With congressional Republicans in the majority in Congress and unwilling to cross Donald Trump, the job of containing Trump’s incipient tyranny falls to three centers of independent power: the nation’s courts, its press, and a few state governments.

Which is why Trump is escalating attacks on all three.

The judiciary

After federal Judge James Robart – an appointee of George W. Bush – stayed Trump’s travel ban last Friday, Trump leveled a personal attack on the judge. “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Trump tweeted Saturday morning.

This was followed by another, late Sunday night: “Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system.”

For a President to personally attack a federal judge who disagrees with him is a dangerous overstepping of presidential power.

As Alexander Hamilton famously wrote in the Federalist No. 78, the judiciary is the “least dangerous” branch of government because it has “no influence over either the sword or the purse.” It depends for its power and legitimacy on congress and the president.

Mike Pence tried to defend Trump, saying “the president of the United States has every right to criticize the other two branches of government. And we have a long tradition of that in this country.”

Wrong. While other presidents have publicly disagreed with court decisions, none before Trump has gone after individual judges with personal invective. None has tried to intimidate individual judges. None has questioned the legitimacy of the courts.

Trump is on the warpath against Robart because he defied Trump.

The press

Speaking to the U.S. Central Command on Monday, Trump veered off his prepared remarks to make a remarkable claim: The media was intentionally covering up reports of terrorist attacks.

“You’ve seen what happened in Paris, and Nice,” Trump told the assembled military officers. “It’s gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported. And in many cases the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that.”

Trump thereby elevated his advisor Kellyanne Conway’s “Bowling Green massacre” justification for his travel ban – a massacre that she claimed the press had failed to cover, but which in fact never occurred – to a higher and vaster level of conspiracy.

What could be the press’s reason for covering up terrorist attacks, in Trump’s mind? What is it that Trump assumed the military officers “understood?”

The only possible inference is Trump believes that the press – like Judge Robart – seeks to imperil our nation, because it doesn’t cow tow to Donald Trump.

The states

State governments pose a third line of defense against Trump. Several state attorneys general have taken Trump’s travel ban to court, and one particularly large Democratic state – California – has defied him on immigration and the environment. So Trump is directed his ire against these states as well.

In a televised interview Sunday, Trump threatened to take federal dollars away from California. “We give tremendous amounts of money to California … California in many ways is out of control …. We may have to [defund California]. Certainly that would be a weapon,” he told Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly,

A weapon for what? What could Trump have been talking about? The federal government doesn’t give tremendous amounts of money to California, at least not net dollars. In fact, Californians send more tax dollars to the federal government each year than the state gets back from the federal government.

Fiscally, California isn’t “out of control.” Since 2013, the state has operated with a budget surplus. That’s more than can be said for the federal government. Or for Trump’s own business, for that matter.

Trump’s real beef is California is independent of him. It has defied Trump with its high environmental standards and “sanctuary” cities. Even worse, from his standpoint, its citizens voted against him in the 2016 election by 2 to 1, for a total of over 4 million votes. He can’t seem to get this out of his mind.

Trump has repeatedly suggested that millions of those votes were fraudulent. Last week, Trump spokesman Sean Spicer identified California as one of the “bigger states” that merit a federal probe into election fraud, adding, “That’s where I think we’re gonna look.”

But Trump has no evidence of voter fraud in California, or any other state for that matter.

For Trump, evidence is irrelevant. California needs to be taught a lesson – just as do Judge Robart and other members of the federal judiciary who defy him, just as do journalists and media outlets that criticize him. And what is that lesson? That they dare not cross Trump.

The judiciary, the press, and California are major centers of resistance to Trump, because they are independent of him. So he’s escalating his attacks on them.

Trump doesn’t want any resistance. He wants total control.

A daily opinion poll publication continued to show far-right leader Marine Le Pen losing the French presidential runoff on May 7, Reuters reports.

The Opinionway poll, published on its website shortly before 1100 GMT (6.00 a.m. ET), showed Le Pen scoring 25 percent in a first-round vote set for April 23, with independent Emmanuel Macron on 22 percent and conservative Francois Fillon on 20 – scores that would put Macron into the runoff against Le Pen.

Macron would beat Le Pen 66 percent to 34 percent in the two-way runoff. Fillon, were he to make it instead of Macron, would beat Le Pen with a score of 62 percent versus her 38 percent.

Cities are growing faster than ever before. It’s no wonder: diverse, dynamic communities foster creativity and innovation, while concentrations of people, companies and resources offer significant economic advantages — including more job opportunities, income and wellbeing. Cities today are the indisputable drivers of both national and international economies, generating roughly 80 percent of world GDP.

Not all is rosy, however. Rising urban populations present numerous challenges — from increased pollution and strained infrastructure to higher socioeconomic inequality, with extremes of wealth and poverty. In emerging economies, where growth is especially intense, some cities have yet to ensure even basic housing and sanitation. In today’s age of increasing protectionism, it may fall to the world’s urban leaders to reinforce cities’ role as global drivers of economic growth and job creation.

But what can city leaders do? A lot, it turns out: by choosing smart, sustainable policies, they can encourage business, create jobs, optimize resources, and offer great potential for wealth creation and higher standards of living at the local level.

As for what the right policies are, Cities and the Economy aims to point the way. The latest in the “IESE Cities in Motion: International Urban Best Practices” series — by professors Pascual Berrone and Joan Enric Ricart and researcher Ana Isabel Duch T-Figueras — the book advises leaders to adopt a “sustainable smart growth” approach that balances economic development, social progress and environmental issues “in the most ecological and equitable way possible.” To this end, it reviews the main trends and challenges of urban economic development, highlights international best practices and compiles notable success stories.

Four Levers for Sustainable Economic Development

The IESE Cities in Motion book series identifies technology, public policy, consumer behavior and infrastructure design as the four main levers of change that allow cities to decisively transform the ways they function and grow.

1. New applied technologies and innovations are changing how businesses operate, generating new business models and even entirely new sectors. Digital platforms, big data and the Internet of Things (IoT) are three important tools for local economies. Notably, it is estimated that the app economy contributed almost two million jobs in the EU in 2015, many of those in city centers.

Blending innovation with urban planning (another lever, described below), Boston’s Innovation District dedicated 1,000 acres of land to promote collaboration and entrepreneurship back in 2010. The “industry-agnostic” district had attracted over 200 startups by the summer of 2015 — the highest concentration in the U.S. — thus creating over 5,000 jobs and attracting venture capital investments second only to those of the San Francisco Bay Area.

2. Policies, legislations and regulations: Without delving into statewide economic policy, city leaders can take actions to boost an urban area’s competitiveness and enhance its business environment — including developing regulations that facilitate doing business, entrepreneurship, innovation, clustering and creativity.

One simple step towards a better business climate is cutting red tape. One-stop shopping for business permits — eliminating wasteful and sometimes Kafkaesque bureaucracy — can facilitate formalized entrepreneurship and spur employment. When experts in the Rwandan capital of Kigali identified a lack of coordination regarding construction permits as a significant obstacle to doing business, they established a “one-stop shop” and an electronic platform to reduce administrative friction; processing times fell from 125 days to just 30, on average.

3. Change in people’s behavior and preferences: People, especially those from younger generations, are looking for different ways of consuming and participating in the economy. This shift in preferences is paving the way for new economic models, such as the “green,” “circular” and “sharing” economies.

Some collaborative business models have raised concerns about precarious working conditions and the unregulated provision of services that must be urgently addressed. However, Seoul, South Korea offers a positive example with the public good in mind. In 2012, the Asian capital initiated the “Sharing City Seoul” project, addressing transportation, residential and environmental issues through sharing initiatives. The city estimates that the upcoming second round of sharing projects will create over 1,000 new jobs, reduce CO2 emissions by nearly 30,000 tons, and create considerable savings for citizens and for the city.

4. Infrastructure and urban planning must match city growth for economic advances to be sustainable. Suboptimal resource allocation and inefficient management not only hinder growth, but further segregation and poverty. Today, a full third of developing countries’ urban populations lives in slum conditions. To counter this, cities must offer both “physical” and “soft” urban services — from infrastructure, transportation and waste management to healthcare, education and connectivity. The latter is especially important in countries where the high cost of communication services is a barrier to business. Cities such as Lagos, Nigeria and Bangalore, India, for example, are helping create business opportunities with internet access throughout the city. These so-called “technology hubs” are becoming magnets for entrepreneurs and innovators, offering access to today’s hyper-connected markets.

While there is no standard formula for economic development, cities can take inspiration from the many global initiatives that are working well. By assessing their unique position, and identifying and exploiting their particular competitive advantages, urban centers can address the inequality and poverty that continue to plague them worldwide while catalyzing sustainable economic growth.

Many older adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy in the United States are being prescribed older anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs), and only half begin treatment with AEDs within the first 30 days of a potential epilepsy diagnosis.

The analysis included 2008-2010 Medicare administrative claims for a five percent random sample of beneficiaries augmented for minority representation.. Investigators found no major racial/ethnic disparities in AED prescription patterns.

