Projected increases in the frequency, intensity and duration of heatwaves in the desert of the southwestern United States are putting songbirds at greater risk for death by dehydration and mass die-offs, according to a new study.

Researchers used hourly temperature maps and other data produced by the North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS) — a land-surface modeling effort maintained by NASA and other organizations — a long with physiological data to investigate how rates of evaporative water loss in response to high temperatures varied among five bird species with differing body masses. Using this data, they were able to map the potential effects of current and future heat waves on lethal dehydration risk for songbirds in the Southwest and how rapidly dehydration can occur in each species.

Researchers homed in on five songbird species commonly found in the desert southwest: lesser goldfinch, house finch, cactus wren, Abert’s towhee and the curve-billed thrasher.

Under projected conditions where temperatures increase by 4 degrees Celsius (7 degrees Fahrenheit), which is in line with some scenarios for summer warming by the end of the century, heatwaves will occur more often, become hotter, and expand in geographic range to the point where all five species will be at greater risk for lethal dehydration.

Birds are susceptible to heat stress in two ways, said co-author Blair Wolf, a professor of biology at the University of New Mexico. With funding from the National Science Foundation, Wolf investigated heat tolerance for each of the five species in the study as well as for other bird species in Australia and South Africa. “When it’s really hot, they simply can’t evaporate enough water to stay cool, so they overheat and die of heat stroke,” he said. “In other cases, the high rates of evaporative water loss needed to stay cool deplete their body water pools to lethal levels and birds die of dehydration. This is the stressor we focused on in this study.”

What happens is at about 40 degrees Celsius [104 degrees Fahrenheit], these songbirds start panting, which increases the rate of water loss very rapidly, explained co-author Alexander Gerson, an assistant professor of biology at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. At the time of the study, he worked with Wolf as a postdoctoral researcher at the University of New Mexico. He added, “Most animals can only tolerate water losses that result in 15 or 20 percent loss of body mass before they die. So an animal experiencing peak temperatures during a hot summer day, with no access to water, isn’t going to make it more than a few hours.”

As expected, they found that the small species are particularly susceptible to lethal dehydration because they lose water at a proportionately higher rate. For example, at 50 degrees Celsius [122 degrees Fahrenheit], the lesser goldfinch and the house finch lose 8 to 9 percent of their body mass to evaporative water loss per hour, whereas the larger Curve-billed thrasher only loses about 5 percent of its mass per hour. By the end of the century, the number of days in the southwest desert where lethal dehydration poses a high risk to the lesser goldfinch increases from 7 to 25 days per year. For larger species, those days will also increase, but will remain rare.

Despite their physiological disadvantage, house finches and lesser goldfinches might actually fare comparatively better, the researchers noted, because they can survive in a number of ecosystems and they have a more expansive range. But desert specialists such as the curve-billed thrasher and Abert’s towhee have more specific habitat needs and so have a more limited range, restricted in the United States mostly to the hot deserts of the Southwest. That means that a greater proportion of their population is at risk for lethal dehydration when severe enough heatwaves occur.

“When you get into a situation where the majority of the range is affected, that’s where we start to become more alarmed at what we are seeing,” said lead author Tom Albright from the University of Nevada, Reno, noting that this increases the risk of lethal dehydration affecting a large proportion of the population.

According to the researchers, given this warming scenario, climate refugia — microclimates such as mountaintops, trees and washes with shade that allow songbird body temperatures to cool to safe levels — might prove very important in management plans for certain vulnerable species. “Using this type of data, managers identifying the best refugia can have a better idea of the temperature profile that will be suitable for these birds,” Gerson said.

By Maja Garaca Djurdjevic and Danijel Kovacevic

The International Court of Justice in The Hague has rejected a controversial request from Bosnia and Herzegovina to appeal against a judgment clearing Serbia of responsibility for genocide.

The International Court of Justice in The Hague on Thursday rejected a request for a review of the 2007 genocide judgment clearing Serbia, saying it had not come from Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state.

The UN court said that it had considered the opinions of the three members of the tripartite Bosnian presidency, who each wrote to the International Court of Justice to express their views on the issue that has divided the country along ethnic lines.

“The court considered that their content demonstrates that no decision has been taken by the competent authorities, on behalf of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state in terms of requests for revision of the judgment of 26 February 2007,” the court said in a statement.

“Accordingly, no action can be taken,” it said.

Bosnia and Herzegovina’s legal counsel Sakib Softic submitted a request to the ICJ in The Hague last month for a review of the judgment in the lawsuit in which Bosnia attempted to sue Serbia for genocide in Bosnia during the war of 1992 to 1995.

The appeal request was supported by the Bosniak member of the tripartite presidency, Bakir Izetbegovic.

But Bosnian Serb politicians strongly opposed the appeal request, arguing that it was unconstitutional because it was not approved by the state-level tripartite presidency.

The Serb member of the tripartite presidency, Mladen Ivanic, said that the ICJ’s decision to reject the request for a review was “completely expected” and in line with the Dayton peace agreement which ended the war.

“Nobody other than the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina can make decisions,” Ivanic told a joint press conference with the Bosnian Foreign Minister, Igor Crnadak.

Crnadak said that it showed that “Bosnia and Herzegovina can only function as one”.

“This is a triumph of law over politics,” he told the press conference.

At a separate press conference, Bosniak presidency member Izetbegovic described the ICJ’s decision as “a tough blow for me, as a Bosniak and as a politician”.

“This decision will calm down the political crisis [in Bosnia and Herzegovina] but I don’t know how it will compensate for the injustice committed towards Bosniaks,” Izetbegovic said.

Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic meanwhile welcomed the court’s move.

“This decision of the International Court of Justice in The Hague is absolutely correct because any other solution would seriously jeopardise the functioning of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state and further contribute to raising unnecessary tensions in relations with Serbia, which no one needs, now or at any time,” Nikolic said.

The 2007 judgment in the original case said that genocide had been committed when more than 7,000 Bosniak men and boys from Srebrenica were massacred by Bosnian Serb forces.

The court found that Serbia had failed in its duty to prevent genocide, but that there was insufficient evidence to say that Belgrade bore direct responsibility.

The Croat member of the tripartite presidency, Dragan Covic, said on Thursday that the failed attempt to launch an appeal had damaged Bosnia and Herzegovina.

“We have weakened the country’s reputation in the eyes of this international institution,” Covic said.

But the head of the Association of Victims and Witnesses of Genocide, Murat Tahirovic, expressed disappointment at the ICJ’s decision not to hear the appeal.

“We expected that the court would be considerate to the victims… Unfortunately, the court was guided exclusively by legal issues,” Tahirovic told BIRN.

“This is unfortunately the end of the process against Serbia,” he added.

Srdjan Puhalo, a political analyst from Banja Luka, said that Bosniak presidency member Bakir Izetbegovic had miscalculated and “clearly lost this game”.

“The first thing is that the ICJ has shown us is that it is important to respect the institutions of the state,” Puhalo told BIRN.

He argued that war victims had been unnecessarily hurt by the situation.

“The victims did not deserve this kind of treatment,” he said.

Puhalo also said that the controversy over the appeal had not helped Bosnia to do any more to deal with its traumatic wartime past.

“The third thing is that we most certainly will not learn anything from this,” he said.

By Giancarlo Elia Valori*

The war in Syria against Assad’s Alawites and his post-Baathist State began with the people’s uprising of March-April 2011. Mass demonstrations in the traditional Sunni areas of Hama and Homs, to which the pro-government organizations responded with rallies supporting Bashar al-Assad and his regime.

It was the usual pattern of the Arab Springs: civil unrest, mass and non-violent uprising, to which the regime was bound to react violently, thus leading to radicalization in which the jihad “foreign legion” set in.

This should happen after the old Rais leaving and after the international organizations certifying it is a “democratic fight”.

Gaddafi’s fall was triggered off by a small revolt of some prisoners’ relatives in Benghazi.

Later the Libyan militants of the “League for Human Rights” came – of whom there was no trace before – and shortly after a submarine of the French Navy arrived, bringing weapons and trainers.

Again in 2011, in Tahrir Square, Cairo, also the sister of Al Zawahiri, the leader of Al Qaeda, participated in the demonstrations, while the team of stewards for controlling the crowd in those more or less spontaneous demonstrations was provided by the armed wing of the Muslim Brotherhood.

At the time, one of the books recommended by the Ikhwan of the Muslim Brotherhood was exactly “The Politics of Nonviolent Action” by Gene Sharp, the founder of the Albert Einstein Institution, a real handbook for organising non-military and non-violent subversion.

That text and that technique had already been found in the techniques used by the OTPOR network in Serbia, a group opposing Milosevic’s regime.

