 4.6 million fishing vessels in the world in 2014, 90 percent of which are in Asia and Africa, and only 64,000 of which were 24 meters or longer, according to SOFIA.

Globally, fish provided 6.7 percent of all protein consumed by humans, as well as offering a rich source of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins, calcium, zinc and iron. Some 57 million people were engaged in the primary fish production sectors, a third of them in aquaculture.

Fishery products accounted for one percent of all global merchandise trade in value terms, representing more than nine percent of total agricultural exports. Worldwide exports amounted to $148 billion in 2014, up from $8 billion in 1976. Developing countries were the source of $80 billion of fishery exports, providing higher net trade revenues than meat, tobacco, rice and sugar combined.

That the global supply of fish for human consumption has outpaced population growth in the past five decades – preliminary estimates suggest per capita intakes higher than 20 kilograms, double the level of the 1960s – is due in large measure to growth in aquaculture.

The sector’s global production rose to 73.8 million tonnes in 2014, a third of which comprised molluscs, crustaceans and other non-fish animals. Importantly in terms of both food security and environmental sustainability, about half of the world’s aquaculture production of animals – often shellfish and carp – and plants – including seaweeds and microalgae – came from non-fed species.

While China remains far the leading nation for aquaculture, it is expanding even faster elsewhere, the report notes. In Nigeria, aquaculture output is up almost 20-fold over the past two decades, and all of sub-Saharan Africa is not far behind. Chile and Indonesia have also posted remarkable growth, as have Norway and Vietnam – now the world’s No. 2 and No. 3 fish exporters.

A recently published US State Department report on human trafficking provides Qatar with yet another roadmap to counter World Cup-related international criticism of its labour regime.

The State Department’s annual review serves as a warning to Qatar as the clock ticks on an ultimatum by the International Labour Organization (ILO). The ILO last May said that it would establish a Commission of Inquiry if Qatar failed to substantially reform its controversial labour regime.

Such commissions are among the ILO’s most powerful tools to ensure compliance with international treaties. The UN body has only established 13 such commissions in its century-long history. The last such commission was created in 2010 to force Zimbabwe to live up to its obligations.

The stepped up pressure on Qatar is the result of a perception that the Gulf state has yet to live up to promises of labour reform made since the 2010 awarding of the 2022 World Cup hosting rights.

Qatar and several of its institutions, including the supreme committee responsible for organizing the Cup, have since then taken steps to counter abuse of a system that trade unions and human rights groups denounce as modern slavery. Qatar has however stopped short of taking steps that would fundamentally reform, if not, abolish the system.

Called kafala, the system involves a sponsorship regime for foreign workers who account for some 90 percent of Qatar’s workforce, that puts employees at the mercy of their employers.

Kafala gives employers the unilateral power to cancel residence permits, deny workers the ability to change employers at will and refuse them permission to leave the country. “Debt-laden migrants who face abuse or are misled often avoid reporting their exploitation out of fear of reprisal, the lengthy recourse process, or lack of knowledge of their legal rights, making them more vulnerable to forced labour, including debt bondage,” the report said.

The State Department, despite acknowledging that the Gulf state had made “significant efforts,” concluded that Qatar had failed to step up its efforts to counter human trafficking in the last year.

The report took Qatar to task on three fronts: the implementation of existing legislation and reforms, its failure to act on a host of issues that would bring the Gulf state into compliance with international labour standards, and its spotty reporting.

The report noted that many migrant workers, despite a ban on forcing employees to pay for their recruitment, continue to arrive in Qatar owing exorbitant amounts to recruiters and at times have been issued false employment contracts.

Qatar’s Ministry of Administrative Development, Labour and Social Affairs said earlier this month that it had cancelled the licences of two recruitment agencies and had issued a warning to two other agencies regarding violations of the law governing recruitment.

A ministerial committee has recommended the establishment of a committee that would ensure regulation of domestic workers, who in Qatar, like in most Gulf states, are viewed as the most vulnerable segment of the workforce because labour laws and reforms do not apply to them.

The report acknowledged that Qatar had initiated its first prosecutions with the conviction of 11 people charged with trafficking, including ones related to domestic workers.

“Female domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to trafficking due to their isolation in private residences and lack of protection under Qatari labour laws,” the State Department said.

The US agency said that many workers continued to complain of unpaid wages. Qatar introduced a wage protection system last November that obliges employers to pay their employees electronically in a bid to ensure that they are paid on time and in full.

The report quoted a 2014 study by Qatar University’s Social and Economic Survey Research Institute as saying that 76 percent of expatriate workers’ passports remained in their employers’ possession, despite laws against passport confiscation.

Much of the roadmap distilled from the State Departments criticisms and recommendations involve measures that the government could take with relative ease. They include:

• Creation of a lead agency for anti-trafficking efforts that would replace the Qatar Foundation for Protection and Social Rehabilitation (QFPSR) that was removed as the government’s central address, and expansion of the new agency’s responsibilities beyond the abuse of women and children;
• extending labour law protection to domestic workers and ensuring that any changes to the sponsorship system apply to all workers;
• enforcing the law banning and criminalizing the withholding of passports by employers;
• providing victims with adequate protection services and ensuring that shelter staff speak the language of expatriate workers;
• reporting of anti-trafficking law enforcement data as well as data pertaining to the number of victims identified and the services provided to them;
• providing anti-trafficking training to government officials.

The report noted that it was “unclear whether the government decreased efforts to protect victims of trafficking due to a lack of government provided statistics in this area, and many victims of forced labour, including debt bondage, likely remained unidentified and unprotected.”

A quick implementation of the roadmap would serve to enhance Qatar’s tarnished credibility and demonstrate its sincerity even if the fundamental problems associated with the kafala system remain unaddressed. The government has said sought to eliminate some of the most onerous aspects of kafala in reforms of the sponsorship system that are scheduled to take effect in December.

The reforms would eliminate indefinite-term labour contracts and replace them with five-year agreements. Workers, however, would not be allowed to break the contract or change employers before the contract has expired. Workers would continue to need their employer’s permission to travel but the reforms introduce a government appeal mechanism.

The measures in the distilled roadmap are likely to be less politically sensitive than demands by trade unions and human rights groups that the kafala system be abolished in a country in which changes to the status of foreigners evoke existential fears.

Many of the Gulf state’s minority Qatari citizens, who account for a mere 12 percent of the Gulf state’s population, fear that changes would open the door to greater rights for foreigners which would threaten Qatari control of their society, culture and system of government.

The political sensitivity is enhanced by some Qataris questioning whether expenditure on mega-events like the World Cup are appropriate at a time that reduced energy prices have forced the government to cut costs and announce plans to rewrite the social contract that granted the country’s rulers absolute power in exchange for cradle-to-grave welfare.

