Every day I receive dozens of emails. Most of these emails (at least 30) are about Myanmar’s inhuman treatment of the minorities. It is simply depressing to read the sad stories of their extermination, aptly termed the slow-burning genocide by Dr. Maung Zarni, a fellow human rights activist.

Who would have thought that in a Buddhist country, run by Suu Kyi, a winner of the Nobel Prize for peace, these unfortunate minorities – mostly Muslims – will continue to be victimized for total annihilation simply because of their different religious and ethnic identity? Obviously, the non-violent messages of Siddhartha Gautam Buddha have miserably failed to humanize the Buddhists of Myanmar. They remain mortgaged to their savage past of extreme intolerance that had terrorized their neighbors for centuries.

I am aware that in the post-9/11 era, some world leaders are willing to look the other ways or excuse the inexcusable crimes of Suu Kyi’s government to stopping genocide of the Muslim minorities. But genocide is a serious matter that deserves our serious attention. It would be utterly irresponsible to overlook this grievous crime simply because the country is now run by an elected, popular lady, a practicing Buddhist who was the poster lady for democracy, and not a hated military junta that she successfully replaced.

The United Nations in 1948 defined genocide to mean any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, including: (a) killing members of the group (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

As I have repeatedly mentioned since the mid-2000s, what is happening with the minority Muslims in general, and particularly the Rohingyas of Myanmar who mostly live in the Rakhine state (formerly Arakan) bordering Bangladesh, is nothing short of genocide. The overwhelming verdict of the subject matter experts, since at least 2012, is also the same. The destruction of the Rohingya – politically, culturally and economically – is a complete one that is carried out both by Buddhist civilians backed by the state and perpetrated directly by state actors and state institutions. I have been calling it a national project that is scripted and directed by the state since the days of General Ne Win enjoying the full cooperation, collaboration, contribution from, and execution by the Buddhist majority – monks, mobs and the military.

As noted by Dr. Maung Zarni and Alice Cowley in their seminal work “The slow-burning genocide of Myanmar’s Rohingya”, both the State in Myanmar and the local community have committed four out of five acts of genocide as spelled out by the 1948 Convention on the Punishment and Prevention of the Crime of Genocide.

What is so disturbing with the on-going genocide of the Rohingya and Muslim minorities in Myanmar is that it is happening in our time, some 69 years after the UN Convention. For the sake of argument, one may find some excuses for the major perpetrators of genocidal crimes of the pre-1948 era saying that they did not know better (this is not to excuse their horrendous crimes!) but what’s the excuse for Suu Kyi and her predecessors within the military?

Our human history has repeatedly been tarnished by genocidal crimes of the few. But rarely do we see genocide as a national project with full participation of the all to annihilate the ‘other’ people. And yet, such is the reality in today’s Myanmar!

Buddhist monks, businessman and politicians influence the general public on the need to purify what they call the ‘Buddhist motherland’ from any vestige of ‘outsiders’, the kalar (kala) – Islam and Muslims; false rumors are spread like wildfires to create unfathomed animosity; they stage demonstrations demanding the government to go tough with the already marginalized targeted group, to put them in concentration camps or to kill them unprovoked creating the urge for the victims to get out of this ‘den of extreme intolerance’ if they still want to survive; cordon off or surround Muslim neighborhoods with guns, pistols and machetes, and terrorize the victims with all the devious methods known to mankind – scorched-earth policy of burning their homes, businesses, educational, social and religious institutions, arresting, and detaining, harassing and killing innocent people, esp. anyone below the age of 50, and finally, using rape as a weapon of war to dehumanize the victims. And the list of such evil measures goes on with full participation from all the segments of the Buddhist people of Myanmar. It’s a complete project of elimination of the Rohingya and other minority Muslims.

Otherwise, how can we explain the on-going crimes of the Buddhist people and government of Myanmar? It is no accident that Suu Kyi wants to cover Myanmar’s heinous crimes by disallowing any investigation from the international community and using the kangaroo parliament to condemn the efforts and reports of the UN special rapporteur Yanghee Lee. For such crimes, I need neither go to the history of ethnic cleansing drives of the 1930s and 1940s of the British era nor even those of the newly independent Burma. Just the current events in the past week are enough to understand the gravity of the situation and the monumental crimes of the Buddhist Myanmar against the minority Muslims.

A 45-year old Rohingya man was brutally killed by Rakhine extremists, aided by Myanmar security forces, inside the premises of the Sittwe University on Saturday, August 5, 2017 at around 9:30 a.m. The victim was identified as Mohammad Abul, son of U Ali Ahmad of Kone Dagar (Konka Fara) Rohingya IDP camp, Sittwe (formerly Akyab). Commenting on the brutal murder, a Rohingya rights activist lamented the fact that under Suu Kyi’s watch and tacit encouragement the “Rakhine extremist are trying to eradicate all Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar systematically. The Buddhist community’s mission is ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya minority.” On the same day, a Rohingya youth Eliyaz (26), son of Mohammed Hassan from the village of Ohn Taw Gyi, is feared to have been killed by Rakhine extremists in the village of Aung Dain.

In the early hours of Thursday, August 3, a group of about 30 Buddhists armed with sticks and swords attacked the Muslim-majority Sakya Nwe Sin neighborhood in the former royal capital, Mandalay. A local administrator said two young Muslim men were injured.

Mandalay residents told Reuters the incident had stirred fears of a repeat of deadly communal violence that hit the same neighborhood in 2014.

Mandalay and other central towns have seen sporadic outbreaks of hate crimes against the minority Muslims since Myanmar’s transition from full military rule began in 2011.

On Wednesday, August 2, small groups of Buddhist monks with dozens of lay supporters set up two “boycott camps” close to country’s most important Buddhist site, the Shwedagon pagoda, and at a Mandalay pagoda just blocks from scene of the mob attack later that night.

Behind banners accusing Suu Kyi’s administration of failing to protect Buddhism, the monks upturned their alms bowls – a traditional symbol of defiance against the country’s rulers.

Since Tuesday, August 1, the minority Rohingya community – comprising of some 650 people – living in the village of ‘Zaydi Pyin’ in Rathedaung Township remains surrounded by State-backed Rakhine extremists. Their access to food and to roads, forests and rivers are cut off with barbed wire fences erected by the government-backed extremists, thereby restricting their movement and forcing starvation on them. Unless the blockade is removed immediately many Rohingyas may die.

A human rights activist said, “The main reason behind such a blockade is to make them starve and die; and eventually force them to leave their homes once and for all. So, the Myanmar government can tell the world that the Rohingyas are leaving their homes on their own.”

On Sunday, July 30, 2017, a group of Military and BGP raided Yedwin Pyin village northern Maungdaw and fully demolished some Rohingya houses, looted their properties such as money, jewelries and other valuables and left the immovable things destroyed. Then the military and BGP gang-raped three Rohingya women from the village.

Nearly 1000 Rohingyas died and tens of thousands were displaced in 2012 in Rakhine state. Genocidal violence against the Rohingya people escalated there last year after attacks on border posts allegedly by Rohingya militants. The military operation sent an estimated 75,000 people across the nearby border to Bangladesh, where many gave accounts of serious abuses. A United Nations report issued earlier this year said Myanmar’s security forces had committed mass killings and gang rapes against Rohingya during their campaign against the insurgents, which may amount to crimes against humanity.

The European Union has similarly proposed the investigation after the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said the army’s operation in the northern part of Rakhine State – where most people are Rohingyas – likely included crimes against humanity.

Reuters was among international media escorted to the area last week in a tour closely overseen by security forces. Rohingya women told reporters of husbands and sons arbitrarily detained, and of killings and arson by security forces that broadly match the accounts from refugees in Bangladesh. Typical of genocide deniers, Suu Kyi’s government continues to deny such accusations and says most are fabricated.

In several recent cases, local officials have bowed to nationalist pressure to shut down Muslim buildings that they say are operating without official approval. Two madrassas were shuttered in May in Myanmar’s largest city, Yangon.

Local media reported the closure of a mosque and another Islamic school in Oatkan, on Yangon’s outskirts, this week.

Authorities in Kyaukpadaung, central Myanmar – famed for not accepting non-Buddhist residents – last month agreed to demolish a structure that was falsely suspected of being a mosque.

In a letter to Suu Kyi on Thursday, August 3, twenty groups working on human rights in Myanmar said the government needed to do more to protect Muslims, who make up 4.3 percent of the population.

“The Burma government must not appease the ultra-nationalists who are utilizing hate speech, intimidation, and violence to promote fear in Muslim communities across the country,” said the letter. “It is extremely alarming to see how anti-Muslim sentiment has spread beyond Rakhine state, where the Rohingya Muslim minority has been harshly persecuted and isolated, even to major cities like Yangon.”

On August 4, responding to mounting reports of violence in northern Rakhine State, including the deaths of villagers in the last week, Amnesty International’s Director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific James Gomez said:

“The alarming reports of attacks in northern Rakhine State underscore the need for everyone operating in the area to refrain from violence before it spirals out of control. These latest attacks underscore the need for the Myanmar authorities to cooperate fully with the UN Fact-Finding Mission and allow them unfettered access to all parts the country. The people of Myanmar and the international community deserve to know the truth. The authorities’ pledge to respond to the latest killings in Rakhine with ‘intensive clearance operations’ is particularly worrying, given the scorched-earth tactics Amnesty International has documented during these operations in the past. While the Myanmar authorities have the duty to maintain law and order and investigate these attacks, they must ensure that these investigations are conducted in a fair and transparent manner, in accordance with international human rights law.”

In Myanmar, Rohingyas face extinction. They are denied all the fundamental rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Myanmar’s nationality law, approved in 1982, denies Rohingya citizenship. Rohingyas are not recognized among the 134 official ethnicities in Myanmar because authorities see them as illegal immigrants from neighboring Bangladesh. They are subjected to forced labor, have no land rights and are heavily restricted by the government. They have no permission to leave the camps built for them, have no source of income and must rely on the World Food Program to survive, which is often restricted to them. The local Buddhists are forbidden to supply food or do any business with them.

Adolf Hitler’s instruction to his Army commanders on August 22, 1939 read: “Thus for the time being I have sent to the East only my ‘Death’s Head Units’ with the orders to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of Polish race or language. Only in such a way will we win the vital space that we need.”

We falsely assumed that after the fall of Nazism we shall never again see a repeat of such grievous crimes. The fact, however, is Suu Kyi’s government, like her predecessors, has perfected such criminal policies to wipe out the Rohingya and minority Muslims.

