(EurActiv) — Bulgaria, Romania and Latvia had the most road deaths per capita in the EU in 2015, tarnishing the EU’s record on vehicle safety in a year when the number of people killed by vehicle crashes rose for the first time in almost twenty years.

Around ten people per 100,000 residents were killed by vehicles last year in Bulgaria, according to figures published today by Eurostat. Bulgaria’s roads are the most deadly, topping the list with the most deaths in the EU.

Violeta Bulc, the EU transport policy chief, has increased pressure on national governments to crack down on reckless and dangerous drivers since it was revealed earlier this year that the number of traffic deaths increased between 2014 and 2015 across all 28 EU countries.

“We lose 70 people per day in Europe on European roads and we’ve done enormous efforts to bring this number down,” Bulc told reporters yesterday.

Bulc has said that driverless cars could help to decrease the number of people killed in traffic. Her office will publish a strategy paper at the end of this month with details of how the Commission will speed up the development of driverless car technology. The executive is already funding research on driverless cars and meeting with industry groups and car companies to hammer out new policies, including on how driverless cars will use roads and car insurance rules.

The European Commission pledged to slash the number of road deaths down to around 16,000 per year by 2020. Last year, 26,000 people were killed on roads in the EU. In 2010, 31,400 people died as the result of vehicle crashes.

Road deaths have generally declined in the EU over the last 20 years, but 2015 marked a small increase in the number of people killed on roads for the first time since 1997.

Malta and Sweden recorded the lowest numbers of road deaths, according to the 2015 figures.

Traffic injuries and deaths are on the rise in EU countries. Last year, injuries and deaths went up by 26.7% in Cyprus compared to 2014 numbers. In Finland, crashes caused 16.2% more injuries and deaths in 2015. Croatia, Austria, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Malta also reported significant increases in injuries and deaths caused by vehicle crashes.

In 2001, the European Commission adopted an action programme with the objective of halving the number of road fatalities by 2010, from around 40,000 per year. The programme was broadly successful, resulting in a reduction of casualties to over 35,000 in 2009, which is the equivalent of a medium-sized town.

The programme has since been replaced by a new one running until 2020, with seven strategic objectives. Measures include mandatory safety measures for vehicles, safer road infrastructure, better safety enforcement and a focus on motorcyclists.

The Commission wants to halve the number of road deaths in the EU between 2010 and 2020. As of the end of 2015, the figure had only dropped by 17%.

A Santa Claus at Seminole Towne Center in Sanford, Florida has been removed from his duties after an Oviedo woman claimed that he told her child Hillary Clinton was on his naughty list.

The mother told Towne Center management the incident happened Tuesday night when she brought two of her children to see Santa.

She said when her 10-year-old daughter told him what she wanted for Christmas, he told her she was on his nice list.

She said he then asked her, “Do you know who is on my naughty list? Hillary Clinton.” The girl said he then laughed.

The girl’s mother called management, and a representative told News 6 that mall officials called the company that hired Santa.

News 6 found out that company is The Noerr Program, Inc., which provides Santas to malls around the country. A spokesman said the Santa in question told them he thought it was a joke, but when the mother called to complain, they removed him from the mall floor.

Spokesman Charlie Russell said his company apologized to the girl’s family.

He also said the Santa in question was sent to counseling in human resources.

When asked if the Santa would be returning, Russell said he didn’t know. Santa learns that it isn’t just the FBI that can’t mess with Hillary.

Doctors and nurses at a pediatric hospital in eastern Aleppo scrambled Friday to evacuate babies in incubators from underground shelters to safety after the facility in the besieged Syrian city was bombed for the second time this week.

Medics and aid workers also reported a suspected attack involving toxic gas in a district on the western edge of the province. At least 12 people, including children, were treated for breathing difficulties, said Adham Sahloul of the Syrian American Medical Society which supports health facilities in Aleppo.

International inspectors have held the government responsible for using chemicals in attacks on civilians which Damascus denies.

Airstrikes also hit a village in a rural area of Aleppo province, killing seven members of a family, including four children, opposition activists said.

Friday was the fourth day of renewed assaults by Syrian warplanes on districts of eastern Aleppo, an enclave of 275,000 people. The onslaught began Tuesday when Syria’s ally, Russia, announced its own offensive on the northern rebel-controlled Idlib province and Homs province in central Syria.

Since then, more than 100 people have been killed across northern Syria.

Friday’s airstrikes in Aleppo hit a complex of four hospitals that had been attacked two days earlier. The latest strikes forced the pediatric hospital and a neighboring facility to stop operating.

“Now it is being bombed. … I am sorry. … I have to go to transfer the children,” the head of the pediatric hospital wrote in a text message to The Associated Press.

The incubators had already been moved underground for safety, but with bombs falling all around the facility, hospital workers had to rush them to a safer place despite the danger.

Nurses rushed to get babies to safety, and one was seen carrying a blanket-wrapped infant. She then hugged and comforted another nurse who was sobbing as she picked up a baby.

Mohamad Abboush, an east Aleppo resident, said that the airstrikes killed two of his relatives, his 45-year-old uncle and 12-year-old cousin, on Friday morning. As they sought medical care for other relatives wounded in the attack, he said they found one hospital in ruins and another in flames.

The airstrike had completely destroyed a four-story apartment block where his relatives had been living in the Tariq Al-Bab neighborhood, he said. The survivors had been taken to houses in another area, but nowhere was safe.

“The whole of Aleppo is being bombed,” he said.

In Geneva, UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson said that if investigators identified who was to blame for the deadly Sept. 19 attack on the UN aid convoy in Syria, the “war crime” could be brought to the UN Security Council.

The US has said it believes two Russian aircraft carried out the strike near Aleppo, which killed 20 people, destroyed a warehouse and 18 trucks, and shattered a one-week truce. Russia has denied involvement.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon launched an independent board of inquiry into the attack, which UN satellite imagery experts said was an airstrike.

“We now have a three-person board of inquiry. And they are in the area, I believe, and were a couple of days ago, even last week I think, and are working on it,” Eliasson told a news conference.

“Of course we know that it’s a difficult mission because it’s a place where access is very difficult,” he added.

“We know of course that manipulation of evidence can take place and evidence can disappear and so forth.”
Meanwhile, a US-backed Kurdish-Arab alliance fought fiercely to drive Daesh from a hilltop north of Raqqa — the de facto capital of the terror group.

Few in Russia appear happy with the use of the non-ethnic term “rossiisky” to refer to all residents of Russia, but even fewer are comfortable with the idea now being floated that all of the people of that country should be referred to as “russkiye,” a word that has since Soviet times has referred only to the members of the ethnic Russian nation.

That non-Russians should be opposed to such a shift, one many say they saw coming when Vladimir Putin gave his blessing for the term “rossiiskaya natsiya,” an oxymoronic combination of a political term and an ethnic one, is no surprise: it would at least in principle point to a new drive to downgrade their status and ultimately assimilate them.

But that ethnic Russians should be opposed may seem counter-intuitive. However, there are good reasons for their fears. If the state reduces what they see as their unique ethnicity merely to citizenship, then many of them believe that the content of their ethnic group will be gutted in much the same way the Soviet system did with its talk of a “Soviet people.”

The anger of non-Russians about Putin’s proposal and about the ways it almost certainly would slide in the direction of assimilationist pressures on them to become ethnic Russians has attracted a great deal of attention, but both the anger of Russians about that term and the ways they will be pushing Putin in that dangerous direction have not.

Now that may soon change as a result of arguments against “rossiisky” and for “russky” instead that have been advanced by film director Stanislav Govorukhin and the support they are getting from commentators like Aleksey Vladimirov of the Russian nationalist Rex news agency. And their views are more likely to kill Putin’s idea than the opposition of non-Russians.

In interviews for both the electronic and print media this week, Govorukhin says that his position is rooted in the fact that “the entire world knows us, including Bashkirs, Yakuts, and Ukrainians as Russians [‘russkiye’]; and now we must explain to everyone that we aren’t ‘russkiye’ but ‘rossiyane’?” (kp.ru/daily/26608/3624960/).

According to him, “the expression ‘russky people’ refers to its multi-national nature, and russkiye for a long time has designated not a specific nation but rather the community of people living in Russia.” Some “fools” may be offended, but they shouldn’t be, given that this was the practice in tsarist times.

Govorukhin added that the word “rossiyanin,” the noun for someone who is part of the civic nation is “offensive.” Even more offensive are its derivatives, “’rossiyanka’ and ‘rossiyane.’ These should have no place in the Russian language or in Russian reality (nazaccent.ru/content/22399-govoruhin-nazval-otvratitelnym-slovo-rossiyanin.html).