OTPOR was a group of young people trained in the US Diplomatic Mission to Budapest, Hungary.

In fact, after the crisis of the Syrian regime following the 2011 events, the barbed wire was removed from the sensitive borders and Sunni jihadists began to arrive in Syria from Jordan and Turkey, who immediately settled on the border between Syria and the Lebanon – or better between Al Qusayr and the Ghouta region – to seal and hold Damascus as if in a vice.

It is also worth recalling that, even before rising to power, Bashar al-Assad was directly responsible for the Lebanese dossier and, hence, for the close and direct relations between the Syrian regime and Hezbollah.

The situation changed with the bombing of the Syrian intelligence headquarters in Rawda Square on July 18, 2012, in which the following people died: the Syrian Defence Minister; Bashar’s cousin and Defence Deputy-Minister, Asef Shawkat; the Deputy-President of the Republic, Hassan Turkmani, and finally the Head of the intelligence services, Hafez Makhlouf.

It has not been ascertained yet whether the attack was perpetrated by a suicide bomber or was carried out with explosives detonated remotely.

They were explicitly mentioned, as “brothers” and “martyrs”, by the Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in his speech of May 25, 2013 expressing the Lebanese Shiite group’s full military and operational support to Assad.

Hezbollah had already intervened with its “shadow armies”, in the first phase of the clashes between the Alawite leader’ Syrian Arab Army and the Sunni and jihadist forces, but only on the narrow border line between Syria and the Lebanon.

Hence, the “resistance axis” between Iran, Hezbollah and Assads’ Syria was created by means of weapons – an “axis” that the Syrian and the Shiite Lebanese propaganda had been spreading for years.

The Iranian, Syrian and Hezbollah policy line was opposed to a Sunni but, more explicitly Saudi, project to conquer Syria, marginalize the Alawites and confine them only on the Mediterranean coast and later come to a clash or to Iran’s regionalization.

The first slogans of the pro-Assad protesters, in 2011, were mainly against the Saudi king and sometimes against the Jordanian one.

Certainly, today the presence of Hezbollah in the Syrian conflict has proved to be decisive in the defeat of the various organization of the Sunni jihad and the Free Syrian Army – born from a split of Assad’s Armed Forces, again in 2011, and later turned into an instrument for projection of the Turkish force, especially in Northern Syria.

The losses of the Lebanese “Party of God” are supposed be at least 1,500 soldiers, while Israel has not yet decided how to move in Syria, except for the defence of the Golan Heights, thus waiting for its various enemies to destroy one another.

With one exception, made explicit precisely by Prime Minister Netanyahu in June 2013: we need to evaluate and respond to the new and disturbing presence of Hezbollah in Syria.

Moreover, in addition to the “resistance axis” between Iran, Syria and the Lebanese “Party of God”, we must also consider Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which resumed its official relations with Iran in July 2016, with Iran providing economic aid and military support while – as stated, at the time, by Hamas political bureau – “Saudi Arabia made our proposals fade away”.

It should be noted that, in the Yemenite war, Hamas – the political-military arm of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood – had defended President Mansour Hadi against the Houthis, namely the Shiite followers of the Seventh and Last Imam, supported by Iran.

Yemen is clearly the bridgehead for controlling Saudi Arabia and having access to the Persian Gulf but also, indirectly, to the Suez Canal.

It is also strange that the EU dependence on international trade has not led the European decision-makers to think that whoever controls that region holds in his hands the jugular vein of the whole Eurasian peninsula’s maritime trade.

Currently, however, the European decision-makers’ strategic culture and sensitivity is virtually zero.

Moreover, the presence of the “Party of God” in Syria allows a wide deployment and dislocation of forces, as well as a sort of Syria’s “colonization” by Iran in exchange for its strong support to Hezbollah just inside the Lebanon .

Hezbollah has become hegemonic in the Lebanon and hence can be turned into a kind of “Middle East army” for the entire Shiite world gravitating around Iran.

Between Iran and the Lebanon, thanks to the Shiite “Party of God”, a series of “demographic gaps” between Syria and Iraq towards the Lebanon can be created – and this is already happening today.

The poles of this new Iranian Shiite demographics are the areas of Kefraya and Fuah, from where the residents – mostly Shiites – have been directed to the West Damascus neighbourhood – characterized by a Sunni majority – while the latter will settle in Kefraya and Fuah, in the areas vacated by the Shiites, if the international agreements on the “Four cities” still apply.

Therefore Iran wants full continuity with the Lebanon and this is the reason why it is planning a real population exchange between Northern and Southern Syria.

This also implies Shiite control of the Turkish-Syrian border – and hence of NATO.

Furthermore Hezbollah will settle in Madaya and Zabadani, the cities it has contributed to defend from the “takfiri” (the Sunni apostates) and from “terrorists” – just to use the terminology of the Lebanese Shiite propaganda.

In Daraa, 300 Iraqi Shiite families have already settled in the areas vacated by the Sunni forces after the “ceasefire” of last September.

We can easily understand what this means for the Jewish State’ security.

A pincer-shaped movement between North and South, between the border with Southern Lebanon, dominated by the “Party of God”, and the South, with Hamas which is armed and trained by Iran, is one of the worst possible scenarios for Israel.

Only a new relationship with Egypt and Jordan could strategically counterbalance this threat.

As President Trump has already stated, currently the United States does not necessarily want a Syria without Assad, because “it is up to the Syrian people to choose” and, in any case, “Assad is better than the jihadists”.

Furthermore, the Syrian President responds to President Trump’s advances assuming that “Syria and the United States can be natural allies”.

In more explicit terms, Assad wants to be part of the new alliance “against terrorism” in the region, but the problem is that the United States will never accept strategic continuity from Tehran to the Roman temples of Baalbek on the Lebanese coast, nor strategic closure towards Israel.

A good possibility of solving the issue lies in the Russian presence in the region.

Russia has every interest in supporting the Jewish State and an equal need to stay and control Syria so as to prevent Iranian pressures on its military bases in Tartus and the control of its communication lines in the Syrian territory.

Obviously President Trump does not want Iran standing in his way in the future Middle East “anti-terror League” – and certainly he does not want to have to deal with Ansar Allah of the Houthi rebels in Yemen, with the Fatemyoun Division of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, created in Afghanistan by Shiites who fought in Syria, and with the Zaynaboyoun Brigade of the over one thousand Pakistani Shiites, as well as – of course – with Hezbollah.

In the plans of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, the “Shiite highway” goes from Iran to Iraq up inside Syria; it enters north of Aleppo up to the West-Mediterranean coast and then turns south into the Lebanon up to its border with Israel, in Naquora Maron el-Ras.

However, the tension between Russia and Iran, which could favour a new presence of the United States in the region, is already visible.

Vladimir Putin clearly wants Hezbollah to leave the Syrian territory soon.

Obviously Iran has no interest in pressing the “Party of God” to go back into the Lebanese ranks – Hezbollah is essential to control the above-mentioned “Shiite highway”.

Moreover, Bashar al-Assad is too experienced not to understand that delivering much of his country to the Iranians and to the Lebanese Shiite will push him politically into a corner and will deprive him of the essential Russian support for his freedom of manoeuvre with Iran.

The US Congress and the six countries of the Gulf Security Council also require the implementation of the above stated ”Agreement of the Four Cities”, namely Madaya, Al Fuah, Kafariya and Zabadani, the cities “punished” both by the Shiite and the Sunni jihadist forces.

The Agreement, reached at the same time as the Astana ceasefire, envisages that sick people and other people at risk be evacuated and medicines and food be delivered to the residents.

However, as you may expect, clearing out a city means to conquer it.

As stated before the US Congress, the best way to weaken Hezbollah is to block the Iranian arms shipments reaching the Lebanon through Syria.

A great Sunni bloc in Central Syria would avoid the strategic continuity between Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolution Guards, thus enabling Bashar al-Assad to rule a territory large enough to have credible power in the region.

About the author:
*Professor Giancarlo Elia Valori is an eminent Italian economist and businessman. He holds prestigious academic distinctions and national orders. Mr Valori has lectured on international affairs and economics at the world’s leading universities such as Peking University, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Yeshiva University in New York. He currently chairs “La Centrale Finanziaria Generale Spa”, he is also the honorary president of Huawei Italy, economic adviser to the Chinese giant HNA Group and member of the Ayan-Holding Board. In 1992 he was appointed Officier de la Légion d’Honneur de la République Francaise, with this motivation: “A man who can see across borders to understand the world” and in 2002 he received the title of “Honorable” of the Académie des Sciences de l’Institut de France.