The Peace Index published regularly over the years by Tel Aviv University released its latest survey (summary of the results is here) of Israeli opinion on issues concerning relations with Israeli Palestinians and Palestinians under Occupation.  The poll found strong support for annexation of the West Bank and denial of rights to its Palestinian residents.  It also indicated that a plurality of Jews believed (mystifyingly) Israel should continue the Occupation even if there were a draft peace agreement with the Palestinians. The Index also showed a questionable commitment by Israeli Jews to democratic values when it concerns the Palestinian minority.

A slight plurality of Jews (44-43%) believe the Occupation has improved Israel’s security situation.  52% of Jews believe it has “contributed to Israel’s national interest.”  57% of both Jews and Palestinians believe it has worsened Israel’s diplomatic relations with the rest of the world.  I’m not sure where the other 43% are living–in a cocoon or perhaps they don’t give a damn how Israel is perceived by the world.

A plurality (39%) of Israeli Jews do not believe that the Green Line represents Israel’s border, while 33% believe that it is.  This confusion is completely understandable given the government’s deliberate attempt to sabotage through massive settlements and Occupation of the Syrian Golan and the West Bank, the notion that the Green Line is Israel’s border.

The pollsters asked Israeli Jews how many Jews lived in the West Bank.  Interestingly and tellingly, the pollsters did not include East Jerusalem settlements, which it euphemistically called “expanded Jerusalem.”  But the answer it deemed correct ranged from 250,000-500,000.  There are roughly 500,000 Jews living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.  So it seems those who prepared the poll were fudging on this issue.  But claiming to omit East Jerusalem from Jewish settlements indicates a bias on the part of those preparing the Peace Index which raises questions about the credibility of this portion of the survey.  One-fourth of those surveyed underestimated the number of Jews by half saying there were 100,000-250,000.  16% overestimated the population and nearly one-fourth had no idea of the answer.

Over 50% of Jews said they had not visited the West Bank in the past five years.  Given such a figure, one wonders why any of them care about maintaining Israel’s grip there.

Jewish respondents were asked if a national referendum were held today about maintaining the Occupation or ending it, 52% would favor continuing it.  Even if there were a draft peace treaty with the Palestinians, a 46% plurality would reject ending the Occupation.  This makes one wonder on what basis these Israelis believe there could be any peace agreement.  Only 51% of Israeli Jews believe Israeli Palestinian citizens should be entitled to vote in such a referendum.  44% believe they should not.  In other words, a bare majority of Israeli Jews believe in according Palestinian citizens rights equal to theirs.

Nearly 40% of Israeli Jews predict the Occupation will “continue as it is.”  20% believe the international community will force Israel to end the Occupation.  This is a very interesting figure and quite significant.  The same percentage believe Israel will annex the Territories and deny Palestinians there their rights.

As for what the Jewish public prefers personally as the outcome: 23% believe it should remain as it is; 12% prefer the international community should intervene to compel Israel to end the Occupation;  32% prefer Israel annex the Territories and deny Palestinian residents there equal rights; 19% prefer annexation and granting non-Jewish inhabitants equal rights.  Interestingly, only 26% of Israeli Palestinians prefer a one-state solution offering equal rights to Jews and Palestinians.  Personally, I believe that a Jewish survey administered by a Jewish university and pollsters would very likely underreport the number of Israeli Palestinians supporting one-state.  Perhaps not deliberately.  But relatively few Israeli Jews support one state, therefore it’s easy to believe a bias crept into the survey results on this question.

This article was published at Tikun Olam

By Giorgi Lomsadze*

“Mimino” truck driver Rubik Khachikian, no doubt, would be proud: Armenian truck drivers recently came close to securing a breakthrough in the bitter breakaway dispute between Georgia, Russia and the separatist enclave South Ossetia that has bedeviled diplomats for years.

Since June, Georgia has been facing an Armenian-truck traffic jam in its north, where a landslide and flooding clogged the highway leading to its only official border-crossing with Russia. The road is the sole way by land for Armenia to reach Russia, a key economic and diplomatic partner, and its main military ally.

With this trade lifeline blocked, Armenia late last month tried its luck asking Tbilisi for passage through separatist South Ossetia, which Moscow calls an independent state, and Tbilisi Georgian territory occupied by Russia.

The Georgian government proved unexpectedly amenable to the idea, first raised by Armenian Transportation and Communications Minister Gagik Beglarian.

But the Georgian public heavily criticized the proposal. Government critics insisted that allowing transit through the breakaway territory region means capitulation to Russia and violation of the Georgian law on the occupied territories, which bans the transportation of cargo via the separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Yet Georgian Prime Minister Giorgi Kvirikashvili and other proponents of Armenia’s proposal argued that it was in Georgia’s interests to ensure the continued passage of both Armenian and Georgian exports to Russia.

Dismissing the criticism as “hysteria,” Kvirikashvili pointed out that using South Ossetia as a backup export route would be temporary.

“To make full use of its transit function, Georgia should be a reliable partner,” Kvirikashvili said on July 1, Georgian news outlets reported. “This is why I had a conversation with the Armenian prime minister and they proposed that they would talk to the Russian side about temporarily opening that channel in the least painful way for everyone, without talking about statuses.”

Georgia’s occupied territories law can be suspended in case of a force majeure situation, he added.

Kvirikashvili claimed, though, that Russia had provided “an inadequate response,” and had refused to put aside its ongoing dispute with Tbilisi over the separatist territory’s sovereignty.

Moscow itself does not appear to have commented publicly, while South Ossetia said nobody asked for its opinion.

Still, Armenian Transportation Minister Beglarian travelled to Tbilisi on July 5. According to Georgia, the talks are now centered on redirecting cargo traffic to the West, toward the Black Sea, where a ferry service could be used for transit to and from Russia.

It is unclear if the South Ossetia option is still on the table

By Conn Hallinan*

On the surface, the June 23 Brexit and the June 26 Spanish elections don’t look comparable.

After a nasty campaign filled with racism and Islamophobia, the British — or rather, the English and the Welsh — took a leap into darkness and voted to leave the European Union. Spanish voters, on the other hand, rejected change and backed a center-right party that embodies the policies of the Brussels-based trade organization.

But deep down the fault lines in both countries converge.

For the first time since Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan rolled out a variety of neoliberal capitalism and globalization that captured much of the world in the 1980s, that model is under siege. The economic strategy of regressive taxes, widespread privatization, and deregulation has generated enormous wealth for the few, but growing impoverishment for the many. The top 1 percent now owns more than 50 percent of the world’s wealth.

The British election may have focused on immigration and the fear of “the other” — Turks, Syrians, Greeks, Poles, etc. — but this xenophobia stems from the anger and despair of people who have been marginalized or left behind by the globalization of the labor force that has systematically hollowed out small communities and destroyed decent paying jobs and benefits.