In Soviet times, people called themselves “Soviet people,” but “now, there is no Soviet power and therefore I do not understand who we are.”

Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov was asked about Govorukhin’s words, but he declined to comment. Someone who did not was Aleksey Vladimirov of the Rex news agency. He declared bluntly: “Govorukhin is Right” because those who want to introduce the term “rossiyanin” are the same who allowed privatization (iarex.ru/articles/53272.html).

The historian said that Govorukhin has raised the question in the proper way, “but the problem is not in the offensiveness of the word itself, although [rossiisky] is undoubtedly that.” The real problem is “why and how” people shifted from “russkiye” to “rossiyane” and understanding just who is to blame.

According to Vladimirov, the people who wanted to get rid of the self-designator “russki” were the same ones who wanted to break with the Soviet past and “with the historical self-consciousness of russkiye people and russkaya civilization.” Indeed, they were the ones who did this even as they privatized the economy and destroyed the common values of Soviet times.

Consequently, to restore unity, it is necessary not to accept the term “rossiisky” but to do away with it and go back to “russky.” Vladimirov and Govorukhin clearly believe that is necessary but many ethnic Russians are certain to dissent from their view, especially since they have benefitted from privatization.

In short, Putin has opened a Pandora’s box; and it is not clear now whether even hope will remain in the near future.

Half of all coral species in the Caribbean went extinct between 1 and 2 million years ago, probably due to drastic environmental changes. Which ones survived? Scientists working at the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) think one group of survivors, corals in the genus Orbicella, will continue to adapt to future climate changes because of their high genetic diversity.

“Having a lot of genetic variants is like buying a lot of lottery tickets,” said Carlos Prada, lead author of the study and Earl S. Tupper Post-doctoral Fellow at STRI. “We discovered that even small numbers of individuals in three different species of the reef-building coral genus Orbicella have quite a bit of genetic variation, and therefore, are likely to adapt to big changes in their environment.”

“The implications of these findings go beyond basic science,” said Monica Medina, research associate at STRI and the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History and associate professor at Pennsylvania State University. “We can look forward to using similar approaches to predict demographic models to better manage the climate change threatened Orbicella reefs of today.”

To look back in time, the team of researchers working at the Smithsonian’s Bocas del Toro Research Station and Naos Molecular and Marine Laboratories collected fossils from ancient coral reefs and used high-resolution geologic dating methods to determine their ages. They compared the numbers of fossilized coral species at different time points. One of the best-represented groups in the fossil collections were species in the genus Orbicella. In addition to the fossil collections, they also used whole genome sequencing to estimate current and past numbers of several Orbicella species.

Within a single individual there are two copies of their genetic material, in some instances, one copy is different than the other and is called a genetic variant. The authors first assembled the full genomic sequence of an individual from Florida and then, using it as an anchor, reconstructed the genetic variation contained within single individuals. Depending on the amount of the genetic variation at certain intervals across the genome, the authors were able to recover the population sizes of each species at different times in the past.

Between 3.5 to 2.5 million years ago, numbers of all coral species increased in the Caribbean. But from 2 to 1.5 million years ago, a time when glaciers moved down to cover much of the northern hemisphere and sea surface temperatures plunged, the number of coral species in the Caribbean also took a nosedive. Sea levels fell, eliminating much of the original shallow, near-shore habitat.

“Apart from the species that exist today, all species of Orbicella that survived until 2 million years ago suddenly went extinct,” write the authors. When huge numbers of species die out, it makes room for other species to move in and for new species to develop to occupy the space the others held.

Two species that grow best in shallow water doubled in number at about the same time that their sister species and competitor, the organ pipe Orbicella (O. nancyi) disappeared.

When a species declines during an extinction event, it loses more and more genetic variation, and sometimes does not have much to work with during the recovery period. Scientists call this a genetic bottleneck. Orbicella was able to recover after the bottleneck. “It’s incredible how predictions from genetic data correlated so well with observations from the fossil and environmental record,” said Michael DeGiorgio (assistant professor of biology at Pennsylvania State University).

“We see hope in our results that Orbicella species survived a dramatic environmental variation event,” said Prada. “It is likely that surviving such difficult times made these coral populations more robust and able to persist under future climatic change.”

“The in-depth analysis of population size in a now ESA-threatened coral, as well as the release of its genome and that of its close relatives (which are also threatened) would be of great interest to coral reef researchers addressing conservation issues,” said Nancy Knowlton, senior scientist emeritus at STRI, currently at the National Museum of Natural History.

It turns out bird poop helps cool the Arctic.

That’s according to new research from Colorado State University atmospheric scientists, who are working to better understand key components of Arctic climate systems.

Publishing in Nature Communications and featured by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science Jeff Pierce and graduate student Jack Kodros present evidence linking ammonia emissions from summertime Arctic seabird-colony excrement, called guano, to newly formed atmospheric aerosol particles. These particles can in turn influence Arctic cloud properties and their effects on climate.

Clouds play a key role in modulating Arctic temperature; thus, understanding factors that influence clouds is essential, Pierce says. Central to the development of clouds is the availability of cloud condensation nuclei – small atmospheric particles around which water can condense.

Using a combination of observations and computer modeling, Pierce, Kodros and co-authors at Dalhousie University, University of Toronto, and Environment and Climate Change Canada determined that migratory-seabird colonies have a definitive influence on atmospheric particles and clouds in the pristine summertime Arctic.

They report the presence of summertime bursts of atmospheric particles linked to ammonia emissions from seabird-colony guano. These particles can spread throughout the Arctic, fostering cloud-droplet formation, and in turn reflect sunlight back to space for a net cooling effect.

“This newly identified and fascinating ecological-atmospheric connection highlights the interconnectedness of the many components of Earth’s climate system,” Pierce said.

An old mystery as to the cause of especially smelly camel urine, with implications for the millions of people affected by African parasites called trypanosomes, has been solved by biochemists from Trinity College Dublin. These parasites frequently cause fatalities via sleeping sickness.

The biochemists have unearthed a metabolic by-product of trypanosome activity known as indolepyruvate, which may offer excellent possibilities for developing anti-trypanosome drugs and therapies because inhibiting its production may be key in fighting the parasite.

Additionally, because this by-product modifies the behavior of important immune cells and prevents them from becoming fully active, it has potential as an inhibitor of common inflammatory diseases.

Professor in Biochemistry at Trinity, Derek Nolan, and his team collaborated with Professor of Biochemistry, Luke O’Neill, and his inflammation research group to make the discovery. Their findings have just been published in the journal PNAS.

Trypanosomes are parasites of the mammalian bloodstream that rely on biting flies – like the tsetse fly — for transmission. They must constantly evade their hosts’ immune defences through waves of infections, while simultaneously prolonging the survival of their hosts, so as to ensure life-cycle completion and future transmission via other biting flies.

Neither vaccination nor prophylactic intervention is possible, and all current treatments have associated limitations that restrict their application. Although cases of human infection have declined recently these parasites still represent a major societal burden across 36 sub-Saharan countries that are within range of the tsetse fly vector.

According to Professor Nolan, “Camel herders have long known that the urine of camels infected with trypanosomes has a pungent odour, and is reddish brown in color. We found that this is directly attributable to parasite breakdown of aromatic amino acids, such as tryptophan, in the host, and to the excretion of the novel by-products into the bloodstream.”

“The advantage for the parasite of excreting indolepyruvate is that it modulates the inflammatory and immune responses of the host — especially at the peaks of infection. This prolongs host survival and thereby potentiates the transmission of the parasite to the tsetse fly, which ensures it can complete its life cycle.”

“We are hopeful that by solving the riddle of the putrid camel pee, these new insights have unearthed a potential target for anti-trypanosome therapies, which are badly needed as sleeping sickness continues to claim a huge number of lives in sub-Saharan Africa,” Nolan said.

Bangladesh has singularly failed to protect its Ahmadi, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu and Shi’a Muslim communities from a new outbreak of targeted attacks and communal violence, says a report by Minority Rights Group International (MRG).

According to the report, since 2013, the country has been hit by a series of violent incidents targeting its religious minorities by militant groups, some of which claim affiliation with groups such as the so-called Islamic State or al-Qaeda.

MRG’s Carl Soderbergh said that many of the abuses suffered by minority groups have been carried out in a climate of impunity.

“Many abuses appear to be carried out with the complicity of law enforcement agencies and the judiciary,” said Soderbergh on Nov. 17.

MRG’s report says that communal violence driven by political rivalries — long a problem for religious minorities — continues to take place, with perpetrators enjoying apparent impunity.

