The F-35 should be, and almost certainly will be, the last manned strike fighter aircraft the Department of the Navy will ever buy or fly.-– Ray Mabus, US Secretary of the Navy

By Kishore Kumar Khera*

Aviation, which started with the Wright Brothers’ first controlled flight of a heavier than air machine on 17 December 1903, has come a long way in the last 114 years. As is true for many technological developments, aviation too quickly acquired a niche for itself in the military matrix. Manned aircraft were first inducted in warfare as high ground observatories to monitor enemy troop movement. Aerial reconnaissance with an observation by the pilot and later with a still camera was the first operational role of aircraft. The next step involved aircrew carrying small bombs and dropping them manually from the cockpit. Thus was born the role of ground attack. In the next phase, aircraft were equipped with guns to engage enemy aircraft in the air and this commenced the aerial combat role. Besides these, the development of bigger airframes and powerful engines enabled the development of transport aircraft, which were subsequently modified with the fitment of radars, jammers and fuel tanks for surveillance, electronic warfare and inflight refuelling, respectively. These roles are being performed by manned aircraft albeit with much better technology and accuracy than was possible during the 20th century.

Technological advancement in computing and communication facilitated the development of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). Controlled from a ground station, the UAV either flies a pre-planned path or can be dynamically controlled. As was the case with manned aircraft about a century ago, the operational roles of UAVs are following a similar trajectory. Besides being used as a weapon, the first operational role for UAVs was of aerial reconnaissance wherein the UAV was fitted with optical cameras. The development of sensor technology and its miniaturisation along with better computation and communication allowed transmission of real time data in various electromagnetic bands, a boon for a military commander. UAVs scored substantially over manned aircraft in this role owing to their longer endurance. Coupled with satellite imagery capabilities, UAVs have practically driven out manned aircraft from the reconnaissance role except in a very few critical cases where their low speed remains an operational impediment. However, UAVs have been able to overcome their speed limitation to a certain extent by their low Radar Cross Section (RCS), making it difficult to detect and engage them.

Going by the precedent of manned aircraft, the next role UAVs were assigned was of ground attack. This required more powerful engines and larger airframes for enabling the UAV to carry weapons. Here too, technology played a pivotal role in enhancing weapons delivery accuracy thus reducing the weapon size required for the same extent of impact on the target. This role by UAVs is being carried out successfully in Afghanistan with Hellfire missiles from USAF MQ9. The UAV’s long endurance allows a high success rate for search and strike missions as compared to a manned fighter aircraft with comparatively limited endurance. The success rate of UAV ground attack missions is to a large extent dependent on their operation in a benign air defence environment.

The full development and employment of UAVs in an air defence role is still some distance away owing to prevailing technological challenges. In the same vein, switching to unmanned transport aircraft may also take a few decades. While the roles of UAVs are gradually increasing in the civil sector, ranging from the delivery of packages to the shooting of high-quality aerial films, a debate is on about the end of an era for manned aircraft for operational missions. There are three critical components involved in the employment of UAVs instead of manned aircraft in combat, viz, basic flying (take off, landing and planned navigation), tactical flying (situation appreciation and changing the plan midway) and weapon delivery (correct and timely targeting). While progress has been made in all three verticals, it is yet to reach a level that would enable the complete replacement of manned aircraft. Factors that need to be considered in this debate are:-

Sensors and Dynamic Situation Processing. In a benign air defence environment and uncontested air space, UAVs are efficient in mission accomplishment. When decision-making autonomy is required or there are rules of engagement or a developing air situation that cannot be explicitly expressed mathematically, a human is essential. The current generation of sensors do not have the capacity to replicate the appreciation by a human eye and pose a limitation in operations because the UAV operator is not situationally aware. The major drawback of the current generation systems is their inability to capture high fidelity data, process, encrypt and transmit it and, based on directions from the ground station, receive, decrypt and process it to execute a command. Based on the type of processor and communication systems, this process may take anywhere from 600 milliseconds to three seconds – a very long duration in combat operations. The development of Artificial Intelligence will overcome this deficiency and provide the requisite autonomy to the UAV.

Speed and Manoeuvrability. UAVs are generally characterised by their low speed and consequent low manoeuvrability as compared to manned fighter aircraft and this makes them vulnerable. At the same time, however, a low RCS and greater endurance are design features that assist UAVs in mission accomplishment.

Weapon Carrying Capacity. Owing to their power, UAVs are capable of carrying low calibre/low weight weapons in limited numbers as compared to manned aircraft. But this limitation can be overcome by converting fighter aircraft into UAVs or through the use of special weapons with high accuracy to reduce Over Target Requirement (OTR)1 in terms of number and size of weapons.

Quantity and Costs. UAVs do not need some of the safety and operating systems that manned aircraft need and thus enjoy better cost efficiency. This normally translates into greater numbers of UAVs for the same cost as compared to a combat aircraft. However, autonomous aviation technology is yet to mature, which can be assessed from the fact that UAV accident rates are four to five times higher than that of manned aircraft. This negates the cost effectiveness partially as of now, but is likely to improve with better technology.

Endurance and Risks. UAVs practically eliminate human endurance as a factor for mission duration. Autonomous inflight refuelling could keep the UAV in the air for days. Risk to life and risk of capture of operators is fully eliminated. However, the control of UAV is heavily dependent on electromagnetic waves, which are susceptible to interference/jamming/technical malfunctions. Any delay in the transmission of critical commands could be lethal. Another aspect of the absence of an aircrew in UAVs is the limited ability of on board systems to diagnose any system malfunction especially owing to an external factor. An aircrew can diagnose an instrument failure and react to save the aircraft, but an UAV with instrument failure will most probably be lost.

Trends. With effect from 2010, the induction of UAVs has outnumbered induction of manned aircraft in the US armed forces. And since 2011, the US Air Force has trained more UAV pilots than fighter/bomber pilots. But most of the financial allocations the world over including in the US are still being made for manned aircraft development and procurement. This will change once better processing power, artificial intelligence and communication equipment are developed and incorporated in UAVs. Technology involving a swarm of UAVs operating in a group and being mutually supportive is at an advanced stage of development and will assist UAVs in garnering a greater share of operational missions.

Efficacy. The conversion of fighter aircraft to UAVs for undertaking training missions has been tried and tested in the cases of the F4 and F16 in the US Air Force and the F6 in the People’s Liberation Army Air Force. The same could be developed further for undertaking operational missions with high risk.

Suitable Missions. In the foreseeable future, an optimal solution is a mix of manned aircraft and UAVs till technology can support a better appreciation of situational awareness and command and control aspects. Currently, the most suitable missions for UAVs are the five Ds – Detect, Designate, Dirty, Destructive and Dangerous. Detect missions require long endurance and are pre-planned and repetitive in nature like surveillance over a large area for a prolonged duration to detect a possible development. Designate either in conjunction with Detect or stand-alone missions designate a target system/sub system using laser designators for an attack by an armed aircraft/UAV. Dirty missions are undertaken in an NBC environment in order to negate the risk to human life. Destructive missions are when the UAV is equipped with explosives and is used as a weapon And Dangerous missions involve those against a heavily defended target to either attack the defences or force the adversary to expend missiles on UAVs.

Indian Scenario

While Israel and USA are leaders in UAV technology and operations, the Indian UAV programme is in its infancy. Going by the example of the Light Combat Aircraft (LCA), the production of an Indian combat mission capable UAV is at least a couple of decades away. India will have to depend on imports or joint ventures for Make in India in the interim, as UAVs are essential in any operational matrix. Till a requisite number of mission capable UAVs are inducted in India, some of the operational missions will have to be carried out by manned aircraft, albeit in a suboptimal way. The induction of Su30MKI, LCA and Rafale will continue till 2022 and these aircraft with an average calendar life of 25 years or more will be in service well beyond 2050. By that time, for operational effectiveness, at least 50 per cent of combat missions would be designated to UAVs and that would require a large fleet of various types of UAVs. To meet that challenge, it would be prudent to establish a joint venture for the production of UAVs in India under the Strategic Partnership programme.

Sum Up

With the current state of technology, UAVs are the best bet for operations in an uncontested air space for surveillance and search and strike missions with low calibre high accuracy guided weapons. However, operations in a moderate to dense air defence environment will need manned aircraft to react appropriately, although UAVs can be of great value in reducing the risk to manned aircraft by saturating the air space and attacking air defence systems thus compelling an adversary to expend his missiles. UAVs are essential ingredients of a combat force and their role will continue to increase along with their capability. A quantum jump in the operational role of UAVs can be expected only with a breakthrough in AI. Until that happens, the role of UAVs will increase gradually to reach about 50 per cent of combat operations over the course of the next three decades.

Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDSA or of the Government of India.

About the author:
*Group Captain Kishore Kumar Khera, VM is Research Fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA), New Delhi.