Despite growing evidence of genocide, the international community has so far avoided calling this large scale human suffering genocide because no powerful member states of the UN Security Council have any appetite to forego their commercial and strategic interests in Myanmar to address the slow-burning Rohingya genocide. Dr. Zarni quotes Terith Chy, a Khmer Criminologist, “The world is watching and does nothing to end the sufferings of the Rohingya. This is much like what happened in Cambodia and Rwanda. The world stands by. It keeps on watching, watching, watching . . .” [(Genocide) Documentation Center of Cambodia]

I wonder how long shall we just watch and watch, and do nothing to stop the genocidal crimes of the Myanmar government!

An official source at the Saudi Foreign Ministry has said reports by several media outlets quoting Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir regarding the Syrian crisis as “inaccurate.”

Saudi Press Agency (SPA) quoted the source as saying: “The firm position of the Kingdom on the Syrian crisis is based on the principles of the Geneva 1 Declaration and UN Security Council Resolution 2254, which provides for the formation of a transitional authority to govern the country, the drafting of a new constitution and the preparation of elections for a new future for Syria which will have no place for Bashar Assad”.

The source confirmed Saudi Arabia’s support for the High Negotiations Committee (HNC), the procedures it is considering to expand the participation of its members, and the unification of the opposition.

By Faisal J. Abbas*

It has been two months since the diplomatic standoff with Qatar began. As it is now evident that this crisis is not going to be resolved swiftly, many questions have been raised as to what impact the ongoing tension will have on Doha itself, as well as on the region as a whole.

Some of these unanswered questions are enormously important politically, such as the issue of how effective the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) will be should the rift continue. There are similar economic questions, although Qatar has repeatedly insinuated that it has not been affected by the boycott imposed by its neighbors in that regard.

Yet even a junior business analyst would know that any real economic impact would be mid- to long-term, rather than immediate. This is particularly true given that Doha has the resources to offset the economic pressure for the time being. We should also not forget that the boycotting countries (Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt) have not yet used all their arsenal, such as withdrawing their assets from Qatar.

What was a surprise however, as revealed today in the Arab News/YouGov poll on how the US views the Qatar crisis, is how quickly the diplomatic row has negatively affected “Brand Qatar,” at least in the US.

The poll reveals that there was an unusually high level of awareness among Americans of the diplomatic standoff, with 71 percent of respondents saying they have some degree of knowledge about it. More interestingly, the survey shows unfavorable views toward Doha, with only 27 percent of those polled believing it is a “friend or an ally” of the US.

Furthermore, it was interesting to see that despite the billions spent by Qatar on various “soft power” initiatives — from education to charity to international sport — the study found that more Americans associate it with supporting terror than anything else.

No smoke without fire

There are various explanations for this negative perception in the US. One is that there is simply no smoke without fire.

The reality is that many of the wanted terrorists on the list provided by the boycotting quartet are also on US or UN terror lists.

Similarly, there is no doubt that Al Jazeera’s Arabic news station has long been a platform for Osama bin Laden and terror groups associated with him, and that many Muslim youths have been negatively affected by the poisons aired by the channel.

This all makes it very difficult for Qatar to be convincing when it plays the “innocent” card, or claims it is just being bullied by its neighbors.

What Doha fails to realize is that placing giant teddy bears in Hamad International Airport (as cute as that is) or sponsoring European football clubs will not make people forget its “ugly” side of funding terror.

This duality might have worked for Qatar in the past, but if the Arab News/YouGov study proves anything, it is that one may be able to fool some people some of the time, but one certainly cannot fool everyone all of the time.

What most rational observers fail to understand is why Qatar does not simply hand over these internationally wanted terrorists. This is in no way a breach of its sovereignty; on the contrary, it enhances “Brand Qatar” as a country that is keen to cooperate regionally and internationally in combating terror and making a serious effort to reconcile with its neighbors.

• Faisal J. Abbas is the editor in chief of Arab News. He can be reached on Twitter @FaisalJAbbas

Simon Fraser University graduate student Oldooz Pooyanfar is monitoring what more than 20,000 honeybees housed in hives in a Cloverdale field are “saying” to each other–looking for clues about their health.

Pooyanfar’s technology is gleaning communication details from sound within the hives with her beehive monitoring system–technology she developed at SFU. She said improving knowledge about honey bee activity is critical, given a 30 percent decline in the honeybee population over the past decade in North America. Research into the causes of what is referred to as Colony Collapse Disorder continues. The presence of fewer bees affects both crop pollination and the environment.

Pooyanfar’s monitoring platform is placed along the wall of the hive and fitted with tiny sensors containing microphones (and eventually, accelometers) that monitor sound and vibration. Temperature and humidity are also recorded. Her system enables data collection on sound within the hives and also tracks any abnormalities to which beekeepers can immediately respond.

The high-tech smart system is being used to gather data over the summer.

Pooyanfar, who has been working with Chilliwack-based Worker Bee Honey Company, believes that better understanding the daily patterns and conditions, using an artificial neural network in the hive, will help to improve bee colony management. Current methods of monitoring provide less detailed information and can disrupt bee activity for up to 24 hours every time the hive is opened.

“To learn about what bees are communicating, we can either look at pheromones–the chemical they produce–or sound,” said Pooyanfar, who initially received funding through the MITACS Accelerate program. The City of Surrey is providing the field space for her research.

“With this monitoring system, we are collecting data in real time on what the bees are ‘saying’ about foraging, or if they’re swarming, or if the queen bee is present – right now we are collecting as much data as possible that will pinpoint what they are actually doing.”

Pooyanfar, a graduate student in SFU’s School of Mechatronics Systems Engineering, plans to eventually manufacture a sensor package for this application to help lower the costs of monitoring and allow more beekeepers to monitor their hives in real-time. Her initial-stage research was featured at the Greater Vancouver Clean Technology Expo last fall.

Why It Matters

Biologists are working to better understand Colony Collapse Disorder given the value of honey bees to the economy and the environment. Monitoring bee activity and improving monitoring systems may help to address the issue.

According to B.C.’s Ministry of Agriculture there are more than 2,300 beekeepers throughout B.C. operating as a hobby, part-, or full time business with about 47,000 colonies, and as many as two billion bees.

The ministry also notes that honey bees play a major role in agriculture as pollinators of crops, contributing an estimated $470 million to the economy in British Columbia ($250 million in field crops and $220 million in greenhouse crops), and over $2 billion in Canada.

Soon the footpath you walk on could be full of cigarette butts, instead of being littered with them.

Trillions of cigarette butts are produced every year worldwide, with most discarded into the environment. They take ages to break down while their toxic chemical load is released into creeks, rivers and the ocean.

Now a team at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia, led by Dr Abbas Mohajerani has demonstrated that asphalt mixed with cigarette butts can handle heavy traffic and also reduce thermal conductivity.

This means the product could not only solve a huge waste problem but would also be useful in reducing the urban heat island effect common in cities.

Mohajerani, a senior lecturer in RMIT’s School of Engineering, said he was keen to find solutions to mounting cigarette butt waste.

“I have been trying for many years to find sustainable and practical methods for solving the problem of cigarette butt pollution,” Mohajerani said.

“In this research, we encapsulated the cigarette butts with bitumen and paraffin wax to lock in the chemicals and prevent any leaching from the asphalt concrete. The encapsulated cigarettes butts were mixed with hot asphalt mix for making samples,” Mohajerani said.

“Encapsulated cigarette butts developed in this research will be a new construction material which can be used in different applications and lightweight composite products.

“This research shows that you can create a new construction material while ridding the environment of a huge waste problem.”

About 6 trillion cigarettes are produced every year, leading to more than 1.2 million tonnes of cigarette butt waste. These figures are expected to increase by more than 50 per cent by 2025, mainly due to an increase in world population.

“Cigarette filters are designed to trap hundreds of toxic chemicals and the only ways to control these chemicals are either by effective encapsulation for the production of new lightweight aggregates or by the incorporation in fired clay bricks,” Mohajerani said.

Mohajerani became a world-renowned researcher in 2016 for his research in recycling cigarette butts in bricks.

The project is the result of five years of research. It has been published in the journal of Construction and Building Materials (Elsevier)

According to a new blog post, Google is planning to use machine learning algorithms to analyse “performance data, user engagement, and user ratings” on the Play Store’s apps, and downgrade buggy, crashing ones to stop them from rising to the top of listings, Business Insider reports.

This means that the most visible apps in the Play Store will be less likely to crash, behave weirdly, or even ask for more permissions than they should.

The search giant had already put artificial intelligence algorithms in place to determine an app’s quality, but it’s now acting upon its findings to actually curate Android’s digital store.

Two months ago, Google also announced the new “Android Excellence” program, which expands on what was known as the Play Store’s “Editor’s Choice”. There are now several human-curated categories of rotating apps that Googlers tweak every now and then to highlight apps that they think are good.

China and ASEAN said they both agreed Sunday to a framework for talks on a “code of conduct” in the disputed South China Sea, but the Southeast Asian side indirectly criticized Beijing’s territorial expansion there in an unusual statement.

The foreign ministers of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations said they warmly welcomed “improving cooperation” with China and were encouraged “by the conclusion and adoption of the framework of a code of conduct in the South China Sea,” in a joint communique. They issued it late on Sunday evening (local time) after meeting with Beijing’s top diplomat in Manila during the day.

China and ASEAN will start negotiations later this year on a code of conduct governing actions in the disputed sea region after both sides agreed to a framework, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told reporters following the meeting, which was held behind closed doors.

In their communique the ASEAN ministers confirmed that the regional bloc was ready to begin “substantive” negotiations on a code of conduct.

But in an oblique reference to China’s efforts to expand in the potentially mineral-rich sea region – such as through building artificial islands, air strips and other installations – they also noted “concerns expressed by some Ministers on the land reclamations and activities in the area, which have eroded trust and confidence, increased tensions and may undermine peace, security and stability in the region.”

“We emphasized the importance of non-militarization and self-restraint in the conduct of all activities by claimants and all other states,” according to the short section on the South China Sea included in a 46-page communique.

China and Taiwan, as well as four members of ASEAN – the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei – all have territorial claims in the sea, and overlapping claims have been a source of tensions. The sea is strategically important because it is home to a third of the world’s shipping lanes.

‘Positive momentum’

Wang Yi said the climate in 2017 between states that have claims to the sea region had improved and was more conducive to peace.