The rights group further said that for all of these groups, who alongside atheists, secular bloggers and liberals, have borne the brunt of extremist attacks, this violence is the latest chapter in a long history of discrimination. Despite the promise of independence in 1971 and the passing of a secularist constitution the following year, in the ensuing years an increasingly restrictive religious nationalism has sidelined Bangladesh’s minorities within their own country.

Who will become the next chair of the Democratic National Committee? This leadership contest has significant implications for the future of American politics. The choice will help determine how the Democratic party responds to its extraordinary defeats in recent years, ending with the election of Donald Trump.

You might think this overwhelming drubbing would cause the Democratic party to reorganize itself into a very different party from the one it’s become – which is essentially a giant fundraising machine, too often reflecting the goals and values of the moneyed interests that make up the bulk of its funding.

Don’t bet on it.

For one thing, many vested interests don’t want the Democratic party to change. Most of the money it raises ends up in the pockets of political consultants, pollsters, strategists, lawyers, advertising consultants and advertisers themselves, many of whom have become rich off the current arrangement. They naturally want to keep it.

For another, the Democratic party apparatus is ingrown and entrenched. Like any old bureaucracy, it only knows how to do what it has done for years. Its state and quadrennial national conventions are opportunities for insiders to meet old friends and for aspiring politicians to make contacts among the rich and powerful. Insiders and the rich aren’t going to happily relinquish their power and perquisites, and hand them to outsiders and the non-rich.

Most Americans who call themselves Democrats never hear from the Democratic party except when it asks for money, typically through mass mailings and recorded telephone calls in the months leading up to an election. The vast majority of Democrats don’t know the name of the chair of the Democratic National Committee or of their state committee. Almost no registered Democrats have any idea how to go about electing their state Democratic chair or vice-chair, and, hence, almost none have any influence over whom the next chair of the Democratic National Committee may be.

I have been a Democrat for 50 years – I have even served in two Democratic administrations in Washington, including a stint in the cabinet and have run for the Democratic nomination for governor in one state – yet I have never voted for the chair or vice-chair of my state Democratic party. That means I, too, have had absolutely no say over who the chair of the Democratic National Committee will be. To tell you the truth, I haven’t cared. And that’s part of the problem.
Nor, for that matter, has Barack Obama cared. He basically ignored the Democratic National Committee during his presidency, starting his own organization called Organizing for America. It was originally intended to marshal grass-roots support for the major initiatives he sought to achieve during his presidency, but morphed into a fund-raising machine of its own.

Finally, the party chairmanship has become a part-time sinecure for politicians on their way up or down, not a full-time position for a professional organizer. In 2011, Tim Kaine (who subsequently became Hillary Clinton’s running mate in the 2016 election) left the chairmanship to run, successfully, for the Senate from Virginia.

The chair then went to Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, a Florida congresswoman who had co-chaired Clinton’s bid for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008. This generated allegations in the 2016 race that the Democratic National Committee was siding with Clinton against Bernie Sanders – allegations substantiated by leaks of emails from the DNC.

So what we now have is a Democratic party that has been repudiated at the polls, headed by a Democratic National Committee that has become irrelevant at best, run part-time by a series of insider politicians. It has no deep or broad-based grass-roots, no capacity for mobilizing vast numbers of people to take any action other than donate money, no visibility between elections, no ongoing activism.

If it is to be relevant to the future, the Democratic party must be capable of organizing and mobilizing Americans in opposition to Donald Trump’s Republican party – turning millions of people into an activist army to peacefully resist what is about to happen by providing them with daily explanations of what is occurring in Trump’s administration, along with tasks that individuals and groups can do to stop or mitigate their harmful effects.

It must harness the energies and idealism of young people across the nation who were drawn to Bernie Sanders’s campaign because of its promise to get big money out of politics; reverse widening inequality; turn the nation’s wildly expensive and baroque healthcare complex into a single-payer system; reverse climate change; end the militarization of our police and the mass incarceration of our people and stop interminable and open-ended warfare.

And it must create a multi-racial, multi-ethnic coalition of working-class, middle-class, and poor white and black Americans and Latinos determined to wrest control of the economy back from an oligarchy of Wall Street moguls, corporate titans and billionaires who have used it for their own gain – starting with the president-elect.

That means helping working-class white people understand they’ve been conned by Trump into believing he’s a populist, and that their economic insecurities are due to a rigged game rather than to immigrants, black people, Latinos and Muslims.

In other words, to become a credible force that wins elections and addresses what ails America, the Democratic party must no longer represent America’s ruling class. It must be the voice of the dispossessed – now the majority of Americans.

The Democratic party will choose its new chair soon after the start of the year. So far the contestants include Howard Dean, a former DNC chair, Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, Naral Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue, Labor Secretary Tom Perez, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley and South Carolina Democratic party chair Jaime Harrison.

Between now and then, there will be a fierce behind-the-scenes struggle among the handful of contenders. I don’t know who will win, but I do know this: the party must transform itself from a fund-raising machine into a movement. That will be difficult, but not impossible. The times demand it. If the Democratic party fails in this mission, it will be supplanted by another organization capable of doing so.

By Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty

The convincing victory of Donald Trump, the Republican candidate, over the globally known Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, has stunned Americans and, indeed, the world at large.In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s sudden announcement to declare ₹500 and ₹1,000 notes as no longer legal tender has the thrown the country into a frenzy. Opposition parties, with nothing in common, are joining hands to bitterly criticise the implementation of demonetisation after carefully articulating that they are not against any campaign against black money. The criticism has crystallised around the issue of harassment and misery this move has caused to the poor and marginalised. There is justification for this criticism since the implementation has certainly shown up deficiencies. Adhoc measures, like using indelible ink as an afterthought to prevent repeat visits by those changing old currency for new, clearly shows a lack of common sense in planning. It did not require rocket science to anticipate that those holding large amounts of cash would use their friends, employees and others to make multiple trips to convert old currency.Though the analogy may not be exact, the US is facing its own Brexit moment. While markets took a dive, the most agitated people are Americans themselves.

In unprecedented demonstrations, Americans have taken to the streets in several cities across the US, proclaiming that they do not accept Trump as their president. These cities are mostly in the liberal West coast and East coast states, though not excluding some in the so-called “rust belt.” While some Americans gave vent to their disappointment at the Trump victory, President Barack Obama invited Trump, the forty fifth President-elect, to the White House, as per the time-honoured custom, to discuss the transition to a new presidency.Trump will have to appoint a transition team to discuss with the outgoing White House officials the transfer of power and get official briefings on all aspects of domestic and foreign policies.

The failure of the popular vote

No allegations of rigging or malpractice have surfaced. A silver lining in Clinton’s defeat is the fact that she got more more popular votes but lost because of the electoral system, based on an Electoral College which gives every state a certain number of Electoral College votes. The total Electoral College has 538 votes and it takes 272 votes to win. A candidate who wins a state even by one vote, gets all the Electoral College votes allotted to that state in a winner-takes-all system.Once a candidate gets past the magic figure of 272, it does not matter how many additional Electoral College votes are added thereafter. Nor does the total popular votes polled has any relevance.Trump will need all the help he can get from Obama and his team. As an individual, Trump brings zero experience of governance to the presidency.It is one of the peculiar customs of the American spoils system that around 3,500 officials in the American administration have to resign when Obama demits office. Trump has to fill in these vacancies. He can rehire many officials, if he wants, but most of them will be supporters of the Democratic Party and that will pose a problem.

American Ambassadors across the world will have to send their resignation letters as a formality. Most career Ambassadors will be retained, but political appointees will have to pack their bags and return home. This is the essence of the Presidential “spoils” system.

The Trump victory has defied conventional wisdom and the worst culprit has been the American media, which persistently spewed anti-Trump news and commentaries.

Pollsters were equally off the mark and consistently predicted a Hillary Clinton victory. Despite this demonisation and misleading poll predictions, Trump has proved them all wrong with his stunning victory, which underlines the power of the ordinary voter. No amount of punditry in news studios and opinion polls can gauge accurately the mood of the general voter, when the issue is approached through an ideological prism and apriori assumptions.

“The fact that Trump clinched the nomination should have alerted everyone to his potential to win”

The fact that Trump rode roughshod over his own Party’s leadership and clinched the nomination of his Party should have alerted everyone to his potential to win the Presidential election.

Many observers were also misled by the opposition to his candidature by Republican stalwarts, including former President George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, the presidential candidate who lost to Obama.

It is to Trump’s credit that despite these formidable impediments, his campaign team was obviously more tuned into the mood of voters, particularly in the American heartland, populated by blue collar white voters who had stagnated as de-industrialisation demolished jobs.