“Great Britain’s citizens haven’t been losing control of their fate to the EU,” wrote Richard Eskow of the Campaign for America’s Future. “They’ve have been losing it because their own country’s leaders — as well as those of most Western democracies — are increasingly in thrall to corporate and financial interests.”

While most of the mainstream media reported the Spanish election as a “victory” for acting Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy’s conservative People’s Party and defeat for the left, it was more a reshuffle than a major turn to the right. If Rajoy manages to cobble together a government, it is likely to be fragile and short lived.

The Shadow of Brexit

It was a dark couple of nights for pollsters in both countries.

British polls predicted a narrow defeat for the Brexit, and Spanish polls projected a major breakthrough for Spain’s left — in particular Unidos Podemos (UP), a new alliance between Podemos and the Communist/Green United Left bloc.

Instead, the Brexit passed easily and the UP lost 1 million votes from the last election, ending up with the same number of seats they had in the old parliament. In contrast, the People’s Party added 14 seats, although it fell well short of a majority.

A major reason for the Spanish outcome was the Brexit, which roiled markets all over the world but had a particularly dramatic effect on Spain. The Ibex share index plunged more than 12 percent and blue-chip stocks took a pounding, losing about $70 billion. It was, according to Spain’s largest business newspaper, “the worst session ever.” Rajoy — as well as the center-left Socialist Party — flooded the media with scare talk about stability, and it partly worked.

The Popular Party poached eight of its 14 new seats from the center-right Ciudadanos Party and probably convinced some potential Podemos voters to shift to the mainstream Socialists. But Rajoy’s claim that “We won the election. We demand the right to govern” is a reach. His party has 137 seats, and it needs 176 seats to reach a majority in the 350-seat parliament.

The prime minister says he plans to join with Ciudadanos. But because the latter lost seats in the election, such an alliance would put Rajoy seven votes short. An offer for a “grand alliance” with the Socialists doesn’t seem to be going anywhere either. “We are not going to support Rajoy’s investiture or abstain,” said Socialist Party spokesman Antonio Hernando.

Which doesn’t mean Rajoy can’t form a government. There are some independent deputies from the Basque country and the Canary Islands who might put Rajoy over the top, but it would be the first coalition government in Spain — and a fragile one at that.

Austerity on the Horizon

Part of that fragility is a scandal over an email between Rajoy and Jean-Claude Juncker, head of the European Commission, that was leaked to the media. The Commission is part of the “troika” with the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank that largely decides economic policy in the EU.

During the election, Rajoy promised to cut taxes and moderate the troika-imposed austerity measures that have driven Spain’s national unemployment rate to 22 percent, and a catastrophic 45 percent among young people. But in a confidential email to Juncker, the prime minister pledged, “In the second half of 2016, once there is a new government, we will be ready to take further measures to meet deficit goals.”

In short, Rajoy lied to the voters. If his party had won an absolute majority, that might not be a problem, but a coalition government is another matter. Would Ciudadanos and the independents be willing to associate themselves with such deceit and take the risk that the electorate would not punish them, given that such a government is not likely to last four years?

Unidos Podemos supporters were deeply disappointed in the outcome, although the UP took the bulk of the youth vote and triumphed in Catalonia, Spain’s wealthiest province, and the Basque country. What impact UP’s poor showing will have on divisions within the alliance isn’t clear, but predictions of the organization’s demise are premature. “We represent the future,” party leader Pablo Iglesia said after the vote.

There is a possible path to power for the left, although it leads through the Socialist Party. The SP dropped from 90 seats to 85 for its worst showing in history, but if it joins with the UP it would control 156 seats. If such a coalition includes the Catalans that would bring it to 173 seats, and the alliance could probably pick up some independents to make a majority. This is exactly what the left, agreeing to shelve their differences for the time being, did in Portugal after the last election.

The problem is that the SP refuses to break bread with the Catalans because separatists dominate the province’s delegation and the Socialist Party opposes letting Catalonia hold a referendum on independence. Podemos also opposes Catalan separatism, but it supports the right of the Catalans to vote on the issue.

Europe’s House Divided

Rajoy may construct a government, but it will be one that supports the dead-end austerity policies that have encumbered most of the EU’s members with low or flat growth rates, high unemployment, and widening economic inequality. Support for the EU is at an all time low, even in the organization’s core members, France and Germany.

The crisis generated by the free market model is hardly restricted to Europe. Here in the United States, much of Donald Trump’s support comes from the same disaffected cohort that drove the Brexit. And while “The Donald” is down in the polls, so were the Brexit and the Spanish People’s Party.

The next few years will be filled with opportunity, as well as danger. Anti-austerity forces in Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal, and Ireland are organizing and beginning to coordinate resistance to the troika. But so too are parties on the far right: France’s National Front, Hungary’s Jobbik, Greece’s Golden Dawn, Britain’s United Kingdom Independence Party, Austria’s Freedom Party, Denmark’s People’s Party, and the Sweden Democrats.

Instead of reconsidering the policies that have spread so much misery through the continent, European elites were quick to blame “stupid” and “racist” voters for the Brexit. “We are witnessing the implosion of the postwar cultural and economic order that has dominated the Euro-American zone for more than six decades,” writes Andrew O’Helir of Salon. “Closing our eyes and hoping that it will go away is not likely to be successful.”

A majority of Britain said “enough,” and while the Spanish right scared voters into backing away from a major course change, those voters will soon discover that what is in store for them is yet more austerity.

“We need to end austerity to end this disaffection and this existential crisis of the European project,” said a UP statement following the election. “We need to democratize decision making, guarantee social rights, and respect human rights.”

The European Union is now officially a house divided. It is not clear how long it can stand.

*Conn Hallinan can be read at dispatchesfromtheedgeblog,wordpress.com and middleempireseries.wordpress.com.

By Clint Watts*

(FPRI) — The Islamic State has taken the final week of Ramadan to make a big statement: “We will not go quietly.” In the last seven days the terror group has shown that a “wounded Islamic State is a dangerous Islamic State” lashing out in an unprecedented wave of suicide bombings and other attacks around the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia.

The Islamic State’s gradual decline in Syria and Iraq has finally brought a long expected shift in the group’s tactics from conventional military operations back towards insurgencies paired with regional and international terror attacks. The Islamic State overtook al Qaeda by declaring a caliphate and has since surpassed their forefathers as a terror group by executing a daily string of directed and networked attacks in six countries while narrowly missing in a seventh.

Here’s a quick recap of the Islamic State’s Ramadan Campaign. (For an explanation of the directed versus networked taxonomy see “Directed, Networked and Inspired: The Muddled Jihad of ISIS and al Qaeda Post Hebdo.” I’m estimating whether these attacks are directed or networked based upon available open source information. These classifications may change as further information arises.)