“The atmosphere of this year is different from the past,” Wang said. “China and ASEAN countries have been working together for the past year and we fully recognize that.”

“Thanks to our concerted efforts, the current situation in the South China Sea is showing positive momentum,” he said, adding that China and ASEAN recognized a current trend towards “relaxation” of tensions in the sea region.

When the situation in the South China Sea becomes “generally stable and if there no major disruption from outside parties,” both parties can then start their consultations in time for the ASEAN Leaders’ Summit in November, the Chinese foreign minister said.

“China and ASEAN have the ability and wisdom to work together to maintain regional peace and stability,” he said. “And we will work out regional rules that we mutually agreed upon so as to open up a bright future for our future relations.”

Before the ASEAN countries came out with their statement on the South China Sea, the 10 ministers were divided over the issue, according to reports.

The ministers had been debating for at least two days on how to respond to China collectively, with Vietnam said to be strongly resisting an agreement on the framework for a code of conduct as pushed by Beijing.

“There’s still no consensus,” a diplomat said earlier during the weekend, according to Agence France-Presse.

“Vietnam is adamant, and China is effectively using Cambodia to champion its interests. But the Philippines is trying very hard to broker compromise language.”

In past months, the Philippines had pushed for a code on the South China Sea to be legally binding, according to diplomatic sources.

Sino-Filipino relations over sea

The ASEAN-China meeting was part of a flurry of one-to-one meetings held Sunday between foreign ministers from the Southeast Asian bloc and top diplomats from other countries including Japan, the United States, India and Russia.

The meetings in Manila, hosted by the Philippines, this year’s holder of the ASEAN chair, took place on the eve of the ASEAN Regional Forum, an annual security meeting bringing together 27 countries.

Wang did not elaborate on to whom he referred as the “outside parties,” but his announcement came shortly after the U.S. Navy carried out “freedom of navigation” exercises near disputed islands, as it sought to counter-balance perceived Chinese bullying in the disputed area.

The current ASEAN chairman, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, has made it a priority to repair bilateral ties with China, which has rejected an international court’s ruling in 2016 that invalidated its claim to the entire sea region.

Duterte made a state visit to China last year, and also threatened to sever security cooperation with Beijing’s traditional rival, the United States.

In 2013, Duterte’s predecessor, Benigno Aquino III, took Beijing to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague after Chinese vessels were spotted in Scarborough Shoal, which had for years been a traditional fishing area for Filipinos.

The area consists of rocks and shoals and is only about 200 km (125 miles) from the main Philippine island of Luzon.

The court last year threw out China’s historical claims to the region. The court said that, in effect, no country had sovereign rights over the rocky outcrop, therefore entitling all countries with overlapping claims to use its resources.

The ruling angered China, putting the region on edge amid fears that it could force Beijing to retaliate militarily. Beijing since then has carried on with its expansionist moves in the sea region, and intelligence officials said it may be deploying weapons on the islands it occupies.

Following the court decision last year, Duterte himself said that he told Chinese leader Xi Jinping that he planned drilling explorations in the area. But he claimed that Xi threatened him with war if he went ahead with implementing those plans.

Reported by BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated online news service.

By Dr. Arshad M. Khan*

The high level individuals leaving the Trump administration must be a record. Eleven since the end of January averaging out to almost two per month. The latest Mr. Anthony Scaramucci now holds a record of sorts as the shortest serving White House communications director in history. He was in office exactly ten days when the White House Chief of Staff, General John Kelly — himself a new hire — fired him on Monday.

Among other problems, this chaos in the White House has also prevented a coherent policy on Russia. The president wants to improve relations with Russia — a view supported by the major European powers. That this commonality of interests could have been turned into concrete support is plain to see, and that it was not makes White House incompetence transparent. Had he been so armed, he could have gone to the American people and talked about the negative consequences of the sanctions, the economic costs to Europe, plus worsening relations and the upping of tensions with the only military power capable of destroying America. Instead, a naked president received a bill passed by veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate — the latter in a vote of 98 – 2. Note only does the bill increase sanctions on Russia, but it impedes any effort on his part to remove them.

In six months he has been unable to muster any kind of support on Russia in Congress; he is unable to use the bully pulpit to speak directly to the American people or make any effort to sway any but the most ardent of his supporters — such failure for a move towards peace, which most Americans correctly informed about Ukraine would welcome. Instead we get 2 a.m. infantile rants on real and perceived slights.

Putin’s patience has run out. His response to the sanctions: an unprecedented expulsion of 755 U.S. diplomats. Crimea will never be given up.

Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of history should know Ukraine was a Russian province for centuries. Crimea was added to it in the 1950’s to facilitate the administration of a large bridge construction project. All part of the Soviet Union then, little did it matter which local authority administered the peninsula. To make an issue of it now, when the population is overwhelmingly Russian and voted to leave the Ukraine, is as hypocritical as spending the $5 billion to destabilize and remove the democratically elected government of Ukraine in the first place.

Iran has decided to ignore the slights against it in the sanctions bill, and it is understandable when both Trump and Netanyahu together are spoiling for a fight. The last object of congressional ire in the bill, North Korea, has delivered a metaphorical middle finger raised from a closed fist in the form of a missile rising straight up. The experts inform us that its trajectory and height demonstrate a capacity to reach any city in the United States.

Trump’s response was belligerent and telling. He assured us any war would be fought over there. In other words, ‘America first’ applies also to South Korean and Japanese lives. In the Korean war, the north wanted to bomb Japan because it was being used as a bomber base, but its Chinese and Russian sponsors were afraid of expanding the war. No such constraints now. As for the other U.S. staunch ally, South Korea, a third of its population lives in Seoul and its suburbs all within heavy artillery range. The resulting carnage could cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

It’s an ill wind … as the saying goes, and it is blowing some good. The late night talk show comedians are having a ball. Belly-splitting skits and satire abound. Michael Moore the activist film maker has a show ‘The Terms of My Surrender’ that has just opened on Broadway. The tagline “Can a Broadway show bring down a President?” might appear far-fetched until you realize Moore predicted early that Trump would win and even gave the reasons why. He believes the way to bring down this absurd presidency is by laughing at him. “His thin skin is so thin,” he says “he can’t take being laughed at.”

About the author:
*Dr. Arshad M. Khan is a former Professor based in the US. Educated at King’s College London, OSU and The University of Chicago, he has a multidisciplinary background that has frequently informed his research. Thus he headed the analysis of an innovation survey of Norway, and his work on SMEs published in major journals has been widely cited. He has for several decades also written for the press: These articles and occasional comments have appeared in print media such as The Dallas Morning News, Dawn (Pakistan), The Fort Worth Star Telegram, The Monitor, The Wall Street Journal and others. On the internet, he has written for Antiwar.com, Asia Times, Common Dreams, Counterpunch, Countercurrents, Dissident Voice, Eurasia Review and Modern Diplomacy among many. His work has been quoted in the U.S. Congress and published in its Congressional Record.

Source:
This article was published by Modern Diplomacy

A research team based at the University of Chicago has overcome challenges that have limited gene therapy and demonstrated how their novel approach with skin transplantation could enable a wide range of gene-based therapies to treat many human diseases.

In the August 3, 2017 issue of the journal Cell Stem Cell, the researchers provide “proof-of-concept.” They describe a new form of gene-therapy – administered through skin transplants – to treat two related and extremely common human ailments: type-2 diabetes and obesity.

“We resolved some technical hurdles and designed a mouse-to-mouse skin transplantation model in animals with intact immune systems,” said study author Xiaoyang Wu, PhD, assistant professor in the Ben May Department for Cancer Research at the University of Chicago. “We think this platform has the potential to lead to safe and durable gene therapy, in mice and we hope, someday, in humans, using selected and modified cells from skin.”

Beginning in the 1970s, physicians learned how to harvest skin stem cells from a patient with extensive burn wounds, grow them in the laboratory, then apply the lab-grown tissue to close and protect a patient’s wounds. This approach is now standard. However, the application of skin transplants is better developed in humans than in mice.

“The mouse system is less mature,” Wu said. “It took us a few years to optimize our 3D skin organoid culture system.”

This study, “Engineered epidermal progenitor cells can correct diet-induced obesity and diabetes,” is the first to show that an engineered skin graft can survive long term in wild-type mice with intact immune systems. “We have a better than 80 percent success rate with skin transplantation,” Wu said. “This is exciting for us.”

They focused on diabetes because it is a common non-skin disease that can be treated by the strategic delivery of specific proteins.

The researchers inserted the gene for glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1), a hormone that stimulates the pancreas to secrete insulin. This extra insulin removes excessive glucose from the bloodstream, preventing the complications of diabetes. GLP1 can also delay gastric emptying and reduce appetite.

Using CRISPR, a tool for precise genetic engineering, they modified the GLP1 gene. They inserted one mutation, designed to extend the hormone’s half-life in the blood stream, and fused the modified gene to an antibody fragment so that it would circulate in the blood stream longer. They also attached an inducible promoter, which enabled them to turn on the gene to make more GLP1, as needed, by exposing it to the antibiotic doxycycline. Then they inserted the gene into skin cells and grew those cells in culture.

When these cultured cells were exposed to an air/liquid interface in the laboratory, they stratified, generating what the authors referred to as a multi-layered, “skin-like organoid.” Next, they grafted this lab-grown gene-altered skin onto mice with intact immune systems. There was no significant rejection of the transplanted skin grafts.

When the mice ate food containing minute amounts of doxycycline, they mice released dose-dependent levels of GLP1 into the blood. This promptly increased blood-insulin levels and reduced blood-glucose levels.

When the researchers fed normal or gene-altered mice a high-fat diet, both groups rapidly gained weight. They became obese. When normal and gene-altered mice got the high-fat diet along with varying levels of doxycycline, to induce GLP1 release, the normal mice grew fat and mice expressing GLP1 showed less weight gain.

Expression of GLP1 also lowered glucose levels and reduced insulin resistance.

“Together, our data strongly suggest that cutaneous gene therapy with inducible expression of GLP1 can be used for the treatment and prevention of diet-induced obesity and pathologies,” the authors wrote. When they transplanted gene-altered human cells to mice with a limited immune system, they saw the same effect. These results, the authors wrote, suggest that “cutaneous gene therapy for GLP1 secretion could be practical and clinically relevant.”

This approach, combining precise genome editing in vitro with effective application of engineered cells in vivo, could provide “significant benefits for the treatment of many human diseases,” the authors note.