His slogan of making America great again appealed among white working class voters. As a businessman and not a politician, Trump pushed his candidature as an outsider, promising to clean up the incestuous power elite that inhabits the Washington beltway.

Trump’s victory is, no doubt, a victory of democracy, an assertion of the power of the people and the peaceful transfer of power, a fundamental aspect of democracy.

Hillary in for a rough time

Though Hillary Clinton telephoned Donald Trump to concede defeat on 9 November, her speech conceding her loss came later at the New Yorker Hotel in New York City. She also reminded her audience that there would a long hard battle against misogyny and bigotry.

President Trump may exact a price for the scathing attacks against by him by the Clinton campaign machine.

Speculation has already broken out in the American media that Trump will appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton’s errant emails and dodgy financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation.

Such speculation includes the possibility of President Obama issuing a Presidential pardon before he demits office. Trump is likely to play hardball on this issue and Hillary may run into rough weather soon. A pre-emptive presidential pardon may well be her salvation.

Candidate Trump and President Trump may turn out to be different personalities. In post victory public pronouncements, Trump has been cautious and used words meant to heal wounds. Trump has a lot on his plate, including how to avoid being prosecuted on charges of fraud brought against the issue of Trump University.

Trump’s lawyers are asking the court to postpone hearings with a view to ensure that after his assumptions of the Presidency, Trump will be covered by immunity from prosecution. Trump will have to take a call on several issues that will have domestic and international repercussions.

For instance, his rhetoric about building a wall to keep out Mexicans might get morphed into tougher immigration policies and the wall may well be virtual. After his victory, in a qualified statement, he has said that his administration will deport illegal immigrants who are involved in drugs and criminal activities.

The other main issue will be the international trade regimes. Protectionism may increase and major FTAs like NAFTA will come under pressure. Realities of economics and trade will, undoubtedly, mitigate any drastic steps. The TPP may well be dumped.

Trump is expected to reach out to Russian President Putin and this will lead to more cooperative relations with Russia. This will impact the situation in West Asia, particularly the vicious Syrian Civil War.

Trump’s anti-China rhetoric will also bump into the economic reality of the “Great wall of China” if Trump decides to “punish” China for currency manipulation. China and the USA are “joined at the hip” on trade and economic issues. Can Trump really “shoot from the hip”? Unlikely.

Trump and Asia

Except for immigration issues, India seems fairly insulated from any action that a Trump presidency may initiate. India-US relations have now developed a bipartisan consensus within the American political spectrum. Rapidly expanding defence ties and growing American investment in the “Make in India” programme are likely to go on unimpeded.

It might actually prosper under the Trump presidency. Any rapprochement with Russia will be welcomed by India whose gaze will be focused on China and the so-called American rebalance to Asia. Whether Trump give a free hand to China in Asia will keenly be watched in India.

Pakistan, probably, has no reason to celebrate. At any rate, Pakistan has already decided to become a client state of China, recognising that it being a client state of the US is no longer giving it the dividends it has enjoyed during the Cold War and later.

The Trump Presidency has thrown the US and the world back to the drawing board and predictions about policy moves are fraught with uncertainty. Wait and watch seems to be the default mode as Trump puts together his Cabinet to form the next government of the US.

This article originally appeared in Catch News.

By K. V. Kesavan

India-Japan partnership is regarded as a significant element contributing to the peace and stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The successful visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Tokyo for attending the annual bilateral summit on 11-12 November has become one more significant landmark in the bilateral relations. The importance of the summit should be seen in the persistent efforts made by both countries to broaden and diversify their partnership. The joint statement issued by both leaders testifies to it. Today the Indo-Japanese engagements are not just focused only on economic issues, but they include a wide range of interests including regional security, maritime issues, counter terrorism, energy security, UN reforms, climate change, etc.

For India, the single most important takeaway from the summit is the landmark agreement on civil nuclear cooperation which had eluded a solution for well over six years. For a vast country with ambitious development targets, India is in a dire need to augment its energy resources. India’s present level of electricity production cannot cope with the rapidly growing demands of the economy. In addition, India is the third largest importer of crude oil and the third largest emitter of carbon dioxide. Since nuclear energy would be relatively cheap and clean, India has to go all out to harness it. It is the only realistic option for ensuring a steady supply of energy to manage the skyrocketing demands for electricity. At present India’s nuclear power accounts for only three percent of its total electricity output, but it wants to increase its share to about twenty five percent in the next twenty years. In order to realise that goal, India has plans to build about eighty new nuclear reactors in the coming decades. If India could count on Japan’s advanced cutting edge reactor technologies, it could accelerate India’s progress in the nuclear power generation and take advantage of the convergent mutual interests with Japan. Japan itself is in the process of boosting the export of its nuclear technologies for peaceful uses. It has already signed and is in the process of signing many civil nuclear agreements with countries like Brazil, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Vietnam. But what has delayed the cooperation agreement with India is the fact Japan has not shared its nuclear technologies with any country that is not a signatory of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). However, this is not to overlook two exceptions. First, Tokyo entered into an agreement with France in 1972. Second, a similar accord was signed with China in 1982. Though both France and China were not signatories to the NPT at that time, they were recognised as nuclear powers under the NPT which they signed in 1992.

Though India has unmistakably demonstrated its non-proliferation credentials, the prospects of its joining the NPT are almost nil. But it has signed nuclear cooperation agreements with eleven countries including Russia, the US, Australia, South Korea and Canada.

Though both India and Japan are strongly committed to nuclear disarmament, their approaches to issues like the NPT and CTBT have differed. Tokyo reacted sharply to India’s first nuclear test in 1974 and suspended its ODA. In 1998, following India’s nuclear tests, Japan launched a scathing criticism of New Delhi’s action and took stringent economic measures including the suspension of its ODA. But, after 2001 Tokyo’s attitude towards India’s nuclear policy tended to gradually change, perhaps due to its own altered perception of the strategic situation in the Asia Pacific, including China’s emergence as an economic and military power and North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. In 2008, when India was negotiating its nuclear agreement with the US, Japan showed a positive attitude and supported it at the NSG. Japan saw a convergence of its own strategic interests in supporting India as an emerging power. From 2010, bilateral negotiations for a civil nuclear agreement were started , but soon faced a major obstacle due to the Fukushima disaster. After many hurdles, both Modi and Abe took the negotiations forward and succeeded in signing the agreement now.

Public opinion in Japan is sharply divided on the nuclear cooperation agreement — and since it has to be ratified by the Japanese Diet — the pros and cons of the accord will be heatedly debated. Considering the massive majority strength that the ruling LDP-Komeito coalition enjoys in both houses, ratification will not pose any problem. Any issue connected with Japan’s nuclear policy has always been a sensitive one which draws the concerns of large segments of the Japanese society. Influential anti-nuclear groups organise big demonstrations to register their concerns and opposition. This phenomenon has become far more pronounced since the 2011 Fukushima disaster. In this connection, one should note how the Fukushima crisis has completely changed the nuclear energy scenario of Japan. At present, only one or two reactors have resumed their operations and it is a Herculean task to reactivate the rest of about fifty reactors which are lying idle. Equally important is the gigantic task of decommissioning the Fukushima reactors that would cost trillions of Japanese Yen. The question of rehabilitating thousands of homeless people in and around Fukushima is also mind-boggling.

The Japanese media examines the Indo-Japanese accord in the light of all these hardships and the left-oriented dailies such as the Asahi and the Mainichi have carried on a relentless campaign against the revival of nuclear power. It is also worth noting that former prime minister Junichiro Koizumi has stated recently that if the Japanese opposition political parties could come together and project the nuclear issue as the only serious electoral issue, they would be able to capture power. Such a statement coming from a former LDP prime minister certainly shows the intensity of the appeal that nuclear issue could make.

Both Asahi and Mainichi argue that it was a serious “flaw” on the part of the Japanese government not to include a clear “nullification clause” within the main text of the present agreement itself. Mainichi suspects that India, by arguing that the additional note it has signed with Japan is not binding, does not want to give up its right to conduct tests because Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons and is not a member of the NPT. Many in Japan, including the Asahi argue that the agreement has undermined Japan’s credibility as a leading champion of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament goals. Asahi complains that under the deal Japan has agreed to provide nuclear technology to India without proper and sufficient guarantees that it will not conduct nuclear tests.

Article 14 of the agreement has spelt out details regarding the procedures for terminating the agreement and the follow-up measures. But it says precious little on the right of Japan to nullify the agreement in the event of India conducting a test. In a separate note, both countries have acknowledged the 5 September 2008 statement made by Pranab Mukherjee, then India’s External Affairs Minister at IAEA, Vienna, as the basis for cooperation. In that speech, Mukherjee underlined India’s commitment to a voluntary, unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing.