June 27 to July 5: The Islamic State’s Cascading Terrorism

Success breeds success for the Islamic State and their directed suicide assaults seek to amplify their image, rally their base during a down time, and inspire their supporters to undertake further violence in their name. Here’s what the Islamic State has perpetrated in short order.

• June 27 – (Networked Attack) Four suicide bombings in Mukalla, Yemen by the Islamic State’s local wilayat killed 43 people, the majority of which were soldiers.
• June 27 – (Directed Attack) Four suicide bombings along with other attacks targeted Christians in Qaa, Lebanon killing 5 and wounding nearly three dozen others.
• June 28 – (Directed Attack) Three suicide bombers assaulted the Istanbul Attaturk airport killing 36 and wounding 147 others. The suicide bombers were a Russian, an Uzbek, and a Krygyz.
• July 1 – (Networked Attack) Armed men from a Bangladeshi group supporting the Islamic State executed a hostage standoff in Dhaka killing 21; most of whom were Westerners.
• July 2 – (Directed Attack) Multiple suicide bombers struck Baghdad killing more than 200, the most deadly attack in Iraq since 2007.
• July 4 – (Directed Attack) Five alleged Islamic State operatives allegedly preparing an attack were arrested in Kuwait.
• June 28 reported on July 4 – (Networked Attack) Alleged Islamic State supporters threw grenades into a Malaysian nightclub.
• July 4 – (Directed Attack) Three separate suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia were perpetrated: one near the U.S. consulate in Jeddah, one at the Prophet’s mosque in Medina, and one near a Shi’a mosque in Qatif. At the time of this writing, casualty numbers are still coming in.
• July 5 – July 5 is to be the last day of Ramadan in 2016. Will they finish off the week with yet another, bigger attack(s)?

Interestingly, only two of the above attacks do not involve a suicide operation – Bangladesh and Malaysia. Jama’at ul Mujahideen Bangladesh, a group connected with the Islamic State, but not a formal wilayat, had until recently only perpetrated targeted sectarian assassinations and this attack appears to not only be a major, violent step forward for the group but also seems more reminiscent of the Paris attacks and other international hostage seizures. Association of the Malaysian grenade attack with the Islamic State would also be a new trend regionally. In both cases, these peripheral attacks in South and Southeast Asia show the lesser capability of these distant Islamic State associates. It’s difficult to tell at this point whether they don’t have the capability to perpetrate suicide bombings or the personnel willing to execute such attacks.

Ultimately, the Islamic State has cascaded its terror attacks striking one target in a different country each day. Will it inspire attacks globally? Only time will tell, but possibly not. Western media has paid short attention to these attacks with the exception of the Istanbul airport. As al Murabitoon and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb learned with its Western African terror campaign post Paris, Western media coverage endures when Westerners are killed in the West, all other attacks have less value.

Here are some other items of note from this past week’s terror campaign.

The Islamic State against all enemies – Muslim, Christian, Shi’a, Sunni, Arab, Western

Some have incorrectly suggested that the Islamic State nimbly focuses its attacks predominately against Westerners or certain audiences. This week’s Islamic State attacks and resulting deaths point to the opposite conclusion: all enemies of the Islamic State are targets and Muslims have suffered the worst. In Saudi Arabia alone, the Islamic State hit near a Western consulate, a Shi’a mosque and a Sunni holy site. Lebanon saw targeting of Christians. Bangladesh brought a focus on Westerners. The Istanbul attack killed mostly Muslims. Yemen and Saudi Arabia saw the Islamic State concentrating on security forces. Each Islamic State affiliate may pick and choose certain targets for local reasons but as an aggregate, no one faith or ethnicity is spared from the Islamic State’s wanton violence.

Islamic State’s Remaining Fighters: Die In Place Or Go Out With A Bang?

The Islamic State lost Fallujah last week and some of its members that tried to escape were pulverized in massive airstrikes. Many Islamic State foreign fighters can’t return home or have no Islamic State affiliate to drift back to. For those homeless foreign fighters, the choice is simple: they can either die in place fighting for a crumbling caliphate or they can go out as martyrs striking their homelands or a regional or international targets. The Islamic State owns the largest number of homeless foreign fighters in history. As the group loses turf, they’ll likely become part of the largest human missile arsenal in history and be directed against any and all soft targets they can reach. This campaign is likely not the end of the Islamic State’s suicide campaign, but only the beginning.

Foreign Fighters Go As Far As Their Passports Will Take Them

 Last winter, the West suffered from the Islamic State’s decision to allegedly dispatch hundreds of European foreign fighters back to their homelands. Paris and Brussels burned and operatives across a host of European countries were arrested. Western passport holders and those hidden in refugee flows pushed as far as they could to hit high profile soft targets. Turkey struggled for years with foreign fighters passing easily through their borders into Syria and fighters from the Caucasus and Central Asia found the country quite permissible, likely facilitating this past week’s Russian-speaking suicide bombers. Richard Engel reported that as many as 35 operatives were recently dispatched into Turkey alone. The Yemeni and Saudi attacks focused more heavily on security forces and were likely perpetrated by Islamic State pledges from their respective countries and possibly a Pakistani. The bottom line: the Islamic State is sending its bombers to the locations where they can achieve the biggest results. They are not in short supply of Western, Middle Eastern, Central Asian, or Russian operatives – expect more suicide attacks in places that al Qaeda only dreamed of reaching.

Strong Counterterrorism Matters: The Islamic State Preys On The Weak

Those countries with stronger counterterrorism and security apparatuses have fared the best this past week. The Saudis, long known for squelching terrorists in their midst, sustained far fewer deaths than other countries hit this week. Iraq, despite years of investment, seems unable to protect itself from suicide attacks with yet another massive suicide bombing. Lebanon and Bangladesh, two locations of rising promise for the Islamic State (see Figure 1), have weaker security environments and local conditions ripe for extremism. The Islamic State will likely learn from this past week and exploit those places where they got the greatest return on their investment.

Is The Islamic State Looking For An Exit Strategy?

In conclusion, the Islamic State’s rapid pace of violence may come at a time when they need to find a new home for the brand. Their caliphate revenues and oil production continue to dry up. They will need to shift to illicit schemes and donations to survive. Successful attacks attract investors: will this latest string of violence bring money? Probably not, but what this rampant violence can do is signal to Islamic State’s central leadership which affiliates are still committed to the Islamic State brand. Affiliates, existing or emerging, may want to carry on the Islamic State’s vision outside of Syria and Iraq. Much like al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula was for the al Qaeda Central during their downturn, Islamic State Central will need an affiliate to carry the black banner forward or their caliphate experiment will crumble as fast as it was created.