Source:
This article was published by IDSA

Notes:
1. Over Target Requirement (OTR) is the number of weapons required over a target to achieve the requisite level of damage and is calculated based on target system, its functional and vulnerability analysis along with weapon characteristics and parameters of its damage mechanism like Blast Over Pressure, Dynamic Pressure, Pressure Pulse, Penetrative Index, Fragmentation Pattern, Shock and Fire Indices in the given attack profile.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has called on the European Union to play a more active role to help the full implementation of the country’s nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), for the benefit of the Middle East and Europe, PressTV reported.

“The full implementation of the JCPOA benefits the EU and the region, so it is essential that the EU step up its efforts and role in this regard,” Rouhani said during a meeting with the new Austrian ambassador to Tehran, Stefan Scholz, on Wednesday.

Rouhani said the post-JCPOA era had offered a good opportunity for the further promotion of ties between Iran and the European countries, including Austria.

Hailing Austria’s successful hosting of the Iranian nuclear negotiations, Rouhani said all parties would reap the benefits of the JCPOA.

“The JCPOA is a win-win agreement, which on the one hand, removed false concerns of certain Western countries, and on the other hand, lifted cruel sanctions against the Iranian nation,” the Iranian president said, adding that the agreement had brought about peace and provided a suitable economic condition for investors.

He said Iran was keen to seize the post-JCPOA opportunities for investment and expand economic ties, especially banking transactions.

The Austrian envoy, for his part, lauded the Tehran-Vienna ties as deeply-rooted and based on mutual respect, and said his country supported Iran’s policies at the international arena.

Scholz added that Austria was eager to cooperate with Iran in boosting regional and international security.

Separately on Wednesday, the Iranian president received the new Serbian and Uruguayan envoys to Tehran.

Rouhani told Serbia’s Dragan Todorovic that Iran welcomed further ties with the European country in all sectors.

For his part, the Serbian envoy expressed the willingness of his country to expand ties with Iran in all fields, including the banking sector.

He also passed on an invitation from Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vucic to Rouhani to visit the European country.

During talks with the new Uruguayan ambassador to Tehran, Carlos Sgarbi von Steinmann, Rouhani said Iran and Uruguay had close stances on global developments, adding that the two countries underlined the need for ties based on mutual respect.

The Iranian chief executive highlighted nations’ right to self-determination, criticizing certain powers for interfering in the domestic affairs of other states, including Latin American countries, saying such policies could lead to further tensions.

The Uruguayan envoy, for his part, said his country would expand efforts to shore up ties with Iran in all sectors.

In an earlier article I suggested eliminating all personal tax deductions, with a possible exception related to health care. One of the well-publicized problems with the American health care system is that employer-provided health insurance is not taxed, pushing us to a system in which people get health insurance from their employers. A better option would be to allow a competitive market in which people shop for their own health insurance, as they do with homeowner insurance, auto insurance, life insurance, and really, all insurance except for health insurance.

One way to change the system is to make employer-provided health insurance a taxable benefit, taking away the tax advantage of buying health insurance through one’s employer. That would impose a tax cost on those receiving the benefit, which could be offset by allowing everyone to deduct the cost of their health insurance from their taxable income.

One problem with the deduction is that those with higher incomes would benefit more from it than those with lower incomes whose tax liabilities may be less than what they would have to pay for health insurance. So, provide everyone with a refundable tax credit up to some limit, or maybe as a percentage of their premium cost. For example, the credit could be 85% of the cost of their premiums. This is not that original an idea, in that it is similar to one of the proposals John McCain made when he was running for president.

This policy would have a huge beneficial effect on the market for health care, although it would not be optimal for tax policy. Simply looking at the tax system, the best option would be just to tax employer-provided health insurance and use the extra revenues to lower tax rates for everyone. The problem is that politically, it would be very difficult to tax health insurance benefits without some offset. The tax credit provides a mechanism that would not impose a cost on those who now receive the benefit, would invigorate the market for health care and health insurance, and would encourage everyone to buy health insurance.

It is not a perfect policy, but it is a politically feasible way to improve on what we have now.

This article was published by The Beacon.

Our president has no trouble naming his enemies — CNN, Rosie O’Donnell, Nordstrom, immigrants, Muslims, the all-women version of Ghostbusters, etc. etc.

But when it comes to violent white supremacists, his passive streak is impossible to miss. When neo-Nazis and Klansmen incited a riot in Charlottesville, Trump famously blamed “many sides.”

Even after a belated statement finally condemning the racist perpetrators, Trump immediately backtracked. The very next day, he blamed the fictitious “alt-left” for the violence and insisted there were “many fine people” among the torch-bearing Confederates.

This was far too much even for many Republicans.

Senator Jeff Flake accused the president of “making excuses” for “acts of domestic terrorism.” John McCain insisted “there’s no moral equivalency between racists” and their opponents. Marco Rubio worried the president was resurrecting an “old evil,” while Texas Rep. Will Hurd called on Trump to apologize.

These Republicans (and many others) deserve credit for speaking out. But condemning Nazis is the lowest bar in the broader fight against white supremacy.

The fact is, the policy machinery of that supremacy — that is, the laws that systematically ensure negative outcomes for people of color — hums hot as ever. No hoods or flags required.

I wonder, for instance, whether these Republicans will also condemn their former Senate colleague Jeff Sessions. As Trump’s attorney general, Sessions is preparing an assault on affirmative action practices at universities as we speak.

Before that, Sessions ordered federal prosecutors to seek stiff mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders, which is a major driver of the mass incarceration crisis that disproportionately locks up nonwhite Americans (“the new Jim Crow,” law professor Michelle Alexander calls it).

Sessions also looks likely to tear up federal reform plans for police departments with documented histories of brutality and racism.

What does his party have to say about that?

I wonder, too, whether they’ll call out Trump’s bogus panel on “voter fraud” led by Kris Kobach. Every study on the subject shows that “voter ID” laws and other restrictions do almost nothing to reduce in-person voter fraud. Makes sense: In-person fraud is virtually non-existent.

But these laws do have a proven effect in keeping African Americans, Latinos, and poor people away from the polls. That’s exactly why they’re still cropping up in GOP-controlled states all over the country.

And what will these Republicans say about the states — all 27 of them — who’ve passed laws preventing cities from raising their minimum wages? That directly lowers wages in jobs dominated by women and people of color, who lag far behind white men in both income and wealth.

Finally, will they speak out against the several states now considering laws that would let drivers run over protesters who block roadways?

Those roadway-blocking tactics were popularized by Black Lives Matter activists and supporters of indigenous pipeline resisters, so it’s little wonder who these lawmakers imagine being run over. Especially after a neo-Nazi rammed his car into the anti-racists gathered in Charlottesville.

I’m glad the Republicans now speaking out say they loathe white supremacy. Good.

But white supremacy is more than racist name-calling or flag-waving. Most days, it’s a mundane system that pits the law against our non-white neighbors — and laws don’t need anyone to “feel” racist for them to work. They can look perfectly colorblind on paper, but they’re not.

Republicans — and all of us — need to be every bit as ready to name the machinery of white supremacy as we are to condemn its nastiest supporters. Otherwise we’re just making excuses, too.

*Peter Certo is the editorial manager of the Institute for Policy Studies and the editor of OtherWords.org. 

By Ryan McMaken*

With a Republican in the White House, the anti-gun-control lobby smells a bit of blood in the water. Now is the time, they suggest, to pass national gun-licensing reciprocity laws forcing gun-restrictive states to recognize permits issued by gun-permissive states.

Writing in The Hill, Tim Schmidt sums it up:

*****

It is time for there to be national reciprocity for concealed carry permits, instead of the patchwork of laws governing reciprocity that vary by state. Virginia, where the [recent shooting of Congressman Steve Scalise] happened, has reciprocity for some states’ concealed carry permits, but if members would have brought their guns back and forth from D.C., they would have been breaking the law. It should never be a crime to be responsibly prepared to defend yourself in any possible situation.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) have introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017, which would allow legal gun owners and concealed carry permit holders nationwide to responsibly arm themselves no matter where they are.

****

The way this is phrased sounds nice and totally unobjectionable: this bill sounds like it’s just saying people should be left alone.

The problem, however, is that the drive for mandated reciprocity is essentially a drive to increase federal involvement and federal control in the realm of gun policy.

Schmidt is right in the sense that, of course it should never be a crime to defend one’s self. The question remains however: should the federal government be the agency that guarantees that right? Should the feds have the power to overturn state and local laws that limit gun ownership?

This issue can be addressed from both a legal and Constitutional standpoint, and from a general philosophical decentralist view.

The Constitutionalist View

Suzanne Sherman at the Tenth Amendment Center has already weighed in against the idea on Constitutional grounds, based on two main arguments:

1. Reciprocity laws are compacts made among the states, and are not imposed by the federal government.

2. The Bill of Rights Doesn’t apply to the states.

On the first matter, Sherman notes that the proposed legislation would impose reciprocity on the states. This, Sherman notes, is a departure from what we usually mean by reciprocity, which denotes compacts that two or more states have voluntarily entered into.