“We think this can provide a long-term safe option for the treatment of many diseases,” Wu said. “It could be used to deliver therapeutic proteins, replacing missing proteins for people with a genetic defect, such as hemophilia. Or it could function as a metabolic sink, removing various toxins.”

Skin progenitor cells have several unique advantages that are a perfect fit for gene therapy. Human skin is the largest and most accessible organ in the body. It is easy to monitor. Transplanted skin can be quickly removed if necessary. Skins cells rapidly proliferate in culture and can be easily transplanted. The procedure is safe, minimally invasive and inexpensive.

There is also a need. More than 100 million U.S. adults have either diabetes (30.3 million) or prediabetes (84.1 million), according the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. More than 2 out of 3 adults are overweight. More than 1 out of 3 are considered obese.

By Santo D. Banerjee

A pious wish has been making the rounds since August 4, 2017 in the online news sites in India. On that remarkable day, they carried reports from Washington, D.C. conveying the impression that India’s permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council was just round the corner. The source was invariably the U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert.

The TIMESOFINDIA.COM, for example, carried the following report that apparently served as template for others: “The US, which supports India being given membership at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), is likely to raise the issue of New Delhi’s membership at the world body later this month, said the US State Department today [August 4].”

The report went on to say: “Replying to a specific media question on whether the US plans to raise this issue at the UN, a US state department spokeswoman said she ‘believed’ the US might to do so via its UN ambassador Nikki Haley.”

Referring to Haley, the State Department spokeswoman was reported saying: “I believe she is (planning to raise the issue of India in the UNSC). I would have to double-check with her office. I can certainly do that and get back with you.”

India is a member of the Group of Four (G4) nations – including Brazil. Germany and Japan – which support each other’s bids for permanent seats on the Security Council. Each of these four countries has figured among the elected non-permanent members of the council since the UN’s establishment in October 1945.

It is argued that the four countries’ economic and political influence has grown significantly in the last decades, reaching a scope comparable to the permanent members (P5): Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. However, the G4’s bids are often opposed by the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) movement, nicknamed the Coffee Club, that developed in the 1990s in opposition to the possible expansion of permanent seats in the Security Council.

Headed by Italy, it aims to counter the bids for permanent seats proposed by G4 countries and is calling for a consensus before any decision is reached on the form and size of the Security Council.

To begin with, the Coffee Club included Italy, Pakistan, Mexico and Egypt. Soon Spain, Argentina, Turkey, Canada, and South Korea joined them. Meanwhile the group includes about 50 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

The Uniting for Consensus group argues that the increase of permanent seats would further accentuate the disparity between the member countries and result in the extension of a series of privileges with a cascade effect. The new permanent members would in fact benefit from the method of electing particularly advantageous in a number of specific organs of the United Nations System.

The TIMESOFINDIA.COM report went on to say: “In late June, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited with US President Donald Trump, the latter supported India’s bid for a permanent seat in a reformed UNSC and in other multilateral institutions like the Nuclear Suppliers Group [NSG].”

“President Trump reaffirmed the support of the United States for India’s permanent membership on a reformed UN Security Council,” said the Indo-US joint statement released at the end of the PM’s visit on June 26 2017. The statement titled Prosperity Through Partnership is available on:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/06/26/united-states-and-india-prosperity-through-partnership

“As global non-proliferation partners, the United States expressed strong support for India’s early membership in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the Wassenaar Arrangement, and the Australia Group,” the report said quoting the joint statement.

NSG is a group of nuclear supplier countries that seek to prevent nuclear proliferation by controlling the export of materials, equipment and technology that can be used to manufacture nuclear weapons. It was founded in response to the Indian nuclear test in May 1974 and first met in November 1975.

The test demonstrated that certain non-weapons specific nuclear technology could be readily turned to weapons development. Nations already signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) saw the need to further limit the export of nuclear equipment, materials or technology.

The Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies is a multilateral regime with 41 participating states including many allies of the former Soviet Union. It was established in July 1996, in Wassenaar, the Netherlands, which is near The Hague.

The Australia Group (AG) is an informal forum of countries which, through the harmonisation of export controls, seeks to ensure that exports do not contribute to the development of chemical or biological weapons.

The TIMESOFINDIA.COM report added: “The State Department spokeswoman . . . touched upon PM Modi’s US visit, terming it “lovely”. It went on to say: “I know we had a lovely visit with Mr. Modi. It was certainly wonderful to have him here in the United States. I know the President enjoyed hosting him, as did the Secretary (of State Rex Tillerson) as well,” the report quoted Nauert saying.

According to the report, “In addition to the US, many others, including Russia, the Netherlands and Turkey, support India’s entry into the UNSC.” Further: “Russia reaffirms its strong support to India’s candidature for a permanent seat in a reformed United Nations Security Council,” the report quoted a vision document issued after the PM’s talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in June. “Russia also reaffirmed its support for India’s membership to the NSG and other non-proliferation regimes.”

The TIMESOFINDIA.COM continued: “China objects to India’s membership bid in the NSG a 48-member elite group which controls the nuclear trade. China says there is no change in its stance on the admission of non-NPT states into the grouping. NPT refers to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which India is not a signatory to.”

The bottom line is that the messengers of presumably good news have not cared to read what the Indo-US joint statement says: “President Trump reaffirmed the support of the United States for India’s permanent membership on a reformed UN Security Council.”

Also former US president Barack Obama had endorsed India’s long-held demand for a permanent seat on the Security Council, saying in a speech to the Indian Parliament in 2010 that he looked forward to a “reformed United Nations Security Council that includes India as a permanent member.”

A man carrying a knife and reportedly shouting “Allahu Akbar” tried to force his way through security checks at the Eiffel Tower on Saturday. French prosecutors have launched a counterterrorism investigation, according to reports citing judicial sources.

The man was arrested near the Eiffel Tower in Paris on Saturday at about 11:30 pm local time, according to media reports. The intruder was reportedly shouting “Allahu Akbar” when he approached the security officers, who quickly neutralized him, several French media outlets reported.

A man crossed the first security barrier by pushing a security guard and hitting him on the shoulder. He then pulled out a knife and shouted “Allah Akbar,” according to a source close to the investigation, as quoted by AFP. “Operation Sentinel soldiers then ordered him to put his knife on the ground. He placed it there without resistance and was immediately detained,” the source added.

In police custody, the man claimed that “he wanted to commit an attack on a soldier and was linked to a member of the Islamic State jihadist group who encouraged him to carry out the act,” according to another source close to the investigation, AFP reports.

While the incident resulted in no injuries, the site was evacuated. The next morning the tourist site was opened again.

The suspect has not been identified yet, although Le Parisien reported that he is a French citizen who was born in Mauritania in 1998.

While the incident was initially regarded as a common crime, French prosecutors reclassified it as a counterterrorism case and attempted murder of government officials after the interrogation of the intruder, according to media reports citing judicial sources.

France has been in a state of emergency following attacks in Paris in November 2015 which saw over 130 people killed. The measure gave police and administrative authorities more power.

In June, French lawmakers adopted a controversial counterterrorism bill cementing some measures that were introduced by the state of emergency, including house searches and seizure of weapons.

President Rodrigo Duterte signed into law the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act, a law providing free tuition for Filipino students at 112 state universities and colleges.

The president signed the law despite opposition from his economic advisers who said the government did not have the money to sustain the program.

Palace spokesman Menardo Guevarra said “free tertiary education … is a pillar or cornerstone of the president’s social development policy.”

Congress will make the decision on how to fund the implementation of the law.

Guevarra said official development assistance from other countries could be a source “to help tide us over especially for the first few years.”

The implementation of the law will require at least US$2 billion, according to the Department of Budget.

Youth groups welcomed the government announcement, describing it as “an initial victory not only for the youth today but also for future generations.”

“We have to keep vigilant, however, on possible limits that may be inserted in the new law,” said Sarah Elago, youth representative in the Lower House of Congress.

She said students should also press for “quality education” and “spur the movement for genuine nationalist, scientific, and mass-oriented type of education.”

By Joe Slama

A recent article in the Economist has some disturbing news about the rise of so-called “professional exorcists” in France and elsewhere, according to one Catholic exorcist.

“It almost seemed like the main focus was on entertainment,” Fr. Vince Lampert of the International Association of Exorcists told CNA, speaking on one of the problems with the phenomenon.

“For the purpose of any exorcism, one of the steps would be for the person to re-connect with their faith or to discover their faith for the first time. It almost seemed like people there were just thinking of evil as something that you can kind of play around with.”

Fr. Lampert is the exorcist for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, having functioned as such since 2005. While the identities of most exorcists are kept secret, Fr. Lampert often gives talks on the subject.

The Economist piece details the practice of “private exorcists” independent of the Church, claiming that the reason for a rise in popularity is two-fold: a perceived lack of interest from the Church and the benefits customers believe they receive from the “rituals.”

As far as lack of interest from the Church goes, Fr. Lampert responded that in his view, this is not the case. Rather, the Church simply wants to be cautious with cases potentially involving demonic activity, rather than rush to a quick judgment as some may want.

“The Church always wants to move very cautiously,” he said.

He described times when he has seen people who seem to desire a quick-fix to their problems or a superstitious solution, such as those offered by sangomas, a sort of shaman in South Africa that Fr. Lampert believes may be connected to the French phenomenon due to immigration.

“I will say that oftentimes I encounter people that really don’t want any connection with faith,” said Fr. Lampert.

“They just want to treat the priest-exorcist as a shaman as well. ‘There’s evil in my life, make it go away; I don’t really want there to be any responsibility on my part to pray or to grow in faith for the Church.’ They don’t want to change any aspect of their life, they just expect the priest exorcist to make all this go away.”

The business of “private exorcists” can be booming. The Economist article references one of these “professionals” as claiming to make €12,000 (over $14,000) a month from the business. True exorcisms conducted by the Church, however, never have monetary costs associated.

“The Church does view exorcism as a ministry of charity, so she helps anyone who’s in need,” said Fr. Lampert.

Additionally, the perceived positive effect of these “rituals” may actually be dangerous.

“If it’s evil at work, then somehow evil is giving the illusion that somehow what they’re doing is being efficacious, if you will, as a way to continue to play and toy with the people that somehow believe that they can combat the forces of evil independent of the presence of God,” Fr. Lampert said.

These “professionals” mistakenly seem to claim that it is through their power that they exercise their supposed spiritual authority, Fr. Lampert noted.