About the author:
* Clint Watts is a Robert A. Fox Fellow in the Foreign Policy Research Institute’s Program on the Middle East as well as a Senior Fellow with its Program on National Security. He serves the President of Miburo Solutions, Inc. Watts’ research focuses on analyzing transnational threat groups operating in local environments on a global scale. Before starting Miburo Solutions, he served as a U.S. Army infantry officer, a FBI Special Agent on a Joint Terrorism Task Force, and as the Executive Officer of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point (CTC).

Source:
This article was published by FPRI.

The FBI’s recommendation against the prosecution of Hillary Clinton for her wanton, illegal mishandling of classified information in her emails puts on display once again the reality of the so-called rule of law in the USA. This reality is, above all, that the system is trifurcated: there is effectively one set of rules for the great mass of white, middle-class citizens; another set for blacks, Mexicans, and poor whites; and, most notably, another set for the powerful and connected members of the ruling elite.

For the first group, which for the most part tries to be “law-abiding” and supportive of “law enforcement,” the laws, regulations, and cops are obnoxious at times, but not for most people intolerable. People get used to being told what they must do and refrain from doing. They may grouse about certain laws, but they remain loyal to the political and governmental system that puts those laws in place and oversees their enforcement. These people are inclined to view instances of police abuse as the misfeasance of “a few bad apples.”

The second group has a clearer view of reality. They understand for the most part that the laws and the cops are not there for their protection, and indeed are part of an overall arrangement that looks all too much as if it were deliberately designed to humiliate, oppress, and persecute them, often in the guise of enforcing drug laws or petty commercial regulations that act as barriers to their self-employment or operation of small businesses. To members of this group, the cops are an army of occupation, and the disproportionate number of blacks and Mexicans in jails and prisons as well as the various state and local convict-labor arrangements testify fairly clearly to the correctness of their perception.

L’affaire d’Hillary, in contrast, shows that the system’s kingpins are pretty much above the laws, even the laws that they themselves have made and purport to enforce equally without fear or favor. The Clintons appear for all the world, and long have appeared, as a free-range criminal family with far-reaching elite connections—who’s to say what is bribe and what is shakedown?—amounting to what might well be described with a nod to Lady Macbeth herself as “a vast left-wing conspiracy.” So even when the FBI itself has the pelotas to report in great detail on Hillary’s law-breaking, it takes upon itself the pronouncement that a prosecutor would not have a case against her.

Meanwhile, thousands of members of the first group languish in prison for lesser offenses, and millions of the second group rot in jails, prisons, and under probation for actions that ought never to have been criminalized in the first place—above all, violations of the laws against the use, possession, and trafficking in certain substances that individuals wish to enjoy and have every right to enjoy without anyone’s molestation. But the prison-industrial system is happy, and isn’t that what counts in a system so corrupt that its stench fills the earth?

Yes, Americans purport to take great pride in possessing a system “of laws, not of men.” But it’s a gigantic joke, and not a funny one at all. It’s a rotten system from A to Z, but its rottenness bears with greatest force on those who occupy the periphery of American society, less heavily on those largely ignorant and ideologically self-blinded in the great mass of white, middle-class “respectable” people, and scarcely at all on the rich, well-connected, and politically powerful. In short, even in a country that imagined itself to be different—a city on a hill, blah, blah, blah—it turns out that things work here pretty much as they work and always have worked nearly everywhere on earth. The peasants suffer abuse and oppression, and the likes of Hillary Clinton and Co. laugh about the way things are all the way to the bank and the throne.

This article appeared at The Beacon.

The morning after five police officers were fatally shot in Dallas, Texas, police officers were ambushed and shot in the St. Louis suburb of Ballwin, Missouri and Valdosta, Georgia. Authorities in Tennessee said Thursday’s shooting also targeted cops.

Dallas PD says that they have discovered bomb making materials, rifles, ammunition, ballistic vests and a journal of combat tactics in Micah Johnson’s home. The man opened fire on Dallas police during a protest, killing 5 and wounding 7.

Investigators have interviewed over 200 officers, at least 12 of whom discharged their duty weapons during the shooting rampage, according to the report. Police also said that Micah Johnson had no criminal history, but information obtained by detectives “indicates that the suspect was an Army veteran” and that some witnesses described him as “a loner.”

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says that there appears to have been only one gunman in the Dallas shooting, AP reported.

The officer wounded in Missouri was taken by ambulance to the Mercy Hospital emergency room, according to reporter Mike Colombo.

He is in critical but stable condition, the Ballwin Police Department said Friday afternoon.

The Ballwin police officer was walking back to his squad car when the suspect got out of his car and ambushed the officer with a firearm before fleeing the scene, an unidentified source told KSDK’s Jacob Long.

Footage from the dashboard camera shows the officer was shot from behind, Ballwin PD chief told reporters.

The officer was shot in the neck during a traffic stop, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch’s Christine Byers reported. A weapon was recovered. Police described the suspect as a tall, thin African-American male wearing a gray T-shirt and blue jeans, and driving a blue Ford Taurus with Illinois temporary tags, according to KTVI.

The suspect was arrested after a search of known residences associated with him, Long reported.

The Ballwin officer is at least the second to have been shot in the US on Friday morning. An officer in Valdosta, Georgia was injured in an exchange of gunfire with a suspect.

The officer was investigating a report of a damaged vehicle when a man opened fire, which the officer returned, police said. Both men were injured and are expected to survive.

The suspect called 911 call to report a break-in, then ambushed and shot the officer, authorities clarified to AP on Friday afternoon.

The Valdosta officer was shot “multiple times,” Police Chief Brian Childress said, as quoted by AP.

“He is out of surgery now. His family is at the hospital. And I’m happy to report he’s going to be fine,” Childress said. “He’s in stable condition but he’s in the ICU as a precaution.”

One of the gunshots hit the man in the abdomen, just below his bulletproof vest, Georgia Bureau of Investigation spokesman Scott Dutton said. Other bullets hit the officer in his vest.

There’s nothing to indicate the Valdosta shooting is related to the one in Dallas, Childress said, though he noted it is still early in the investigation.

“You start to wonder. But any motive of why this happened this morning would be speculation,” Childress said.

In Texas, five police officers were killed and seven other cops and two civilians were injured by a gunman during a peaceful protest Thursday evening.

The Valdosta officer was wearing a body camera, and its footage has been turned over the the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, the police chief said.

The gunman who shot at cars on a Tennessee highway on Thursday morning was “troubled” by police shootings of African-Americans, and may have been targeting officers, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation said Friday afternoon.

Meanwhile, on Friday morning, police in Orlando, Florida received a “vague threat” that is being thoroughly investigated. The police department, still reeling from the aftermath of a massacre at a gay nightclub in the city that killed 49 people plus the shooter, would not give any details about the threat, citing security concerns.