Sherman writes:

Many advocates of forced National Reciprocity point to the “Full Faith and Credit Clause” found in Article IV, Section 1 of the Constitution. Such application is likewise problematic because it deviates from the original intent of the clause, lifted directly from the Articles of Confederation without any change to its meaning. This clause, as ratified, simply ensured citizens in one state could own land or property in another with the full rights of a citizen of that state. It in no way implied that one state had to recognize the institutions or licensing of another state. Driver’s licenses are acceptable for passing through various states, but it is, like CCW licensing, by mutual assent of the states. In other words, there is no federal statute mandating that one state must honor another state’s driver’s licenses.

In other words, the sort of “reciprocity” imagined by the backers of nationwide forced reciprocity is a new kind ofreciprocity that substitutes federal policy for decentralized state-level policy.

The enormous downside to this is that it federalizes what has long been recognized as largely the domain of state and local governments. Further federalizing gun policy may look like a fine idea right now, but as Sherman notes, it only takes a couple of new anti-gun appointments to the Supreme Court for the whole idea to blow up in the faces of pro-gun advocates. It’s far more prudent, Sherman contends, to work against any increase in federal involvement in gun policy.

The Bill of Rights Was Never Meant to Apply to the States

Sherman’s second point is one that Constitutionalists and decentralists have made for years. Namely, that the Bill of Rights is properly understood as a document that limits the federal government, not state governments.

Sherman writes:

When he introduced the proposal for a Bill of Rights to Congress, Madison wanted some of the provisions to be made applicable against the states. He argued that was where liberty would be most likely threatened. Again, he was defeated unanimously. The Bill of Rights was never understood to be applicable against the states. There is absolutely no historical evidence of the Bill of Rights being made enforceable against the states. Even nationalist John Marshall, in the 1833 case Barron v. Baltimore, was forced to admit this when he said that the first ten “amendments contain no expression indicating an intention to apply them to the state governments. This court cannot so apply them.”

…It was not until 1925, in the case of Gitlow vs New York, that the Supreme Court magically “found” the authority to apply the Bill of Rights against the states supposedly hidden away in the 14th Amendment…”

Sensing that things are going their way, it has become fashionable for some gun-freedom advocates to push for more federal control over state and local gun laws. One example is the recent case of Mcdonald vs. the City of Chicago which finally declared that the Second Amendment — like other portions of the Bill of Rights — applies to the states. Nevertheless, by pushing for more federal control in this case, gun-rights advocates are only pushing for more federal control over the states.

Even those who have no particular affinity for the current American Constitution have noted this as well.

Lew Rockwell writes:

[T]he purpose of the Bill of Rights was to state very clearly and plainly what the Federal Government may not do. That’s why they were attached to the Constitution. The states, under the influence of skeptics of the Constitution’s limits on the central power, insisted that the restrictions on the government be spelled out. The Bill of Rights did not provide a mandate for what the Federal Government may do. You can argue all you want about the 14th amendment and due process. But a reading that says it magically transforms the whole Bill of Rights to mean the exact opposite of its original intent is pure fantasy.

In other words, appealing to the 2nd Amendment as a means of limiting state and local gun laws is based on newly invented federal powers that have no basis in legal or historical facts around the Constitution as written. Thus, it is ironic that many conservatives — who often fancy themselves to be “strict constructionists” and “local control” people — have suddenly made peace with the idea of using the Bill of Rights to boss state governments around.

The Decentralist View

The Constitutional arguments are all well and good, but the US Constitution should never be viewed as the final word on any matter. The current constitution has always gone much too far in terms of centralizing political power in the United States, and the United States should never have been anything more than a loose military alliance and customs union. It’s no more necessary that the federal government regulate gun laws than it is necessary to define marriage or prohibit prayer at school sporting events.

In fact, gun policy, like abortion policy, wage policy, land-use policy, and everything else, should be relentlessly decentralized.

In his article “What We Mean by Decentralization,” Lew Rockwell explains the various reasons why decentralization is a mroe effective check on power than handing everything over to a Supreme Court or other federal “protectors” or rights.

Rockwell lists five reasons for this:

First, under decentralization, jurisdictions must compete for residents and capital, which provides some incentive for greater degrees of freedom…

Second, localism internalizes corruption so that it can be more easily spotted and uprooted….

Third, tyranny on the local level minimizes damage to the same extent that macro-tyranny maximizes it….

Fourth, no government can be trusted to use the power to intervene wisely…

Fifth, a plurality of governmental forms—a “vertical separation of powers,” … prevents the central government from accumulating power. Lower governments are rightly jealous of their jurisdiction, and resist…

Also key to this equation is the fact that decentralization offers a multitude of choices between different regimes in the face of government restrictions and persecution. If only one huge government has been granted the power to protect rights, to where will one go when the government fails to do its prescribed task? On the other hand, when a wide variety of smaller governments are charged with protecting rights, the failure by one regime is not nearly as catastrophic since the offending regime can be far more easily avoided through emigration and boycott than can a large centralized regime.

Thus, it might sound nice to put the federal government in charge of protecting gun rights, but the potential downside is immense given that federal policy can change easily, and then be imposed nationwide.

This isn’t to say that small, decentralized government are a cure-all either. Ideology always plays an important role, and in a world where the majority wants all private citizens disarmed — well, that will happen regardless of what level of decentralization exists.

However, if what we desire is a governmental landscape that offers more choices for residents and more limitations on state power, decentralization is the proper path, and handing over gun policy to federal “protectors” is a terrible idea.

About the author:
*Ryan McMaken is the editor of Mises Wire and The Austrian. Send him your article submissions, but read article guidelines first. (Contact: email; twitter.) Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado, and was the economist for the Colorado Division of Housing from 2009 to 2014. He is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.

Source:
This article was published by the MISES Institute

The scoundrels and misleaders in the Democratic Party are leaving no stone unturned in their effort to escape responsibility for their ignominious defeats. There is no evidence of the Russian government “hacking” the election. Instead evidence points to a leak at the Democratic National Committee which revealed the gory details of their corruption and incompetence.

The lies have fallen apart one by one. After months of repeating that seventeen intelligence agencies agreed on Russian election interference they finally admitted that the number was actually three. The Democratic Party is willing to risk hot war and irreparable damage to the system in order to escape blame for their electoral failures. They have been exposed as little more than a brand management team that does nothing to help the millions of people who are still willing to vote for them.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus such as Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters have been in the forefront of this charade and now they have been joined by others. The Root online magazine announced it is joining this dubious group in doing the business of the bipartisan war party and the discredited democrats. “How Russia Used Racism to Hack White Voters” was the first installment in a new series, Black Guide to Russia. The Root promises that “each story will analyze the latest developments of the Russia investigation with a fresh, black perspective.” What is the black perspective on 21st century McCarthyism, on the craving for endless war or supporting the party which consigns black voters to the losers’ column?

The answers to these questions are found in the history of The Root itself. It was founded in 2008 by Henry Louis Gates and Donald Graham of the Washington Post family. It is now part of the Gizmodo media group and Gates is still editor. Gates continues in his role as the go-to black man for white people. His influence is confined to cutting deals for himself in exchange for access to white people who are hostile to black interests. The Root takes Russia bashing to a new low, claiming that racist white Americans voted for Donald Trump in part because the Russians tricked them into it.

This media outlet which purports to present news of interest to black readers has chosen fealty to the Democratic Party over all else. If Trump’s victory is to be analyzed it must be through the lens of willful white racism. Republicans traditionally used winks and nudges to make clear their role in the duopoly as the white people’s party. Trump dispensed with code words and dog whistles. He made it clear that he would be the white people’s representative. Everyone from the corporate media to the Republican Party establishment to this columnist missed how much his message resonated with white America.

But according to The Root, white people were swayed by Russian “hybrid warfare” and fake news into doing what they have always done, support people who promised to put them and their interests first. Peddling this high level of foolishness requires a delicate balancing act, so The Root simultaneously blames white racism but says that the Russian government helped to peddle lies. “The Root will investigate the social conditions that made the American populace so vulnerable to being played.”

In 2016 white Americans played themselves in the way they always do. Donald Trump proved that they put whiteness first. They don’t care about Russia or traditional right wing ideology as much as they care about being white. They saw themselves in Trump and more than 60 million people gladly voted for him.

The only ones spreading lies are The Root, the Democratic Party and corporate media. If The Root wants to analyze the election results by all means they should. They should analyze how black people are trapped within the confines of the Democratic Party as they try to stave off Republican victory. They should talk about how the resulting risk aversion made Hillary Clinton the nominee and doomed black people to loser status within the loser party. They should look at the millions of black voters motivated only to support Obama who promptly stayed home when his name was no longer on the ballot. The Root might do what the Democratic Party refuses to do, expose the degree of voter suppression which prevents black people from exercising their right to the franchise.

There is a plethora of worthy subject matter in reporting on the 2016 election but The Root chooses to follow official propaganda instead of giving readers anything worth considering. Black Guide to Russia is nothing more than Propaganda or Not warmed over with a dark face. Propornot was a blatant if clumsy effort on the part of the Washington Post and the Democratic Party to keep the media within the confines of manufactured consent on the issue of United States foreign policy. The Black Agenda Report team was on the list of outlets condemned for doing what journalists ought to do, print what powerful people would like to see disappear.