Source:
This article was published by Modern Diplomacy

By Lisa Ferdinando

Iran poses the most significant threat to U.S. Central Command’s complex area of responsibility, Centcom commander Army Gen. Joseph L. Votel told the Senate Armed Services Committee Thursday.

Centcom has dealt with a number of significant challenges over the past 12 months, including in Iraq and Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt and the Sinai, the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, he said.

“We are also dealing with a range of malign activities perpetrated by Iran and its proxies operating in the region,” the general said at the hearing on the posture of U.S. Central Command and U.S. Africa Command.

“It is my view that Iran poses the greatest long-term threat to stability for this part of the world,” Votel said.

Iranian activities of concern, according to Votel, include “malign influence across Iraq and Syria,” and efforts to prop up the Syrian regime and exploit Shia population centers.

‘Highly Complex Area’

The Centcom area of responsibility, which covers four million square miles from the Arabian Gulf region into Central Asia, remains a “highly complex area, widely characterized by pervasive instability and conflict,” he said.

The region is “increasingly crowded” with external nation-states, including Russia and China, that are pursuing their own interests in attempting to shift alliances, Votel said.

“The central region has come to represent the nexus for many of the security challenges our nation faces,” he said, “and, most importantly, the threats in this region continue to pose the most direct threat to the U.S. homeland and the global economy.”

Violent extremist groups such as al-Qaida and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria are taking advantage of the fragile security environment of heightened ethno-sectarian tensions, economic uncertainty, and weak or corrupt governance, Votel explained.

“These groups have clearly indicated their desire and intent to attack the U.S. homeland, our interests abroad and the interest of our partners and allies,” he said.

Progress in Counter-ISIS Fight

The coalition against ISIS continues to build momentum in defeating the terrorists in Iraq and Syria, and is pressuring the terrorists on multiple fronts and across all domains, according to Votel.

He highlighted the importance of working with coalition members and partners on the ground.

“As you are seeing clearly demonstrated in Iraq and Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere throughout our area of responsibility, we have adopted a ‘by, with and through’ approach that places a heavy reliance on indigenous forces,” Votel said.

The counter-ISIS campaign, now in its third year, is on track with its military plan to defeat the terrorists in Iraq and Syria, according to Votel.

“While we must take the necessary actions to counter immediate threats, such as ISIS in Iraq and Syria,” Votel’s written statement to the committee said, “we also need to find ways to address these and other root causes of instability if we hope to achieve lasting positive effects in that part of the world.”

Afghanistan Update

The Afghanistan’s security forces are beginning their third year with full responsibility for security, with limited U.S. or coalition support, Votel pointed out.

While the Taliban made gains in 2016, the Afghan forces quickly responded and reversed some Taliban gains, he said. It is essential, according to the general, for the United States to continue to assist the Afghan forces in addressing capability gaps, including in aviation.

Votel said he and Army Gen. John W. Nicholson, the commander of the Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan, are developing advice and recommendations for Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on the way forward in Afghanistan.

“I do believe it will involve additional forces to ensure that we can make the advise and assist mission more effective,” Votel said.

By Ajey Lele*

The employment rate for prime-age workers (ages 25-54) inched up to 78.3 percent in February, a new high for the recovery, as the economy added 235,000 jobs. This is 0.5 percentage points above its year-ago level. Most of the rise has been among women, with an increase in the prime-age employment-to-population ratio (EPOP) of 0.8 percentage points to 71.6 percent over the last year. The rise among men over this period has been just 0.2 percentage points.

This rise is noteworthy since it suggests that there are more workers being pulled into the labor force as the recovery continues, even as the unemployment rate has remained relatively stable. If this trend continues, it indicates that the labor market can continue to tighten without creating inflationary pressure.

Other data in the report are consistent with a labor market that still has considerable slack. While the number of people working part-time involuntarily fell by 136,000 in February, it is still well above pre-recession levels. (Voluntary part-time is well above pre-recession levels, presumably due to the ability of workers to get insurance outside of employment through the Affordable Care Act.)

The percentage of workers who are unemployed because they voluntarily quit their jobs fell for the third consecutive month. At 10.7 percent of the unemployed, this key measure of workers’ confidence in their job prospects is closer to recession levels than full employment.

Wage growth also appears to be slowing somewhat. Year-over-year growth in the average hourly wage was 2.8 percent in February, but if we compare the average of the last three months (December-February) with the prior three months (September-November) the annualized rate of wage growth was just 2.5 percent. This does not support the view that wage growth is accelerating. It is also important to remember that employers are shifting compensation from health care to wages, so wage growth is likely exceeding the rate of growth of labor compensation.

The insanity over the “mass grave” story in Tuam has now reached a fever pitch. The Irish Prime Minister, Enda Kenny, says that the Bon Secours Sisters took the babies of unwed mothers and “sold them, trafficked them [and] starved them.”

That is a serious charge, and serious accusations demand serious evidence. He provided none. Kenny offered not one scintilla of evidence to back up his fantastic story. Not surprisingly, he found a kindred soul in the U.S. in Niall O’Dowd of Irish Central; he quoted his remarks with relish the next day.

Here is what Kenny said on March 7: “No nuns broke into our homes to kidnap our children. We gave them up to what we convinced ourselves was the nuns’ care.” That is all true. But then he goes on to say that the nuns sold the children, trafficked them, and starved them.

The nuns did not sell children to bidders. They placed abandoned and often abused children—abandoned and abused by their mothers and/or fathers—up for adoption. Customarily, as one would expect, the adopting parents would make a donation to the nuns. That’s what people do as a demonstration of their gratitude. But from the Kenny-O’Dowd account, they would have us believe that the nuns ran some kind of auction, selling the kids off to the highest bidder.

Children were “trafficked”? That conjures up images of slave labor. This is a new charge. Kenny and O’Dowd need to share their evidence with the rest of us. Otherwise, we might conclude they are liars.

Children were “starved” to death? This is the most damning of the accusations. Kenny just throws this charge out there hoping it will stick. O’Dowd is more specific, claiming that some of the children in the care of the nuns died of “marasmus,” or malnutrition.

The following explanation of why the children died in the Mother and Baby Home operated by the Bon Secours Sisters was given by an Irish student of this subject.

“For the years 1925-1926, 57 children, aged between one month and three years, (plus two, aged six and eight years) died in the Children’s Home. Of this number, 21 died of measles, other causes were convulsions, gastroenteritis, bronchitis, tuberculosis, meningitis, and pneumonia.”

The researcher also listed other factors. “Other causes of death were as follows: pertussis (otherwise known as whooping cough), anaemia, influenza, nephritis (kidney inflammation), laryngitis, congenital heart disease, enteritis, epilepsy, spinal bifida, chicken pox, general oedema (dropsy), coeliac disease, birth injury, sudden circulatory failure, and fit.”

A total of 22 diseases is cited, but there is no mention of marasmus. Why not? This takes on greater significance when we consider the author of this description: it was none other than Catherine Corless, hero of the “mass grave” fame. It can be found on the last two pages of her 2012 journal article, “The Home.”

Let’s say Corless is wrong about this; perhaps she overlooked the marasmus. The real issue here is not whether kids died of malnutrition—let’s assume they did—the real issue is O’Dowd’s intellectual inability to conceive of any reason other than intentional starvation.

Dr. Jacky Jones worked for the Irish health services for 37 years in the field of health education and health promotion. She says that “high infant mortality rates were normal for certain groups of people in Ireland until the 1970s.” She further notes that “Children from poor families were four times more likely to die before their first birthday.”

Now ask yourself this: Were the children of indigent unmarried mothers in the early twentieth century more likely or less likely to be part of that segment of the population as described by Dr. Jones?

Those children who were dropped off at the convents were not the sons and daughters of the rich. They were the abandoned and often abused offspring of parents who could not, or would not, care for them. That some of the children may have been suffering from malnutrition when they were acquired by the nuns would hardly be surprising, and it is just as unsurprising to think that some died “before their first birthday,” as Dr. Jones said.

If this is too hard for O’Dowd to understand, then perhaps he thinks that the reason why more people die in hospitals than in hotels is because hospitals are known for killing people. It would never occur to him that the sick and dying are more likely to check themselves into a hospital than a hotel. Get the point, Niall?

It is malicious to accuse anyone of intentionally starving children to death without proof, and it is even worse when an entire order of nuns is charged with doing so. That is what the Prime Minister of Ireland has done, and that is what the founder of Irish Central has done.

One more thing. Children who suffer from marasmus are typically emaciated. Click here to see pictures taken of children in the care of the Bon Secours Sisters. Do they look emaciated? The pictures, by the way, are posted on Irish Central!

A referendum vote for a new constitution in Turkey is threatening to cause a diplomatic row with Germany. It has also created tension amongst the other European countries such as Austria and Netherlands.