“Certainly, I didn’t hear any reference to Christ. It almost seemed like it was the individual who was the one casting out evil. But certainly from a Catholic perspective the exorcist would be operating within the name and the power and the glory of Christ. It’s not any power or authority that I possess on my own.”

He describes how this functions in a true exorcism.

“Ultimately, Christ would be the exorcist, because you’re calling on his name, his power, the authority that comes from Christ, and then the priest, the exorcist then, is an instrument that Christ is using.”

Furthermore, these fake rituals can do more harm than good for the person desiring them if they have issues arising from sources other than the demonic, he added.

“The Church could end up causing more harm than good if it labels a person as being possessed, and that label doesn’t allow the person to get the true help that they need, perhaps from their medical doctor or from a mental health professional. You could have these professionals who are just preying on people’s misery, and they could actually be making things a lot worse.”

Fr. Lampert described the process which someone who suspects that demonic activity has entered their life should go through.

“The number one place where people should always begin is with their local pastor, so if they’re Catholic they should talk to the local parish priest who can listen to their story. If you just call somebody blindly and say, ‘I think I’m possessed,’ you might get a non-favorable response from them. But if you go in and you say, ‘OK, there are certain things go on that I can’t figure out, can you help me?’ then that priest is going to be better equipped to make the connection between the exorcist of that diocese and that person.”

He compared this to going to a doctor for physical ailments.

“It’d be like if you need to see a medical professional, a cardiologist, you don’t just walk in and see one; you go through your family doctor who then makes the connection for you. A person should always rely on their local pastor.”

Fr. Lampert also listed a desire for “immediate gratification” as well as resistance to following Church procedures on exorcisms as reasons people turn to unqualified professionals.

If someone seeking help isn’t a practicing Catholic, “then people have to be willing to follow the procedures and the protocols that the Church has in place. Sometimes, people don’t like that, and that’s when they can turn to these so-called professionals because they will give them immediate gratification, if you will.” The Church often assists non-Catholics with these problems.

Many dioceses have an exorcist assigned within them by the local bishop. For safety purposes, their information is usually not made public, hence the need to consult first with a local pastor.

In a piece first published in the National Catholic Register in March, Fr. Lampert noted that demonic activity and the need for exorcist services in the U.S. is on the rise as well.

“The problem isn’t that the devil has upped his game, but more people are willing to play it,” Father Lampert said in reference to pornography, illegal drugs use, and the occult. “Where there is demonic activity, there is always an entry point.”

“As the acceptance of sin has increased, so, too, has demonic activity,” said Msgr. John Esseff of the Pope Leo XII Institute, which trains priests “to bring the light of Christ to dispel evil.” Msgr. Esseff was quoted in the Register article.

Fr. Lampert in the March piece noted that while true possessions are rare, exorcists also assist in the case of demonic infestation, vexation, and obsession.

According to the register piece, “(h)e explained that demonic infestation happens in places where things might move and there are loud noises. With vexation, a person is physically attacked and might have marks such as bruises, bites or scratches. Demonic obsession involves mental attacks, such as persistent thoughts of evil racing through one’s mind.”

However, he cautions against the faithful focusing too much on the devil. “The focus should be on God and Jesus Christ,” he said in the Register piece. “When I remind myself that God is in charge, it puts everything in perspective, and the worry and fear dissipates.”

“If people would build up their faith lives, the devil will be defeated.”

North Korea’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) hardly change the overall US-DPRK strategic calculus. The only practical policy course is to implement isolative strategies that limit the threat from Pyongyang.

By Liang Tuang Nah*

Since North Korea’s first nuclear test in 2006, it has been subjected to numerous sanctions. Despite these punitive measures and its ostracised status, it has carried out five nuclear tests and conducted two successful tests of its Hwasong-14 Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) on 4 and 28 July 2017.

With this new weapon, does this change the strategic dynamic between the United States and the DPRK? More importantly, what can the US and international community do to contain the threat from Pyongyang?

The Geostrategic Status Quo Remains

Assuming that North Korea’s nuclear and missile technicians are able to fit nuclear warheads atop the Hwasong-14, that these warheads can survive the extreme temperatures encountered as the missile travels to the target, and that the missile guidance system is accurate, this does not change fundamental US-DPRK geostrategic realities.

The US has thousands of nuclear warheads mated to sophisticated land-based, airborne and ocean-going nuclear delivery systems. Coupled with powerful conventional military forces, this means that the DPRK has no hope of prevailing over the US and its ally in the south, the Republic of Korea (ROK).

That said, Pyongyang has never realistically faced the threat of a US invasion or even limited military action in recent times. Crucially, Pyongyang holds Seoul hostage with thousands of artillery systems aimed at the latter, and its 9.9 million population.

It is due consideration for South Korean lives that makes pre-emptive military action by the US-ROK alliance unthinkable. Even without the North’s nuclear arms programme, there exists a “balance of threat” which logically “deters” any attacks from Washington and/or Seoul.

Three Perils

Setting aside any paranoid motivations driving DPRK nuclear development, a dispassionate analysis of the increased danger from Pyongyang’s control over functioning nuclear warheads and missiles reveals three key perils.

Firstly, if the North has reliable ICBMs mated to functional nuclear warheads, it is likely to be more disruptive to regional stability, as it would be more prone to antagonistic adventurism. If Pyongyang was willing to order the murder of Kim Jong-nam in Malaysia with its current nuclear capabilities, how far would it be willing to go if it had a functional nuclear deterrent?

Secondly, fissile material production for atomic warheads has the potential to be environmentally damaging. If North Korea ramps up nuclear warhead fabrication, the risk of nuclear accidents and associated spread of radioactive fallout to Asia and beyond increases exponentially.

Finally, the DPRK as a de facto nuclear state creates a dangerous precedent as it acts as a beacon for atomic munitions aspirants. Basically, the message would be, “no matter how poor or ostracised you are, you too can build nuclear bombs”. Now that the international community is confronted with a rogue nuclear state, how should the US and its allies respond?

Threat Limitation

For all his threats to unleash destruction upon Seoul and Washington, it’s a safe bet that Kim Jong-un is not suicidal and will not court regime ending reprisals. Hence, Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons will never be used, being effectively neutralised by American deterrence.

That said, and for reasons mentioned earlier, it would be prudent to stymie the DPRK’s nuclear arsenal to minimise its indirect and proliferation-based threats. Economics provides a possible answer.

From the pace of DPRK missile and warhead development, Pyongyang is willing to divert funds from the official economy, to grow its nuclear teeth. Therefore, the North Korean economy is fair game and should be targeted by secondary sanctions or pressure, to deprive it of trade partners. Examining statistics, we can see that apart from China and Russia (who are unlikely to seriously pressure North Korea), the DPRK’s other export customers include states like the Philippines, India, Taiwan and even Middle Eastern countries like the United Arab Emirates, which recently bought US$100 million worth of military products from it.

These nations are receptive to political and economic persuasion from Washington and can be convinced to sever economic ties with the DPRK. Even as the revenue loss will only amount to the low hundred million dollars, this will still weaken the Kim regime’s funding, given the relatively small size of its economy.

Ostracise Pyongyang

Additionally, the US and its allies could pressure states which have indirect links with North Korea to further hinder Pyongyang’s acquisition of dual use technology, and ability to earn foreign exchange through service provision. For instance, the aforementioned nations could be coaxed into limiting the number of DPRK diplomats.

Not only will this tell Pyongyang that there is an ostracising cost to its nuclear and missile testing, but this will also hinder its attempts to evade international sanctions or conduct illicit revenue raising activities. Furthermore, de facto pro-Western countries hosting North Korean businesses like restaurants and trading firms which earn valuable revenue, could be convinced to reduce the presence of such companies by not renewing business licenses, and not issuing new ones.

Lastly, states which recruit North Korean labour, might be cajoled to send these people home, as the DPRK government reaps most of their earnings and only pays a pittance to them. Taken together, these non-trade related isolationist measures, along with the curtailment of trade ties would lead to the yearly loss of several hundreds of millions of US dollars worth of foreign currency earnings for the North, thereby making it even more challenging to fund future nuclear and missile aggrandisement.

In conclusion, since military action is impractical, while Beijing is unwilling to broadly sanction the DPRK’s economy, the next best option is to tighten United Nations Security Council sanctions enforcement amongst all cooperative states, persuade the North’s subsidiary trading partners to sever economic ties, and coax others to implement indirect isolative measures.

Although these steps cannot induce nuclear and missile rollback, they do potentially mean the difference between Pyongyang having several dozen nuclear tipped ICBMs and the limited threat from only several ICBMs which could be more easily intercepted.

*Liang Tuang Nah is a Research Fellow with the Military Studies Programme at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

By Jack Pannell*

On Sunday July 30, Venezuela held the vote for its Constituent Assembly. The National Electoral Council (CNE) has claimed a turnout of just over 8 million people.[i] This is over 40 percent of the electorate and, considering the main opposition Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD) boycotted the elections, would represent a strong turnout in favour of Chavismo. The opposition MUD has attempted to undermine this vote, as it has done repeatedly in the last two decades, questioning CNE figures that historically have been consistently accurate.[ii] Media has also been quick to accept allegations of fraud against the CNE, while failing to call into question the opposition’s dubious count of 7.5 million votes in the unofficial referendum they held on July 16.

The CNE figure of 8,089,320 would be a remarkable indication of a political swing back in favour of Chavismo. Indeed, given the MUD boycott, the count would represent the highest number of pro-Chavista votes since Chavez’s re-election in 2012, and the second highest in Venezuela’s history.[iii]

Indeed the turnout of 41.5 percent would be a greater proportion of the electorate than that which voted in the 1999 election for Chavez’s own constituent assembly.[iv] Although the CNE has a solid track record in managing elections, these numbers have now been called into question by the software company that designed Venezuela’s voting technology, as well as by a Reuters analysis reportedly based on CNE data. A full audit however, has not yet been conducted by the CNE, nor have they released their full report on the vote. The President of the CNE, Tibisay Lucena, has rejected the allegations by the software company.