Barack Obama’s babbling about fake news began shortly after election in a desperate attempt to keep the sinking ship afloat. Trump’s talk of rapprochement with Russia and the end of trade deals beloved by the duopoly threatened the established order. Turning Vladimir Putin into a bogeyman is an attempt to right the ship of neo-liberalism and empire. It is sad that The Root has joined corrupt people and institutions to uphold what ought to be torn down.

Hopefully this sham journalism will disappear from public consciousness. If Putin didn’t exist the Democratic Party and its operatives would have had to invent him. They keep going back for more, and make themselves less credible in the process. If a Black Guide to Russia is any indication, the sooner they all disappear the better.

Egypt could become one of the world’s top Bitcoin trading hubs within weeks thanks to the launch of the country’s first cryptocurrency exchange.

The Bitcoin Egypt project will allow Egyptians to buy Bitcoins using Egyptian Pounds (EGP) for the first time.

The project is the brainchild of Alexandrian entrepreneurs Rami Khalil and Omar Abdelrasoul, who seized the opportunity to capitalise on the country’s growing demand for Bitcoin.

“We got the idea after we saw that there were lots of people in Egypt who wanted to trade cryptocurrencies but they were a hard time doing it on international exchanges as they were unable to buy coins using EGP,” Abdelrasoul said.

“So we decided to offer a solution by giving them the chance to trade using the Egyptian Pound, ” he added.

The news comes at a time when global interest in Bitcoin has surged thanks to the rising value of the cryptocurrency.

Meanwhile the value of Egypt’s own currency was halved in November last year following the devaluation of the Egyptian Pound.

Overnight, many Egyptians saw the value of their savings reduced by 50% and today the US Dollar fetches around 18 EGP compared to around 7 EGP in 2013.

These days some Egyptians currently use high end computers to ‘mine’ for bitcoins online in the hope of making a living finding the cryptocoins, which are currently valued at 77573 EGP each.

However, Bitcoin trading was previously difficult thanks to the country’s foreign currency shortage and the unwillingness of many international exchanges to accept EGP.

Abdelrasoul hopes that the new exchange will make it easy for ordinary Egyptians to buy and sell coins in local currency.

“We think it will bring lots of positivity for Egypt with lots of opportunities for innovation and development.

“Now that there is an exchange accepting EGP, it will allow people to start developing applications and uses for Bitcoin in Egypt,” he added.

However, the value of Bitcoin remains volatile and many investors believe that that current high value of the cryptocurrency comes as a result a bubble, which could burst sending exchange rates crashing within minutes.

Earlier this month Chairman of the Egyptian Financial Supervisory Authority (EFSA) Sherif Samy warned potential Bitcoin investors about the risks of trading given that the currency is unregulated in Egypt and no legal protections exist.

In June, the country’s Central Bank denied reports that it planned to recognise Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies.

Despite the unregulated nature of the industry, Abdelrasoul claims that the startup has not suffered any issues from the authorities.

So far we’ve had no problems as it’s a bit of a grey area. They don’t seem to have a problem with Bitcoin trading,” he added.

In fact, Abdelrasoul claims that Bitcoin usage has grown in Egypt during recent years of instability.

“Bitcoin use is growing and it could be useful for people who are affected by the devaluation, if they wanted to invest their money in cryptocurrencies,” he said.

However, he believes that it is too early to tell whether Bitcoin could provide a stable alternative to the beleaguered Pound.

He added: “The crypto market in egypt is still young and unpredictable.”

Original source

Euro area annual inflation was 1.3% in July 2017, stable compared with June 2017. In July 2016 the rate was 0.2%. European Union annual inflation was 1.5% in July 2017, also stable compared to June 2017. A year earlier the rate was 0.2%. These figures come from Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union.

The lowest annual rates were registered in Ireland (-0.2%), Cyprus (-0.1%), Bulgaria and Finland (both 0.6%). The highest annual rates were recorded in Lithuania (4.1%), Estonia (3.9%), Latvia and the United Kingdom (both 2.6%). Compared with June 2017, annual inflation fell in four Member States, remained stable in eight and rose in sixteen.

The largest upward impacts to the euro area annual inflation came from accommodation services (+0.10 percentage points), package holidays (+0.06 pp) and air transport (+0.05 pp), while telecommunication (-0.11 pp), vegetables (-0.05 pp) and fruit (-0.04 pp) had the biggest downward impacts.

The euro area consists of Belgium, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia and Finland.

The European Union includes Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

The euro area and European Union data refer to the respective country compositions at a specific point in time. New Member States are integrated into the aggregates using a chain index formula.

By Madeline Asta*

When Michel Temer assumed the presidency in 2016 after the illegitimate impeachment of former President Dilma Rousseff, he immediately focused his attentions on new economic reforms. For the past two years, Brazil’s economy has seen negative gross domestic product (GDP) growth, which has thrown the country into a recession — the worst it has seen in recent history.[i] In an effort to bring the economy out of the recession, Temer has enacted multiple austerity policies aimed at tightening public spending and increasing taxes. However, these policies have been met by public outrage and congressmen have challenged recent tax hikes. While the Brazilian economy has seen GDP and inflation improvement since the beginning of 2017, there has been little tangible improvement in the society. Public services are failing due to lack of funding and the fiscal deficit is at its highest point since 1997.[ii]

With the Congresso Nacional (National Congress) preoccupied by corruption scandals, there has thus far not been discussion to find effective reforms aimed to reduce the deficit, and Brazilians still suffer from high socioeconomic inequality. As Temer faces corruption allegations of his own, he is only able to hold onto his political power through his promise of economic relief. Even though Congress recently voted to protect Temer from corruption charges, if his policies show signs of weakening, his congressional allies will most likely abandon him should further charges be brought forward. In order to truly improve its current economic, political, and social structure, Brazil needs progressive tax reform and an end to corruption; furthermore, any reform must also be accompanied by effective public expenditure measures and cannot be clouded by excessive political maneuvers.

The Evolution of Austerity Under Temer

Temer’s first course of economic action when he became the de facto president was passing the PEC 55 amendment in December 2016, which capped increases in public spending at the inflation rate, allowing for no real increase in public spending, for the next twenty years. However, this public spending cap did little to fix Brazil’s large fiscal deficit, which has continued to increase in the first six months of 2017 despite the budget cuts.[iii] During these past six months, government tax revenue has fallen by 1.2 percent while government spending has increased by 0.5 percent, adjusted for inflation.[iv]

On July 20, Temer used these statistics to justify his latest decision to raise revenue by doubling fuel taxes, announcing a new freeze on public spending, and increasing the payroll tax.[v] Temer froze an additional $5.9 billion Brazilian Reais ($1.89 billion USD) in public spending in an effort to match government tax revenue, and the fuel tax — which was increased from R$0.38 ($0.12 USD) to R$0.41 ($0.25 USD) per liter — was challenged by congressmen and brought to court, but remains in place.[vi] Temer has implemented tax increases due to the difficulty of passing reforms through congress and his inability to further reduce spending — as he has already cut public spending to the point that, as of now, most public payments are constitutionally mandatory.[vii] However, raising taxes in a regressive tax system such as Brazil’s, where sales and fuel taxes force low-income Brazilians to spend a larger percentage of their income on taxes than high-income citizens, is not a sustainable method of increasing government revenue.

Temer entered office seeking to pass pension, labor, education, and tax reforms, supposedly to restructure and resurrect Brazil’s economy.[viii] However, reforms proved difficult to pass through congress, due to their social implications for the lower class and congressional preoccupation with corruption scandals, and Temer moved onto other measures to tackle the country’s large fiscal deficit. Prior to Temer’s latest economic measures, the 2017 budget had already been cut by R$39 billion ($12.5 billion USD), compared to the 2016 budget.[ix] Nevertheless, this additional reduction still does not seem sufficient to meet the 2017 fiscal deficit target of R$139 billion (USD $44.5 billion).[x]

Instead, according to a Finance Ministry economic survey on July 13, the deficit is predicted to only reach R$145.3 billion (USD $46.3 billion) by the end of 2017.[xi] In order to reach the fiscal deficit target, Temer is hoping to pass pension reform; however, the proposed reform has been met with opposition from both congress and the public due to its harmful implications for senior citizens.

Government spending costs are estimated to account to R$284.5 billion this year, the second largest expenditure of the Brazilian government, behind social security payments.[xii] Before debt payments, pensions account for almost half of government expenditures, and in 2016, social security spending totaled 8.1 percent of GDP, and is set to reach 17.2 percent of GDP by 2060.[xiii] Temer sees pension reform as the most efficient way to cut back the country’s fiscal deficit, but economic reforms need congressional approval before they can be adopted. Congress is currently debating a pension reform bill that seeks to raise the retirement age from 54 to 65 for men and 62 for women.[xiv]

While congressional debate has been stalled due to Operação Lava Jato (Operation Car Wash) investigations, citizens have organized large protests and strikes to show their disapproval of the bill. In April, prison guards stormed a congressional committee room and workers organized a nationwide austerity strike.[xv] In a survey conducted by Datafolha in May 2017, 71 percent of voters opposed the reform bill.[xvi] Temer sees reform as an alternative to massive tax increases, but voters do not share this same viewpoint. Despite Temer’s efforts, Brazil’s fiscal deficit is targeted to remain high throughout the year, and as Temer continues to impose austerity policies, Brazilians are forced to live on fewer and fewer public resources.