On April 2017, Turkey will be voting for a new constitution, which has drawn criticism from within and the West. The problem with the new draft for the constitution is that it aims to fundamentally change the way Turkey is governed. The draft constitution is called as the “Turkish-style presidency.” It is because it is seeking to replace the current parliamentary system with a presidential one. The presidential system will give President Recep Tayyip Erdogan all the executive power, a reminiscent of the first Turkish President Kemal Attaturk.

Apart from giving Erdogan the power, the constitution would also move away Turkey from its secularism as the incumbent government under the Islamist party AKP is trying hard to rule the country based on Islam.

During Attaturk’s time, Turkey was pushed towards secularism (which left many people angry) and under Erdogan’s time, the country is moving towards an Islamic country.

The difference during Attaturk’s and now is that majority of the Turkish people1 want Islam to be a predominant factor. Erdogan is also being able to garner support from the public based on the terrorist attacks Turkey is witnessing and also the 2016 July coup.

In the pretext of protecting Turkey, Erdogan is usurping all the powers in his own hands.

The arrest of the German-Turkish journalist Deniz Yücel was also in this excuse of stopping the propaganda of spreading terrorism and protecting Turkey from further terrorist attacks. Yücel was accused of supporting terrorism propaganda in Turkey.

Hence, Erdogan is trying to garner support domestically as well as from the Turkish Diaspora.

The arrest of Yücel had already created tension between Germany and Turkey as Erdogan was accused of human rights violation and restriction on freedom of speech.

The problem deepened in the last week of February when the Turkish minister under the support of Erdogan wanted to garner support from the Turkish Diaspora staying in Europe. The Turkish ministers wanted to organise rallies in the foreign soil which was cancelled by the host authorities, hence leading to spat.

On 5 March, the German authorities2 withdrew permission for two rallies by the Turkish citizens in German cities at which Turkish ministers were to urge a “Yes” vote in a referendum next month. The cancellation of the rallies has led Erdogan to hit out at German authorities by accusing the German government “no different than the Nazi ones of the past.”3 Around 3 million Turkish citizens live in Germany and out of which around 1.5 million can cast a ballot in April. Erdogan is focusing on these 1.5 million Turkish citizens of Germany who are eligible to vote in Turkey. These 1.5 million Turkish citizens are strong supporters of Erdogan and he wants the support of them for garnering the majority support which is needed for the new constitution. Basing on the Diaspora support, Erdogan warned Berlin not to stop him from speaking in Germany if he wanted to.  He said that “If you don’t let me in, or if you don’t let me speak, I will make the whole world rise up.”4

The German politicians along with the EU leaders have expressed their anger on Erdogan and have asked the German Chancellor Angela Merkel not to become weak on her dealings with the Turkish president. Germany, who is facing problems due to the flow of refugee from Syria, had struck a deal with Turkey last year to stop the flow of people from coming to Germany and Europe. Many European leaders feel that Erdogan is trying to take advantage of it.

Turkey’s relationship with Germany and other EU members has been undergoing rough phases since Ankara expressed the desire to become an EU member. The problem of the non-membership for Turkey has been because of the prejudices within the EU members which actually pushed Turkey towards a strong Islamic country. Although the EU members have shown the non-fulfilment of the criteria by Turkey as reasons to keep it away from the membership but the main problem is that the foundation of the EU, apart from common economic cooperation and peace and stability in Europe, was also of being a Christian club. Samuel Huntington’s theory of clash of civilizations and the battles of Crusades cannot be overlooked in this context. Turkey and the EU is a classic case of these two, especially under Erdogan and his government.

However, the EU and Turkey has been having a working relationship with each other. Erdogan has been taking advantage of this working relationship with the EU. He has been able to divert the minds of the Turkish people, including the secularists (to a large extent), from moving away from the EU membership. The secularists’ Turkish people have been feeling the injustice being meted out on Turkey by not giving the EU membership. Erdogan and his government have been able to turn the country into an Islamic one by applying some of the EU criteria such as freedom of religion etc to build their own Islamist foundation.

Under the secularist government, religion was separate in Turkey and the Islamist political parties were not able to gain power leaving the majority of the people dissatisfied. The Turkish people under Attaturk were annoyed as they were not allowed to practice the Salafist Islam. However, under Erdogan’s government, the conservative form of Islam has come back; pushing the country to go back to the Ottoman Empire’s time where there was the seat of Caliphate was in Turkey.

Erdogan through his actions have proved his desire of turning Turkey into an Islamic state and move away from the West. He actually took advantage of the delay in Turkey’s EU membership and has been hinting on withdrawing Ankara’s membership proposal from the EU and joining the SCO5. The plus point for Erdogan and his government is been the economic growth and development the country has witnessed over the years under their power. Economic growth and high standard of living are the basic needs for the common people and Erdogan and his party has been able to provide it, resulting in strong popularity amongst the Turkish people. Hence, the draft of the constitution which is been put up for referendum (to a large extent) is leaning towards Erdogan and his government.

Meanwhile, Erdogan is also trying to play the NATO card with Europe in order to strengthen his own position. He is bringing Turkey closer to Russia as he understands that Europe and Russia is having a belligerent relationship. Turkey wants to take advantage of this factor too. Russia which has a huge problem with NATO is trying to bring Turkey into its camp in order to weaken EU and NATO alliance. The European leaders are being careful with the spat which Turkey and some EU members are having over the referendum. It is because they fear that the tension between them will be taken advantage by Russia under the leadership of Vladimir Putin. Russia, who is another ‘sovereign democracy’ where the President has become an authoritative power in the name of national security and stability of the country, is building strong partnership with Turkey in every sector—political, economic and defence. Erdogan and Putin’s style of rule are similar hence bringing them closer.

The EU leaders are worried with the actions of Erdogan both externally and domestically. Externally, Turkey’s actions are threatening to weaken the EU and NATO alliance. Domestically, the European leaders along with the German politicians feel that Erdogan is trying to stoke problem within Germany by creating problems between the Turkish citizens and German natives within Germany. They also feel that these rallies need to be stopped as these rallies might sow the seed of anti-democracy6 within Germany and other European countries.

Hence, the diplomatic spat between Turkey and Germany is double edged. Erdogan is trying to strengthen his power through the constitution and at the same time twist the arms of EU and NATO by coming close to Russia.

Disclaimer: The views are that of the author and not of the Council

*Sr. Indrani Talukdar is a Research Fellow at the Indian Council of World Affairs, New Delhi.

Notes:
1. The Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which is an opposition party, has given its support to Erdogan and the draft of the constitution.
2. Chancellor Angela Merkel said her government had played no part in steps taken by city councils who, according to one mayor, acted purely on security grounds.
3. Merrit Kennedy, “Turkey-Germany Relations at New Low After Erdogan Makes Nazi Comparison”, NPR, March 6, 2017. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/06/518805720/turkey-germany-relations-at-new-low-after-erdogan-makes-nazi-comparison (Accessed on March 7, 2017).
4. Merkel calls for calm over ‘Nazi’ accusations amid strained German-Turkish relations”, DW, March 6, 2017. http://www.dw.com/en/merkel-calls-for-calm-over-nazi-accusations-amid-strained-german-turkish-relations/a-37819933 (Accessed on March 8, 2017).
5. Moving to SCO is also because Europe is still reeling under the economic crisis of 2008 and the shift of economic power has gone to Asia. Another point to move away from the West and moving closer to Asia including Russia is because these countries are fighting for a multipolar world order where the US and Europe’s dominance is weakened.
6. “German politicians line up against ‘anti-democratic’ Turkish referendum campaign”, DW, March 3, 2017. http://www.dw.com/en/german-politicians-line-up-against-anti-democratic-turkish-referendum-campaign/a-37797622 (Accessed on March 8, 2017).

By Joyce Karam

After a three-month halt by the Obama administration on a $390 million arms sale to Saudi Arabia, the Trump Cabinet has taken initial decisions to resume the sale after Congress’ approval.

A US State Department spokesperson told Arab News: “As a matter of policy, we don’t comment on proposed arms transfers until they’re formally notified to Congress.”

But there have been no denials by the Trump administration of reports that resuming the arms deal has been approved by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson this week.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that “the State Department has approved a resumption of weapons sales to Saudi,” in a reversal of a decision made in December by the Obama administration “to suspend the sale of precision guided munitions to Riyadh” in protest at Arab Coalition actions in Yemen.

The full resumption and delivery of arms will not be immediate, however. Under US law, it would require a final interagency decision to formally present the proposed sales to Congress. After that, there will be a 30-day notification period before moving forward.

Also, Tillerson’s approval would require the “White House backing to go into effect,” the Washington Post reported.