“In this population of older adults on Medicare Part D drug coverage, we noted that while prescriptions of newer line AEDs, in particular levetiracetam, are increasing compared with other studies of older Americans with epilepsy, there remains a substantial proportion receiving older line AEDs, most notably phenytoin,” said Dr. Maria Pisu, senior author of the Epilepsia article.

“We cannot assess why this occurs from these data, but the use of newer AEDs with more favorable side effect potential and lower risk for drug-drug interactions is particularly important in an older population with a significant number of co-occurring conditions.”

Dr. Pisu noted that the study’s main interest, however, was in assessing differences in treatment across racial/ethnic groups because disparities in epilepsy care have been reported before, and some groups may disproportionately suffer from the consequences of suboptimal epilepsy treatment.

“We found, however, that minority groups seem to receive comparable AED treatment to Whites despite clear socioeconomic differences with the white counterparts.”

By Ray Hanania*

Assertions that US President Donald Trump is unfair to the needs of the Arab world are misleading and contradict facts, much like the claim that he “hates” Muslims. Trump’s efforts to crack down on Islamic extremists who have openly vowed to kill Americans has been widely misinterpreted and wrongly denounced as a “Muslim ban.” It is clearly also not true that he has abandoned core issues of justice in the Arab world.

So far, when you look more closely, Trump’s actions are those of a president who is clearly seeking to embrace a more centrist approach to Middle East challenges. Although he met this week with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss Iran and the stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Trump has already started to build a strong base of understanding with moderate Arab leaders.

His first face-to-face meeting with a Middle East leader was with Jordan’s King Abdallah, who had also met with Vice President Mike Pence in Washington. Trump spoke by phone with Netanyahu two days after his inauguration, but called Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi the next day. Days later, Trump made two important calls, one to Saudi King Salman and another to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan.

It was not just the calls. When Netanyahu’s extremist government announced it would expand illegal Jewish-only settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, Trump spokesman Sean Spicer issued a diplomatic reprimand.

“The American desire for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians has remained unchanged for 50 years. While we don’t believe the existence of settlements is an impediment to peace, the construction of new settlements, or the expansion of existing settlements beyond their current borders, may not be helpful in achieving that goal,” he said.

“As the president has expressed many times, he hopes to achieve peace throughout the Middle East region. The Trump administration has not taken an official position on settlement activity and looks forward to continuing discussions, including with Prime Minister Netanyahu when he visits with President Trump later this month.”

Pro-Israel mainstream American journalists pounced on Spicer, insisting the statement was contradictory, but Spicer and Trump did not back down. These are not the actions of a president who has written off Arab interests or embraces a “Muslim ban.” But they are also not the only ones.

Last week, as the US State Department was preparing to issue a statement commemorating International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Trump intervened. The State Department release focused on the suffering of Jews, but Trump issued a new statement that eliminated the word “Jews.” He was denounced by leading Jewish-American organizations, but a spokeswoman cited Trump’s close family members who are Jewish.

Trump’s daughter Ivanka is married to Orthodox Jewish businessman Jared Kushner, who was appointed a top Trump adviser. Ivanka converted to Judaism for the marriage, and Trump’s grandchildren are Jewish. His spokeswoman said Trump wanted to be “more inclusive.” The Nazis murdered nearly 12 million people, including 6 million Jews and 6 million Russians, Slavs, gypsies, Arabs and others.

During his candidacy, Trump declared that his administration would be “neutral” on the Israel-Palestine conflict. Although he is perceived as pro-Israel, he is very familiar with the Palestinians. One of the most successful Palestinian-American entrepreneurs, Farouk Shami, has known and worked with Trump for years. Long before his election, Shami predicted Trump would be fair in addressing Arab and Palestinian concerns.

It is profoundly foolish and misguided to define Trump on the distorted and biased reporting of the Western media, which has a history of promoting and fueling anti-Arab and anti-Muslim stereotypes.

Worse is to believe the extremist assertions of the anti-Trump activists who claim to support Palestine, but have done everything possible to prevent the implementation of the only solution to the conflict, the two-state solution, which would create a sovereign Palestine in the territories occupied by Israel.

Trump is much more complex than his critics will allow the public to believe. They have sought to simplify him as a racist, twisting facts about his suspension of immigration from only seven of the 50 Muslim nations. If Trump were truly anti-Muslim, he would have suspended immigration from all Muslim nations to allow time to implement more stringent application screenings.

What the Arab world needs is to assert its moderate voices. That means leading moderate voices must come together to form an effective coalition. Who is this coalition leadership? Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which Trump has already recognized in his outreach.

He presents an opportunity for the Arab world to redefine itself and energize the pursuit of peace and justice. A proactive Arab coalition led by Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the UAE can positively impact US politics and make Middle East peace possible.

Arab nationalism as a political force was first embraced by Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser in the 1960s. That effort failed mainly because Egypt was militarily ill-equipped to confront Israeli aggression, and because of the turmoil that plagued Syria then, and still plagues a Syria dominated by Iran today.

Trump has given the Arab world a rare opportunity to forge a moderate coalition to advance Arab nationalism and the true rights of the Arab street, not through revolution, protest or violence, but through strategic partnerships. A coalition led by Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and the UAE is the only Middle East and Arab strategy that makes any sense.

*Ray Hanania is an award-winning Palestinian-American former journalist and political columnist. Email him at rghanania@gmail.com.

We are told we live in a Judeo-Christian civilization, that the West has a Judeo-Christian heritage, a concept useful to a largely Christian empire where Jews play a powerful role, but one which is rejected by serious scholars, both Christian and Jewish. Talmudic scholar Jacob Neusner told Newsweek: “Theologically and historically, there is no such thing as the Judeo-Christian tradition. It’s a secular myth favored by people who are not really believers themselves.”

The concept was popularized in the 1940s as a reaction to Nazism and was used by the imperial elite in promoting anticommunism, and in Israel’s conquest of Palestine, fashioned as a “clash of civilization” targeting Islam. Many of the founders of Israel (Ben Gurion and Begin) had been communists, and many American Jews in entertainment and intellectual life were communists and had to refashion themselves as anticommunists in the new age of US empire.

It became the foundation of the ideology of the “special relationship” between the US and the newly proclaimed Jewish state in 1948, and was integral to American politics by the 1960s. It was an inevitable result of Israel’s creation and its early need to make an unbreakable bond with the leading empire.

The special relationship grew naturally from its deep roots in American exceptionalism, the celebration of the arrival of the Puritans in the seventeenth century seeking their own Promised Land, oblivious to the American natives they would displace, and the immigration of 2 million eastern European Jewish immigrants in the late 19th–early 20th centuries.

The idea that European and American Jews wanted to ‘return’ to the original Promised Land of the Old Testament appeals to Americans both Jewish and non-Jewish. Israel became both the physical and spiritual embodiment recapitulating the sweep of western civilization. Hence, Christian Zionists, enthusiastic supporters of a colonial project in a non-colonial era, and Bush II’s “Crusade” to be waged against Muslim terrorists after 9/11, as coined in his White House press conference on September 16, 2001. This metaphor touched Christians subliminally. Most never though how insulting and disturbing it was to Muslims, how it was implicit in the widespread acceptance of a Judeo-Christian civilizational construct (even though many Jews were killed in the Crusades too).

On the surface, the special relationship has been fashioned as a subliminal bond between two ‘chosen peoples’, Israel a kind of little brother to America in the Middle East, watching over the local Arab regimes, and making sure the oil flowed.

The underlying special relationship, however, was the ‘embrace’ of the US state by the Zionists, both in the diaspora and now in situ in the Middle East. Israel needed to control US foreign policy, especially there, to further the Zionist goals, and to do whatever that required, be it fighting communism, providing arms to Iran or the Contras and drones to NATO troops in Afghanistan, conducting false-flag operations, or turning its Arab neighbors against the US.

The correct terminology would be Islamo-Christian vs Judaic civilizations, as there is a direct continuity between Christianity and Islam, which have more in common with each other than either has with Judaism. Richard Bulliet argues this in The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization (2006). Islam is the natural culmination of both Judaism and Christiantiy, and never persecuted Jews as did Christianity. Until recently 90% of Jews lived comfortably not with Christians in medieval Europe, but in northwest Africa and the Levant under Muslim rule.

The rise of the patriotic right in the US is a reaction to the ongoing decline of Christian values in postmodern multicultural society, where religion is secondary and can be used or ignored at will. This has been the result of ‘Judeo-Christian’ civilization, which is really just a euphemism for the ideology behind US imperialism. The Christian-Jewish allies governing the empire were not interested in promoting Christian moral values, substituting commerce and sex, and Christianity declined rapidly in the 20th century. The debate about transgender women (men dressing as women) demanding to use women’s washrooms became a symbol of the trivilization of morality, now a matter of what each individual feels, rather than what is accepted as social standards to be observed.

The capitalist West promotes consumerism at all costs, colonizing minds and bodies, bringing with it trivialization of sex and dismissal of religious values of modesty, moral living and worship, values that lie at the heart of both Christianity and Islam. The post-WWII ‘critical theorists’, the ‘Frankfurt School’, identified hedonism as the problem, but had no answer. Marcuse’s  One Dimensional Man showed that “advanced industrial society” created false needs, integrating individuals into the existing system of production and consumption via mass media, advertising, industrial management, and contemporary modes of thought.