At least 37 civilians have lost their lives and 62 others sustained injuries when Daesh militants carried out a bombing and shooting attack near a Shia shrine north of the Iraqi capital.

Security sources said a militant blew himself up at the external gate of the mausoleum of Sayyid Muhammad bin Ali al-Hadi in the city of Balad, situated 80 kilometers (50 miles) north of Baghdad, late on Thursday.

Several militants then stormed into the holy site and started shooting at pilgrims. Another bomber also detonated his explosives in the middle of the crowd, who were celebrating Eid al-Fitr festivities, which mark the end of the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, Reuters reported.

Security forces killed a third bomber and defused his explosives, the Iraqi Joint Operations Command said in a statement.

Daesh (Islamic State) claimed responsibility for the attack.

The militants also fired several mortar rounds at the mausoleum during the attack.

The development comes as the death toll from Sunday’s car bomb attacks in busy commercial areas of the capital has climbed to 292.

The first attack occurred at about 1 am local time (2200 GMT Saturday), when a bomber blew up his refrigerator truck packed with explosives at a crowded thoroughfare in the Baghdad’s south-central neighborhood of Karrada.

The area was busy at the time, as people were eating out and shopping late at night for Eid al-Fitr.

At least four buildings were severely damaged or partly collapsed, including a shopping mall that is thought to be the main target of the bombing. Burnt-out shells of a lot of vehicles parked in the area were scattered all around.

Shortly afterwards, a roadside bomb explosion ripped through Shallal market in the capital’s northern neighborhood of Shaab.

Daesh later claimed responsibility for the attacks, which it said were aimed at the Shia neighborhoods of the Iraqi capital.

Original article

Following Brexit, many banks, insurance and investment companies will have to transfer part of their businesses from London to the EU.

The following five European cities are most likely to replace London as the largest financial centers in the EU, DW wrote.

Frankfurt

Germany’s Frankfurt has probably the best chance of becoming Europe’s new financial capital, DW noted. The headquarters of leading German banks and investment companies, the largest stock exchange in continental Europe as well as numerous offices and branches of foreign financial institutions are located here. However, the main trump card is that the headquarters of the European Central Bank (ECB) is also located in the city.

Another important factor is the upcoming merger of the Frankfurt and London stock exchanges. The decision to combine the two most important European trading platforms was made in February 2016, when everyone expected the UK to stay in the EU.

Paris

Another possible candidate is the French capital. Whether it will become Europe’s financial capital will largely depend on the European Banking Authority (EBA).

On the one hand, the EBA might move to Frankfurt, where there are two other important financial regulators, and on the other, to Paris, where the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and the headquarters of the leading French banks are located.

Luxembourg, Dublin, Amsterdam

According to DW, Luxemburg, Dublin and Amsterdam also have good chances of becoming financial centers after Brexit.

European authorities in Brussels oppose the concentration of European institutions only in a few major centers and seek to relocate them in different EU cities. Therefore, the EBA could also move to Luxembourg, Dublin and Amsterdam.

English language, Anglo-Saxon culture and the offices of numerous high-tech companies from the United States all favor Dublin. This and low taxes are very important factors for British and American bankers.

The taxes in Luxembourg are also very low. This is one of the reasons why there are numerous investment funds located in the country. Amsterdam is also a likely candidate to become Europe’s financial center.The headquarters of the Dutch and Euronext stock exchanges are there, as well as longstanding close ties of local businesses with England.

Thus, according to DW, banks and financial companies are likely to relocate their businesses from London to a number of various cities in the euro zone, but the high-priority directions will still be Frankfurt and Paris.

By Jeff Seldin

Senior U.S. officials Friday tried to downplay concerns that the deadly Dallas shooting, which killed five police officers, was linked to any wider plot, even as some groups condemned the violence as domestic terrorism.

“It is my understanding that investigators have now publicly ruled out the possibility that the individual who carried out this terrible act of violence had any sort of connections to terrorist organizations, either in the United States or around the world,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said while briefing reporters in Warsaw, Poland.

Later at a news conference in New York, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said the shooter had “no known links or inspiration from any international terrorist organization.”

The suspect in Thursday’s attack, identified by investigators as Micah Xavier Johnson, was killed by police. Two other men and a woman were in police custody, though they had not been identified.

So far, Dallas police and the U.S. Justice Department have refused to classify the attack. Police said only that it was a “well-planned” ambush.

Despite the government’s caution, the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, was unequivocal in its condemnation of the Dallas shootings.

“This was an act of domestic terrorism,” SPLC President Richard Cohen said in a statement Friday. “We must not allow this act of violence to lead to more violence and more hate.”

The SPLC also said Friday that the suspected shooter was a fan of what it sees as black separatist hate groups — including the New Black Panther Party, the Nation of Islam and the Black Riders Liberation Party — liking them on Facebook.

Adding up the evidence

But whether the U.S. will officially label the Dallas shootings as domestic terrorism is not clear.

“The government will be looking at which charges are likely to get a conviction,” said William Yeomans, a fellow in law and government at American University Law School in Washington. “They’ll be looking at what the evidence warrants.”

Yeomans, who spent 26 years as a U.S. Justice Department attorney, said pursuing terrorism charges often depends on the intent of those perpetrating the violence.

“The Paris shootings, for instance, would be classic terrorism, or probably San Bernardino, where you attack the civilian population to terrorize the civilian population, to make it afraid, and you do it to serve some political or other objective,” he said.

But another crime that inspired terror, the shooting deaths of nine African-American churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina, last year, was treated not as terrorism but as a hate crime.

“That seemed very clearly to be racially motivated and to be a civil rights violation,” Yeomans said.

The accused shooter, a white man named Dylann Roof, was said to have written about his contempt for blacks, Jews and Hispanics on the internet, and a friend told police that Roof talked about starting a civil war.

Though it’s rare, U.S. officials could decide to treat a case like the Dallas shootings as both domestic terrorism and a hate crime, Yoemans said, noting the type of charges the government decides to pursue can have a wider, political impact.

“In the popular mind, it can send different messages,” he said.

Culture Minister Vladimir Medinsky has called on Vladimir Putin to order the education ministry to cut the number of hours in schools devoted to instruction in both domestic non-Russian and foreign languages in order that there will be more time for pupils throughout the country to learn Russian well.

Medinsky told the Presidential Council on Interethnic Relations this week that “we have quite seriously increased the regional component both in language and in history. We are devoting more attention now to foreign languages, and this also of course is correct, but it must not harm the study of Russian” (rbc.ru/society/03/07/2014/934389.shtml).