The State Department spokesperson that Arab News spoke to said any decision to resume arms sales does not imply a lack of concern over civilian casualties in Yemen, and the US urges all sides to take additional measures to mitigate against the risk of civilian harm.

The US official added: “More generally, we continue to believe that a political settlement of the Yemen conflict offers the best mechanism for all parties to secure their interests.”

Another US official framed the decision to resume sales around Trump’s counter-Iran efforts. The official told the Washington Post: “We’ll be looking for ways to blunt Iranian malign influence in the region. And we’ll be looking for all the tools that the US government has… I think you have to look at Yemen.”

Hussein Ibish, a resident senior scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington (AGSIW), told Arab News: “The Trump administration’s decision to release the long-scheduled weapons sale to Saudi Arabia isn’t a surprise.”

In terms of policy, Ibish added: “Trump, Tillerson and US Secretary of Defense James Mattis have all signaled a strong interest in maintaining a strong military posture toward Iran, and close cooperation with allies such as Saudi Arabia.”

However, Ibish said: “Even under (Barack) Obama or (Trump’s former campaign rival) Hillary Clinton, the sale would ultimately have gone ahead because of the strong American interest in the outcome in Yemen and maintaining close security ties to Saudi Arabia.”

Repsol and partner Armstrong Energy have made in Alaska the largest U.S. onshore conventional hydrocarbons discovery in 30 years. The Horseshoe-1 and 1A wells drilled during the 2016-2017 winter campaign confirm the Nanushuk play as a significant emerging play in Alaska’s North Slope, Repsol said.

The contingent resources identified with the existing data in Repsol and Armstrong Energy’s blocks in the Nanushuk play in Alaska could amount to approximately 1.2 billion barrels of recoverable light oil.

Repsol has been actively exploring Alaska since 2008, and since 2011 the company has drilled multiple consecutive discoveries on the North Slope along with partner Armstrong.

The successive campaigns in the area have added significant new potential to what was previously viewed as a mature basin. Additionally Alaska has significant infrastructure which allows new resources to be developed more efficiently.

Repsol holds a 25% working interest in the Horseshoe discovery and a 49% working interest in the Pikka Unit. Armstrong holds the remaining working interest and is currently the operator.

Prior to drilling Horseshoe, Repsol as operator drilled 13 exploration and appraisal wells on the North Slope, which led to multiple reservoir discoveries currently included in the Pikka Unit.

The Horseshoe discovery extends the Nanushuk play more than 20 miles south of the existing discoveries achieved by Repsol and Armstrong in the same interval within the Pikka Unit during 2014 and 2015, where permitting for development activities are underway. A significant percentage of the above noted resources are expected to be reclassified as proven and probable reserves upon sanctioning of the Nanushuk Development Project.

Preliminary development concepts for Pikka anticipate first production there from 2021, with a potential rate approaching 120,000 barrels of oil per day.

The Horseshoe-1 discovery well was drilled to a total depth of 6,000 ft. (1,828 meters) and encountered more than 150 ft. of net oil pay in several reservoir zones in the Nanushuk section. The Horseshoe-1A sidetrack was drilled to a total depth of 8,215 ft. and encountered more than 100 ft. of net oil pay in the Nanushuk interval as well.

The Greek Parliament should resist external pressures and reject any changes to legislation based on the European Commission’s Joint Action Plan for the EU-Turkey agreement, that will further worsen the situation for people seeking safety and a better life in Europe, 13 nongovernmental organizations said Friday in an open letter.

As the Greek Parliament is expected to vote within the coming days on these changes, the organizations are calling on Greek Members of Parliament not to support amendments to Greek Law 4375/2016 already published in the EU Joint Action Plan that will remove safeguards for vulnerable people and families. The parliament should stand by the protections enshrined in Greece’s current asylum legislation by making sure that most vulnerable persons and those eligible for family reunification under the Dublin Regulation are exempted from accelerated admissibility procedures aimed at sending them back to Turkey.

Removing existing safeguards for vulnerable people and those with prospects for family reunification in other EU member states would mean keeping more people on the already overcrowded islands and putting further undue pressure on the islands’ population. The result would be the creation of more detention centers, fast-tracking asylum proceedings, and limiting appeals steps, all with the goal of facilitating deportations, and possibly sending people into harm’s way.

The organizations urged Parliament to make Greece an example of a country willing to uphold the human rights of and protection for people seeking safety and security in Europe, and not to allow Greece be used as a laboratory for testing migration policies at the expense of the most vulnerable.

“Greek members of parliament have a responsibility to make sure that the rights of everyone in Greece are protected, including of vulnerable asylum seekers,” said Eva Cosse, Greece researcher at Human Rights Watch. “That means rejecting plans that will further worsen the situation for people seeking refuge in Europe.”

Moscow has urged US intelligence services to provide a detailed and open response to WikiLeaks’ accusations of CIA hacking activities as #Vault7 constitutes a serious threat to international security, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said.

“We’d really like the security services in Washington to respond fully and openly to the released documents with specific facts, and if this information is confirmed then it poses a great threat to the world and international security,” Zakharova said at a briefing in the Russian capital.

Moscow “occasionally” receives information about the activities of the American special services, she pointed out.

Previously, such reports “were always confirmed, but also there’s always been attempts to retouch this information and remove it from the front pages,” Zakharova said.

“In any case, almost every time this information was confirmed,” the ministry’s spokeswoman said.

On Tuesday, WikiLeaks released the first installment of the #Vault7 leak, revealing the scope of the CIA’s hacking capabilities.

According to the whistleblower group, the batch of 8,761 documents accounts for only 1 percent of the total files to be released.

The leaks have revealed the CIA’s covert hacking targets, which included computers, smartphones, routers and even smart TVs infiltrated for the purpose of collecting audio, even when the device is switched off.

The Google Android operating system, used in 85 percent of the world’s smartphones, was also exposed as having severe vulnerabilities, which allowed the CIA to “weaponize” the devices.

The US government hackers were able to access data from social messaging platforms, including WhatsApp, Weibo and Clockman before encryption, the leaks revealed.

During his livestream on Thursday, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange promised that the group would provide tech companies that suffered “billions of dollars of damage” due to the CIA hacking “exclusive access” to technical data it has obtained.

Tax cuts and boosted spending to create jobs hike the value of the US dollar, reducing US exports and competitiveness.

By Chris Miller

Reports that US President Donald Trump called former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn at 3 am to inquire about the economic effects of a strong dollar show just how little the administration has thought about trade policy. True, complaints about unfair trade featured regularly in Trump’s campaign rhetoric. But a complaint is not a policy. The scuttling of the TPP and policies that Trump is expected to implement look unlikely to help US exporters or boost American manufacturers against foreign competition. If anything, the policies may make the trade deficit even larger.

One reason is that the dollar has climbed since the election. Before November, markets expected a divided government, with Republicans retaining control of the House of Representatives and Democrats taking either the presidency or the Senate, or both. Such a result was expected to deliver few changes in fiscal policy.

With one party, the Republicans, controlling the White House and Congress for the first time since 2011, the election upended expectations for fiscal and monetary policy. Many analysts now assume that the Republican-controlled Congress will soon pass tax cuts financed by increasing the size of the federal government’s budget deficit.

Looser fiscal policy forces the Federal Reserve to rethink its approach to monetary policy. Fed Chair Janet Yellen had already signaled that the US central bank had planned to increase interest rates in 2017 to account for higher, though still low, inflation. Before the election, most analysts expected the Fed to proceed slowly with interest rate hikes. After all, the Fed had promised to normalize interest rates in previous years before backing off after inflation levels disappointed.

The boost in deficit spending, if it comes, will force the Fed to act faster than many analysts had expected. Higher deficits should be supportive of more rapid price increases. If the Fed expects that inflation will increase more rapidly than previously estimated, the board of governors may choose to increase rates more quickly to prevent inflation from overshooting targets.

Higher interest rates raise borrowing costs in the United States and slow GDP growth. The immediate effect of such expectations was visible not in US growth figures but on the value of the dollar. Interest rate differentials among countries often have a significant effect on the value of their currencies. The reason – investors prefer to own debt instruments denominated in currencies with higher real interest rates, because they get a higher return. If US interest rates increase sharply, many analysts suggest that dollar-denominated assets will become higher-yielding relative to other currencies. The demand for dollars, therefore, should increase. In expectation of this mechanism, the dollar’s value climbed after the election.

A stronger dollar creates a dilemma for an administration committed to boosting US exports and reducing the trade deficit. The more valuable the dollar is compared to other currencies, the more expensive US goods are for foreign consumers. If the dollar rises against the euro, for example, US automobiles and other products become relatively more expensive than German ones, leading other countries to buy more from Germany and less from the United States. As a political slogan, “strong dollar” sounds better than “weak exporters.” But the two are usually linked.