The Argument against the Figure

The MUD-led opposition has disputed the figure of 8 million, citing empty voting centers as well as polling data that makes the turnout seem improbable. A poll carried out in May and June suggested that 85 percent of Venezuelans were opposed to the forming of a constituent assembly.[v] These statistics make it hard to believe that more people would vote in the constituent assembly than voted for either Capriles or Maduro in the 2013 presidential election.[vi] However polls should not be taken to be a definitive indication of public support for or against the constituent assembly.[vii]

Photographs of empty voting booths do not constitute a fair assessment of the vote as a CNE report on the election reveals that 45 municipal centers and 76 parish centers were disrupted by the violence and roadblocks of the opposition on the day of the vote.[viii] Although there were accredited international observers from a number of countries, including the United States, another criticism that has been levelled is that there was no oversight by institutions such as the Organisation of American States.

Of course from the perspective of the government this is completely understandable. When the Secretary General of that organization has declared the vote to be illegal there is little incentive for Venezuela to authorize OAS observation. A nation refusing access to international monitoring does not necessarily delegitimize the vote. Several other OAS members have also chosen not to allow OAS participation including Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay, and those countries have not received the same scrutiny for that decision.[ix] Similarly the 2015 parliamentary elections did not have independent monitoring by such OAS or other such organizations.[x] The government certainly did not rig that election, and the opposition did not complain when they won 109 of the 167 seats in the National Assembly.[xi]

Another major criticism was that the government did not, as it usually does, provide indelible ink to all voting centers to ensure voters cannot vote twice.[xii] CNE documents indicate that an alternate procedure was established to contribute to a clear system of verification if a voter did show up at a center they were not registered at.[xiii] Although they did have a system of authentication in place, not distributing the ink in such a polemic election is somewhat confusing. It gives the opposition and the media a clear line of attack against the vote, for what would have been a relatively cheap and easy measure to enforce.

Some of the most damaging evidence impugning the reliability of the number so far is a report by Reuters from Wednesday morning that only 3.7 million people had voted by 17:30 on Sunday, meaning the vote would have had to have over doubled in just an hour and a half to reach the final 8 million.[xiv] The CNE has, at the time of writing, not commented on these allegations. Also concerning is the fact that Antonio Mugica, the head of voting firm Smartmatic, has claimed that there was a discrepancy of at least one million votes between the actual turnout and the announced figure.[xv]

Smartmatic has been used in Venezuela’s elections since 2004, and has never disputed the final tallies of any election or referendum.[xvi] Tibisay Lucena, The President of the CNE stated today that “this is an unprecedented opinion on the part of a company whose only role is to provide certain services and technical support and not to determine its results”.[xvii] She also noted that the system in place allowed each individual elector to validate their own participation.[xviii] Additionally Lucena attacked the opposition for violently disrupting over 100 voting centers, and the United States for initiating a state of “permanent aggression” against Venezuela for conduction elections, which were permitted by the country’s constitution.[xix]

The opposition have a vested interest in undermining the government, and have in the past attempted to question fair election results.[xx] The MUD chose not to send any auditors to observe the election. Smartmatic itself has noted that this contested discrepancy would not have been possible if “auditors of all political parties had been present” for the election, as had been the case for all elections since 2004.[xxi] Contributing to the confusion is the fact that The CNE has, in the past, always released the detailed results of their elections, and as of publication has not yet done so for Sunday’s election. That said, Smartmatic has not released any data to verify its own claims either, and has stated it is waiting for a full audit to be completed first.[xxii] There are certainly indications that there may have been some manipulation of the final vote tally, but an observed audit must be carried out to ensure that the truth is established.

Conclusion

There are strong allegations that suggest that manipulation of votes may have been committed during the vote for the Constituent Assembly. It should also be noted that some opposition figures allege turnout was around 2.5 million, a claim which is likely to be proven false.[xxiii]

Both sides are politically interested in the turnout of the vote, and both have cause to try and manipulate people’s opinions of the turnout for their own gain. Moving forward a full audit and the publication of all electoral data are essential to try to determine the fidelity of the results of the vote. Addressing charges of electoral manipulation with further charges and counter-charges is not the path to be taken. Fraud by the government, or allegations by forces attempting to delegitimize the vote, would undermine democratic processes, and legitimize, in the eyes of the opposition and foreign powers, their fears that the Constituent Assembly is a tool to maintain power, and not an attempt to solve the ongoing crisis.

*Jack Pannell, Research Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Additional editorial support provided by Madeline Asta, Research Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Notes:
[i] “8.089.320 venezolanos votaron para elegir a constityentes” Consejo National Electoral, June 31 2017, http://www.cne.gov.ve/web/sala_prensa/noticia_detallada.php?id=3551

[ii] “Venezuela’s Maduro Claims Poll Victory as Opposition Cries Foul”, BBC News, July 31 2017, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-40772531

[iii] “Divulgacion Presidenciales 2012” Consejo National Electoral, October 7 2012, http://www.cne.gob.ve/resultado_presidencial_2012/r/1/reg_000000.html

[iv] Lucas Koerner, “Venezuela sees ‘historic’ turnout in national constituent assembly elections”, Venezuela Analiysis, July 31 2017,https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13275

[v] Diego Ore and Eyanir Chinea, “Poll finds 85 percent of Venezuelans oppose constitution revision” Reuters, June 10 2017, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-idUSKBN1910SY

[vi] “Divulgacion Presidenciales 2013” Consejo National Electoral, April 14 2013, http://www.cne.gob.ve/resultado_presidencial_2013/r/1/reg_000000.html?

[vii] That said, the polling organisation that collected this information, Datanalisis, is led by Luis Vincente Leon, a man who has openly opposed the Maduro government. That is not to say that the figures are false, but that the data is not definitive. For example another polling organization, Hinterlaces, put support for the assembly at 54 percent. In this case Oscar Schemel, the President of the firm, was himself a candidate for the constituent assembly, though this too, does not mean the figures are suspect.

[viii]“Medidas de contingencia para Elecciones a la ANC 2017 Guía Informativa” Consejo Nacional Electoral, July 2017 http://www.cne.gob.ve/web/normativa_electoral/elecciones/2017/centrosreceptores/documentos/guia_informativa_medidas_contingencia.pdf

[ix] Ryan Mallett-Outtrim “Are Venezuela’s Unofficial Referendum Results Credible?“ July 18 2017 https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13246

[x] Daniel Lansberg-Rodriguez, “Electoral Monitoring With a Wink and a Nod”, Foreign Policy, August 10 2015, http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/08/10/for-venezuela-election-monitoring-with-a-wink-and-a-nod/

[xi] “Resultado Asamblea” Consejo Nacional Electoral, December 6 2015, http://www.cne.gob.ve/resultado_asamblea2015/r/0/reg_000000.html

[xii] J Weston Phippen, “Violence and Claims of Fraud in Venezuela’s Controversial Vote” The Atlantic, July 31 2017,

https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/07/venezuela-vote-constituent-assembly/535434/

[xiii]“Medidas de contingencia para Elecciones a la ANC 2017 Guía Informativa” Consejo Nacional Electoral, July 2017 http://www.cne.gob.ve/web/normativa_electoral/elecciones/2017/centrosreceptores/documentos/guia_informativa_medidas_contingencia.pdf

[xiv] Girish Gupta, “Exclusive: Venezuelan vote data casts doubt on turnout at Sunday poll”, Reuters, August 2 2017 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-politics-vote-exclusive-idUSKBN1AI0AL

[xv] Laura Smith-Spark and Lorenzo D’Agostino, “Venezuela Election turnout Figures Manipulated, Voting Firm Says” CNN, August 3 2017, http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/02/americas/venezuela-election-turnout-manipulated/index.html

[xvi] Ibid.

[xvii] “El Consejo Nacional Electoral de Venezuela rechaza acusación de “manipulación” en elección de la Constituyente y la vincula a un contexto de “agresión”” BBC Mundo, August 2 2017,

http://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-40809426

[xviii]Barbara Orozco, “CNE rechazo Declaraciones se Smartmatic sobre Fraude en la Contituyente” El Universal, August 2 2017, http://www.eluniversal.com/noticias/politica/cne-rechazo-declaraciones-smartmatic-sobre-fraude-constituyente_664083

[xix] Ibid.

[xx] Gregory Wilpert, “Election Observation and Legitimacy of Venezuela’s Parliamentary Elections” Venezuela Analysis, December 19 2005, https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1533?page=1

[xxi] “Smartmatic Statement on the Recent Constituent Assembly Election in Venezuela” Smartmatic, August 2 2017, http://www.smartmatic.com/news/article/smartmatic-statement-on-the-recent-constituent-assembly-election-in-venezuela/

[xxii] Ibid.

[xxiii] Henrique Capriles R., Twitter, July 30 2017, https://twitter.com/hcapriles/status/891781884992258053

A Hospital Ship of the People’s Liberation Army Navy of China ‘Hepingfangzhou’ arrived at the port of Colombo Friday on a goodwill visit.

The ship was welcomed in accordance with naval customs by the Sri Lanka Navy.

The state of the art ship has been constructed in a bid to engage swiftly in humanitarian response to disasters around the world and it is also popularly known as the Ark of Peace.

The ship has treated over 120,000 people across from the globe during her circumnavigation. Further, this modern platform is equipped with all in-house facilities such as; theaters, intensive care units, consultant medical services, residential treatment units and Computerized Tomography Machines. Meanwhile, the helicopter onboard can be utilized in swift transfer of patients at any given time of emergency.

During the four day official visit in Sri Lanka, the officers of the Ark of Peace expect to meet with the Commander of the Navy, Vice Admiral Ravindra Wijegunaratne.

Further, the medical staff of the ship partnering with the medical personnel of the Sri Lanka Navy is scheduled to conduct several medical camps as well.

Arrangements have been made ready for Sri Lankan doctors and medical students to get onboard this Hospital Ship to experience a rare opportunity. The ship will leave the Colombo harbor on August 9.

In a rare move, the Saudi Ministry of Justice has released a statement defending the kingdom’s decision to execute 14 ‘terrorists’, including one teenaged pro-Democracy protester who was about to board a flight to study in the US.

The ministry’s spokesman, Sheikh Mansour Al-Ghafari, said that all defendants received a fair trial with “full legal rights” in the presence of representatives from human rights groups. He said that the defendants were allowed to chose their own attorneys, and that death sentences are only handed down for the most serious of cases which threaten the security of society.

Saudi Arabia has been the focus of of media attention recently after it emerged that one of the 14 people set to be executed is a visually and hearing impaired man who was arrested as a teenager at the airport. He was travelling to the US to study at Western Michigan University.

Lawmakers and activists in the US have urged President Donald Trump to intervene and stop the executions from being carried out.