This results in a “one-dimensional” universe of thought and behaviour, in which aptitude and ability for critical thought and oppositional behaviour wither away. Against this prevailing climate, Marcuse promotes the “great refusal” as the only adequate opposition to all-encompassing methods of control. In other words: enjoy watching Rome as it burns. This translated into the continued corruption of Christian-based society. No thought was given to Islam as the answer.

Trump and Putin

The International Russian Conservative Forum in St Petersburg in 2015 brought together Europeans who are advocating this return to Christian values. It highlighted the issues that Trump harnessed to denounce what they called the degradation of white, Christian traditions in the West. The rise of the right in Europe is against same-sex marriage, abortion on demand, immigration, international finance, radical Islam and globalization, among other targets. Their champion is Russia and President Vladimir Putin, seen as a pillar of robust, conservative, even manly values.

Russia was isolated and pilloried under Obama, but is ready to make common cause with leftists, centrists, greens and any other potential allies critical of American domination and general social ills. Robert Fiore praised Russia as the vanguard of Europe’s future, a common theme among both Russian and foreign speakers at the Forum. “We are the avant-garde of a new Europe that will very soon emerge,” he said. “It will be a Christian Europe, a patriotic Europe, and Russia will not just be a part but a leading force.” This helps explain Trump’s embrace of traditional values and his admiration of Putin. He is part of this movement of social and political renewal.

Christians and Muslims natural allies

Muslims are the natural allies of the cry of despair that elected Trump, though his lifestyle embodies this hedonism and he seems an unlikely ally. The common people sense that America is awash in crass materialism, and long for a renewal of Christian values, which are virtually identical to Muslim values: restraint, industry, worship, peace in foreign relations, respect for life.

This may sound odd, given the large plurality of Evangelical Christians, whose literal reading of the Bible puts them in league with Zionism, the crushing of Palestinians and the complete take-over of Palestine by the Jews. But these ‘Christians’ are like the al-Qaeda ‘Muslims’ and the Zionists themselves — inauthentic to the principles underlying all three monetheistic faiths. Trump appealed to the Evangelicals during the election, but he is not one himself, having been raised a Presbyterian.

Most Muslims in the US supported the Democrat Hillary Clinton in the November 2016 presidential elections. Democrats made tolerance and respect for Islam a modest plank in their platform, but unashamedly pursue anti-Muslim policies abroad, and have no answers to America’s moral decay. Both Clinton and Sanders called on the support of Muslims, included them at their rallies, in their advertising, and highlighted the contributions of Muslims to America as part of their campaigns. Yet this support was skin deep.

The burning issue for Muslims is the tragedy of Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan, targeting Muslims, which only gets worse under both Republicans and Democrats. Trump has called for an end to American intervention, even an end to NATO, so despite his bizarre call to end Muslim immigration, he actually addresses American Muslims’ most pressing concern.

The November election saw American-Somali-Muslim, Ilhan Omar, elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives. Ilhan Omar is nominally a Democrat, but Minnesota has the DFL, the Democratic Farmer Labor Party, rather than the sold-out Democratic Party of Clinton. The election season also saw Khizr and Ghazala Khan, a Gold Star military Pakistani-American family who captured Muslims’ (and millions of Americans’) hearts with “Uncle” Khizr Khan’s strong and passionate speech at the Democratic National Convention. Khan honored his son, Humayun Khan, who lost his life in the line of duty in Iraq. This was an important moment: an honest question to the soon-to-be US present, calling on him to show his own civic duty, and to honour Muslim Americans.

Muslim Americans live in peace in their homeland. Their only agenda is to practice their faith and be good citizens. They have no ulterior agenda supporting a pariah state, as do many (most?) Jewish Americans. They do not approve of the culture of exploitation of women, pornography, violence, drugs, abortion on demand. They have not been seduced by the cult of consumerism. They can be Christians’ best allies in the renewal of Islamo-Christian values.

Trump promised to end Muslim immigration, but Muslims already outnumber Jews in the population, and they are on the front line in the fight against terrorism. They have no dual loyalty, they are not spying or fighting for any foreign state. Muslim Americans have traditionally supported Democrats as more ‘inclusive’, but the Democratic Party failed them.

To help fashion a genuine renewal in America is the work of grassroots groups, local initiatives, whether in helping the poor, defending the environment or ‘fighting’ for a peaceful foreign policy. It is here that Muslims can make a difference, while showing the truth of Islamo-Christian civilization. Grassroots activists recognize that Muslims are their natural allies. There are millions of Americans who are now aware of the reality of anti-Muslim hatred, and can be easily convinced of their common cause with Muslims to renew a culture based on Christian, really Islamo-Christian values.

The two strands in the Trump phenomenon — a renewal of morality, an end to foreign wars — should be the focus of American (and Canadian) Muslims. We can find common cause with those who want to renew American along ethical, peaceful lines.

Crescent International

When US Representative Maxine Waters (D-CA) attacked President Trump’s supposed relationship to Russian President Putin — “he is wrapping his arms around Putin” — she exposed more than she intended.

Her shocking ignorance of the basic facts of what is happening in Syria (she couldn’t remember Aleppo) and in Ukraine (she confused Crimea with Korea) let out a little-known secret about your Representatives: they most often know no more about an issue than the bullet points handed them five minutes before an event by a staffer, or more frequently by their Party leadership.

The idea that Congress is some great deliberative body — or even a mediocre deliberative body — is one of the great myths of our time. Congress is, with a few exceptions, nothing but an echo chamber for conventional wisdom.

That is how such mindless accusations like Trump being in some sort of “bromance” (as the New York Times so idiotically put it yesterday) ricochet along and become part of the Washington canon. I was interviewed on RT to discuss the embarrassing Maxine Waters statement and the unholy anti-Russia alliance between Democrats who cannot come to terms with losing the presidency so they all scream “PUTIN!” and neocons panting for Cold War 2.0 against Russia:

This by article was published by RonPaul Institute.

By Lulwa Shalhoub

Jeddah’s art scene is seeing a rich flow of exhibitions and events that shed light on work from local and regional artists.

The 21,39 art initiative, a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting art and culture, has combined a series of events that began this month and will carry on until May, with support from the General Entertainment Authority.

One of the highlights of the activities is “And Along Came Polyester,” which gathers the work of five women artists from the Gulf to showcase their contemporary work in solo exhibitions under the same roof at Athr Gallery.

Other art activities include the opening of the Tadafuq and Tasami exhibitions, as well as a series of talks and panel discussions at the three-day Safar forum at Gold Moor.
Arab News spoke to the five artists about their experiences at the “And Along Came Polyester” exhibition.

Aisha Al-Sowaidi, Qatar

As an interdisciplinary designer, I want to share new ideas and create a dialogue of cultures.

Aisha Al-Sowaidi attempts to shift the dynamics in traditionally used objects and furniture. She focuses on the “majlis,” redesigning core elements in its main function.

With a sense of nostalgia, her artwork suggests that through having these objects in the memory, they can compel you to traverse through emotions.

“I’m very happy to join the exhibit and be among the five selected artists. It was a wonderful experience to come to Jeddah and discover the amazing art scene and see people interested in attending such events.”

Al-Sowaidi prefers to look at artists as individuals regardless of their gender. “I think art gives a person the power to express an idea or emotion through a single glance. The visual makes an impact and creates a clearer memory. For me as an interdisciplinary designer, I want to share new ideas and create a dialogue of cultures.”

She said as women pursue a career in art, they need to listen to inner voices and follow their own direction.

“At some point, stop taking advice. Too much advice controls your direction. The best advice will come from within after creating and exploring many forms and techniques,” she said, adding that a challenge is the lack of creative environment in which to grow.

Al-Sowaidi is a multidisciplinary designer based in Doha. Her work incorporates old experiences and behaviors with contemporary design of objects used in the house. She holds an MFA in design studies and a BA in graphic design.

Sarah Abu Abdullah, Saudi Arabia

Sarah Abu Abdullah’s exhibition “18 Blankets” is an experiential art project she uses as a vehicle to showcase the absurdity of reconstructing daily life in the context of domesticity. Her work unravels the processes of home, a journey mangled and untangled by the uncanny familiar within private domestic spaces.

When talking about what she thought of the event, she said: “I wouldn’t say it’s a precedent. Something doesn’t need to be happening for the first time to be good, and there were many past attempts in the history of art by women in the region. We’re only a result and a continuation of that effort and history.

“There’s an obsession with firsts that’s quite unhealthy. Art (made) by women and giving women artists attention is great and should happen more often.”

She said being an artist is not necessarily about power, yet a focus on women’s voices is important.

Abu Abdullah said the key to success in art is self-education and hard work. “Look at art. Read about art. Write about art. Stay humble, but don’t box yourself into others’ expectations of what your art should be.”

The Saudi artist works primarily on video and film as a medium. She grew up in Qatif, and is pursuing her Master’s degree in digital media at the Rhode Island School of Design in Providence.

Layla Juma, UAE

Layla Juma’s exhibition “A Still Moment in Thought & Spatial Perception” displays repetitive, geometric shapes to create rhythmic sequences and forms.

These shapes are crafted to conceptually articulate the ever-changing architectural landscapes of the present and the imagination of their future.