Reshuffling of Public Funds

With Temer’s tight economic policies, public service departments have seen their funding significantly decrease. As a result, Brazil’s federal police (Polícia Federal, PF) was forced to limit air rescue services, cease issuing passports, and refrain from paying many employees.[xvii] Faced with the stark economic realities his policies have created, Temer announced on July 27 that he would divert R$2.2 billion (USD $700 million) that were initially intended for infrastructure projects to public services – air traffic control, civil defense, and the Polícia Federal.[xviii] Gil Castello Blanco, founder of Brazilian non-governmental organization Contas Abertas, asserted that the recent money diversion demonstrates that the current economic structure has made it “almost impossible” to bring economic growth through investment alone.[xix] When pursuing his economic goals, Temer saw public services as an outlet for budget cuts, primarily due to the focus of the last two leftist administrations on providing support for the nation’s poorest. However, the reduced funding has forced many public services to stop functioning, impeding efforts for national economic growth and public improvement.

Economic Recovery

Despite the hardships still felt by many Brazilians, the country’s economy is still predicted to grow at 0.3 percent this year, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).[xx] This growth comes after two years of economic contraction, and can be largely credited to Temer’s restrictive economic measures; however, this does not mean that Brazil’s economy is back on track. GDP growth is not the only measure of development and doubt exists that these policies will be sustainable throughout the year; therefore, any further economic or social recovery will be slow and weak.

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), should Temer’s policies hold, unemployment is not expected to decline until the end of the year and even then will decline sluggishly.[xxi] So far in 2017, inflation has decreased significantly and is predicted to fall 4.5 percent below the target rate.[xxii] However, this decrease is largely due to a decrease in demand for goods and services, as Brazilians have cut back on their consumption due to the severity of the recent recession.[xxiii] In order to truly improve the economy, Temer must focus on increasing consumer consumption again, but this will be difficult to achieve while pursuing his strict economic policies.

The Future of Brazil’s Economy

Looking solely at GDP growth and inflation rates, Brazil’s economy may have improved since Temer assumed the presidency, but inequality and public discontent remain high. As the fiscal deficit remains high and the reduction target seems unattainable, more cuts are possible in the future. Conservative government officials largely support the cuts and are using their political authority to pursue personal agendas. Torquato Jardim, Brazil’s Justice Minister, sees the budget cuts as an excuse for the Polícia Federal to restructure their operations and adapt to lower funds.[xxiv] Furthermore, Jardim has used Temer’s handling of the fiscal crisis as an opportunity to call for the dissolution of Operação Lava Jato’s task force.[xxv] However, Jardim acted without consulting the Polícia Federal and discussing how best to modify the department’s spending. Dyogo Henrique de Oliveira, Minister of Planning, declared all departments will need to lower spending, but he made one exception for healthcare.[xxvi] Brazil’s government is unified on the issue of fixing the economy and cutting government spending, but there is large disagreement regarding where best to cut back.

As Brazil’s political stability continues to be tested with corruption scandals, congressmen remain behind Temer hoping that his policies and reforms succeed in improving the economy. On August 2, Congress voted to reject corruption charges made against Temer, but support for the de facto president remains contingent on economic progress.[xxvii] Congressman Eduardo Cury, the vice-president of the Partido da Social Democracia Brasileira (PSDB) – the largest party in the governing conservative coalition – stated, “our commitment at this point is only to back the reforms. If we see that they are not advancing, then we should quickly look for an alternative government.”[xxviii]

To the government and his few supporters, Temer “represents reform and a return to a normal economy.”[xxix] Therefore, despite the accusations of corruption, Temer remains in power due to the support he has from congress and legislators fears of being indicted themselves. Should his economic policies fail to bring the desired outcome, his legislative support will desert him, as more corruption charges are likely to come forward in the future. Nevertheless, in the chance of his indictment, no ideal replacement exists for Temer at this time, as corruption allegations have filled congress and no qualified candidates have stepped up to fill the position until the 2018 elections.

Despite the recent show of support from Congress by rejecting Temer’s corruption charges, his political immunity remains weak — especially if new corruption charges emerge or his economic policies do not give desired results. Brazil’s economy is recovering after two years of a recession, but the recovery is weak and at risk of reversal if public services remain unfunded and the fiscal deficit is not addressed. Furthermore, the current political instability in Brazil, caused by sweeping charges of corruption, creates economic uncertainty. Brazil needs a budget reform that aims to reorient social spending to be more efficient, not limiting it at the expense of Brazilians’ wellbeing. The most effective reform could come from a tax reform, to create a progressive system that does not force poor Brazilians to spend larger percentages of their income on taxes than wealthy citizens. Furthermore, many Brazilians rely on government expenditures for cash transfers, education, and healthcare. If Temer makes further moves against these services, there will be massive public response that will likely threaten both his political legitimacy as well as any semblance of economic progress made by the de facto president.

*Madeline Asta, Research Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Additional editorial support provided by Aline Piva, Research Fellow and Head of Brazil Unit, Liliana Muscarella Research Fellow, and Sheldon Birkett and Martina Gugliemone, Research Associates at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

[i] Cascione, Silvio. “Brazil’s worst-ever recession unexpectedly deepens in late 2016” Reuters. March 7, 2017. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-economy-gdp-idUSKBN16E1EL

[ii] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil posts record high fiscal deficit” latinnews.com. July 27, 2017. https://www.latinnews.com/component/k2/item/72979.html?full=true&period=July%202017&archive=3&cat_id=808294:pensions-crisis-intensifies-in-el-salvador

[iii] Ibid.

[iv] Ibid.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil raises taxes and slashes spending in austerity drive” latinnews.com. July 27, 2017. https://www.latinnews.com/component/k2/item/72910.html?period=July%202017&archive=3&Itemid=6&cat_id=808213:brazil-raises-taxes-and-slashes-spending-in-austerity-drive&Itemid=6

[vii] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil posts record high fiscal deficit”

[viii] Leahy, Joe. “Temer stays tough on Brazil economic reforms” Financial Times. February 2, 2017/ https://www.ft.com/content/9d8a1286-e805-11e6-893c-082c54a7f539

[ix] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil raises taxes and slashes spending in austerity drive”

[x] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil posts record high fiscal deficit”

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] Boadle, Anthony. “Brazil plans federal workers’ buyout to cut deficit” Reuters. July 24, 2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/brazil-economy-budget-idUSL1N1KF1RP

[xiii] Marcello, Maria Carolina. “Brazil pension reform clears hurdle, faces tough approval path” Reuters. May 3, 2017. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-politics-pensions-idUSKBN17Z1RF

[xiv] Ibid.

[xv] Ibid.

[xvi] Ibid.

[xvii] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil moves to revive public services following budget cuts” latinnews.com. July 28, 2017. https://latinnews.com/component/k2/item/72998.html?full=true&period=July%202017&archive=3&cat_id=808320:venezuela-on-edge-ahead-of-constituent-assembly-election

[xviii] Ibid.

[xix] Ibid.

[xx] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil posts record high fiscal deficit”

[xxi] “Brazil – Economic forecast summary (June 2017)” OECD. 2017. http://www.oecd.org/eco/outlook/brazil-economic-forecast-summary.htm

[xxii] Ibid.

[xxiii] Ibid.

[xxiv] LatinNews Daily. “Brazil moves to revive public services following budget cuts”

[xxv] Ibid.

[xxvi] Ibid.

[xxvii] Boadle, Anthony. “Brazil’s Temer wins Congressional votes to block graft charge” Reuters. August 1, 2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-corruption-temer-idUSKBN1AI09B

[xxviii] Boadle, Anthony and Alonso Soto. “Rosier economy, lack of replacement give Brazil’s Temer a breather” Reuters. May 31, 2017. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-politics-temer-idUSKBN18R2C2

[xxix] Ibid.

Police have confirmed deaths and several injuries after a “massive crash” involving a van in Barcelona’s city center. Authorities have deemed the incident a “terrorist attack,” AFP and El Pais reported.

La Vanguardia reported that 13 people were killed in the crash and 30 others others injured, two critically.

Police say the crash occurred after the van jumped the sidewalk, AP reported.

Authorities are looking for the driver of the vehicle, who escaped on foot, according to El Nacional.

Reports have emerged stating that two armed men entered a Turkish restaurant called Luna de Istanbul and are holding people hostage. They are reportedly negotiating with police.

However, Spain’s El Pais newspaper reported that the perpetrators are holed up in a bar on Tallers Street.