The dilemma of the strong dollar is just one of many contradictions of US trade policy. A second major contradiction is China. Several top administration officials have threatened to label China a currency manipulator, suggesting that Beijing is playing games with the value of the yuan in order to boost exports.

It is true that China is manipulating its currency, but not the way President Trump imagines it to be. Most analysts agree that Beijing is keeping its currency artificially high, not low. China fears that if its currency declines in value against the dollar, Chinese investors will move money out of the country, potentially starting an avalanche of capital export that could destabilize the economy. To prevent this, Beijing has spent $1 trillion in foreign exchange reserves buying yuan to boost the currency’s value. At the same time, the Chinese government has tightened exchange controls, seeking to prevent Chinese residents from converting large sums from yuan to dollars or from speculating on a decline in the yuan’s value. An estimated $1 trillion left China in 2015. If China were to stop manipulating its currency, the yuan would likely fall against the dollar, making Chinese exports relatively cheaper and encouraging US consumers to buy more from China. That would create a larger, not smaller, trade deficit.

A third contradiction of US trade policy concerns trade deals. On the one hand, the administration says it wants to boost exports and reduce the trade deficit. On the other, it has withdrawn from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP, which included 11 other countries, and threatened to review other deals such as NAFTA, which links the US, Canada and Mexico. These moves create a dilemma. Unlike a generation ago, the biggest barriers to trade are not tariffs, which have fallen sharply nearly everywhere, but local regulations. Current World Trade Organization rules have been effective at lowering tariffs, but less effective at ensuring an equal regulatory playing field, especially in countries such as China where the government owns many businesses. If the goal is to increase US exports, withdrawing from trade deals that provide guarantees for fair regulatory treatment for US firms abroad will have the opposite effect.

A final contradiction of US trade policy is that it focuses on the wrong places. Focusing on the balance of trade between two countries ignores that trade is a multilateral business. The key question is not with which countries the United States may have a trade deficit or surplus, but which countries are saving too much and spending too little. Mexico has a bilateral trade deficit with the United States, meaning that it exports more to the United States than it imports. However, an examination of Mexican trade with all the country’s various trading partners shows that trade is roughly balanced.

That is not the case for all countries. Germany, for example, exports far more than it imports. That is not good for Germans, because the country suffers a deficit of investment at home. At the same time, Germany is stuck financing other countries’ trade deficits rather than consuming for its own sake. This is harmful not only for the median German household, which is poorer than it need be, but also for the rest of the world, which does not benefit from higher demand for goods and services that Germany could afford but chooses not to.

Converting popular discontent into coherent policy is never easy. In the last election, both major party candidates condemned the Trans-Pacific Partnership and promised to negotiate better trade deals for US firms and workers. This made a political splash, but has little correlation with effective trade policy. Despite rhetoric about “keeping jobs at home,” that task has become more challenging since the election, because the dollar’s jump harms US exporters. There has been no effort thus far to convert rhetoric into policy. The incoherent critique of China as a currency manipulator is the starkest example of where rhetoric and policy have run in contradictory directions. Without a shift from campaign mode to policymaking mode, there is no reason to expect the US trade deficit to decrease.

*Chris Miller is associate director of the Brady-Johnson Program in Grand Strategy at Yale. He is the author of The Struggle to Save the Soviet Economy.

(EurActiv) — Climate change means the risk of forest fires will skyrocket in Mediterranean Europe in the coming decades, according to a new study. Existing fire prevention measures will be inadequate, so a change of strategy will be needed.

The University of Barcelona study, published in the Scientific Reports journal, analysed a number of models related to summer Burning Areas (BA) and the climate indicators linked to them.

Its researchers concluded that “the direct effect of climate change in regulating fuel moisture (e.g. warmer conditions increasing fuel dryness) could be counterbalanced by the indirect effects on fuel structure (e.g. warmer conditions limiting fuel amount), affecting the transition between climate-driven and fuel-limited fire regimes as temperatures increase.”

Accordingly, the risk of forest fires will increase but the effects of climate change on areas prone to burning are not always clear.

The study used the extensive database of the European Forest Fire Information System (EFFIS) and looked at areas that had been exposed to fires during the summer in the Mediterranean basin, when it coincided with drought and certain moisture conditions.

“The study concludes that there is a statistically significant relationship between fires and droughts that happened in the same summer in many areas,” said Marco Turco, a weather conditions researcher at the University of Barcelona and the city’s Supercomputing Centre.

“Additionally, the relationship between drought and fire is stronger in northern areas,” he added and that antecedent climate conditions play a relatively minor role, except in few specific eco-regions.

This means that drought is a more decisive factor and plays a more prominent role in the wetter and more productive northern areas than in the drier southern areas. This is because most vegetation in the south is adapted to having to make do with less water, according to the study.

It predicts that in the coming decades, the northern areas of the Mediterranean will be dominated by direct effects of climate change, rather than indirect effects.

The study also warns that fire prevention efforts could be overwhelmed by the effects of the climate if changes are not made.

In recent decades, areas in the Mediterranean that have been exposed to fire have actually gone down, while instances of drought have indeed increased.

These opposing trends suggest that, so far, management has been doing its job. But Turco insisted that keeping fire prevention measures at their current level might be insufficient to counter future increases in drought.

That is why the study’s researchers have called for current management strategies to be taken back to the drawing board.

Turco explained that the drought-fire models developed in the course of putting together the study can help create a system of seasonal forecasting that could easily complement the strategies that are in place.

By Todd Royal

A recent internal document from Venezuela’s state-run oil company, PDVSA, verifies that they have fallen behind in payments by some $750 million in a Chinese and Russian oil-for-loan program to Venezuela. The shipments of oil comes at a time when Venezuela is on the brink of running out of money, which could perpetuate social, economic, and possibly political collapse. Further, Russia and China have provided a total of $55 billion in credit to the beleaguered nation; and with oil accounting for the vast majority of Venezuela’s export revenue, this brings on another crisis it is ill-equipped to handle at this time.

Venezuela is already suffering from triple-digit inflation, food shortages reminiscent of the former Soviet Union, and currency devaluation similar to Weimar Germany. Credit rating house Fitch has reports that PDVSA’s default is probable as well. The main reason behind this dire economic outlook is the Maduro administration’s habit of using loans from China and Russia to finance social benefits and infrastructure.

Now that Fitch has provided new insight, along with internal documents showing the operational failures and crippling impact PDVSA struggles are having on Venezuela’s solvency, bigger questions need to be asked by China and Russia moving forward about falling oil prices and geopolitical stability in South America.

As of the end of January, PDVSA still owed both countries’ oil firms close to 10 million barrels of not just crude, but a refined product as well. Currently, shipments from PDVSA are being delayed by at least 10 months, and China’s state-run China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) is owed another 3.2 million barrels of crude. According to a daily press briefing by Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang last month: “China has paid great attention to its relationship with Venezuela, and at present, Venezuela’s providing oil to China to repay the loan is basically normal.”

So far the Kremlin hasn’t been outspoken on the matter and allowed Russian state-run firm Rosneft to take the lead since they are also owed $5 billion in oil by Venezuela.

The biggest question for both countries will be understanding the nature of falling oil prices over the short-term, and how that relationship coincides with Venezuela’s financial problems. OPEC now has near 100% compliance on its production cut, but world oil markets still aren’t seeing prices rise sufficiently. That’s because gains are being offset by U.S. shale production that has increased US production to nearly 9 million barrels per day. What this means for Venezuela is that prices aren’t moving upward anytime soon. Ultimately, in a low-price environment, Venezuela will continue having a tough time meeting their oil-for-loans obligations to China and Russia.

Onerous for Venezuela is the looming threat of entering into some type of receivership agreement with both nations. These loans and the subsequent payment structures were entered into when oil was much higher than its current range of $50-60 a barrel. It’s a never ending swirl of hopelessness for Venezuela and the PDVSA, because what they need to be doing is shipping crude to countries such as the U.S. and India who would pay in desperately-needed cash. Instead, with this $55 billion figure hanging over them, they can’t meet their loans obligations.

In the words of Francisco Monaldi, a fellow in Latin American Energy Policy at the Baker Institute in Houston, Texas:

“What falling oil prices mean are heavier debts and the PDVSA is taking a legal risk by postponing cargoes to key customers (China and Russia) and a financial risk if it also delays deliveries to customers who pay by cash. And if the PDVSA can’t meet its obligations to Russia and China, the countries could recover money through projects or assets outside of the oil sector.”