The defendants are reportedly all from Saudi Arabia’s Shia minority community and had been involved in protests against the oppression and persecution they face at the hands of the Sunni government.

Saudi Arabia and pro-Saudi media have reported that the men are ‘terrorists’ who had been involved in the killing of civilians.

Original source

By Bhaso Ndzendze

African countries are in a developmental conundrum; they have seen economic reversals in the wake (and arguably because) of the World Bank and yet African countries, at least for the foreseeable future, need the World Bank – owing to a paucity of alternative lenders in the present. In its assessment of the outcomes of World Bank involvement in Africa’s development, this paper emerges with a mixed picture.

While the institution’s policy prescriptions saw large-scale failure in the form of cumulative debt, GDP declines and impoverishment in many African countries (for example Liberia, Nigeria, the DRC/Zaire and many others), it also succeeded in some (the two success stories often touted are Ghana and Uganda). But it would also be illegitimate to pin the failures purely on the World Bank. Ultimately, there are states – for example the DRC/Zaire, the Central African Republic/Empire of the 1980s, among others – wherein substituting the funder, and even removing the structural adjustments (which were not even wholly applied in some countries) would not have resulted in a less bleak picture. Indeed that they needed to go to the World Bank in the first place is proof enough that the countries in the region were mired in economic problems that preceded involvement with the institution.

Thus this article concludes that the World Bank has hitherto hampered development in Africa; but with the help, in many instances, of African leaders, who fostered unreceptive neopatrimonial environments and mismanaged the loans, at the expense of African citizens. Ultimately, however, it is not too late as there is nothing in this setting which does not lend itself to reversal.

‘Accelerated Growth’, Structural Adjustments, and Lost Decades: The World Bank and African Underdevelopment, 1979-Present

Despite remarkable performance in the 1960s, African economic development slowed down in the 1970s and stagnated in the 1980s, Africa’s so-called lost decade. In turn, the African states’ attempts to reinvigorate economic growth through state-led investments and import substitution industrialisation strategies were unsuccessful. And then, unable to raise funds locally, shunned by commercial banks abroad, African states opted for rescue by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. In effect, Western donor institutions took over as Africa’s bankers. Thus Senegal in 1979 became the first African state to obtain a loan from the World Bank predicated on structural adjustment programmes (SAPs). Soon, others followed suit. Despite their desires, and domestic pressures (interestingly, this was not always the case; as in Dar es Salaam there was virtually no opposition to austerity measures because some 90% of the population had been living off the private, informal market), to do otherwise, by 1980 some thirty-six African governments signed up; many were either on the verge of, or beyond, bankruptcy.

These structural adjustments, today so synonymous with the World Bank, included currency devaluation, elimination of subsidies, market liberalisation through removal of tariffs and quotas, decreased government spending, privatisation, low regulation of foreign enterprises and raising of agricultural prices that had been artificially kept down by governments. The idea had been to enact a series of radical economic reforms to shift African states from the state-centred approach (which had once been lauded even by the west) of the 1960s, and to give the markets a bigger role. Echoing the language of Ronald Reagan, then recently elected President of the United States, the appointer of the successive World Bank presidents, government was no longer to be looked to as the solution to economic problems, government was deemed to be the very cause of these problems.

Because of their emphasis on expenditure cuts, public support for infrastructure, education, social services, as well as for research and extension, while not attaining reciprocal agreements from the corresponding western states, these sectors suffered and rural areas, with their high proportion of poor people, were particularly hard hit. Stein argues that SAPs, as promoted by the bank as a result of their neoclassical roots, were basically a-institutional and therefore ill-equipped to promote market and institutional development in Africa. The outcomes of this were immediate and prolonged. For many scholars, the spread of the Ebola virus in West Africa in 2014 was as a result of the neoliberal orthodoxy imposed on Liberia in the 1980s which championed rolling back expenditure on, and privatisation of, health services under direction from the Berg Report, Accelerated Growth, prepared under the auspices of the World Bank. The outcome, in a situation where there was a lack of state capacity with regards to health services (precisely due to the World Bank’s directives) and no will on the part of the private interests to invest in a “clientele” which could not afford the treatment, was the transnational proliferation of what could have been a containable outbreak. Less severely, Tanzania’s medical and educational systems had ceased to function in all but name with school enrolment down from 98% (in 1981) to 76% in 1988.

Further, between 1991 and 1995, Africa’s annual real per capita GDP growth averaged at 0% for all Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (the below market price lending facility that funds poor states in exchange for the adoption of World Bank-directed structural adjustments) countries, whereas non-ESAF developing countries experienced, on average, 1.0% annual real per capita GDP growth. Far worse was the fact that between 1991 and 1995, sub-Saharan African countries which had adopted ESAF programs experienced an average annual 0.3% decline in terms of per capita incomes over the period of adjustment. The shrinkage is also attributable to the decline in purchasing due to World Bank-mandated structural adjustments which necessitated austerity and currency devaluation.

And in 1996, the World Bank, in response to demands for action to address the external debt crisis of poor countries, ushered in the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative. More than 80% of the countries identified by HIPC as needing debt relief were African. But the debt relief would come, in a familiar way, with conditions attached; in order to qualify for debt relief under HIPC, countries had to participate in structural adjustment programs. The HIPC program has been criticised for providing too little actual debt relief and providing it too slowly while at the same time opening up African markets to Western corporations with whom they could not yet compete due to the infancy of their own markets.

To the extent that SAPs failed to promote growth, no improvement in poverty can be expected from growth effects. The impact on poverty and food security arising from the shifting of relative agricultural prices has been mixed, but in general in Nigeria, South Africa, Kenya and Egypt, for example, the winners have been net surplus producers of agricultural products among rural households, particularly those with export crops, while the losers have been net consuming poor households and the urban poor.

What of Africa’s Leaders?

It is not only the conditionality which determine the success of World Bank involvement in Africa, but also the conditions under which these are introduced; national leadership being the key one since the loans are granted to states and not private entities.

One of the few leaders to actually implement structural adjustment was Jerry Rawlings of Ghana in the 1980s and 1990s. Coming into power through a coup in 1982, he embarked on a wholesale reform, accepting market disciplines and a reduced role of the state. He increased cocoa prices, he devalued the Ghanaian cedi, import-licensing systems were abolished, and about 60,000 public sector employees were retrenched, and Ghana’s prized Ashanti Goldfields was privatised. Despite doubling of debt between 1983 to 1988, in that period, cocoa exports increased in just three years from 155,00 to 220,000 by 1986. Equally significant, food per capita rose, and inflation fell from 123% to 40% between 1983 and 1990; increasing the Ghanaians’ buying power. Similarly, Uganda through PRSP policies reduced its GDP-debt ratio from 58.3% in 1999 to 2.1% in 2009.

Even these so-called miracles, in any case 2 out of 54 African states, have been lacklustre and are disappointing on the whole – Ghana’s GDP in 1998 was still 17% less than its 1970 levels, and Uganda’s low debt has been due to donations. And some question whether these results have clearly been linked to SAP-related macroeconomic policies. Yet, it is probable that Ghana’s GDP would be even worse without the role of the World Bank, and in a more corrupt country – such as in post-Nyerere Tanzania cited above where bribery and corruption were rife – the donations and loans received by Uganda to reduce its debt-to-GDP ratio could have been imprudently managed and not made a difference.

The issue of whether the overall disappointing performance of SAPs in Africa is due to incomplete and “half-hearted implementation”, inappropriate policy components of the SAPs, or adverse external factors lies at the heart of the debate. A review of the available studies suggests that in most cases a combination of these three factors was at work – Africa has over 50 states after all. It is certainly true that there was incomplete, half-hearted, and “stop-and-go” implementation, that there were deficiencies in the sequencing of measures, lack of coordination of policies and inappropriate policy design, and that the markets for primary products, Africa’s main export, deteriorated in the 1980s and 1990s but it is clear that the failures were in large part due to World Bank failure in vetting the countries to be granted loans, and inabilities to affect penalties for mismanagement of funds. Qualification for loans, in other words, should have been predicated on more than just a state being a Western ally during the Cold War, or the anti-terror ally today. And here lies the problem, neopatrimonialism, in such places as the former Zaire, CAR, Nigeria, Malawi and numerous others, ensured that the funds were misused, and yet the World Bank failed to recognise this, or when it did, it did not hinder it from continuing to give the loans – which in turn went into “white elephant” projects. Indeed, a shadow review by ActionAid concluded that the Bank does not have an effective plan for ensuring accountability even in the wake of the Operation Policy and Country Services unit.

Where to From Here?

In at least two African countries, the World Bank has been a facilitator of development; and in those countries where there has been debt and negative growth in spite of World Bank presence, it is still possible that matters would be even worse in its absence, as it has been one of few institutions willing and able to make concessional loans. Furthermore, World Bank granting of loans has been found to positively increase attractiveness of receptor states in the short run and causes other funders to be more willing to make investments. SAPs during periods of falling growth or no growth appear to reinforce underlying expectations for the future; they are associated with positive expectations.

And to conclude, it has to be noted that essentially, the failures of the World Bank in the continent have also come about as a result of the World Bank’s own internal structural inconsistencies as well as an unreceptive climate within countries. For example, some scholars have argued that the content of PRSP, its ideological underpinnings, and the global context in which it is situated seem to involve contradictory impulses for national ownership, governance and poverty reduction in Africa. We may go so far as to say that the institution is essentially a paradox; it is a neoliberal institution, and yet is itself state-owned – and therefore prone to serving national interests – and, moreover, despite its profession of market-orientation, it is a lender to governments as opposed to private entities; and thereby buys out of key classical liberal truisms such as competition and room for incentives. Equally pertinent, African countries themselves need to own up the other end of the equation because they are the recipients of the funds. In the wake of the 1990s Asian crisis and recovery through World Bank assistance (especially in the case of South Korea which managed to pay back its loan ahead of schedule), it is clear that the bank can be a partner for recovery and growth provided there is prudent assimilation of these funds. But before these funds can be granted, there ought to be a revisiting of the process so as to ensure the loans do not end up in imprudent hands in the first place. Perhaps then, and only then, the World Bank can continue to facilitate development on the continent. Wedded into this is the responsibility of not only African but World Bank leaders to make the bank more responsive – something which previous presidents such as James Wolfensohn and incumbent Jim Yong Kim began to grasp in their various “listening tours” around prospective recipient states.