In the additional note, Japan has taken the position that an Indian action in violation of the 5 September 2008 statement would constitute a departure and call for Japan’s suspension of the reprocessing of nuclear material subject to the Agreement in accordance with Article 14. But India perceives that the terms of the note are not binding. It is reported widely that India considers the additional note as recording the views and special sensibilities of Japan and that India has not made any more “additional commitments” than what it has stated in similar agreements with the US and other countries. To what extent this difference in perceptions will be exploited by the opposition political parties as well as the anti-nuclear groups will be carefully watched by Abe and his colleagues before they choose the time for the ratification of the Japanese Diet.

By Vivek Chadha

The impact of the demonetisation policy as related to curbing the finance of terrorism announced on November 08, 2016, is gradually emerging from the shadow of its surprise announcement. It is becoming abundantly clear that this is unlikely to remain a one off decision taken in isolation and will in all probability be accompanied by additional measures against the financing of terrorism and corruption. Even as the rollout takes place, it provides an opportunity to assess its potential fallout in the mid and long term, as also possible future options available to the government to further build upon the ongoing initiative.

Nature of Threat

Prior to attempting this analysis, it is important to outline the nature of threat faced by India as part of the ongoing fight against the finance of terrorism and its linkage with other internal challenges. It is also relevant to determine its implications, as this becomes the basis of future policy options.

The finance of terrorism in India follows a hybrid model, which includes terror funding from within and beyond the country’s borders. An assessment of past cases that have come to light suggests that terrorists have employed a variety of formal and informal channels to fund their activities. Amongst formal channels, money has been moved through the banking channels, as was witnessed prior to the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts.1 It can also involve the use of money transfer service scheme (MTSS), as has been resorted to repeatedly by the Indian Mujahideen (IM) to finance their operations in India.2 Benefactors in Pakistan transferred money to innocuous middlemen not previously suspected of terrorist linkages in India. This money was later withdrawn and handed over to IM cadres to fund their activities. There have also been attempts to exploit the barter trade between India and Pakistan through over or undervaluing the invoice, thereby creating a surplus value, which was then diverted for funding terrorism.3

As part of the informal channel, large amounts of money are also received in the form of counterfeit currency or fake Indian currency notes (FICN) that are smuggled into India.4 This is done through a variety of routes, including movement of parcels by air, land and sea. The transfers have at times been routed through third countries in West, South or Southeast Asia in order to avoid close scrutiny of shipments. These have also been smuggled across the borders through existing criminal networks to facilitate their redistribution into the economy. However, the most commonly exploited method of transferring terror funds, remains movement by cash. Money is transferred in the form of cash across borders through couriers, and thereafter converted into Indian currency to support terror funding. Cash also forms the last mile instrument of choice, for financing both organisational activities and terrorist operations. This includes money spent for buying weapons, paying cadres, or organising terror strikes. This is especially the case with groups which collect their funds directly in the form of extortion, kidnapping or so called taxation etc. The resultant funds generated are stored as cash or gold.5 There have also been cases of money being invested in real estate deals or investments in businesses both inside and beyond Indian borders, to cater for long term needs.6

The last, and possibly the most commonly used method of transferring value remains hawala in the Indian context, especially by Pakistan and Pakistan based terror groups which have been fuelling, funding and coordinating terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) as well as through the IM. This does not involve the physical movement of cash across borders, but through the employment of hawaladars or hawala agents to collect and disburse money across different countries and continents.

Impact of Demonetisation

An assessment of these threats provides a clear picture of various options employed by terrorists and countries like Pakistan to fund terrorism in India. In order to draw a co-relation between demonetisation and its impact on each of the formal and informal channel of terror funding, it is important to examine the role played by 500 and 1000 rupee denominations at various stages of the finance of terrorism cycle. The same is indicated at Table 1 below.

As the table suggests, the financial hit likely to be taken by a terrorist group is closely linked with its cash reserves, the ability to retain liquidity in a business where terror groups choose to invest and the ease of reconverting these assets into liquid money. Groups in Northeast India and the CPI (Maoist) operating in the Naxal affected areas of the country are likely to be hit the most, as a large proportion of their financial reserves are more likely to have been held as cash. Further, investments in property will become relatively difficult to liquidate in order to recreate funds for organisational support mechanisms.

In contrast, Pakistan and J&K based terror groups while impacted, will be able to recuperate faster, as they are financed by the Pakistani state, rich donors in West Asia, voluntary collections in Pakistan, FICN or drug money. None of these can be impacted in the long term and to the extent that terror organisations are unable to sustain themselves. However, the impact will certainly be felt in the immediate and midterm future, wherein, the cash available for sustaining activities like civil disobedience in Kashmir Valley, will be sucked out of the terror economy.

Suggested Policy Options to Sustain Impact on the Finance of Terrorism

Demonetisation is an important measure and possibly one which can potentially create the necessary conditions for combating the finance of terrorism. However, as the table above indicates, demonetisation is not a complete and all-encompassing end in itself. It is part of a process which must be taken forward through additional allied and subsidiary policies.

The objective of demonetisation is linked with removing unaccounted wealth (black money), criminal proceeds (which is different from black money), as well as FICN and Indian currency hoarded and distributed by terrorist groups. There are different estimates of the percentage of cash within the overall share of each of these three categories. However, irrespective of the percentage of cash, it is certain that removing a major portion of cash alone will not resolve any of these challenges. There is a need to take interlinked steps and it is only the sum of these individual initiatives that can impact the larger fight against the financing of terrorism. While there can be a large number of measures in this regard, this policy brief focusses on five that deserve special attention from the central government’s perspective.

• Two of the most vulnerable sectors that have traditionally been exploited for parking crime proceeds and black money is the property, and gems and jewellery market.7 These sectors have also been used for the temporary investment of terror funds. Unless transactions are made transparent and reflect real market value, black money and terror funds will continue to find their way into these businesses.
• FICN can potentially be reintroduced into India after a break by Pakistan. In order to sustain action, the following are suggested:
  • Enhance detection measures at public sector banks which have lagged behind some of the private banks over the years.
  • Establish a forensic cell which monitors each case of counterfeit currency to better understand the technology being applied to counterfeit notes. This must contribute to future measures to enhance security against counterfeiting.
  • The involvement of Pakistan established through a Special Court judgement in 2014 should be built upon to enhance international diplomatic pressure.8

• Demonetisation provides an opportunity to encourage a shift to a digital economy. This is an essential requirement to not only reduce corruption but also create an electronic trail for transactions. This will help bring transparency into the financial transactions of individuals and organisations thereby constraining corruption, criminal proceeds, money laundering and the finance of terrorism, which are all linked given the common channels employed for transferring funds. While demonetisation is likely to encourage it, incentives by the government for payment of bills can further encourage people to take up plastic and e-money options. This is also likely to be enhanced by the forces of market economy which are already offering money back options.
• A large percentage of funds have been routed through NGOs in West Asia, especially in case of Kashmir. Each institution receiving funds must:
  • Register itself and seek clearance for receiving funds from foreign sources.
  • The controlling group of the NGO or establishment receiving money should be clearly established.
  • A government panel of charted accountants should audit the accounts of these NGOs.
• The finance of terrorism is yet to become a priority area for intelligence and enforcement agencies. While funding of terrorism by Pakistan in J&K may be an almost thirty year old phenomenon, groups in Northeast India have continued to extort the local population blatantly for almost seven decades. This has been facilitated by the inability of the state to clamp down on these groups and enforce its writ. Some of these regions have also witnessed a collusion between power brokers and militant groups, which has been complicit in the creation and utilisation of terror funds. The impact of demonetisation must therefore be seen in the context of corruption, crime, money laundering and the financing of terror being closely linked as a symbiotic contagion that collectively affects the security of the country. This is most relevant in some of the Northeastern regions.

Demonetisation is an important step in the fight against the finance of terrorism. However, it should neither be the first nor the last, if the interlinked threats of corruption, crime and the finance of terrorism have to be controlled. These must also not be addressed simply within departmental and ministerial silos. Instead, an all-ofgovernment approach is imperative if each of these challenges is to be met.