These Chinese and Russian financing mechanisms offer Venezuela and the PDVSA repayment flexibility, so what could have turned into an escalation will more than likely discreetly play out through diplomatic channels. Yet the yield on Venezuelan bonds is 21% higher than benchmark U.S. Treasury bonds, adding further pressure on Venezuela on the issue of who to pay first – bondholders, China, or Russia (for that matter, will they even have the money to pay anyone?). Madura could be presiding over an insolvent failed state this year.

Whatever Russia and China have said in public, or more importantly what they have not said, won’t stay that way much longer. Particularly for Russia, which can ill afford to float billions in loans when its own economy is failing due to sanctions from the Ukraine crisis and lower oil prices. Another pressing question for China and Russia is: What happens if Venezuela defaults on its bonds and oil repayments? Each country would be able to demand prompt payment on defaulted bonds, but then does the Trump administration allow Russia to take over Citgo? Citgo is a U.S. subsidiary of PDVSA; it has pledged almost half of the firm to Russia as collateral.

The most disturbing part of this entire scenario is that there is no need for Venezuela to be in this kind of terrible economic shape. A 1980 Economic Freedom of the World Annual Report ranked Venezuela the 14th-freest economy in the world, with the “highest standard of living in South America.” Moreover, the largest Venezuelan diaspora community resides in the United States, where they are likely to speak fluent English and have some level of college education, according to the Pew Research Center.

Maybe Venezuelans will rise up and do away with the legacy of leftist leaders who have dragged down the fortunes of their country. While Daniel Ortega was again reelected in a landslide victory in Nicaragua, Evo Morales in Bolivia is now fighting an uphill battle to remain in charge, and impeachment proceedings removed Dilma Rousseff from office in Brazil. What becomes of Rafael Correa, the president of Ecuador will be telling, since the citizen’s revolution law prevents him from running for a fourth term. Will he rise again, Putin-like, in future elections?

Corruption and repression have ruined Venezuela. As Latin America moves toward the center-right, one can only surmise that China and Russia will want their loans paid back. Politics makes strange bedfellows, and it isn’t hard to imagine both countries allowing democratic-authoritarians along the lines of Singapore or a centrist, Trump-type of figure to assume power under the guise of rebuilding the economy to pay back their loan obligations. Anything is possible when it comes to billions of dollars, and the looming failed state of Venezuela.

The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the authors are theirs alone and don’t reflect any official position of Geopoliticalmonitor.com, where this article appeared.

Drinking concentrated blueberry juice improves brain function in older people, according to research by the University of Exeter.

In the study, healthy people aged 65-77 who drank concentrated blueberry juice every day showed improvements in cognitive function, blood flow to the brain and activation of the brain while carrying out cognitive tests.

There was also evidence suggesting improvement in working memory.

Blueberries are rich in flavonoids, which possess antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.

Dr Joanna Bowtell, head of Sport and Health Sciences at the University of Exeter, said: “Our cognitive function tends to decline as we get older, but previous research has shown that cognitive function is better preserved in healthy older adults with a diet rich in plant-based foods.

“In this study we have shown that with just 12 weeks of consuming 30ml of concentrated blueberry juice every day, brain blood flow, brain activation and some aspects of working memory were improved in this group of healthy older adults.”

Of the 26 healthy adults in the study, 12 were given concentrated blueberry juice – providing the equivalent of 230g of blueberries – once a day, while 14 received a placebo.

Before and after the 12-week period, participants took a range of cognitive tests while an MRI scanner monitored their brain function and resting brain blood flow was measured.

Compared to the placebo group, those who took the blueberry supplement showed significant increases in brain activity in brain areas related to the tests.

The study excluded anyone who said they consumed more than five portions of fruit and vegetables per day, and all participants were told to stick to their normal diet throughout.

Previous research has shown that risk of dementia is reduced by higher fruit and vegetable intake, and cognitive function is better preserved in healthy older adults with a diet rich in plant-based foods.

Flavonoids, which are abundant in plants, are likely to be an important component in causing these effects.

David Bowie fans are facing up to either getting out of bed very, very early or staying up all night after it was announced that two albums of previously unreleased material are set to hit the shelves. The trouble is they’re both limited edition releases for the 10th anniversary of Record Store Day on April 22, Gigwise said.

Cracked Actor (Live in Los Angeles 1974) is a three-album set recorded on the Philly Dogs Tour in September 1974. Though some of the material also appeared in Alan Yentob’s BBC documentary, Cracked Actor, the forthcoming triple vinyl, five-sided album contains the full concert. The sixth side houses an etching of the Diamond Dogs-era Bowie logo.

Mixed by Bowie’s old friend and collaborator Tony Visconti, the new album features a line-up and set list that’s in contrast to Bowie’s 1974 album, David Live.

Also set for release is Bowpromo, a single-sided release that recreates a rare 1971 pressing that featured seven Bowie tracks on its A-side, with five alternate versions of songs that ended up on Hunky Dory, as well as a version of It Ain’t Easy, which eventually appeared on The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust And The Spiders From Mars. The re-issue also features new sleeve notes and Bowie prints.

Members of the University of Leicester team who undertook genealogical and demographic research in relation to the discovery of the mortal remains of King Richard III have now been involved in a new project to identify the last known victim of Jack the Ripper – Mary Jane Kelly.

The researchers were commissioned by author Patricia Cornwell, renowned for her meticulous research, to examine the feasibility of finding the exact burial location and the likely condition and survival of her remains. This was done as a precursor to possible DNA analysis in a case surrounding her true identity following contact with Wynne Weston-Davies who believes that Mary Jane Kelly was actually his great aunt, Elizabeth Weston Davies.

Now, in a new report, ‘The Mary Jane Kelly Project’, the research team has revealed the likelihood of locating and identifying the last known victim of Britain’s most infamous serial killer known as ‘Jack the Ripper’, who is thought to have killed at least five young women in the Whitechapel area of London between August and November 1888.

The research team consisted of Dr Turi King, Reader in Genetics and Archaeology at the University of Leicester and lead geneticist of the Richard III project, Mathew Morris, Field Officer for University of Leicester Archaeological Services (ULAS) who discovered the remains of Richard III, Professor Kevin Schürer, Professor in English Local History who carried out the genealogical study of Richard III and Carl Vivian, Video Producer, who was video producer for the Richard III project.

As any DNA analysis would rely on the unambiguous identification of the remains being those of Mary Jane Kelly before such a project could even be considered, the University of Leicester team conducted a desk-based assessment of the burial location of Mary Jane Kelly.

The team visited St Patrick’s Catholic Cemetery, Leytonstone, on 3 May 2016 in order to examine the burial area. Research was carried out in the cemetery’s burial records and a survey of marked graves in the area around Kelly’s modern grave marker was undertaken.

Their work was commissioned by Patricia Cornwell who is a crime writer, known for writing a best-selling series of novels featuring the heroine Dr Kay Scarpetta, a medical examiner, and has also written two books on Jack the Ripper.

Wynne Weston-Davies is a surgeon and author of The Real Mary Kelly, an investigation into the life and death of the Ripper’s final victim. In his book published in 2015, Weston-Davies claimed that the woman known to everyone as Mary Jane Kelly was living under a pseudonym and was in fact his great aunt Elizabeth Weston Davies.

Patricia Cornwell contacted Dr Turi King at the University of Leicester to assess the possibility of testing the DNA from the remains of Mary Jane Kelly and matching them against those of Weston-Davies.

Dr King said: “During initial discussions, two issues arose – it was widely reported in the press in 2015 that the Ministry of Justice had indicated that it would issue an exhumation licence to Wynne Weston-Davies – however in fact, they had only acknowledged that they would consider such an application if submitted.

“Secondly, to complete any exhumation application to the Ministry of Justice, a compelling case for the exhumation as well as detailed information on the location and state of the grave would be required, not only for the exhumation of Kelly’s remains, but also to determine if any other remains might be disturbed in the process.

“However, the precise location of her grave is unknown and, not only that, it rapidly became clear that as such, the remains of a number of other individuals would have to be disturbed and that her remains are highly likely to have been dug through when the communal gravesite she was buried in was reused in the 1940s making accurate identification of any of her remains highly problematic if not impossible.”

Mathew Morris said: “There have been several modern markers in the cemetery which have commemorated Kelly since the 1980s and its location is likely to have little or no relevance to the real location of the grave. Problems surrounding the location of the grave stem from the fact that this area of the cemetery was reclaimed in 1947, with earlier grave positions being swept away to make way for new burials.”

“Based on numerous calculations, we concluded that in order to locate Mary Jane Kelly’s remains, one would most likely have to excavate an area encompassing potentially hundreds of graves containing a varying, and therefore unknown, number of individuals.”