Source:
This article was published by Modern Diplomacy

By Mike Eckel

(RFE/RL) — Legislation signed into law this week by a reluctant U.S. President Donald Trump hits hard at Russia, cementing existing sanctions and adding on a few more for good measure to punish Moscow for its actions in Ukraine, Syria, and allegedly cyberspace.

Buried in the bill’s dry legislative language, however, is arguably something more important: a road map, and a signal, for what might follow if Moscow doesn’t change its behavior more toward Washington’s liking.

“I think you could call this a threat,” said Peter Harrell, who worked on Russia and Iran sanctions while at the State Department between 2012 and 2014.

One section focuses on Russian sovereign debt, which the Kremlin has used to stabilize strategically important companies since sanctions were first imposed by the United States and European Union in 2014, following Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula.

The measure, which received overwhelming support in Congress calls on the Treasury and State Departments, along with intelligence officials, to analyze the “potential effects of expanding sanctions…to include sovereign debt and the full range of derivative products.”

“This would be a significant escalation of economic pressure on Russia and would be a significant statement about the toughness of U.S. sanctions on Russia,” Harrell told RFE/RL.

Though the measure only orders a report on the issue, Harrell said it signals that U.S. sanctions officials and congressional leaders might close off a Russian workaround to the 2014 sanctions.

Those sanctions cut off from the international credit markets several major companies either controlled by, or closely linked to, the Russian government.

The Kremlin was forced to bail out those companies to the tune of tens of billions of dollars since they were unable to roll over existing debt, Harrell said, and ended up drawing down some of its rainy-day investment funds.

But the U.S. and EU sanctions didn’t prevent the Russian government from raising capital on its own. Last year, it sold around $3 billion in new Eurobonds.

“If the Russian sovereign government can keep borrowing on international markets, it kind of becomes a workaround for theses sanctions against the big Russian state-owned companies,” Harrell said. “Because while Sberbank and Rosneft can’t borrow on international markets, the Russian sovereign can, and then they can turn around and simply relend the money to Rosneft and Sberbank.”

The Russian government holds a controlling stake in Rosneft, the country’s largest oil company. Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, is also state controlled.

“Congress is signaling to the Russians and U.S. allies and the Trump administration that sovereign-debt sanctions may be coming down the pike,” Harrell said.

Daniel Fried, a veteran diplomat who was the State Department’s sanctions coordinator in 2014, said the law was smartly crafted because it hints at the direction Congress will go in the event of an escalation.

“For example, in response to the Russians giving us an August surprise, as they did in 2008,” he said, pointing to Russia’s invasion of Georgia that year.

Fried said the reports mandated by the new legislation will also help the administration and Congress focus on punitive measures that can actually be implemented without causing other problems.

“It does no good, and it is in fact a fool’s game, to start bellowing and shouting and bragging and you’re going to do this, that, and the other thing that you will actually never do because you haven’t actually thought through the consequences,” he said.

Another key section could pack a similar punch. It orders administration agencies to identify “the most significant senior foreign political figures and oligarchs in the Russian Federation, as determined by their closeness to the Russian regime and their net worth.”

The report should also focus on “the estimated net worth and known sources of income of those individuals and their family members (including spouses, children, parents, and siblings), including assets, investments, other business interests, and relevant beneficial ownership information.”

What this indicates, said Ilya Zaslavskiy, a Russian-born activist who has investigated Russian business tycoons and their investments and lobbying, is that U.S. officials have a more sophisticated read on how Russia’s politics and business sectors are intertwined.

“It shows that now there is a much better understanding of what is going on in Russia,” said Zaslavskiy, who is now affiliated with the U.S.-based Free Russia Foundation. “They understand that it’s both political figures and oligarchs, that it’s not only their network but their closeness to the regime that matters more.”

Earlier sanctions targeted a small group of well-connected businessmen and oligarchs. That included Gennady Timchenko, who allegedly ran an oil-trading business holding exclusive exports contracts that netted billions over many years; Arkady and Boris Rotenberg, construction magnates who have built massive state-funded projects such as the Kerch Strait bridge to Crimea; and Yury Kovalchuk, whose Bank Rossia has lasting ties to Putin’s hometown of St. Petersburg.

Expanding the sanctions to target relatives of individuals with close ties to the Kremlin or government power centers — for example, keeping the daughter of a government minister from studying at a U.S. university — would be a clear escalation, Fried said.

“That would be an escalation, but quite frankly, what do you expect?” he said. “[If] you buy into that sort of government, you enrich yourselves with that kind of government, you’re asking for trouble.”

In contrast to Congress’s strong support for the sanctions, Trump’s position has been lukewarm at best. In signing the bill into law on August 2, he called it flawed but said he was doing it “for the sake of national unity.”

Trump’s first seven months in office have been dogged by questions about interactions between Trump associates and Russian officials, along with the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia sought to influence the 2016 presidential election.

Multiple investigations have been launched in Congress into alleged Russian meddling, and the Justice Department in May appointed former FBI chief Robert Mueller as special counsel to probe whether Moscow attempted to interfere in the U.S. voting and whether Trump associates colluded with Russians.

Trump has called accusations of improper ties to Russia a “hoax” aimed at undermining his presidency.

On the eve of the sanctions bill becoming law, Moscow ordered the U.S. diplomatic mission in Russia to sharply cut its staffing.

By Yves Engler

The Canadian mining giant Barrick Gold’s African subsidiary, Acacia Mining, is embroiled in a major political conflict in Tanzania. With growing evidence of its failure to pay royalties and tax, Acacia has been condemned by President Magufuli, had its exports restricted and slapped with a massive tax bill. Barrick enjoys considerable government backing.

Will the Canadian government continue to support Barrick Gold’s exploitation of mineral resources in Tanzania no matter what abuses the company commits?

Would the Trudeau government stop backing the Toronto-based firm if it bilked the impoverished nation out of $10 billion? Or, what if one thousand people were raped and seriously injured by Barrick security? Would Ottawa withdraw its support if one hundred Tanzanians were killed at its mines?

Barrick’s African subsidiary, Acacia Mining, is embroiled in a major political conflict in the east African nation. With growing evidence of its failure to pay royalties and tax, Acacia has been condemned by President John Magufuli, had its exports restricted and slapped with a massive tax bill.

In May a government panel concluded that Acacia significantly underreported the percentage of gold and copper in mineral sand concentrates it exported. The next month a government commission concluded that foreign mining firms’ failure to declare revenues had cost Tanzania $100 billion. According to the research, from 1998 to March 2017 the Tanzanian government lost between 68.6 trillion and 108.5 trillion shillings in revenue from mineral concentrates.

The controversy over Barrick’s exports led President Magufuli to fire the minister of mining and the board of the Minerals Audit Agency. Tanzania’s parliament has also voted to review mining contracts and to block companies from pursuing the country in international trade tribunals.

While the political battle over royalty payments grows, human rights violations continue unabated at Barrick’s North Mara mine. A recent MiningWatch fact-finding mission discovered that,

“new cases have come to light of serious un-remedied harm related to encounters between victims and mine security and police who guard the mine under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the companies involved and the Tanzanian Police Force. New cases documented in June 2017 include: loss of limbs, loss of eyesight, broken bones, internal injuries, children hit by flying blast rocks, and by teargas grenades thrown by mine security as they chase so-called intruders into the nearby villages. As in past years, villagers reported severe debilitating beatings, commonly with gun butts and wooden batons. Some are seriously wounded by teargas ‘bombs,’ or by so-called rubber bullets. Others are shot, including from behind. As in past years there were a number of deaths.”

At least 22 people have been killed and 69 injured near or at the North Mara mine since 2014. Most of the victims were impoverished villagers who scratch rocks for tiny bits of gold and who often mined these territories prior to Barrick’s arrival. An early 2016 government report found security and police paid by Barrick had killed 65 people and injured 270 at North Mara since 2006. Tanzanian human rights groups estimate as many 300 mine related deaths and the Financial Times reports that not a single police officer or security guard working for the company has been killed on duty.

Amidst the violence at North Mara and an escalating battle over unpaid tax, Canada’s High Commissioner set up a meeting between Barrick Executive Chairman John Thornton and President Magufuli. After accompanying Barrick’s head to the encounter in Dar es Salaam, Ian Myles told the press,

“Canada is very proud that it expects all its companies to respect the highest standards, fairness and respect for laws and corporate social responsibility. We know that Barrick is very much committed to those values.”

Appointed by Trudeau last year, Myles – whose “passion for international development began” when he was 17, according to a University of Toronto profile – took a page out of Stephen Harper’s playbook. During a 2007 trip to Chile the former prime minister responded to protests against various ecological and human rights abuses at the firm’s Pascua Lama project by saying: “Barrick follows Canadian standards of corporate social responsibility.”

A Tanzania business ethics columnist was not happy with the High Commissioner’s intervention. In response, Samantha Cole wrote:

“It is so insulting that these Canadians and British still think they can trick us with their fancy nonsense ‘spin’ politics and dishonesty. What values is Barrick committed to? Have our nation not witnessed with our own eyes killings? rape? arson and burning our homes? destruction to our environment? poison in our water? corruption? fraud? hundreds of legal cases with local Tanzanian companies who are abused, bullied and suffer? and the list goes on. What ‘values’ is Ambassador Myles boasting about? How dishonest and unethical to stand there and lie about values? He should rather say NOTHING because every country where Barrick operates has a long, long list of illegal activities and crimes.”

Disregarding its election promise, the Trudeau government is openly throwing this country’s diplomatic weight behind Canada’s most controversial mining company in the country where it has committed its worst abuses. When asked about Canada’s massive international mining industry during the election the party responded:

“The Liberal Party of Canada shares Canadians’ concerns about the actions of some Canadian mining companies operating overseas and has long been fighting for transparency, accountability and sustainability in the mining sector.”

The Liberals’ statement included explicit support for An Act Respecting Corporate Accountability for Mining, Oil and Gas Corporations in Developing Countries, which would have withheld some diplomatic and financial support from companies found responsible for significant abuses abroad. Similarly, the Liberals released a letter about the mining sector during the 2015 election that noted, “a Liberal government will set up an independent ombudsman office to advice Canadian companies, consider complaints made against them and investigate those complaints where it is deemed warranted.”

Nearly two years into their mandate the Trudeau regime has yet to follow through on any of their promises to rein in Canada’s controversial international mining sector. In fact, the Liberals have largely continued Harper’s aggressive support for mining companies.

If they are prepared to openly back Barrick in Tanzania one wonders what exactly a firm would have to do to lose Trudeau’s support?