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India. Originally published by Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (www.idsa.in) at http://idsa.in/policybrief/demonetisation-and-beyond-addressing-the-finance-of-terrorism_vchadha_181116

1. “1993 Mumbai blasts: four Memons convicted”, The Times of India, September 12, 2006, (Accessed March 20, 2012).
2. See “Supplementary Chargesheet 1”, NIA, Case RC-06/2012/NIA-DLI, accessed on August 31, 2015, para 17.125(f).
3. “Trade money across LoC being used to finance LeT in J&K: Police”, The Times of India, March 21, 2010, (Accessed March 09), 2013.
4. For case study of FICN smuggling into India see Vivek Chadha, Lifeblood of Terrorism: Countering Terrorism Finance, Bloomsbury, New Delhi, 2015, p. 70.
5. Karn Kowshik, Gold biscuits found on Andhra Naxals sets police thinking”, The Indian Express, September 07, 2006, (accessed on March 27, 2013) and “Maoist gold dump recovered”, July 14, 2010, The Hindu, (accessed March 27, 2013).
6. “Rs 1.14 crore “Terror fund” for investment seized by NIA”, The Indian Express, November 5, 2013, (Accessed on December 14, 2013).
7. “Designated Non Financial Businesses and Professions (DNFBPs) in relation to AML/CFT”, MENAFATF, 10 November 2008, (Accessed May 03, 2013), pp 3-4.
8. Special Court judgement of January 30, 2014, in the Gr. Mumbai Sessions Case No. 674 of 2009(NIA).

The latest scuttlebutt within the Washington Beltway and President-elect Donald Trump’s New York City headquarters is that Trump has offered the right person the key position of National Security Adviser, who reports directly to the President and oversees the numerous agencies that protect the United States and the American people. He will be a welcome change from the dishonest people currently advising President Barack Obama, namely Valeria Jarrett, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes.

In the midst of the mainstream news media — a/k/a to Donald Trump “the dishonest media” — trying to find out who will serve in a Trump administration, a number of former military, intelligence and law enforcement members believe that former Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn will make an excellent Director of National Intelligence or, even better, the White House National Security Adviser, who would be immune to tricky Democrats seeking oversight.

Gen. Flynn could arguably surpasses any previous men or women who have held those offices and would be a departure from the usual political trend so visible in today’s Washington, D.C. For example, as President Trump’s national security advisor, the decorated general who served as the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, has enormous knowledge and experience in providing intelligence operations and operatives with non-politicized actionable intelligence necessary on the fields of battle.

Currently, the news media are covering up a situation that occurred in the Obama White House involving the national security advisor and her assistant. According to a Conservative Base news story this year: In the aftermath of being subjected to repeated lying by President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice — especially her now infamous Benghazi fairy tales — and deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes’ punkish statements in the New York Times Magazine about deceitfully getting an Iranian nuclear deal “victory,” at least one congressional committee wants to see change.

Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, on Wednesday unveiled a proposal to totally revamp the National Security Council (NSC). During the Obama administration, the NSC has been repeatedly criticized for distorting the work and accomplishments of America’s national security institutions. Many security and intelligence experts claim the NSC has become a place to dump political hacks who could never get past a Senate confirmation hearing.

“Ben Rhodes is nothing but a young wiseguy who is a political ‘spin doctor’ and more of communications director than a national security expert. He’s never been in the military, never served in the intelligence community but is a graduate school brainchild who knows politics,” said former U.S. Marine intelligence operation and police commander Sid Franes.

Franes said: “Rhodes recently bragged about how he and the Obama team misled journalists regarding the U.S. negotiations for the Iran nuclear agreement. He actually admitted conning young, inexperienced reporters to sway public opinion to seal the deal. The lies were told in concert with Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry.”

“Not only did Obama and his minions lie and connive in order to achieve what amounted to a pyrrhic political victory, but they are boasting about taking advantage of the mentally-challenged news media,” Franes quipped in the Conservative Base news story on May 13, 2016.

However, with a real national security adviser — a three-star general, an intelligence agency director, and a man experienced in dealing with political hacks — the Commander in Chief will get real intelligence, rather than the “doctored” reports that President Barack Obama and his minions demanded.

For example, in September 2016 there were 50 U.S. intelligence officers who blew the whistle on President Barack Obama’s playing loose and fancy free with his reports on his “war on extremism” that should have not only outraged reporters and news editors, but opened the door to the appointment of a special prosecutor. But according to Conservative Base: “Unfortunately, since it was a Democratic president with a leftist political philosophy and a “blame America first” mentality, the nation’s purveyors of information ignored the story or relegated the reports to the back pages of newspapers. And to this day, the “Magnificent 50” intelligence analysts have not seen their loyalty to the U.S. Constitution and to the American people even acknowledged.

“It is time to have a real national security adviser in the White House and a genuine Director of National Intelligence and my money is on Gen. Flynn. Hands down with no doubts, he is what’s needed in Trumps program to drain the swamp,” said former police captain Karley Peterson-Gentelli. “Flynn will reverse the damage done to U.S. intelligence gathering and analysis by the Democrats,” she added.

By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed*

A larger majority of Americans voted for Hillary Clinton — one million more votes went to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton than to her Republican rival Donald Trump — yet, Trump won the electoral college and was elected president.

The same scenario happened during the US presidential election in the year 2000, which prompted many to call for a reform of the American electoral system. Congress finally appears to be ready to review it. Despite plenty of self-criticism and its multiple faults, the American system is considered one of the best models of western democracy, even when compared to the parliamentary systems of France and the United Kingdom.

Criticism arises after every election season, with many complaining about the intervention of large companies and super lobbyists who support candidates through donations — a matter that was criticized by Trump who promised to correct it, although this is doubtful. The American government has more transparency, more checks and balances among authorities and the mechanism for internal accountability, than other western regimes. The president has considerable power, but not absolute. The legislatures undergo auditing and are accountable. It is the legislature that appoints secretaries of state, not the party, but Congress has the power to approve them after hearings.

The US Cabinet, despite the magnitude of the country, has no more than 15 members, while a small country like Lebanon, for example, has 24 ministers. The president, or commander-in-chief, does not chair or even attend Cabinet meetings, unlike the councils of ministers in most countries.

Some see it as a disadvantage of the American system that the president appoints Supreme Court justices only when there is a vacancy, and that the position of a judge is for life or until incapable to discharge one’s duty.

Unlike European systems, government ministers cannot be members of Congress, and must resign if chosen. This is unlike France and the United Kingdom, where all ministers are members of parliament.

Furthermore, the US president cannot interfere in the affairs of Congress, nor head it more than once per year. The powers are separated, and neither can impose its decisions on the others. The president and his government, or the executive power, are separated from the Congress, the legislative power, and the judiciary.

The system requires the government to provide information to citizens upon demand, except for issues considered classified, and anyone can request from his/her representative in Congress to discuss it. Issues classified as top secret are left to specialized committees to review. The system is reasonable but not perfect. Active groups can influence the movement of the state, and the system does not protect everything. Therefore, there are groups and associations for the protection of the environment, minority rights, professionals, and so on.

Inactive groups include Arab Americans and Muslim Americans, who have lost a lot due to their lack of involvement as associations in political work and to their dependence on the constitution to protect their rights. The constitution is the highest authority in the country. While there are countries without one, like Britain, in the United States the constitution is almost sacred, and it cannot be undone irrespective of the strength of the president or judges. Amendments to it are historically rare.

The constitution protects the rights of all, and is a main source of protection for minorities under all circumstances. Most of the discrimination cases raised by Muslim Americans after Sept. 11, 2001, were won by them based on constitutional principles. This does not, however, eliminate the need for political action, as the political system is available for all and flexible, and gives minorities a voice, no matter how small.

This is what distinguishes the United States, where most of its inhabitants are descendants of immigrants from different countries, from European countries where ethnicities and religions are pure and the interests of the majority override those of the minority.

Finally, despite the protection of freedoms and the availability of political action for all, the political system is dominated by two parties: Democratic and Republican.

The ideological differences between them are limited, unlike in Europe. The last election was strange and different because Trump actually does not belong to the Republican Party and does not believe in all its principles. Similarly, Bernie Sanders, Clinton’s main rival in the Democratic Party, is more leftist than any other candidate in the history of the party.

We have yet to see whether these were signs of a change within the American political system or simply two rare cases.

*Abdulrahman Al-Rashed is a veteran journalist and internationally acclaimed columnist. He is the former general manager of Al Arabiya news channel and ex-editor in chief of Asharq Al-Awsat. Originally published in Asharq Al-Awsat

The memorandum of understanding to create the Asian Micro-satellite Consortium (AMC) came into effect on Friday, marking a major step forward in establishing an unprecedented regional regime to develop microsatellite technologies and share and use collected data relating to the environment and natural disasters, etc. The consortium will comprise 16 space agencies and universities from nine Asian nations, including Japan.

Microsatellites have rapidly become a major factor in space exploitation, and their advent could spur a revolution comparable to that which followed the launch of humankind’s first satellite, Sputnik-1, in 1957.