Furthermore, current law relating to the exhumation of human remains in England and Wales states that consent from the next of kin for each set of remains would be required – and in cases where there are a large number of remains within a grave, it is unlikely licences will be granted.

Professor Kevin Schürer, said: “In order to make an application to the Ministry of Justice for a licence to exhume Mary Jane Kelly’s remains, the case for Kelly being Elizabeth Weston Davies needs to be compelling, not least because to test the theory by exhuming the remains will almost certainly involve disturbing the remains of other individuals buried in the vicinity.

“Relatives of these individuals would need to give consent and therefore traced and permission sought. Given the number of individuals whose remains would likely be disturbed, it would take months, possibly years, of genealogical research to trace them all.”

The team concluded that without a full review of the evidence cited by Weston-Davies, much of the case for Mary Jane Kelly and Elizabeth Weston Davies being the same individual appears to be circumstantial or conjectural.

However, the report also found that DNA testing of the remains of Mary Jane Kelly – should she be discovered – would allow for a comparison to be made between those remains and Weston-Davies in order to determine if the genetic data is consistent with them being related, and therefore likely to be Elizabeth Weston Davies.

Dr King said: “As information presently stands, a successful search for Kelly’s remains would require a herculean effort that would likely take years of research, would be prohibitively costly and would cause unwarranted disturbance to an unknown number of individuals buried in a cemetery that is still in daily use, with no guarantee of success.

“As such it is extremely unlikely that any application for an exhumation licence would be granted. The simple fact is, successfully naming someone in the historical record only happens in the most exceptional of cases.

“Most human remains found during excavations remain stubbornly, and forever, anonymous and this must also be the fate of Mary Jane Kelly.”

By Bhaskar Roy*

India-China relations have broadened over the years with not a single shot fired along the disputed borders since the signing of the Peace and Tranquillity Treaty between the two sides. Military exchanges and other high level visits have become a regular affair. There is convergence of interest in several regional and international affairs.

But there are many sticking points which impinge upon India’s core interests. The latest is the issue of Arunachal Pradesh and its capital Tawang, on India’s border with Tibet, which China claims as its Autonomous Region under China’s sovereignty. India endorsed this position in 2003 when Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee visited China.

In an interview with a Beijing based publication recently, Dai Bingguo, a former high ranking diplomat and communist party leader said, “The major reason the boundary question persists is that China’s reasonable requests (for Tawang) have not been met (by India) … if the Indian side takes care of China’s concerns on the eastern section of the border, the Chinese side will respond accordingly and address India’s concerns elsewhere”.

Responding to news from India that the 14th Dalai Lama will be allowed to visit Tawang in March as a pilgrim and the junior minister for Home Affairs of the central government Kiran Rijiju will be there to receive him, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang issued (March 03) a warning to India. Geng said “China is gravely concerned” over this development, holding out the threat that the Dalai Lama’s visit to Tawang will “cause serious damage to peace and stability of the border region and China-India relations”.

Geng Shuang’s statement is the official position of the Chinese government, which is governed by the communist party of China. How serious is China about this threat? When they challenge India in the words of the foreign ministry, do they say if the Dalai Lama visits Arunachal Pradesh, the agreement of the 1993 Peace and Tranquillity Treaty, the Confidence Building Measures and the 2005 agreement of political modalities for settling the border issue will be torn to bits? In none of these treaties and agreements has the question of the Dalai Lama been mentioned. Gradually the Chinese authorities began protesting against visits of Indian leaders including the visit of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Arunachal Pradesh. That too, in sharp words.

The sharp edge and aggressive posture of the Chinese foreign ministry was quickly toned down the next day by the spokeswoman of the ongoing annual National People’s Congress (NPC), Fu Ying. At a press conference for the NPC Fu specifically addressed India-China relations and how it had broadly expanded over the years in a large number of areas from trade to military and frequent high level exchanges to consensus on regional and international issues. She agreed that while some disputes remain, they have been properly discussed through diplomatic channels. She appealed for more understanding of each other and not let disputes stand in the way of cooperation.

Three statements on India by three different high level Chinese officials in different tones make things very interesting in the context of India-China relations. Nobody in China speaks on such important issues without clearance of every word from a sufficiently high level. Are there two views on India among the Communist Party Central Committee and its politburo? This is very unlikely in foreign policy. Or did the South Asia Division of the Chinese foreign ministry overstep their brief, given their long time close relations with Pakistan? Because, it appears, they have been pulled back. Or, is it the old blow hot, blow cold policy?

Dai Bingguo’s proposal on Tawang is not new. It has been held out before and allowed to cool or taken back like some others on the border issue. Clear parameters have never been stated as to what they will cede in the Western Sector. If India agrees to a discussions do not go China’s way, they can withdraw on the grounds that it was only a thought or an idea, and Dai was not the government’s official representative. If anyone believes that China may be willing to opt for Tawang only and give up its claim over the rest of Arunachal Pradesh, which it now calls South Tibet, is day dreaming on the beaches of Hawaii.

According to the 2005 agreement on political modalities for reserving the border issue between the two countries, no populated areas on either side will be transferred. Tawang has a settled population. Since the signing of this agreement China has been trying to either eliminate or dilute this particular clause by some means or the other. The danger is that if one agreement is tampered with, others will follow. Whatever has been achieved since late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s path breaking visit to China in 1988, late Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s visit in 1993, and Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s in 2003, and other confidence building measures, all will begin to unravel. Back to 1962 is not wanted by either of the two countries, or the regional and international actors.

China’s argument that since the 6th Dalai Lama Tsangyang Gyatso was born in Tawang, it is close to the hearts and religious sentiments of the Tibetan people, and India should make this concession. According to Tibetan Buddhism, the Dalai Lama may be born anywhere but his seat is at the Drepung Monanstery in Lhasa, Tibet. It is a Gelug School of Mahayana Buddhism tradition.

The Tawang monastery, known as the Galden Namgey Lhatse Monastery in Tibetan, was founded by Lama Lodre Gyatso in 1680-81 according to the wishes of the 5th Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso. It is also the seat of the Karma-Kargyu sect. The Galden monastery had a religious association with the Drepung monastery that is all.

China, simply, does not have any claim on Tawang. Under such specious arguments the Vatican can claim all Roman Catholic countries.

The Global Times (March 6), a mouthpiece of the Chinese Communist Party, placed further pressure on the 14th Dalai Lama’s upcoming pilgrimage to Tawang. The commentary by Yu Ning said “These Indian officials apparently didn’t realize, or deliberately ignored, the severe consequences the Dalai Lama’s trip (to Tawang) would bring”. The words are not only misleading but also disparaging about Indian officials. This is a handover from the Maoist era when intemperate language was used against foreign countries and leaders.

The commentary went on to say that “Leveraging the Dalai Lama issue to undermine Beijing’s core interest (emphasis added) risks dragging the two countries into a state of hostility”.

These comments come at a time when the two sessions of the CPPCC and NPC are being held in the capital, Beijing, to have the maximum impact on the large number of deputies gathered. India has not given the Dalai Lama any privilege which was not accorded to him earlier. The only difference is that India used to sweep Chinese attacks under the carpet in the interest of stability and promoting good relations. The Indian people are no longer willing to suffer the Chinese onslaughts. The Dalai Lama is a highly revered spiritual leader.

China appears to be very frustrated with India’s disinclination to join the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and their “One Road, One Belt” (OBOR) initiative. Persuasive pressure through diplomatic channels and media offensive on India has sharply increased. India has its own foreign policy and economic policy interest, and improving relations with China is one of them. And this is in China’s interest, too.

Raising the temperature at this time is an ill- advised move. India has its own core interests and strategic interests. China is yet to address them positively.

*The writer is a New Delhi based strategic analyst. He can be reached at e-mail grouchohart@yahoo.com

All 46 US prosecutors leftover from the Obama administration have been ordered to resign, including Preet Bharara of Manhattan, who was asked in November by then President-elect Donald Trump about staying on the job.

The request was formally delivered by Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Friday, who called the process a “uniform transition.”

Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores issued a statement, saying, “Until the new U.S. attorneys are confirmed, the dedicated career prosecutors in our U.S. attorney’s offices will continue the great work of the department in investigating, prosecuting and deterring the most violent offenders,” according to the Associated Press.

The 46 Obama holdovers represent about half of all 93 US attorneys. The other 47 prosecutor positions have already been filled by the Trump administration, as the Obama administration US attorneys left as Trump took the White House.

It is customary that US attorneys leave their positions when a new administration arrives. In 1993, President Bill Clinton requested all 93 US attorneys resign the same day.

President Barack Obama kept US attorney Rod Rosenstein of Maryland, who was appointed under the Bush administration. Now Rosenstein is the nominee for deputy attorney general under Sessions.