The vehicle used in the attack was a rented Fiat van. The perpetrators had also rented a second car with which they had planned to flee, according to La Vanguardia.

The crash occurred on the famous La Rambla, a street popular for tourists visiting the city.

Catalan Emergency Services tweeted that an incident occurred near Plaça Catalunya and advised people to avoid the area.

It said in a second tweet that the closure of rail stations in the area had been requested.

Authorities have cordoned off the area and shut down nearby stores. A helicopter is hovering above the scene.

Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said he was in contact with authorities, stressing that the priority was to help the injured.

(RFE/RL) — Spanish officials say at least 13 people died and 80 were injured when a van plowed into pedestrians in Barcelona’s famous Las Ramblas tourist area on August 17.

The president of the Catalonia region, Carles Puigdemont, said police arrested two people over what they called a “terrorist attack.”

The extremist group Islamic State (IS) claimed responsibility, the IS-affiliated Amaq news agency said.

Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy said he was heading to Barcelona to coordinate efforts to reinforce security.

He said “the terrorists will never destroy a united people who love liberty over barbarism.”

“They are assassins, criminals who won’t terrorize us,” the royal palace said.

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that “terrorists around the world should know the United States and our allies are resolved to find you and bring you to justice.”

French President Emmanuel Macron said, “We remain united and determined.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin called for the world to unite in an “uncompromising battle against the forces of terror.”

In the past year, vehicles have been used to ram into crowds in a series of militant attacks across Europe, killing more than 100 people in Nice, Berlin, London, and Stockholm.

At least 6 civilians were injured before Catalan police neutralized 5 terrorist suspects in the coastal town of Cambrils, some 100km from Barcelona. Police said a bomb squad was set to carry out several “controlled explosions.”

“We have killed the alleged perpetrators,” Catalan police announced on Twitter. “We work on the hypothesis that the events of Cambrils respond to a terrorist attack.”

Authorities are now working to determine if the alleged terrorists wore explosive belts, police said on Twitter.

Six civilians and one officer were injured in the attack before police neutralized the suspects. Two of the injured remain in a serious condition.

El Pais reports that four terrorists were traveling in a car and managed to run over several people before being shot dead by security forces. Police then intercepted the fifth attacker who was on foot. The man was wounded and immediately detained. Later, he succumbed to his injuries.

Earlier police told residents of Cambrils to “stay home and stay safe,” announcing on Twitter that a “police operation” was ongoing in the town.

Catholic leaders voiced prayers for victims after a van sped into a crowd of people in the Las Ramblas tourist area of Barcelona on Thursday, killing at least 13 and injuring dozens more.

“The Holy Father has learned with great concern what is happening in Barcelona,” said a statement from the Holy See press office. “The Pope prays for victims of this attack and wishes to express his closeness to all the Spanish people, particularly the injured and families of the victims.”

Bishop José Gil Tamayo, secretary general of the Spanish Bishops Conference, also released a statement, saying on Twitter, “We follow with concern and prayers the situation of victims of the mass trampling in Las Ramblas. Our solidarity with the victims and Barcelona.”

Witnesses reported that the van appeared to move deliberately as it mowed down people in the crowded pedestrian zone, according to the BBC. Local media reported that the driver fled on foot, and police are searching for the suspect.

Police confirmed that at least 13 people were killed in the attack and more than 100 injured, some very seriously. They declared the incident a terrorist attack. ISIS later claimed responsibility for the attack, although the extent of the group’s involvement is currently uncertain.

Bishop Oscar Cantu of Las Cruces, chairman of the international justice and peace committee for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, called the attack on innocent victims “utterly reprehensible.”

“Once again, an act of terror has taken more than a dozen lives and injured scores of others,” he said, adding that the U.S. bishops’ conference “unequivocally condemns this morally heinous act and places itself in solidarity with the people of the Archdiocese of Barcelona and Spain at this terrible time of loss and grief.”

“Our prayers are with the families of those slain and injured in a particular way as we also pray for an end to terrorism,” Bishop Cantu continued. “May God comfort the afflicted and convert the hearts of those who would perpetrate such acts. May our Lord bless both our world and those suffering today from this attack with the gift of peace.”

By Felipe Galvis-Delgado*

Nearly eight months after finalizing the negotiation of the peace agreement with the guerrilla group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the Colombian government has made another accord – this time with the port city of Buenaventura in the department of Valle del Cauca. From May 16 to June 6, residents of Buenaventura went on strike and protested against the city’s poor living conditions, such as the lack of potable drinking water, inaccessible hospital services, and a weak and corrupt security apparatus. It was not until Colombia began to lose millions of dollars from delayed shipments due to the strike that the federal government took the manifestations seriously and negotiated a deal with Buenaventura’s Civic Strike Committee, a coalition of civil society organizations. Within the provisions of the deal, called el Fondo de Patrimonio Autónomo de Buenaventura (Fonbuenaventura), the government pledges to invest millions into the city’s infrastructure. However, nearly two months after its negotiation, the deal has not been implemented. Although this negotiation is encouraging for the people of Buenaventura, the government must uphold its promise and implement the deal as soon as possible. The following are some of the main takeaways from the recent developments in Buenaventura:

Buenaventura is in desperate need of investment

Buenaventura, a coastal city consisting of about 400,000 residents – most of whom are Afro-Colombians – has long been one of Colombia’s most violent and resource-deprived cities.[i] According to Human Rights Watch, locals live in constant fear of paramilitary groups such as los Urabeños and la Empresa. These groups ruthlessly impose their will through coercive means such as dismemberments in “chop-up houses,” disappearances, and forced displacements.[ii] In fact, Buenaventura leads Colombia in forced displacements with over 107,000 displaced people from 2011 to 2014.[iii] Local authorities have been unsuccessful in combatting these crimes, as police forces are scarce in the city. Additionally, of the few police officers, many have succumbed to corruption or fear retaliation from los Urabeños and la Empresa.[iv] In the rare instances of prosecution, culprits are often not charged because of the lack of accountability in Buenaventura’s judicial system.[v]

Besides extortion and violence, residents of Buenaventura also suffer from uninhabitable living conditions. Due to a lack of government investment, Buenaventura’s water infrastructure is comparable to one of a low-income country; 71% of residents only have access to potable water eight hours a day and many fishermen are forced to fish in waters contaminated by the city’s sewage.[vi][vii] For the ill and injured, the city’s clinics do not have the capacity to attend the entire population, which is detrimental considering the high levels of violence and poverty in the city. In many cases, patients are referred to hospitals in Cali, a neighboring city about 123 kilometers away, and risk dying en route.[viii] Moreover, Buenaventura has an unemployment rate of 62%, a major contributor to the city’s impoverishment.[ix] In general, 91% of Buenaventura’s rural population and 64% of its urban population live under the poverty line.[x]

Buenaventura’s size is not representative of its importance to Colombia

Buenaventura is essential to Colombia’s international trade as it accounts for 60% of the country’s international commerce.[xi] In fact, according to Buenaventura’s Chamber of Commerce, during the twenty-two day strike of Buenaventura’s residents, Colombia lost an estimate of 300 billion Colombian pesos (COP), about 100 million U.S. dollars (USD).[xii] Such national reliance on Buenaventura’s port gave the people leverage during negotiations for increased funding. The impact that the protests had on Colombia’s economy has proven to the federal government that the small city of Buenaventura deserves much more investment and national attention for how much wealth it brings into the country.

The deal has great potential – if it is implemented

After more than three weeks of protests, the Colombian government struck a deal with the Civic Strike Committee by creating Fonbuenaventura, a development project for the city.[xiii] The project has a budget of COP 1.6 trillion, roughly USD 500 million, which will be invested over the next ten years into the small city’s infrastructure, economy, and social services.[xiv] Of that sum, COP 350 billion (USD 120 million) will be allocated to invest in Buenaventura’s sewage and aqueduct systems, which guarantees a clean water supply 24 hours a day.[xv] Additionally, about COP 180 billion (USD 60 million) will go towards the construction of hospitals, COP 170,000 million (USD 58 million) towards education, and COP 62 billion (USD 20 million) towards the judicial system.[xvi][xvii][xviii]

Fonbuenaventura is certainly encouraging for Buenaventura’s residents; however, the fight with the Colombian Congress to implement the deal lies ahead. It is likely that the project’s implementation will face obstruction since the Colombian government has other pending financial expenses, such as the economic implementation of the peace deal with the FARC.[xix] Additionally, the proposed foreign aid budget for 2018 of Donald Trump, the president of the United States, includes a 36% cut from assistance funds to Colombia, resulting in about a 140 million dollar loss.[xx] With more expenses and less capital, the implementation of Fonbuenaventura seems unpropitious.