“The participation in this event was an important step toward enhancing mutual understanding between artists in the Gulf,” said Juma.

“It gives a deep interaction and knowledge of the latest development in arts in our region. It’s wonderful that we meet as artists and share our visual and intellectual dialogue through our artwork.”

Art is a powerful tool to express oneself, Juma said. “We express ourselves through our artworks. We can send messages to the community, and we have an important role to get attention to what we’re producing. Art is a powerful and beautiful way to start a conversation.”

She advises the young generation of artists to interact, learn, communicate and develop ways to produce good art.

“There are always lots of challenges in the artist’s way, starting from the first steps of producing the first artwork and ending with criticism, but the most important thing is how our art work can affect whoever sees it.”

Hala Al-Khalifa, Bahrain

Hala Al-Khalifa’s exhibition “She Wore Her Scare Like Wings” demonstrates a personal journey of healing. The colors used in the paintings portray deformed wings conveying a sense of vulnerability yet strength and perseverance.

“It was a fantastic show celebrating women in arts in Jeddah, and I think showcasing five women from the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) is an incredible idea,” Al-Khalifa said. “It’s a way to exchange dialogue and share thoughts.

“The beauty of this exhibition is that artists had their own themes and mediums to express themselves. I was very happy with this collaboration.”

Her participation in “And Along Came Polyester” introduced her to the moving art scene in Jeddah.

“I’m very happy and proud to see what’s happening in the Jeddah art scene,” she said.

“I’ve been following this initiative (21,39) over the years, and every year I’m amazed at how much they’ve developed.”

She added: “I left Jeddah with a great sense of excitement and energy. I believe artists in Saudi Arabia are extremely cutting-edge.

“The ideas they shared were very exciting, and so was the diversity of the mediums and dialogues; woman artists working alongside men, the younger generation working with the older… It’s remarkable.”

Al-Khalifa said women in the Gulf are empowered in different fields and receive equal opportunities to their male counterparts.

“I believe women in the Gulf have been empowered in various fields, and art is definitely one of them.”

She urges anyone with a passion for art to pursue it. “There are many platforms that celebrate artists now, either in cultural institutions or museums. It’s important to be in this landscape. If there’s an idea or a voice that needs to be heard and a passion for arts, I absolutely advise you to do it wholeheartedly.”

lulwa.shalhoub@arabnews.com

United State’s top diplomat acknowledged on Thursday the role of Saudi Arabia’s leadership in helping to stabilize the region, according to the Saudi Press Agency.

In a phone conversation with King Salman, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson hailed the leadership role played by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in achieving stability and peace in the region and the world, SPA reported.

He stressed on the importance of working with the Kingdom and to develop a comprehensive plan to strengthen bilateral relations in the field of military cooperation and work together against terrorism, and strengthen economic ties.

The two sides reviewed the historical and strategic relations between the two countries, and ways to develop them to serve the common interests of both countries.

States all around the world are seeking to restrict the proliferation of ‘fake news’ to insulate their populations against messages that may destabilise their societies. But is the state the best entity to combat fake news?

By Tan E Guang Eugene and Benjamin Ang*

In 2016, several populist politicians around the world gained power by drawing on the emotion and biases of their supporters. Many of these followers appear to have been swayed by fake news, not verifying the ‘facts’ that their leaders provide them. More worrying, the leaders themselves seem not to care about the veracity of what they are spreading. Fake news can present as websites that deliberately publish hoaxes, propaganda, and disinformation purporting to be real news, and often using social media to drive web traffic and amplify their effect.

Some commentators fear that this is leading to a new normal where extremely biased views become the mainstream, thanks to fake news. These extreme views can cause divisions in society, foment unrest, and in some cases, lay the foundations for violence, such as the fake news that a pizza restaurant was operating a child abuse ring.

Role of Technology

The first problem is that the reporting of news can be biased in how it is presented or phrased, depending on the intention of the writer. The second problem is that some websites report news that has no factual basis. Some writers create them as ‘clickbait’ – online content that attracts attention so that visitors will click on the link to generate advertising revenue. Others may be hostile states spreading propaganda as part of information warfare to destabilise their adversaries. Others yet may be motivated by personal vendettas or paranoid belief in conspiracy theories.

Whatever the motivation is, the speed at which fake news can spread has been supercharged by social media and search algorithms that control what users read. These algorithms are software that show the user only stories and sources that are similar to what he/she has liked before, creating filter bubbles or echo chambers where users only read and share information that they were already inclined to believe. This builds confirmation bias in users, which can create mistaken world views that persist even when the ‘truths’ are disproved by external sources. One example is the fake news that Democratic senators in the United States wanted to impose sharia law in Florida.

The first response has come from the technology companies that create these algorithms. Facebook and Google have introduced processes and software that they hope will help users check the truthfulness of each news article. However, this solution has limitations, because part of the process relies on third parties to verify each article, and those third parties have been accused of bias themselves. Even artificial intelligence struggles to keep up with the chaotic mix of truth and falsehood that is typical in fake news.

Role of the State

Since technology companies alone cannot succeed, states are increasingly getting involved in restricting fake news, some by establishing state-run agencies to check and debunk fake news. The Czech Republic recently set up a unit within the Ministry of the Interior for this purpose, while Germany and Indonesia are also considering setting up similar units to combat news that is “slanderous, fake, misleading and spreading hate”.

State intervention in creating approved media is not new, but in the past this was mostly confined to authoritarian states, where freedom of expression was not highly regarded. Today, even relatively ‘free’ states are trying to assert that they are the most truthful source of information. One fear is that these measures could lead to the future suppression of dissenting views and compromise the freedom of expression in established democracies.

In fact, if a state insists that it is the sole source of truth and dismisses all dissenting voices as fake news, it may ironically lead to an erosion of trust in the state. States can only succeed in this if their citizens wholeheartedly trust the information provided to them by the state, but the level of trust in states varies greatly, and is easily damaged by over censorship.

Role of the People

If the state has limited power to deal with fake news, then some commentators have suggested that citizens must be more critical over the information they consume online. This requires everyone to develop information literacy skills to critically assess if the news they read is authentic or not.

Unfortunately, studies show that most people, regardless of education level, have difficulty distinguishing fake news from fact, partly because the news format is easily imitated and the sources are manipulated to resemble credible journalism.

If the citizens are unable to deal with fake news, then a joint effort with the state may be required. China has an innovative way to operationalise responsibility in cyberspace, which is to require people to use their real names when they are using social media. This enables reader to verify the identities of the writers behind the posts or comments, and places the responsibility for truthfulness firmly on the writers.

This removal of the Internet’s veil of anonymity increases the cost of distributing fake news, as it forces the writer to prove and justify any claims that he or she is making. However, this policy is only possible because of the Great Firewall of China that can filter out unauthorised information.

For states with more open Internet access, such as Singapore, citizens are exposed to information from all over the world, whether it comes from reputable overseas sources or from fake news sites in Macedonia, all of whom are outside the jurisdiction of the state.

For that matter, any laws in force or which can be passed, whether to combat defamation, sedition, or harassment, will have limited effect when the source of fake news is beyond the reach of the state, or is difficult to attribute or identify.

Shared Responsibility

Although states have the responsibility for preserving stability and security for their citizens, the flawed nature of the technology available, state-led solutions, and the people reading and sharing the news mean that there is no one agency that can claim a perfect solution in combating fake news.

There is a dire need for a more holistic solution, and this might well come from a public-private partnership using innovative tactics and technology. In the meantime, for states who want to be the trusted source of information for their citizens, they would do well to cultivate and protect that trust most diligently.

The protection of this trust may require more transparency and timeliness in the information provided by the government, and a media that prides itself on the unbiased reporting of news.

*Eugene EG Tan is an Associate Research Fellow at the Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS), a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Benjamin Ang is a Senior Research Fellow and Coordinator of the centre’s Cyber Programme.

Ethics experts and human rights lawyers slammed the Vatican Feb. 6 for inviting a top Chinese health official to an organ trafficking summit despite concerns the Asian giant still uses tissue from executed prisoners.

The Pontifical Academy of Sciences invited Huang Jiefu, the man in charge of overhauling China’s transplant system, to the two-day conference in Vatican City, AFP reported.

Wendy Rogers, a medical ethics expert at Macquarie University in Australia and the chair of an advisory committee on tackling organ theft in China, slammed Huang’s presence as “shocking.”

Huang told journalists at the summit that the controversy was “ridiculous” and the use of organs from executed prisoners in China “is not allowed under any circumstances.”

He admitted though that organ transplants from prisoners may still be taking place.

Victims reportedly include not only death-row prisoners but also religious and ethnic minorities such as Uighurs, Tibetans, Falun Gong spiritual practitioners and “underground” Christians.

Beijing issued its first regulation banning the trade of organs in 2007, but trafficking remains common as the country suffers a drastic shortage of donated body parts.

The practice of using executed prisoners’ organs for transplants was also banned in 2015, but there are fears prisoners may be being reclassified as voluntary donors to get around the rules.

Rogers and a group of experts wrote to Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, the academy’s chancellor, to warn that the church risked appearing to sanction the practice.

The Vatican “should be aware of how the endorsements — even indirect — of prestigious foreign bodies are used by China’s propaganda apparatus,” the letter said.