The advantages of microsatellites are multifold: In general, they can be developed within a few years, which is much faster than the 10 years required for some larger satellites; they generally weigh 100 kilograms or less; and they are cheaper to build, costing about one-hundredth the price of large satellites.

It is essential for Japan and other Asian nations to create an effective international framework toward the goal of obtaining state-of-the-art satellite bus and sensing technologies and the sharing and use of satellite-collected data, thereby maintaining a global presence in the field—this is the notion that has driven the formation of the AMC.

The 16 participating institutions are space agencies, governmental institutes or top-class universities from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam (see list below). Data relating to such fields as natural disasters and the environment are of great value to these disaster-prone nations. They also help tackle the issue of environmental destruction.

The AMC is also expected to make it much easier to share and standardize satellite bus and sensing technologies, observational data, and data application methodologies. In the future, the consortium is expected to share and utilize data collected by about 50 microsatellites that the participating nations are planning to launch. These microsatellites will allow the AMC to monitor any given location on the Earth around the clock, therefore making it possible to grasp a variety of situations, including major disasters if one should occur.

The standardization of advanced optical sensors and other devices is essential in order to effectively make use of satellite-gathered data. By using drones mounted with such sensors for ground observation in international joint undertakings, it will drastically increase the volume of data gathered and the precision of ground verification.

Data verified on the ground would also help researchers make far more accurate satellite-data-based estimates. The resultant effects could be enormous in such areas as disaster preparedness/mitigation, global environment change, promotion of agriculture, forestry, fisheries and mining, and countermeasures against air and marine pollution.

Yukihiro Takahashi, the professor at Hokkaido University who led the formation of the AMC said “I believe that the consortium will trigger the advanced space utilization with microsatellites not only in Asia but also all over the world including Africa and South America”.

List of participating countries and institutions

Bangladesh:
Bangladesh Space Research &Remote Sensing Organization (SPARRSO)

Indonesia:
Indonesian National Institute of Aeronautics and Space (LAPAN)
Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT)

Malaysia:
Multimedia University

Mongolia:
National University of Mongolia (NUM)
New Mongol Institute of Technology (NMIT)
German-Mongolian Institute for Resources and Technology (GMIT)

Myanmar:
Myanmar Maritime University
Myanmar Aerospace Engineering University (MAEU)
University of Yangon (UY)

Philippines:
Philippine Council for Industry, Energy and Emerging Technology Research and Development (DOST-PCIEERD)

Thailand:
King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang (KMITL)

Vietnam:
Vietnam National Satellite Center (VAST-VNSC)
University of Science and Technology of Hanoi (VAST-USTH)

Japan:
Tohoku University
Hokkaido University

By Karen Parrish

America’s special operations forces are a potent part of the “Force of the Future,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter told reporters Thursday in Florida.

Carter visited Hurlburt Field and Eglin Air Force Base as part of a four-day trip that also included stops in California and Texas. Both Florida installations are critical to national security, he said, adding that he’s grateful to the local communities for the support they provide to service members.

Carter noted that Hurlburt Field is home to some of the nation’s most elite warfighters.

“Very specifically, today we were looking at a number of the special operations forces’ assault capabilities,” he said. “This is a kind of capability that we use nearly every day, somewhere in the world.”

Carter said his most important responsibility as defense secretary “is to approve those operations, and obviously I do that with the greatest care, because there’s risk associated with them — but we do them with professionalism and skill unrivaled anywhere else in the world.”

Counter-ISIL Campaign

Carter said special operators play a key role in the campaign against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. He added that he is encouraged at “all the cities in Iraq and Syria that have already been seized from ISIL” and the envelopment of Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria “with motivated and capable local partners.”

“We will have a victory that sticks,” he said. “ … We’re obviously trying to accomplish that as quickly as possible, and the forces I was visiting with today are an essential part of that. … We’re working them very hard; their op-tempo is extremely hard. That is necessary, but it’s also difficult for them and their families.”

Carter said he wanted service members and their families “particularly to know that we were thinking of them … at this holiday time.”

Carter said Eglin is important as home to platforms like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and “the most lethal, the most precise” advanced munitions capabilities.

“That is one of the themes in our investments in both our 2017 budget and our 2018 budget,” he said. “It was important to see the progress that those programs are making, and they’re doing very well. But they’re absolutely necessary.”

Concerns on Budget Stability

The secretary responded strongly to a reporter’s question about the prospect of a continuing budget resolution.

“It’s not an efficient way to run the Department of Defense,” he said. “ … This is the eighth consecutive year in which the Department of Defense has not had an appropriations bill at the end of the fiscal year.”

Stop-gap funding under continuing resolutions is an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars and is unfair to troops, the secretary said.

“They deserve budget stability and the knowledge that Congress is supporting them with the funding that they need,” Carter said.

Advanced programs and defense industry partners are also adversely affected by continuing resolutions, the secretary said.

“There’s nothing good to say about the absence of a budget,” he said. “And the troops deserve better.”

Democracy was ‘restored’ in Afghanistan following decades of violence and conflicts. Where violent uprisings against the invading Soviet Union by the Mujahedeen wrecked the rural areas of Afghanistan, the Civil War that followed between the various Mujahedeen factions wreaked havoc on Kabul and other major provincial capitals in Afghanistan.

The rule of Taliban took away any semblance of modern political functioning that remained, forcing Afghanistan into ‘middle ages’. The Presidential election of 2014 that gave Afghanistan its present National Unity Government (NUG) was, mildly put, an unsatisfactory exercise. Not only did the conduct of the elections and the outcomes disappoint the domestic audience, it also left the international community dismayed.

The elections, which had 27 candidates vying for the post of the President, was in the end, reduced to an ugly battle between independent candidate, Ashraf Ghani and National Coalition of Afghanistan’s leader, Abdullah Abdullah. Marred by widespread fraud and electoral rigging, the Presidential elections of 2014 were considered a watershed event since it was the first time Afghanistan was going to polls in the backdrop of receding international support.

The NUG was formed after rounds of negotiations between Ghani and Abdullah mediated by the Secretary of State of USA, John Kerry. It was on September 21, 2014, that a two-pronged government was put in place in Afghanistan, ostensibly with an ‘original deadline’ of two years. It was envisaged under the agreement that the NUG would create conditions leading to the convening of a Loya Jirga which after amending the Constitution of Afghanistan would have formalized and codified the structures of political governance in the country.

Under the agreement it was agreed that Ghani would be the President, while Abdullah would hold a position specially created through a Presidential decree – Chief Executive Officer (CEO). It was expected under the agreement that the position of the CEO be transformed into a constitutionally created post of Prime Minister.

Two years from September 2014 was the ‘deadline’ set for bringing about this constitutional change. The NUG was also expected to reform the electoral law and related provisions and hold elections to the Shura-e-Mili (Parliament) and 398 Woleswalis (Districts). But, what has unfolded this far has been far from meeting the mandate.

The ‘original deadline’ has expired; the NUG has justified its title very little. The cabinet under NUG took as much as two years to reach completion, in addition to which, internal rivalries within the government meant that it could not work effectively. Believed to be divided along ethnic lines between a Pashtun President and a Tajik CEO, the NUG was more of a compromise than a show of solidarity.

The Independent Election Commission which was to be reconstituted following allegations of nepotism and corruption is yet to see any reform. In fact, the Special Electoral Reforms Commission that was to suggest reforms in the electoral domain of Afghanistan started functioning only almost an year later.

Among the recommendations it advanced – 11 in total – only 7 have been accepted by the President only to be shot down by the Wolesi Jirga subsequently.

What has further eroded the legitimacy of the NUG is the public announcement of rifts. In a public display of verbal aggression, CEO Abdullah called the President of Afghanistan a ‘misfit’. He claimed that “over a period of three months you (President) don’t have time to see your chief executive one-on-one for even an hour or two? What does your highness spend your time on?” The recent one to join the ‘bash the NUG’ bandwagon is the first Vice President, Abdul Rashid Dostum who had recently asked the government to ‘watch out’ for the ethnic biases it has been spreading.

The ‘original’ time has already run out on NUG; it had to be ‘salvaged’ with Kerry flying to Afghanistan and announcing from Kabul that there had been ‘no deadline’ and that NUG still had years to serve as part of its tenure. In the meanwhile, the situation in Afghanistan has become even more precarious. According to reports, about 35% of Afghanistan’s territory, particularly in the hinterlands is under Taliban control.

While questions have been raised about this assessment, it is undeniable that the authority enjoyed by the ‘legitimate’ national government in Afghanistan has been waning. ISIS has made inroads into Afghanistan and has executed major bombings and frequent small-scale acts of terror.