ESMAD’s excessive use of force was unwarranted

Although the Colombian government’s negotiation with the Civic Strike Committee is an excellent first step towards the development of Buenaventura, it must be noted that negotiations came only after the government ignored the protests and later attempted to brutally suppress them. Specifically, the Mobile Anti-Riot Squadron (ESMAD) used tear gas and tanks to disperse protestors including minors, elderly and disabled people.[xxi] Additionally, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) of the Organization of American States (OAS) has suggested that there may have been racial discrimination against the Afro-Colombian community in Buenaventura by ESMAD.[xxii] The violent and discriminatory suppression of the right to peaceful protest of Buenaventura’s residents is condemnable and contradicting to the purported values of Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos, the newly Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Fonbuenaventura is paramount

Moving forward, the Colombian Congress must ratify Fonbuenaventura as swiftly as possible. Residents in Buenaventura simply cannot afford to wait any longer – hence their willingness to go on a general strike for over three weeks. For about ten months President Santos has prioritized the negotiation and implementation of the peace deal with the FARC. Now it is time for Santos to shift Colombia’s attention towards the impoverished areas of the country – something that is long overdue. To help with the expenses and execution of the project, the international community should play a role in implementing Fonbuenaventura. For example, within the World Bank there is a unit called the Water and Sanitation Program (WSP), which has previously helped cities in Latin America develop sustainable access to clean water.[xxiii] In the United Nations (UN) there is the UN-Water division, which coordinates international organizations focusing on water and sanitation issues.[xxiv] If the Colombian government can collaborate with international organizations like these, it will not have to bear the brunt of Fonbuenaventura, making its implementation more feasible. Nevertheless, one thing is certain: if Colombian President Santos wants to foster harmony and stability in the country, he must set a framework for future administrations to implement Fonbuenaventura and other developing projects in impoverished cities.

*Felipe Galvis-Delgado, Research Associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Additional editorial support provided by Clement Doleac, Senior Research Fellow, Emma Tyrou, Research Fellow, Peter Kohne, Extramural Contributor, and Emma Pachon and Laura Schroeder, Research Associates at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

[i] Max Schoening. “The Crisis in Buenaventura – Disappearances, Dismemberment, and Displacement in Colombia’s Main Pacific Port.” Human Rights Watch. November 2013.

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] “Colombia: New Killings, Disappearances in Pacific Port.” Human Rights Watch. March 2015.

[iv] Schoening.

[v] Ibid.

[vi] “¿En qué van las promesas del Gobierno tras el paro cívico en Buenaventura?” El País. July 2017.

[vii] William Neuman. “Colombian City’s New Face and Violent Underbelly Collide.” The New York Times. July 2015.

[viii] “Las seis deudas históricas por las que protestan en Buenaventura.” Semana. May 2017.

[ix] Ibid.

[x] Ibid.

[xi] “Represamiento crítico de carga en puerto Buenaventura por paro camionero.” El País. June 2016.

[xii] Hans Vargas Pardo. “Así se llegó al acuerdo para levantar el paro en Buenaventura.” El Espectador. June 2017.

[xiii] “¿Empieza a ’embolatarse’ el fondo de inversión para Buenaventura?” El País. July 2017.

[xiv] Vargas Pardo.

[xv] Ibid.

[xvi] Ibid.

[xvii] “En firme acuerdo que pondrá fin al paro cívico en Buenaventura.” El Espectador. June 2017.

[xviii] Jared Wade. “Colombia Ends 22-Day Strike in Buenaventura with Agreement to Invest more than $500 Million USD in Development.” Finance Colombia. June 2017.

[xix] “Aún no está listo el proyecto de ley para crear fondo autónomo en Buenaventura.” El País. July 2017.

[xx] Adam Isacson. “Trump’s 2018 Foreign Aid Budget Would Deal a Devastating Blow to Latin America.” Washington Office on Latin America. May 2017.

[xxi] “Colombia: violence against protestors in Buenaventura Civic Strike must stop.” Amnesty International. June 2017.

[xxii] “CIDH expresa preocupación por el uso de la fuerza en protestas en Colombia.” Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH). June 2017.

[xxiii] “Water and Sanitation Program: about.” The World Bank.

[xxiv] “About United Nations Water.” United Nations.

A WSU research team for the first time has developed a computer algorithm that is nearly as accurate as people are at mapping brain neural networks — a breakthrough that could speed up the image analysis that researchers use to understand brain circuitry.

A report on the WSU team’s work currently in the journal, Bioinformatics.

Like mapping 100 billion homes

For more than a generation, people have been trying to improve understanding of human brain circuitry, but are challenged by its vast complexity. It is similar to having a satellite image of the earth and trying to map out 100 billion homes, all of the connecting streets and everyone’s destinations, said Shuiwang Ji, associate professor in the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and lead researcher on the project.

Researchers, in fact, took more than a decade to fully map the circuitry of just one animal’s brain — a worm that has only 302 neurons. The human brain, meanwhile, has about 100 billion neurons, and the amount of data needed to fully understand its circuitry would require 1000 exabytes of data, or the equivalent of all the data that is currently available in the world.

Neuron by neuron

To map neurons, researchers currently use an electron microscope to take pictures — with one image usually containing a small number of neurons. The researchers then study each neuron’s shape and size as well as its thousands of connections with other nearby neurons to learn about its role in behavior or biology.

“We don’t know much about how brains work,” said Ji.

With such rudimentary understanding of our circuitry, researchers are limited in their ability to understand the causes of devastating brain diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia, autism or Parkinson’s disease, he said. Instead, they have to rely on trial and error experimentation to come up with treatments. The National Academy of Engineering has listed improving understanding of the human brain as one of its grand challenges for the 21st century.

Accurate as humans

In 2013, MIT organized a competition that called on researchers to develop automated computer algorithms that could speed up image analysis, decode and understand images of brain circuitry. As part of the competition, the algorithms are compared to work that was done by a real team of neuroscientists. If computers can become as accurate as humans, they will be able to do the computations much faster and cheaper than humans, said Ji.

WSU’s research team developed the first computational model that was able to reach a human level of performance in accuracy.

Just as a human eye takes in information and then analyzes it in multiple stages, the WSU team developed a computational model that takes the image as its input and then processes it in a many-layered network before coming to a decision. In their algorithm, the researchers developed an artificial neural network that imitates humans’ complex biological neural networks.

While the WSU research team was able to approach human accuracy in the MIT challenge, they still have a lot of work to do in getting the computers to develop complete and accurate neural maps. The computers still make a large number of mistakes, and there is not yet a gold standard for comparing human and computational results, said Ji. Although it may not be realistic to expect that automated methods would completely replace human soon, improvements in computational methods will certainly lead to reduced manual proof-reading, he added.

A team of researchers from Clemson University, Columbia University and the University of Washington has discovered a security success in an unlikely place: the “Panama Papers.”

“Success stories in computer security are rare,” said Franzi Roesner, assistant professor at the University of Washington and one of the principal investigators on this project. “But we discovered that the journalists involved in the Panama Papers project seem to have achieved their security goals.”

The Panama Papers project was a year-long collaborative investigation of leaked documents detailing the uses of offshore funds by clients of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. During this project, a large, diverse group of globally distributed journalists collaborated remotely via the internet while achieving their security goals.

The Pulitzer Prize-winning Panama Papers investigation exposed offshore companies linked to more than 140 politicians in more than 50 countries — including 14 current or former world leaders, according to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ). It also uncovered offshore hideaways tied to mega-banks, corporate bribery scandals, drug kingpins, Syria’s air war on its own citizens and a network of people close to Russian President Vladimir Putin that shuffled as much as $2 billion around the world, ICIJ said.

“We found that the tools developed for the project were highly useful and usable, which motivated journalists to use the secure communication platforms provided by the ICIJ,” said Susan McGregor, assistant professor at Columbia University and one of the principal investigators on this project who presented the work Wednesday at the USENIX security conference in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. She presented the group’s paper, “When the Weakest Link is Strong: Secure Collaboration in the Case of the Panama Papers.”

“This project is an example of the power of multi-disciplinary research,” said Kelly Caine, director of the Humans and Technology Lab at Clemson and one of the principal investigators on the project. “We couldn’t have made these important discoveries without the expertise of everyone on the team.”

Turkey and Iran have agreed to boost military cooperation after talks in Ankara this week between the Iranian armed forces chief of staff and Turkish leaders, President Tayyip Erdogan’s spokesman said on Thursday.

Erdogan, his defense minister and military chief of staff met Iranian General Mohammad Bagheri on Tuesday and Wednesday. It was the first visit to Turkey by the head of Iran’s military since the 1979 revolution, Turkish media said.

Spokesman Ibrahim Kalin also said the U.S. Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis would visit Turkey within days.

Original source

Turner Broadcasting was a surprise winner earlier this year in the bidding for rights to the UEFA Champions League, Europe’s top club soccer competition. But what the company plans do with the rights may be even more surprising: Launch a stand-alone sports streaming service next year that will broadcast the vast majority of the games, The New York Times reports.

It was reported in February that Turner had won the U.S. English-language rights to the Champions League and the second-tier Europa League beginning with the 2018-19 season, but the acquisition — and Turner’s plans for it — will be announced formally on Thursday, August 17.