Sorondo’s short response, said the conference aimed “to be an academic exercise and not a reprise of contentious political assertions.”

A week after Hispanic Catholics experienced racial harassment and taunts from a group of men during a Spanish Mass, the local community in Portland, Oregon sprang into action to show their support for the churchgoers.

Despite the chill and the rain, an estimated 200-300 people created a human barrier on Sunday, Feb. 5, protecting parishioners of St. Peter Catholic Church from possible harassment.

It was a different scene than what had greeted parishioners the week before, when a group of about eight men dressed as hunters shouted racial and sexual slurs at parishioners during Spanish Mass, and taunted the congregation for being made up of many immigrants, according to the Catholic Sentinel. The group of men was nowhere to be seen the following week.

The harassment came at an already tense time for the parish because of new federal immigration policy proposals. Pastor Fr. Raul Marquez, a native of Colombia who has been pastor at St. Peter’s for 5 years, said he had never seen anything like it.

“All that Sunday I felt upset and didn’t understand,” he told the Sentinel.

But the next Sunday came as a pleasant surprise. News of the previous attacks had spread on social media through two videos of the incident, and local community members banded together, with one post reading: “ATTN WHITE PEOPLE – USE YOUR WHITE BODY TO INTERRUPT RACISM!” It urged people to place themselves “between violent bigots and people of color” to form a “strong human chain to stand as a buffer between Latino worshippers and those who hate them.”

And it worked. Catholics, Christians and non-believers showed up in force to provide support, complete with welcoming signs in both English and Spanish and a table of coffee and sweets.

Local priest Father Ron Millican from nearby Our Lady of Sorrows parish and Rev. Elizabeth Larson from St Mark Lutheran Church came to show their support for Fr. Marquez, as well as Matt Cato, director of the Archdiocese of Portland’s Office of Life, Justice and Peace.

Archbishop Alexander Sample expressed his support to St. Peter’s through a letter to the parish, saying that he was saddened by the harassment and offering his prayers for healing.

“Please be assured that I, as your Archbishop and shepherd, stand firmly with you in the face of such ignorant and hateful words. You are our brothers and sisters, and as members of the same family of faith, we must hold fast to our unity in Christ,” he said.

He added that the incident was not isolated and that the same group had been harassing other churches in the area. The men were reportedly part of a Portland-based group called “Bible Believers”—hard-right street preachers who appear at protests against President Donald Trump.

“Be assured of my love and prayers for all of you. May Our Lady embrace you all in her mantle of love and protection,” Archbishop Sample concluded.

Brenda Ramirez, a 21 year-old parishioner, told the Portland Tribune that she was shocked to hear about the attack at her church, but was happy with the large showing of support from the local community.

“It’s just beautiful. This is what America is — not racism or hate. This is what it should be.”

Where have civility and respect for one another gone?Can we please stop demonizing those with whom we (even vehemently) disagree?

— Archbishop Sample (@ArchbishpSample) February 4, 2017

Egyptian prosecutors should drop all charges against at least 26 workers who were arrested and charged in recent months in connection with peaceful strikes and protests, Human Rights Watch said Thursday. The parliament should also revise a new trade unions draft law to fully legalize independent unions and amend penal code provisions that criminalize the right to organize and strike.

Since May 2016, police have arrested scores of striking workers from various industries. Most were later released, but prosecutors have referred dozens for trial, including some before a military court.

“Arresting workers for striking is another example of how Egyptian authorities are determined to stifle all space for peaceful mobilization,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch.

In January 2017, prosecutors charged 19 striking workers at an oil products factory in Suez with inciting a strike and halting production, though all were acquitted in a trial later that month. In December 2016, security forces arrested at least 55 striking workers at the Egyptian Fertilizers Company, and prosecutors summoned eight for investigation. On September 26, Kamal Abbas, a member of the government-sponsored National Council for Human Rights and head of the independent Center for Trade Union and Workers’ Services (CTUWS), wrote to the Interior Ministry regarding the National Security Agency’s “disappearance” of six workers from the Public Transport Authority following raids on their homes two days earlier. On September 28, following a news conference by families of the missing workers, the six workers appeared before prosecutors who accused them of belonging to an unidentified banned group. In May, military prosecutors referred 26 Alexandria Shipyard Company workers to a military court on charges of inciting strikes.

The January strike in Suez followed a sit-in at the privately owned IFFCO oil products factory in the last week of December seeking an equal distribution of bonuses between workers and supervisors. The workers decided to strike after Interior Ministry officers arrested two members of the IFFCO Independent Workers’ Union who had been participating in the sit-in, according to a workers’ statement published in local newspapers.

The CTUWS said that National Security officers demanded that union leaders end the strike and then police arrested 13 striking workers on January 2. Prosecutors summoned another 10 for questioning on the same day and referred 19 to a minor offenses court on charges of inciting a strike, halting production, and sabotaging factory properties. Though the court acquitted the workers, the factory administration can appeal the decision. Activists told Human Rights Watch that, according to workers, 26 people were later fired, including the 19 who were acquitted.

Union leaders at the IFFCO factory demanded a larger share of bonuses after the prices of everyday goods in Egypt rose dramatically when the government floated the Egyptian pound in early November, a requirement for a US$12 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan package. Since then, the pound has lost more than 100 percent of its value, and the IMF has estimated that inflation will rise to 18 percent.

Egyptian authorities greatly restrict the ability of workers to mobilize independently, and the penal code criminalizes strikes and workplace sit-ins in articles 124 and 125, with sentences of up to two years, despite several administrative court rulings that have upheld the right to strike.

Kamal Abbas, the CTUWS leader, told Human Rights Watch that the government-controlled Egyptian Trade Union Federation (ETUF) sent a letter to the administration of the Suez oil products factory saying that the independent workers’ union, which had signed two collective bargaining agreements with administrators in 2012 and 2015, was illegal. The IFFCO Independent Workers’ Union could be shut down as a result.

The government has never legalized the independent labor unions that proliferated after the 2011 uprising, while officially recognized unions have not held elections for 11 years, and successive governments have appointed union leaders, most recently in January.

In June, an administrative court sent the current, restrictive 1976 law on unions for review, stating that “the [ETUF] was not capable of expressing workers’ grievances and hopes whether before the state or business owners.” To Human Rights Watch’s knowledge, the Supreme Constitutional Court has yet to take up the case.

In April 2016, Human Rights Watch called on the Egyptian authorities to legalize independent unions and criticized a draft law that would dissolve independent unions and restrict workers’ rights. The cabinet approved a modified draft in July and sent it to parliament on January 25. The current draft would not recognize existing independent unions and would impose prison sentences for establishing unions that do not follow the new law.

The sharp devaluation of the Egyptian pound also led to strikes in November and December at two privately owned fertilizer companies in the Suez governorate, Egyptian Fertilizers Company and the Egyptian Basic Industries Corporation, the independent news website Mada Masr reported. Police dawn raids ended both sit-ins, and police rounded up at least 55 workers, one worker participating in the sit-in told Human Rights Watch. Central Security Force riot police put the arrested workers inside vans and dropped them in a deserted area three hours later, the worker said. Prosecutors detained two for several weeks before releasing them on bail, and the factory administration dismissed six with no explanation, the worker said. The two factories have no unions.

A representative for the Egyptian Fertilizers Company told Human Rights Watch that police tried for 10 days to convince workers occupying control rooms to leave before “very peacefully” ending the sit-in. The workers returned to work the following morning. He said that halting production was a crime and acknowledged that prosecutors summoned several workers, but said the administration had not made complaints against them during the investigations. Workers denied the administration’s allegations that they stopped the production or occupied the control room.

Dawn raids also led to the arrest of six Public Transport Authority workers from their homes in Cairo on September 24, ahead of a planned strike demanding bonuses. Authorities did not acknowledge their whereabouts for four days, CTUWS leader Kamal Abbas told Human Rights Watch, adding that lawyers had not been allowed to obtain a copy of prosecution documents as required by law. Prosecutors accused the six of joining a banned group that prosecutors did not identify, inciting strikes, and disturbing public order, pro-government news websites reported. Two of the workers remain in pretrial detention, while authorities released four pending investigation.

Egypt’s military has also suppressed workers’ actions. In Alexandria, 26 workers of the military-owned Alexandria Shipyard Company have been on trial before a military court since June 21, 2016. A report by the Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights (ECESR) said the workers had organized a brief protest inside the company’s premises on May 23 and 24, to demand bonuses, promotions, and safety equipment and tried to negotiate with General Abd al-Hamid Essmat, the company’s executive.

On May 25, military prosecutors ordered 13 workers held pending investigation. One, a woman, was released on bail. Thirteen others were arrested weeks later. Fatma Ramadan, the head of an independent union and a workers’ rights researcher, told Human Rights Watch that military prosecutors relied entirely on a memo from the company to charge the workers with inciting strikes and abstaining from work. Human Rights Watch was not able to review the memo. After several days, the company allowed 1,100 of 2,800 workers to return, the ECESR said.

The shipyard administration told workers they would be released if they resigned, said Abbas and an ECESR lawyer. All the prosecuted workers resigned and were released on bail in groups in October, November, and December, but they still face trial.