Pupils naturally benefit from knowing what he called “regional languages.” That is “a bonus, but it makes sense only as an addition to a deep knowledge of our common language,” Russian. Consequently, it makes sense to rebalance the number of hours spent in the study of non-Russian languages to the benefit of Russian.

Putin, who was present when Medinsky made this argument, seems inclined to agree. He said that test results in the area of Russian language knowledge this year were anything but encouraging. That is a matter of concern and should be the focus of expanded attention by the government.

The test results really were less than Moscow hoped for, especially since the educational authorities cut the passing grade by two points in order to ensure that most pupils passed. Moreover, Deputy Prime Minister Olga Golodets openly acknowledged that the tests showed “a reduction in the level of mastery of Russian.”

By Javid Alisgandarli*

What would happen if radical and extremist terrorist organizations such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda or the PKK were to gain access to the nuclear and radioactive materials required to create nuclear bombs and chemical weapons? This question has been worrying the international community and world leaders for over a decade. According to the head of UN Atomic watchdog, “Nuclear Terrorism has become an alarming possibility and countries are not doing enough to prevent it”. But what are the chances of this happening, and where can terrorists access highly enriched uranium, plutonium or other radioactive materials needed for the building of a nuclear bomb? This threat is imminent, and in most instances its seriousness is underestimated as post-Soviet nuclear facilities functioning beyond their lifespan and having poor security and safety controls pose a significant risk in this regard.

One of these facilities is Armenia’s Metsamor nuclear power plant, listed by the European Union and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as one of the five most dangerous nuclear facilities in the world. Built in the 1970’s, Metsamor is located about 35 kilometers west of the capital Yerevan and 20 km from Iğdır (Turkey). According to the IAEA, nuclear power stations should be situated at least 90 km away from human settlements. Moreover, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has also expressed numerous concerns over Metsamor NPP’s location in a seismically active zone; the plant is a source of serious danger for the whole Caucasus region.

After the 1988 Spitak earthquake, the authorities decided to shut down the plant, proof that the Armenian authorities recognized the risks posed by Metsamor power plant in the event of a natural disaster. However, due to domestic energy shortages the Armenian government decided to re-open the plant in 1993. The Unit 2 reactor was brought back into operation on October 26, 1995. Metsamor thus became the only nuclear reactor in the world to be re-opened after being shut down. The ongoing operation of this nuclear facility represents major security and ecological threats to the region, especially Turkey (given its proximity to the Iğdır region), Georgia, and Azerbaijan.

In addition, according to the Austrian Institute of Applied Ecology, Metsamor is one of the most dangerous nuclear power plants in Europe. Furthermore, considering Armenia’s weak financial position it is clear that the Armenian government would be unable to cope with the fallout from an accident. It is also argued that the existence of such a nuclear facility possesses not only environmental and safety challenges to the region, but also to the rest of the world, given the rise of nuclear smuggling and illegal distribution of radioactive materials via Armenia.

Environmental threats

There is some evidence of the leakage of radioactive elements, which are known to be highly dangerous to human health. The Iğdır plain, Ardahan, Kars and Erzurum are all vulnerable to radiation effects from the Metsamor plant. Residents in Iğdır claim they see the effects of radiation on the vegetables and fruits that they are growing. Additionally, the Armenian plant operators allow water used to cool to nuclear power plant to flow back into the Arpachay and Aras rivers. This causes irreversible damage to the environment and pollutes the rivers. According to the Agriculture Office in Iğdır, the number of animals born with physical defects has increased over recent years. Alongside this, rising cancer rates have been identified as one of the most dangerous effects of the Metsamor Nuclear Power Plant. Azerbaijani officials have repeatedly issued warnings concerning pollution of the transboundary rivers, particularly the Araz River, as a result of nuclear waste from the Metsamor NPP and other materials.

Like Ukraine’s notorious Chernobyl plant, Metsamor does not have a containment vessel, i.e. a layer of protection around the nuclear fuel designed to trap most of the radiation released during a nuclear reaction. The reactor vessel is also designed to withstand high pressures. This deficiency is an ongoing cause for concern for many who reside within the vicinity. Since 2003 Armenian chemist and environmentalist Jacob Sanasaryan has repeatedly proclaimed that Metsamor fails to meet international nuclear safety standards and has long exceeded its lifespan.

Nuclear Smuggling

In April 2016, three Armenian citizens were detained after they were caught trying to sell $200 million worth of uranium-238. Further investigation revealed that all three were employees of the Metsamor power plant. This gave rise to many questions among international observers: “Was it stolen or was it given over to the three by the Armenian nuclear agency for a share of the $200 million the material was expected to bring in on the black-market?” The most alarming aspect of this operation was that the smugglers had been trying to sell the highly enriched uranium – a crucial component of a nuclear bomb – to the undercover police masquerading as representatives of Middle Eastern terrorist organizations.

According to Armine Sahakyan, an Armenian-based human rights activist, arrests of Armenians illegally crossing the Georgian border to sell nuclear materials have significantly increased in the past few years. There have been number of Armenian-led nuclear smuggling attempts in Ukraine in recent years (Beregovo, 1999), Georgia (Samskhe-Javakheti, 2001; Sadakhli-Bagratashen, 2003/2004/2009/2014; Sarpi, 2007; Tbilisi, 2000/2010); and Armenia (Meghri, 2003).

These instances show that operating a power plant in a conflict-prone region against the backdrop of weak governance, poverty and numerous socio-political problems leave the door open for nuclear smugglers, which constitutes a global security threat. Emblematic of this issue,  Garic Dadayan has been arrested on the Georgian border for nuclear smuggling and illegal transportation of radioactive materials a number of times, and his early release has raised doubts among many observers. The fact that all the smugglers were arrested on Georgian territory or trying to pass through it gives rise to numerous questions: How was it possible to safely transport radioactive materials on this scale through Armenia without being noticed by the police? There is likelihood that the Armenian authorities – or at least corrupt officers – were involved at some stage in this process.

The prospect of highly enriched uranium and other nuclear and radioactive materials reaching the hands of terrorist organizations is deeply alarming, not only for the South Caucasus region but also for the world at large, given that the terrorists interested in obtaining these materials are often targeting Europe and the West in their acts of violence. The international community should not be silent in the face of this threat. No government should be able to take unilateral decisions regarding the operation of such a dangerous facility. This plant is essentially a ticking time bomb located at the heart of the Caucasus.

*Javid Alisgandarli is a foreign policy analyst for the Baku-based Center for Strategic Studies (SAM) and lecturer at Baku State University.

The tragedy that is America has deepened with the news that several people on Thursday organized a military-style sniper attack targeting police in Dallas during a protest march and rally against police brutality and killings of black people in that city.<

The murder of anybody, whether it’s a police officer or someone who is simply stopped by a cop for a minor traffic violation and is then shot because a jumpy officer mistakes reaching for a wallet to be reaching for a gun, as happened just two days ago in Minnesota, is a dreadful thing.