Many of the most important Champions League games, including the semifinals and final, will still be broadcast on cable television. But starting next summer, more than 80 percent of the matches will only be available to fans who pay for the new subscription service — the latest move by a media organization to monetize unused parts of a multimillion-dollar sports rights deal.

Turner, which owns cable networks including TNT, TBS, CNN and Cartoon Network, and already owns some rights for games in Major League Baseball, the N.B.A. and the men’s N.C.A.A. basketball tournament, will build its new product around soccer, at least to start.

Turner acquired the rights to both the Champions League and the Europa League for three years, beginning with the 2018–19 season, in bidding earlier this year conducted by European soccer’s governing body, UEFA. Sports Business Journal reported that Turner had paid $60 million for the rights, a significant increase over the fee paid by the current rights holder, Fox Sports.

Once the contract begins, less than 20 percent of the hundreds of games in the two tournaments will be broadcast on Turner’s linear television channels; the rest will form the backbone of the new streaming service.

It is the latest so-called over-the-top streaming service for a sports-hungry American market: ESPN announced last week that it would launch a similar Netflix-style service for the thousands of extra games for which it owns the rights, and NBC Sports is testing the soccer market’s appetite with a similar service showing games in England’s Premier League.

“We went into this specifically thinking about an O.T.T. product,” David Levy, the president of Turner, said Wednesday about the company’s decision to pursue the soccer rights. “There was just kind of an overall company strategy to innovate beyond the traditional television ecosystem.”

In the past 16 months, Turner already has launched a movie streaming service, FilmStruck, based around the Criterion Collection, and a cartoon streaming service, Boomerang.

Of the 340 annual Champions League and Europa League matches that Turner acquired — games that have become a midweek afternoon staple for American fans — only about 60 will appear on television, mostly on truTV. The semifinals and finals of the Champions League will air on either TNT or TBS, as will the Europa League final.

Even though Vladimir Putin reappeared Wednesday after a week of being out of public view (themoscowtimes.com/news/putin-watch-over-before-it-even-started-58678), the Kremlin leader’s personal activities this summer have been significantly less frequent than in earlier years, experts say.

They argue that this reflects his desire to present himself in a new way, as a severe but caring father of the nation who focuses on his official duties rather than youthful leader full of vigor with an active private life, a stance he adopted earlier to underscore the differences between himself and his predecessor Boris Yeltsin.

In an article today, two URA.ru journalists, Mikhail Vyugin and Aysel Gereykhanova surveyed a variety of commentators as to why there have been significantly fewer well-covered personal activities of the Russian president this year than there were in earlier summers of his rule (ura.news/articles/1036271854).

“For the first time in the last five years, summer has not become a season of ‘popular’ news from Russian President Vladimir Putin,” they write, a change that is striking because “Russians are accustomed to the idea that summer is a time for demonstrating … that he is not only a leader but a man able to combine work with relaxation and hobbies.”

Vyugin and Gereykhanova survey Putin’s activities over the last decade during the summer months and point out that this summer is especially less busy than the last pre-election summer of 2011. Then, Putin went to the bottom of the Taman Gulf, bringing up two amphoras, and took part in a motor-show with the Night Wolves, arriving on a Harley-Davidson.

This year, however, the Kremlin leader has been much less in the public eye as far as his private activities are concerned. Valery Fadeyev, the secretary of the Russian Social Chamber, says that instead, Putin has visited the regions where gubernatorial elections are scheduled to give support and direction.

Political analyst Oleg Matveychev of the Higher School of Economics, suggests that “it would be strange” for Putin to behave now the way he did six years ago. He doesn’t have to show that he is vigorous; he only needs to show that he is focused on issues of concern to the Russian electorate.

Dmitry Orlov, head of the Altay Industrial College, sees a more fundamental shift. Putin, he says, has decided to portray himself now as “a wise father” of the nation who takes into account the views of all the people in Russia. He doesn’t need to appeal to any one group or collection of groups as he may have had to earlier.

In 2012, Orlov continues, Putin was organizing a conservative majority, but “today he is the leader of the nation. There is thus no need to call focus on any specific group because there are no threats from the opposition as there were in 2011-2012.”

An anonymous source, identified only as someone “close to the Kremlin” agrees. He says that Putin is entering the current elections as “’the president for all’” and “will speak with each electoral group.” That is why he has adopted “a compromise position” on issues like St. Isaac’s, housing renovation in Moscow, and the film Mathilda.

This same source adds that Putin’s relatively infrequent appearances as a private person are part of this effort: They are intended to generate interest among the population as to when and what he might do next, much as the absence of television shows in the summer months leading to speculation about “a new season of a favorite serial.”

Sri Lanka’s pact with China for Hambanbota port may well be a case of strategic deception, and not just a political balancing act between India and China.

By Abhijit Singh

Late last month, Colombo inked a revised version of a $1.1 billion deal for leasing the Hambantota port to a Chinese state-run company. The port has been controversial ever since the China Merchants Port Holdings (CMPort) signed a framework agreement in December 2016 with Sri Lanka, taking an 80% stake in the project. Following the deal, however, there was much domestic unrest and accusations by Sri Lanka’s opposition parties of a sell-out to China, forcing Colombo to reconsider its position.

Sri Lanka also recognised regional concerns that Chinese control of Hambantota would result in its greater use by the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). In particular, Colombo empathised with a growing sense in New Delhi that China’s expanding naval presence in South Asia represented a deliberate violation of India’s strategic redlines.

Sri Lankan leaders say the new deal corrects all that was wrong with the 2016 agreement. Besides restricting CMPort’s stakes to 70% (the lease period remaining at 99 years), Colombo has ensured that the port will not be used for military purposes. The pact limits CHPort’s role in running commercial operations by splitting the administrative functions between two companies. With a capital of $794 million, Hambantota International Port Group (HIPG) will run operations at the port and its terminals. Controlled by CMPort, it will hold an 85% stake, with the rest held by Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA). The second company, Hambantota International Port Group Services (HIPS), will have a capital investment of $606 million and oversee security operations, with the SLPA holding a 50.7% stake and CHPort, 49.3%. Colombo says the agreement gives it full control over security matters, as also the right to inspect ships entering the port.

Yet, there may be more to the agreement than meets the eye. On the day of the pact’s signing, a CMPort press release stated that 58% of the total amount invested was for the creation of HIPS, with $146.34 million put into a bank account to cover operational expenses. This is seemingly inconsistent with Sri Lanka’s claims that Colombo has majority holding in the second firm, with a controlling interest. Moreover, out of 50.7% held by the SLPA in HIPS, 8.7% will be from HIPG, which is fully controlled by CMPort. SLPA’s real stakes then amount to less than 50.7%, with majority shares belonging to HIPG, in which CMPort has an 85% stake. In effect, therefore, Hambantota remains well under the control of the Chinese firm, whose majority stakes ensure control over ship movements, including those of Chinese war vessels.

There is also the likelihood of potential overlaps in authority and jurisdiction between the two controlling firms at Hambantota. As per existing port management norms, the company that controls operations takes decisions on how ships must enter and leave harbour. At Hambantota, HIPS’ right to control warship movements may result in a clash of authority with CMPort, the majority stakeholder.

The Chinese are likely to have anticipated these problems and inserted clarifying clauses in the agreement that recognise CMPort’s final authority in case of a disagreement with HIPS. But the relevant sections haven’t been made public. Indeed, the Sri Lankan government’s inability to place the agreement in parliament for discussions does lead to the suspicion that only select portions of the pact have been revealed.

In expressing their apprehensions, Indian commentators recall the docking of a Chinese submarine at Colombo in 2014. The PLAN submarine should have berthed at an SLPA berth, in accordance with Sri Lankan regulation that stipulates foreign military vessels be accommodated at state-owned facilities. But the submarine came alongside the deep-water Colombo South Container Terminal, a facility built, controlled and run by CMPort, which now also controls Hambantota.

India’s security establishment cannot ignore Sri Lanka’s critical position in South Asia, astride key regional sea-lanes, making it a prime logistics hub for Chinese war vessels. In the past, PLAN ships are known to have silently slipped in and out of Sri Lankan waters, in contrast to the very public visits by warships from other countries. The paucity of military replenishment sites along the principal sea-lanes in the Eastern Indian Ocean has prompted Beijing to nurture a special relationship with Colombo.

The Sri Lankan government’s de facto moratorium on the docking of Chinese warships and submarines at Hambantota, though well intended, is unlikely to endure in the long run. China is bound to exploit deliberate ambiguities in the agreement to utilise Sri Lankan ports for military replenishment purposes. Whatever the circumstances, Indian observers know Beijing will not let New Delhi’s security concerns override Chinese interests in the littoral seas.

The true nature of Sri Lanka’s pact with China at Hambantota will only be revealed through a close reading of its original document. Regardless of what Colombo professes, India will be wary about the agreement at Hambantota — not just in relation to the division of ownership, but also regarding the prospect that China’s possible acquisition of berthing rights at Hambantota could lead to the setting up of the PLA’s first dual-use civilian-cum-military facility in South Asia.

This article originally appeared in Live Mint.