Military prosecutors referred the striking workers to military court under the Military Code of Justice, which covers civilian workers in military-owned institutions and does not establish any workers’ rights. The current draft unions law would not change this.

Egypt’s constitution grants freedom of association and the right to strike. Egypt is a state party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, article 8 of which establishes the right to strike, as well as the right to form and join trade unions and national and international confederations. Egypt is also a member of the International Labour Organization and has ratified its eight fundamental conventions.

Parliament should ensure that the draft union law under consideration meets Egypt’s obligations under international human rights law by allowing free and fair union elections and ensuring straightforward legalization procedures for all existing independent unions. Civilian workers in military institutions should be allowed association rights and should never be tried before military courts.

Human Rights Watch wrote to IFFCO, the Public Transport Authority, and the Alexandria Shipyard Company, regarding the incidents but received no responses.

“Instead of arresting and prosecuting workers, the government should amend its laws to guarantee workers’ rights to effective bargaining and mobilization which are essential to effective economic reform,” Stork said.

A new study on the relationship between people and the planet shows that climate change is only one of many inter-related threats to the Earth’s capacity to support human life.

An international team of distinguished scientists, including five members of the National Academies, argues that there are critical components missing from current climate models that inform environmental, climate, and economic policies.

The article, published in the National Science Review, describes how the recent growth in resource use, land-use change, emissions, and pollution has made humanity the dominant driver of change in most of the Earth’s natural systems, and how these changes, in turn, have important feedback effects on humans with costly and serious consequences.

The authors argue that current estimates of the impact of climate change do not connect human variables — such as demographics, inequality, economic growth, and migration — with planetary changes. This makes current models likely to miss important feedbacks in the real Earth-human system, especially those that may result in unexpected or counterintuitive outcomes.

Furthermore, the authors argue that some of the existing models are unreliable. The United Nations projections of a relatively stable population for the whole of the developed world depend, for instance, on dramatic, and highly unlikely, declines projected in a few key countries. Japan, for example, must decline by 34%, Germany by 31% and Russia by about 30% for the projected stability in total developed country population to be born out.12 In addition, countries often highlighted for their low birth rates, like Italy and Spain, are not projected to decline by even 1% for decades.

In this new research, the authors present extensive evidence of the need for a new type of model that incorporates the feedbacks that the Earth System has on humans, and propose a framework for future modeling that would serve as a more realistic guide for policymaking and sustainable development.

“Current models are likely to miss critical feedbacks in the combined Earth-Human system,” said co-author Eugenia Kalnay, professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Science at University of Maryland. “It would be like trying to predict El Niño with a sophisticated atmospheric model but with the Sea Surface Temperatures taken from external, independent projections by, for example, the United Nations. Without including the real feedbacks, predictions for coupled systems cannot work; the model can get away from reality very quickly.”

Most football leagues suspend players who have accumulated a certain number of yellow cards. This column describes the effect of this rule on the number of fouls committed by players in the English Premier League. Players who are approaching the suspension limit commit 33% fewer fouls than at the start of the season, and even in the first game of the season, the deterrent effect of the suspension rule reduces the number of fouls by 15%.

By Doug VanDerwerken, Jacek Rothert and Brice Nguelifack*

Serious infringements during a football match are punished by the showing the player a yellow card. When two football players who both want to win the ball collide, one player may be reckless, making an injury more likely for the other, or use excessive physical force. Also, players may try to gain an unfair advantage for their team by misconduct, including dissent to referees or by purposely delaying play.

A single yellow card does not trigger a sanction during the match, but it goes on the player’s disciplinary record. This may have additional consequences for persistent offenders. For example, in the English Premier League, if a player receives five yellow cards between the start of the season in August and 31 December, he is suspended for the game that follows the fifth card. If he accumulates a total of ten yellow cards before the second Sunday in April, he is suspended for the two games that follow the tenth card. Should he receive 15 cards before the end of the season, it triggers an immediate three-game suspension.

The availability of detailed statistics in football has allowed researchers to study the impact of cards on the outcome of a match (Ridder et al. 1994, Bar-Eli et al. 2006) and the factors that affect the team’s probability of receiving cards (del Corral et al. 2010).

In our recent research (VanDerwerken et al. 2016), we use match-level statistics by player from the 2011-2012 season of the  Premier League to investigate the impact of the suspension rule on the fouling behaviour of players.

We investigate whether players commit fewer fouls as they approach the suspension limit, whether players that are close to the suspension limit are less likely to receive a yellow card, and how the number of fouls committed would differ if the suspension rules did not exist.

We answer the first two questions using common econometric techniques, and we develop a structural model of optimal yellow cards accumulation to tackle the last question.

Variants of the Premier League’s suspension system are used in many football tournaments. All are delayed punishment schemes, similar to the ‘three strikes’ legislation in some US states that imposes harsh punishments on persistent offenders (Greenwood et al. 1994, Zimring et al. 1999). To analyse the effect of such a system on the behaviour of an individual, it is important (Shepherd 2002) not only to measure the decline in criminal activity of individuals with two strikes. If we do this we underestimate the true impact of the legislation, because all potential offenders may change their behaviour. In our case, the mere existence of suspension rules deters aggressive play even in the first game, because players do not want to get close to the suspension limit.

At the end of the day

We first examine empirically the effect of yellow card accumulation on the number of fouls committed under the current Premier League suspension system. We use Poisson regression¹ to predict the number of fouls, controlling for other variables which are suspected to influence fouling to isolate the effect of penalty card accumulation. For instance, we include a fixed effect for player, which incorporates attributes such as inherent aggression level, position, and athleticism. We also include match-level performance variables such as the numbers of interceptions, tackles won, and unsuccessful dribbles. Finally, we controlled for time until accumulation deadline, venue (home or away), severity of suspension faced, and the difference in score at the end of the game.

Correcting for all these potential influencers, accumulating more yellow cards reduced fouling, as expected. When a player was one yellow card away from a one-game suspension, he fouled about 12% less than he would have done if he were two yellows away, and 33% less than he would have done if he were five cards away (for example, at the start of the season). The decline in the number of fouls was larger when a player faced a two-game suspension. Figure 1, below, shows the estimated expected number of fouls as a function of yellow cards away from suspension.

We also predict the probability that a player would receive a card (yellow, or the more serious red card which means immediate exclusion from the match and an automatic suspension) in any given game using logistic regression. Not surprisingly, this probability decreases as the player nears the accumulation limit. For example, a hypothetical player who was two yellows away from a two-game suspension, and had a 10% probability of getting a card in the next match would have a lower probability of getting a yellow card (3%) if he were one yellow card from the suspension. If the same player was two yellows away from a one-game suspension, his probability of getting a card would increase to 25%.²

Taking each game at a time

How much more would players have fouled if the suspension rules did not exist? A naive way to answer this question would be to calculate an expected number of fouls committed by a player who has not yet accumulated any yellow cards during the season, and treat it as an expected number of fouls per player for every game. This ignores the Lucas Critique (Lucas 1976). Our estimates were obtained in an environment with suspension rules. In this environment, players may foul less even in the first game of the season, because an early yellow card increases the probability of being suspended later.

We developed a structural, dynamic model of optimal yellow cards accumulation to address this ‘fear of first strike’ (Shepherd 2002). The model is a standard dynamic programming problem with the following features. The number of yellow cards accumulated is the state variable. A player chooses his effort at the beginning of the game. Higher effort increases the probability of his team winning the game. It also increases the probability of getting a yellow card. In equilibrium, a player must balance this trade-off, knowing that five yellow cards results in a suspension. The model relies on several parameters, some of which can be calibrated from our data, and some of which cannot. For those we can calibrate, we ensure that the decrease in the number of fouls associated with the player approaching the threshold of five yellow cards is the same in the model as it is in the data. Other parameter values have to be imposed ad hoc.

We then run a counterfactual experiment by removing the suspension rules from the model. In the experiment the players know that a single yellow card in one game has no impact on future suspensions, and they do not need to adjust their play in the early games. Using our chosen parameter values, we find that the existence of Premier League suspension rules reduces expected number of fouls in the first game by about 15% (our estimate of the fear of first strike). Throughout the whole season, the suspension rule causes a 33% reduction in the expected number of fouls. Figure 1 also shows our theoretical model’s predictions of the expected number of fouls in a game committed by a player as a function of the number of yellow cards he is from suspension.

Figure 1

This model allows us to analyse how factors such as referee strictness impact the effectiveness of suspension rules. If referees are too lenient, suspension rules do not have much bite, because the players know they are unlikely to be given a yellow card. If the referees are too harsh, suspension rules do not have much bite either – if even a mildly aggressive play yields a yellow card, a player might as well focus solely on the current game, since he is likely to receive a yellow card anyway.

Increased availability of match-level statistics combined with simple economic theory made it possible to quantify the impact of suspension rules on aggressive play in football. On a more general level, we have learned how individuals respond to delayed punishments, which sheds light on research areas outside professional sports.