The economic situation in Afghanistan does not paint a rosy picture and dissatisfaction with governance along ethnic lines (for instance, the Hazara-led ‘Enlightenment Movement’) appears to be on the rise. It would certainly be biased to not to enlist the achievements of the NUG however scanty and little effective they may have been.

To begin with, the revival of the Bilateral Security Agreement with the US has ensured continuous support from the latter through its changed (and considerably downsized) ‘Operation Resolute Support’. The recommitment of support worth USD 15.2 billion to Afghanistan until 2020 at the recent Brussels Conference is being counted as another achievement.

Regionally, initiatives including TUTAP, CASA1000 have seen the light of the day under the NUG. Bilaterally, Afghanistan has concluded treaties related to economic, strategic, cultural and political cooperation with many of its neighbours and beyond.

On the domestic front, the NUG has recently lauded itself for its achievements in the domains of ‘justice provision and ‘local governance’. The execution of a peace accord with Hezb-e-Islami (Gulbuddin) is being considered a major breakthrough even as it has left many unsettled and unhappy over the amnesty that has been granted to the ‘butcher of Kabul’, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

In its two-year long tenure, the NUG has been an uneasy alliance that has exuded lack of surety and confidence on many fronts. Rifts within the government are out in the open, with a growing sense of frustration over its corruption and lethargic development making the world weary of its investment there.

The path ahead of this government is expected to be as tortuous as its past; it seems it would be long before Afghanistan loses the tag of unpredictability. The next round of Presidential elections is still three years away – that is if the NUG functions (rather, is allowed to function) for its full term – with many things left to be achieved, chief among them being a change in the constitution.

Economically, while the country sits on top of enormous mineral wealth, investments in Afghanistan will continue to flounder for as long as there is insecurity in the country. At the social level, Afghanistan’s social cleavages are being exploited than being galvanized for strengthening democracy there.

In all, the democratic structures, procedures and rituals in Afghanistan inspire little confidence today. While it is certainly not prudent to expect instant success of democracy and rule of law in a country that has been marred by decades of chaos and conflict and continues to be affected by regional and bilateral mischiefs, in NUG, Afghanistan had found an opportunity to refine and reform its mechanisms and techniques of governance. It is high time that the political leaders in Afghanistan act in unison and make the most of this opportunity, lest it gets squandered away permanently in quarrels and fights.

This article was published at CLAWS

The designation of Michael Flynn to be National Security Adviser “is deeply alarming,” said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, in a statement released on Saturday.

US President-elect Donald J. Trump announced on Friday that he intends to nominate Senator Jeff Sessions to serve as Attorney General and Rep. Mike Pompeo as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has been selected to be the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.

Flynn’s “statements about Muslims are profoundly un-American as well as damaging to the fight against terrorism and national security,” Wyden said, adding, “He has indicated an openness to torture and the destruction of an entire city, both of which are clearly illegal, not to mention immoral and destructive to America’s global leadership.”

Wyden claimed that Flynn’s financial entanglements with Russia and other foreign governments are also cause for concern, particularly given President-elect Trump’s refusal to disclose his own finances.

“With the designation of Michael Flynn and Steven Bannon, the president-elect has created a White House leadership that embodies the most divisive rhetoric of his campaign,” Wyden said, adding, “To the extent that these become policies or legislative proposals, I commit to stopping them. I will also approach the confirmation process with the expectation that nominees will, at the very minimum, demonstrate a clear commitment to American values and the rule of law.”

Relatedly, Wyden said he looks forward to the confirmation process for Representative Mike Pompeo to be Director of the CIA.

“Given its recent history of operating a disastrous torture program and then spying on the Senate itself, the agency demands principled leadership now more than ever. Unfortunately, Representative Pompeo’s comments in which he asserted that the CIA’s torture program was legal and that the American people did not deserve to know about it are deeply troubling,” Wyden said.

In a testament to their growing bilateral relationship, King Mohammed VI, who is on an official visit to Ethiopia, and Ethiopian Prime Minister, HE Haile Mariam Dessalegn, presided over the launching ceremony of a project to build a world-class integrated platform for fertilizer production in Ethiopia.

The Moroccan Press Agency MAP reported that on this occasion, CEO of OCP Group, Mostafa Terrab, gave a speech before HM the King and Ethiopian Prime Minister in which he said that the project to build the integrated platform for fertilizer production will require a total investment of nearly 3.7 billion dollars.

“This industrial Megaproject will require an investment of 2.4 billion dollars in its first phase in order to produce 2.5 million tons/year of fertilizer by 2022. This will make Ethiopia self-sufficient in fertilizer, with a potential for export. An additional investment of 1.3 billion dollars is expected by 2025 to reach a total capacity of 3.8 million tons/year of fertilizer to support the growth of local demand,” he said.

This South-South partnership is part of a common vision for the development of Africa between Morocco and Ethiopia and a strong willingness to strengthen economic ties, said Terrab, noting that this project aims to take full advantage of the complementarity between the respective natural resources of the two countries.

This industrial platform, which will consist of an integrated complex of fertilizer production, industrial and storage units, is part of OCP’s future strategic development plan to meet local fertilizer needs. A plan based on the complementarity of the respective natural resources of the two countries, he noted.

According to Terrab, the industrial platform will be equipped with all necessary basic infrastructures. It will be equipped with water pumping station and water treatment plants, as well as with a power plant.

To ensure the necessary raw material needs for the fertilizer platform, a storage unit at the port of Djibouti will be developed and secured, said Terrab.

Subsequently, HM the King and the Ethiopian Prime Minister chaired the signing ceremony of the agreement on the setting-up of the world-class integrated platform for fertilizer production in Ethiopia, and of five private/private agreements.

The agreement on the setting-up of the world-class integrated platform for fertilizer production in Ethiopia was signed by OCP CEO Mostafa Terrab and Girma Amente, Ethiopian Minister of Public Enterprises.
This royal visit to Ethiopia will certainly provide a major opportunity to consolidate further the bilateral relations binding Morocco and Ethiopia and to give a new momentum to investments, both at the level of state-owned companies and at the level of the private sector. Ethiopia and Morocco are committed to beef up their economic ties through taking timely steps and measures for swift trade facilitation.

President Obama gave an interview to German media outlets Spiegel and ARD during his visit to Berlin, in which he discussed divisions in the US, his darkest moments as president, and whether Edward Snowden would be pardoned.

Reflecting on Trump’s victory, Obama pointed to an “underlying division” in the US that has to do with economic growth, stagnation, and cultural and demographic issues – anxieties that Trump tapped into.

“I mean, there were probably millions of voters who voted for me and supported me and this time also voted for Donald Trump, and it just indicates that some of this is less ideological and more just an impulse towards some sort of change,” he told Spiegel.

Obama said that, while young people in America “believe in tolerance” and integration, they are less likely to vote, and consequently “sometimes the elections don’t fully reflect the views of the American population.”

“Essentially, the president-elect was supported by about 27 percent of the American population,” he pointed out.

The president believes that addressing “legitimate economic concerns of those who feel left behind by globalization” would reduce tensions and make the world less divided.

When asked if he would pardon Edward Snowden, Obama said, “I can’t pardon somebody who hasn’t gone before a court and presented themselves, so that’s not something that I would comment on at this point.”

“I think that Mr. Snowden raised some legitimate concerns. How he did it was something that did not follow the procedures and practices of our intelligence community,” he added. “If everybody took the approach that I make my own decisions about these issues, then it would be very hard to have an organized government or any kind of national security system.”

Obama went on to highlight the need to balance privacy and security. “Those who pretend that there’s no balance that has to be struck and think we can take a 100-percent absolutist approach to protecting privacy don’t recognize that governments are going to be under an enormous burden to prevent the kinds of terrorist acts that not only harm individuals, but also can distort our society and our politics in very dangerous ways,”he said.

He went on to add that “on the other hand, it’s important to make sure that governments have some checks on what they do, that people can oversee what’s being done so the government doesn’t abuse it.”

The interviewers also asked Obama what he considered the darkest moment of his presidency, saying that in Europe people would point to “drone attacks, Guantanamo,” terrorism, and shootings.

Obama listed the economic crisis and the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where 20 children were shot, as low points.

“I’m very proud of the fact that we ended torture,” he said. “It’s true that I have not been able to completely close Guantanamo, but we’ve drastically reduced the population from 700 or so to around 60 now, and I am going to continue in these two months to make every effort.”

On drones, Obama commended his administration for having “constrained their use,” and said the alternative would be “to invade these countries where there would be much greater loss of life.”