But it has to be said that, with American police — most of them white — gunning down over 500 people — most of them black or brown and most of them unarmed — in just the first half of this year, it was bound to happen that somebody, or some group of people, would decide to retaliate by taking revenge on the police. That’s not to justify what happened in Dallas, and we still need to learn who was involved in this shooting of 12 cops and two civilian protesters, killing five police officers, and what their motives were. It’s just to say that if the police continue to treat one segment of American society as enemy combatants in a war zone, and if the legal system continues to give brutal cops a pass when they maim or kill innocent citizens, including young children, effectively granting them immunity for their atrocities, there will inevitably be a violent reaction.

Recall the origins of the Black Panther movement, which grew out of a period of urban riots and insurrections across the country to which the nation responded not with jobs, social programs and better school funding, but with military assaults and occupations by armed soldiers. The Panthers openly armed themselves and started shadowing police on patrol in their communities, determined to make it clear that police could not occupy their communities and abuse the residents with impunity. Their bold actions were effective, but they brought down on themselves the full repressive force of the federal government, which launched a full-scale attack to destroy the Panther organization, using informants, agents provocateur, dirty tricks, mass arrests and murder.

In the post 9-11 era of military policing, the situation in minority communities today is at least as bad as, and probably worse, than it was in the 1960s. Social welfare programs that were created in response to the ‘60s riots, have been gutted, causing poverty and hopelessness to spread and deepen. Prisons have been filled with mostly non-white inmates as sentencing guidelines have become stricter and sentences longer. Violence in urban neighborhoods has exploded, and police today in many cities perceive themselves not as “peace officers” but as soldiers operating in hostile war zones, and act accordingly.

Can we be surprised then, that there has been a military-style response in one of those cities?  That is not to justify this bloody act in Dallas, just to explain its inevitability.

There will no doubt be calls, particularly this having happened in Texas, for an even more militaristic crackdown by police on minority neighborhoods. But that would be a terrible mistake. What is needed is an amping down of the violence on both sides — the communities and the police. And also an amping down of the rhetoric, particularly by political leaders.

American society needs to start living up to its demonstrably false claim to be a just society of equality under the law.

This is a good place to note that while this deadly assault on police in Dallas represents the worst attack on law enforcement personnel in memory, it is not the first planned coordinated sniper attack in Texas or the US.  The last one, which was reportedly planned but never activated, was to have taken place in neighboring Houston, in November 2011.  It was not, however, intended to target police officers. Rather, it was intended to assassinate the leaders of the Houston Occupy movement, which was just getting going in that city that fall.

A heavily redacted memorandum (provided to us by the Partnership for Civil Justice and obtained by that public interest lawfirm in a pile of documents it received in response to a Freedom of Information request), sent from the Houston FBI office to the Bureau’s national headquarters in Washington, DC explains:

“An identified [DELETED] as of October planned to engage in sniper attacks against protesters in Houston, Texas, if deemed necessary. An identified [DELETED] had received intelligence that indicated the protesters in New York and Seattle planned similar protests in Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, and Austin, Texas. [DELETED] planned to gather intelligence against the leaders of the protest groups and obtain photographs, then formulate a plan to kill the leadership via suppressed sniper rifles. (Note: protests continued throughout the weekend with approximately 6000 persons in NYC. ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests have spread to about half of all states in the US, over a dozen European and Asian cities, including protests in Cleveland 10//8/11 at Willard Park which was initially attended by hundreds of protesters.”

A second document, a memo from the Jacksonville, Florida FBI office sent out to a number of regional FBI offices and to Bureau headquarters in D.C., indicated that the plan, while not activated in Houston, may have been put on hold indefinitely:

“On 13 October 20111, writer sent via email an excerpt from the daily [DELETED] regarding FBI Houston’s [DELETED] to all IAs, SSRAs and SSA [DELETED] This [DELETED] identified the exploitation of the Occupy Movement by [LENGTHY DELETION] interested in developing a long-term plan to kill local Occupy leaders via sniper fire.”

The really disturbing aspect of all this is that when ThisCantBeHappening! contacted the FBI in Washington to find out what the Bureau had done about this deadly plot, which, as described, sounds like it may have involved some law enforcement or perhaps private security organization in Houston, we were basically blown off, and advised to contact the Houston FBI office or the Houston Police. The former would not return calls, and the latter claimed not to have even heard of the plot.

There were never any arrests of the Houston sniper plotters, though the FBI normally makes a big public announcement whenever it busts up some real or manufactured terrorism plot, suggesting that the Bureau was not at all concerned about this known plan to murder leaders of a lawful protest movement against corporate power.

Again, none of this justifies the murder of police officers, but it is important to note the grotesque double standard of justice that exists, not just in Texas, but in the nation as a whole.

Organizing to defend a community from abusive police, back in the late 1960s, prompted the US government to organize a massive coordinated campaign of  ruthless repression against the perpetrators — the Black Panther Party. But organizing a plot to murder the leaders of a peaceful demonstration against corporate power in the capital of the US oil industry apparently led to no action at all by the nation’s top law enforcement agency. (Nor did anyone in Congress see fit to call a hearing to investigation this plot of the resulting FBI inaction.)

The same double standard applies to the problem of police brutality and murder of blacks and other people of color. If a cop is killed  — especially by a person of color — the full weight of the law enforcement and legal establishment is brought down on the alleged perpetrator. A good example of this is the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, the Philadelphia journalist who was convicted in an abomination of a trial in 1982 for the 1981 killing of a white Philadelphia police officer. Sentenced to death initially, Abu-Jamal spent over two decades on Pennsylvania’s death row before ultimately having that sentence overturned by a federal court, leaving him facing life without possibility of parole. But at every turn, from being left to bleed to death in a police van from a police bullet before finally being brought to a hospital to having his legal appeals rejected by higher courts that had granted relief to other prisoners on the same grounds, down to the present time where the state’s Dept. of Corrections is leaving him untreated for a severe diagnosed case of easily curable active Hepatitis C, Abu Jamal has been abused by police and by the legal system.

Yet as we have seen over and over, especially in the past few years thanks to the proliferation of documentation via cellphones, when police murder an unarmed black or brown suspect (and often a white one too), they escape prosecution, or if prosecuted, skate free on a technicality.

A common refrain at #blacklivesmatter protests is the phrase “No justice, no peace!”

The intent of that phrase is that as long as there is no justice there will be protests. The reality, though, in a nation that so readily turns to guns to solve its grievances, is that there will also be events like what just happened in Dallas.

It’s time to turn things around, not by just ramping up the police repression, but by making justice a reality for all, and not just the privileged class.