*About the authors:
Doug VanDerwerken, Assistant Professor of Mathematics, United States Naval Academy

Jacek Rothert, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, United States Naval Academy

Brice Nguelifack, Assistant Professor, Department of Mathematics, United States Naval Academy

References:
Bar-Eli, M, G Tenenbaum and S Geister (2006), “Consequence of Players’ Dismissal in Professional Football: A Crisis-Related Analysis of Group-Size Effects”, Journal of Sport Sciences, 24:1083–1094.

del Corral J, J Prieto-Rodriguez and R Simmons (2010), “The Effect of Incentives on Sabotage: The Case of Spanish Football”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 11:243–260.

Dawson, P, S Dobson, J Goddard and J Wilson (2007), “Are football referees really biased and inconsistent? Evidence on the incidence of disciplinary sanction in the English Premier League”, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society – Series A, 170(1):231–250.

Greenwood, P, C Rydell, A Abrahamse, J Caulkins, J Chiesa, K Model and S Klein (1994), “Three Strikes and You’re Out: Estimated Benefits and Costs of California’s New Mandatory- Sentencing Law”, Technical Report MR-509-RC, RAND Corporation.

Lucas, R (1976), “Econometric Policy Evaluation: A Critique”, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 1(1):19–46.

Nevill, A, N Balmer and A Williams (2002), “The influence of crowd noise and experience upon refereeing decisions in football”, Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 3(4):261–272.

Ridder, G, J S Cramer and P Hopstaken (1994), “Down to Ten: Estimating the Effect of a Red Card in Football”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89:1124–1127.

Shepherd, J (2002), “Fear of the First Strike: The Full Deterrent Effect of California’s Two and Three-Strikes Legislation”, Journal of Legal Studies, 31:159–201.

VanDerwerken, D N, J Rothert and B M Nguelifack (2016), “Does the Threat of Suspension Curb Dangerous Behavior in Football? A Case Study From the Premier League”, Journal of Sports Economics, OnlineFirst. DOI:10.1177/1527002516674761.

Zimring, F, S Kamin and G Hawkins (1999). Crime and Punishment in California: The Impact of Three Strikes and You’re Out. Institute of Government Studies Press, University of California, Berkeley.

Endnotes:
[1] Poisson regression is similar to ordinary least squares, but the counts are assumed to follow a Poisson distribution instead of a Normal.

[2] As a byproduct of the analysis, we also found that playing at home versus away has a small but discernible effect on the probability of a penalty card. In our running scenario, playing at home reduces the player’s probability from 10% to 8%. Having corrected for suspected lurking variables, it seems reasonable to attribute most of this modest reduction to referee rather than player behaviour, which corroborates what other researchers have found (for example, Dawson et al. 2007 and Nevill et al. 2002).

Federica Mogherini, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, is currently in Washington for her first visit after the inauguration of the new US administration.

According to the EU, Mogherini had a fruitful meeting with the US Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, to discuss the mutual interest of bringing forward the longstanding cooperation between the European Union and the United States on the main international files. They spoke at length, among other topics, about Trans-Atlantic relations, the common challenge of countering terrorism, the ongoing work to strengthen European Defence, relations with Russia, the Iran nuclear deal and the main crises, from Ukraine to Syria.

They agreed to continue working together and meet again soon, the EU said in a statement, adding that Mogherini invited Secretary Tillerson to address the EU Foreign Affairs Council at his earliest convenience.

“I was pleased to meet Secretary Tillerson. We had an open exchange on many dossiers that we are dealing with. The European Union and the United States have a longstanding relationship and we will work to bring it forward on the basis of our principles and our interests. There are many files on which the EU and the US have an interest to closely cooperate,” Mogherini said.

During the first day of her visit, the High Representative met with members of Congress, among which Ron Johnson, Bob Corker, John McCain, Jack Reed, Chris Murphy and Jeanne Shaheen, to discuss EU-US bilateral relations and the main international dossiers.

Later in the day, Mogherini met at the White House with National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn, and with Senior Adviser Jared Kushner.

(EurActiv) — Hungary is ready to build a second line of fencing on its southern border to keep out migrants if the situation worsens this year or next, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s chief of staff said on Thursday.

Hungary has been building fences since the beginning of the migration crisis in 2015. Hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees trekked through Hungary and Austria in 2015 as they sought to reach wealthy European nations.

Orbán announced for a second line of fencing last August, to reinforce the existing barrier erected last year along the 175-kilometre-long border.

Dubbed a “smart fence” due to its high-tech features, the fence was a three-metre-high and 10.3-kilometre-long barrier, equipped with heat and movement sensors, as well as night cameras installed at regular intervals, according to media reports.

Janos Lazar also told a news conference on Thursday that the government plans to set up container camps on the southern border, where it wants to detain migrants while their asylum requests are being assessed.

He said there were close to 600 migrants in Hungary waiting for their asylum application to be processed, mostly in open camps, which posed a “security risk”, and the aim was to restrict their movement, keeping them on the border.

Human rights groups slammed Hungary for holding already large numbers of asylum-seekers in closed camps. They said that such massive, indiscriminate detention of all asylum-seekers “has not been seen in decades in democratic Europe”.

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee vowed to sue Hungary at the European Court of Justice in every case where asylum-seekers are illegally kept in custody, likely forcing Budapest to make compensation payments.

“The government would do better instead to improve the quality of the open reception centers and spend this money on the integration of people who have found asylum in Hungary,” the group said.

Hungary granted asylum or some form of protection to 425 people in 2016, while receiving 29,432 applications.

Last July, Orbán described the arrival of asylum seekers in Europe as “a poison”.

By K. Yhome and Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy*

Asia’s rise in the global economic map is necessitating greater interconnection within and with the outside world. Development of interconnection is taking place between nations, in sub-regions and across regions of Asia. The concept ‘economic corridor’ is used to explain this phenomenon. Economic corridors link economic agents within a country or across regions by providing connection between economic nodes or hubs where economic resources and actors are concentrated.^[1] Economic corridors are seen as “catalyst for regional integration” and “driver for inclusive growth” by bringing in lagging regions into the growth process. They also provide “spatial focus for regional cooperation” initiatives by facilitating priorities of regional projects and provide access to global production chain.^[2] The basic emphasis that lies in the creation of economic corridors is to ensure that within a contiguous area, there is potential to attract investments and generate economic activity.^[3]

Much of the emphasis in this form of economic activity is based on enhancing industrial development, along a region where the potential economic development exists but remains underutilized. One of the important pre-requisites for the development of economic corridors is the need to strategize and integrate the infrastructural development within a particular area and connect it to the regions that are adjacent to these areas. Enhancing transportation systems which potentially link the regions along such corridors are capable of connecting and integrating the processes of infrastructural development to other key sectors such as trade, investments and other economic agencies. While this aspect remains the positive effect of such corridors there are also some downsides that need to be factored in which relate to the issues of social displacement and social conflict that needs to be addressed especially because these regional connectivity projects often permeate through the peripheral areas of nation-state boundaries, which at times remain somewhat removed from the mainstream processes. Another factor that needs to be factored in is the question of large scale environmental issues that can be affected by the expansion of industry.^[4]

As Asia witness development of several economic corridors, this volume looks at four specific ideas and projects of trans-regional economic corridors connecting South and Southeast Asia and through them to other regions. The idea of Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor will connect the Indian and the Pacific Oceans through South and Southeast Asian littorals. The China’s Maritime Silk Road initiative plans to link East Asia to Africa and Europe through South and Southeast Asia. The four-nation Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar Economic Corridor (BCIM-EC) plans to connect China’s southwest region to India’s eastern region through Bangladesh and Myanmar. Lastly, the idea of a Trans-Himalayan Economic Corridor will link South and Southeast Asia to Central Asia through Nepal. While economic corridors are seen from the perspective of economic benefits, which indeed is largely acknowledged, there are also strategic and security issues associated with these corridors, as is evident from the papers in this volume.

The volume puts together perspectives from South and Southeast Asia on trans-regional economic corridors with a focus on connecting the two regions. An obvious question here is why South and Southeast Asia regions. There are two simple reasons. First, these papers were presented at a conference jointly organised by two think tanks––Observer Research Foundation (India) and Institute of South Asian Studies (Singapore)––representing South and Southeast Asia, respectively.^[5] Hence, it was considered imperative that the two regions look at how they would be impacted by the various emerging economic corridors. The second reason is perhaps more compelling. South and Southeast Asia together form a significant geographic zone both in continental Asia and maritime Asia and links the Indian Ocean with the Pacific Ocean. No trans-regional economic corridor in the Indo-Pacific region is conceivable without linking South and Southeast Asia. Furthermore, the two regions also act as a bridge linking inner land-locked Asia to the open seas of Indian and Pacific Oceans.

The first two papers address some board ideas and developments in connecting South Asia and Southeast Asia and set the stage for discussion on various issues and dimensions. Tariq Karim provides a South Asian perspective by bringing the focus of the discussion sharply on domestic and bilateral context of South Asia. As Karim argues the Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal Motor Vehicles Agreement (BBIN-MVA) was, to a large extent, a result of improving political relations between Delhi and Dhaka. The key idea here is that once two countries establish connectivity––whether it is road, rail, air, river, energy, IT––this then can be expanded to sub-regional and regional levels. This can be achieved if political leaderships realise that cooperation is in their larger national interests. He also argues that there is a need to “rethink” connectivity corridors by taking into account the diversity of terrain in different regions. He asserts that there is need to adopt “organic approach” and suggests “multi-modality of transport rather than uniformity” and stressed on the need to link national waterways of the Ganges basin and the eastern Himalayan countries.

Sreeradha Datta discusses connectivity between South and Southeast Asia from the perspective of seeing India as the bridge between in the two regions. The paper asserts that India’s central location in South Asia and with long land and maritime boundaries with Southeast Asia nations it is a natural bridge. Though enjoying an advantageous geographical position, India is often handicapped by various challenges that include security and poor infrastructure in its Northeast region that share land boundary with Myanmar and ineffective execution of connectivity projects. Datta also points out the challenge of terrain in India’s Northeast region for building road and rail lines. The paper suggests that as India pushes for connectivity through continental routes, it is important that maritime links with Southeast Asia is further strengthened as there is huge scope to improve and expand maritime connectivity.

The next four papers focus on various trans-regional connectivity corridors in and around South and Southeast Asia that are at different stages of development – from ideational stage to works in progress. Shankari Sundararaman addresses the key factors responsible for the emergence of the concept of Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor (IPEC) and highlights the opportunities and challenges in translating the vision into reality. Sundararaman argues that the origins of the IPEC idea lie in the growing recognition that the Indian and Pacific Oceans can no longer be seen as two separates regions but as a “one single maritime entity.” The paper further asserts that the IPEC is a vision rooted in the US ‘rebalance’ and ‘pivot to Asia’ strategy to intensify its role in the wider Asia-Pacific region. In the context of South and Southeast Asia, Sundararaman points out that the objective of the United States of linking Indian and Pacific Oceans opens up the possibility of further connecting economies of the two regions.

In his paper on the Chinese proposal for the development of a 21^st century Maritime Silk Road (MSR) initiative, Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy examines the rationale behind the proposal and identifies the strengths and challenges of the MSR proposal. Chaturvedy argues that the Chinese MSR initiative manifests many elements of a ‘grand strategy’ of a rising power––a masterstroke that aims to transform China’s domestic challenges of production overcapacity and the slowing down of economy as well as aimed at creating a favourable international environment conducive to China’s economic development. The paper asserts that China’s “economic outreach” through the MSR provides huge opportunities for South and Southeast Asia as it complements various connectivity initiatives both within and between the two regions. He concludes with a word of caution and observes that the onus lies with China in explaining “how and what” of the MSR to gain confidence of nations in South and Southeast Asia.

The paper on Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Economic Corridor (BCIM-EC) by K. Yhome explores the evolution of the sub-regional initiative and assesses its future prospects. Examining the problems and challenges of the BCIM-EC, Yhome asserts that as the BCIM initiative makes progress there are new issues and dilemmas confronting the sub-regional forum. He points out that there is still no clarity on what approach/idea may form the base of the BCIM initiative––regionalism or sub-regionalism; “economic driven” or “people-centric”; and centralisation or decentralisation. Different views on how to take the BCIM initiative forward and the geostrategic issues create hurdles for realisation of the BCIM-EC. The paper concludes with a few suggestions on areas the sub-regional forum might undertake for cooperation keeping in mind the ground realities.

Madhukar SJB Rana examines the idea of a Trans-Himalayan Economic Corridor (THEC) centred on Nepal. The paper suggests that as China revives the old Silk Roads and the initiative to reconnect China’s Yunnan with India through the BCIM-EC, the extension of the corridor to Nepal will complete the full revival of the ancient “Southern Silk Road” that once connected Tibet, Nepal, India and Yunnan. The paper argues that given its geographical location Nepal can “act as a Himalayan land-bridge” between Central, South and Southeast Asia and emphasises Rivers as the bedrock of sub-regional cooperation. He also discusses interesting ideas such as ‘green mission’, ‘total connectivity’ and ‘trilateralsim’ for sub-regional and trans-regional cooperation.

The following next three papers discuss the economic and security implications of the emerging trans-regional economic corridors with a particular focus on the MSR. Amitendu Palit addresses the economic implications of the MSR on regional trade and specifically the challenges India has in fully integrating with the MSR. Palit argues that variations in economic conditions and capacities among the MSR will mean “differentiated abilities” to exploit the benefits of the MSR. This might limit the benefits of the MSR and may produce “mixed results.” The paper also brings the focus on the challenges of Indian ports and suggests that unless India develops its own infrastructure capabilities with long-term objectives of developing trans-shipment hub, it will remain incompetitive and unable to take advantage of the emerging economic corridors.

Darshana M. Baruah examines the strategic implications of the MSR from an Indian perspective and within the context of the evolving regional geopolitical dynamics marked by growing competition and rivalry. Baruah argues that the MSR would obviously contribute to regional connectivity and boost regional integration in Asia, but the strategic consequences of the initiative on countries like India cannot be overlooked. The paper also addresses the question of how India may respond to the MSR by suggesting that if the evolving geopolitical dynamics has created strategic challenges to Delhi in the form of China’s MSR, it also provided more strategic options such as Japan and the United States. India needs to take full advantage of developing its infrastructure with its partners and friends.

Martin A. Sebastian provides a Southeast Asian perspective on the MSR by examining the evolving security and economic relations between China and the ASEAN nations. Sebastian asserts that the MSR is China’s “charm offensive” to allay fears and mend its ties with Southeast Asian nations in the backdrop of the rising tensions in the South China Sea disputes. The paper observes the Chinese would like to achieve two goals through the MSR – safeguarding the sea lanes and access to resources. China’s growing regional clout is pushing the ASEAN nations towards the United States to balance a rising China. The complex security ties between China and ASEAN ties will cast is shadow over the MSR.

This article was originally published in GP-ORF’s ‘Emerging Trans-Regional corridors: South and Southeast Asia

^[1] Hans-Peter Brunner, “What is Economic Corridors Development and What Can it Achieve in Asia’s Sub-regions,” ADB Working Paper Series on Regional Economic Integration, No. 117, August 2013, p. 1 at  http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/100110/reiwp-117-economic-corridor-development.pdf

^[2] Kunal Sen, ‘Global Production Networks and Economic Corridors: Can They be Drivers for South Asia’s Growth and Regional Integration?’, ADB South Asia Working Paper Series, 33, Asian Development Bank (ADB), Manila, December 2014 at http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/152708/south-asia-wp-033.pdf

^[3] Pradeep Srivastava, “Regional Corridors Development in Regional Cooperation,” ADB Economics Working Paper Series, No. 258, May 2011, pp. 6-16.

^[4] Ibid.

^[5] The conference under the theme “Emerging Trans-Regional Corridors: South and Southeast Asia” with participation from South and Southeast Asia was held on December 7, 2015 in Kolkata.

An Afghan official says NATO drone strikes killed 11 Islamic State militants, including two senior commanders, in the eastern Nangarhar province, The Associated Press reports.

Mohammad Hussain Mashraqiwal, a spokesman for the provincial police chief, identified the two commanders killed in Wednesday’s strikes as Mohammed Omar Sadiq and Omar Farooq, adding that another six people were wounded.

U.S. Navy Cpt. Bill Salvin, a military spokesman, confirmed that American forces conducted counterterrorism strikes in Nangarhar on Wednesday, without providing further details.

An Islamic State affiliate has emerged in eastern Afghanistan as a rival to the much larger Taliban, and has carried out attacks targeting the country’s Shiite minority and security forces.

The Secretariat of India’s highest advisory body on immunization, NTAGI, has been transitioned to the fully government-funded National Institute of Family Health and Welfare (NIFHW), by order of the Centre.

NTAGI’s Secretariat has, until now, been serviced through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-backed Immunization Technical Support Unit (ITSU) at the Public Health Foundation of India (PHFI).

Reports say that the reason behind the Secretariat’s shifting out of ITSU could be allegations of “conflict of interest” in the NTAGI-Gates Foundation relationship, raised by members of the steering group of the National Health Mission.

The concerns reportedly centered around the foundation’s “ties” with pharmaceutical companies, and the influence this could exert on the country’s vaccination policy.

Global Policy Forum, an organization seeking to promote accountability of international organizations, highlighted the growing influence of large global philanthropic foundations, including the Gates Foundation, in a December 2015 study called, “Philanthropic Power and Development — Who shapes the agenda?”

“We welcome this move by the government. We have always said foreign influence in our domestic policies in any way must be avoided,” ET cited Swadeshi Jagran Manch saying. The RSS outfit’s objections reportedly factored into the government’s decision.

The Health Ministry of India said in a statement that it continues to collaborate with the Gates Foundation, and that reports of cutting off “all ties” are misleading.

“The transitioning of the NTAGI Secretariat from ITSU to NIHFW was a planned activity and is part of the health system strengthening efforts by the government,” the ministry said, adding that the shift will not negatively impact the functioning of the Secretariat.

NTAGI is crucial to India’s Universal Immunization Programme (UIP), as its experts provide recommendations on vaccines after reviewing data on disease burden, efficacy and the cost-effectiveness of vaccines. UIP is one of the world’s largest immunization programs, providing free vaccines against 10 life-threatening diseases to an estimated 27-million children and 30-million pregnant women, annually.

The Gates Foundation-ITSU relationship formally ends on February 28.