In the face of an increasing number of casualties among Palestinians and food shortage especially during this holy month of Ramadan, Morocco decided to provide the necessary resources to address these needs. King Mohammed VI personally presided over the operation to deliver humanitarian and medical aid to the needy Palestinian people.

This operation includes the setting up of a field hospital of the Royal Armed Forces (FAR), the granting of blankets and a batch of essential medicines, as well as the provision of food aid by the Mohammed V Foundation for Solidarity.

The hospital, which will be set up in the Gaza Strip, will provide medical care to the Palestinians victims of recent events, as well as to the entire population of the area. It includes the specialties required by the population and adapted to its needs such as vascular and visceral surgery, traumatology, pediatrics, ENT and ophthalmology, etc.

The food aid of the Mohammed V Foundation for Solidarity is diversified and includes essential products particularly consumed in this holy month of Ramadan. This aid, which will benefit the populations of Gaza, Al-Quds and Ramallah, amounts to 113 tons. 5000 blankets will also be sent for the benefit of the same populations.

This action testifies to the natural and historical solidarity of HM the King and the Moroccan people towards the Palestinians.

The FAR medical-surgical field hospital, which comprises several modules and specialties, has a staff of 97 members, including 13 doctors and 21 nurses from different specialties. A batch of 25 tons of medicines will also be delivered to improve medical care.

The shipment of food aid to Ramallah and Al-Quds will begin this evening across the territory of the Kingdom of Jordan, while the field hospital, medicines, food aid and blankets benefiting the population of Gaza will be set up and dispatched upon receipt of permits to be issued by the Egyptian authorities .

So Following the recent tragic events in the Gaza strip and in accordance with the spirit of solidarity driving all components of the Moroccan nation towards the Palestinian people, King Mohammed IV gave his orders to immediately set up this Moroccan field hospital in the Gaza strip.

The hospital will be composed of specialized medical units of the Royal Armed Forces, as well as Moroccan civilian physicians and paramedics. The multidisciplinary medical-surgical hospital will be at the service of Palestinians and will reinforce existing medical capacities.

Through this humanitarian initiative, Morocco intends to contribute to easing the sufferings of a population that have become, for several weeks now, the victim of military attacks flatly denounced by the kingdom and the international community. The King ordered that this humanitarian initiative be implemented imminently and in coordination with Palestinian authorities.

King Mohammed VI instructed to take the required and immediate measures to enhance the capabilities of Morocco’s military field hospital that will be set up in in Gaza.

The measures seek to aid in carrying out its humanitarian mission, provide the needed medical services to Palestinians in Gaza and support their steadfastness and alleviate their suffering in light of the difficult conditions facing them due to the Israeli aggression on the strip

Since its deployment in different regions whether in Sub Saharan Africa, North Africa or in the Middle East , Moroccan medical teams at the field hospital have treated many patients and performed a great number of minor and major surgeries.

Once again, Morocco has shown a continuous commitment to respond to the innocent victims all over he world not only by issuing communiques denouncing aggressions against civilians but by deploying humanitarian aid in an effort to alleviate their suffering and setting up a humanitarian model in an attempt to encourage and to invite other countries to do the same.

Moroccan humanitarian action aims to save lives and ensure the dignity of populations in countries affected by natural and man-made disasters by meeting their basic needs, such as access to water and sanitation, food, medical care and shelter. Humanitarian action is also a pillar of Morocco’s foreign policy, which translates Morocco’s solidarity with respect to crisis-affected people in concrete terms and contributes to international stability.

By Antonia Dimou

Tunisia must avoid foreign-policy cacophony and develop coherent policies that endorse its values.

By Amina El Abed*

Tunisia, the Arab Spring’s sole success story, is emerging from a long state-building process, trying to balance diametrically opposed political parties and movements. Yet once hailed for diplomacy and its voice of reason, Tunisia has become noticeably timid on the international scene and slow to develop positions on too many issues.

While Tunisia should not make waves with powerful neighbors, the country could lose face by aligning with policies that go against the values on which it built its international identity such as unequivocally supporting just causes and non-interference. Another challenge for the Tunisian government is message coherence. Tunisia’s internal stakeholders are immersed in perpetual disagreement on world issues, a foreign-policy cacophony. Understanding and selecting building blocks for its foreign policy are crucial, as the stakes are high for the small and struggling country with its state debt reaching 71 percent of GDP at the start of 2018. The pattern of hesitation and timidity is telling not only about the internal struggle but the lack of a vision for Tunisian foreign policy, which is troublesome, especially in the volatile Middle East.

The civil war in Syria is a case in point. Tunisia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Khemaies Jhinaoui held a press conference in August, reminding political parties that diplomacy was the prerogative of his office and the president. The announcement came after a delegation of National Assembly deputies traveled to Damascus to express support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad without notifying the Tunisian government. Five days later, President Béji Caïd Essebsi also commented on the visit with contrived playfulness, that the delegation had yet to inform the foreign affairs minister about the purpose or outcome of their visit. With the government downplaying the gravity of such interference, the incident garnered little attention.

Internal struggles like these may be the biggest threat to Tunisian diplomacy. The country is weakened by mismanagement, insecurity and economic threats, public mistrust and political amateurism. Tunisian political forces draw strength from outside sources, and every party has its own external policy. Such partisan diplomacy prevents Tunisia from relaying a coherent message to the world about its policies, confides a senior official with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the government struggles to contain the confusion. Parties disregard the national interest to serve their own agendas, the official explains, with party leaders receiving ambassadors and discussing issues without the government’s knowledge.

Tunisia went from one extreme to another. Before the Arab Spring, Zine El Abidin Ben Ali perceived the opposition’s foreign ties as openings for external forces that might threaten the stability of his reign. Preoccupied with security, Ben Ali seldom traveled outside of the country, reducing Tunisia’s profile on regional or international affairs. Small countries have greater impact when they coordinate and converge on foreign-policy messaging, limiting potential interference without crushing varying points of view. Today, however, Tunisia has a myriad of internal actors with divergent ideological tendencies that feed polarization. “The slightest world issue is imported into the country,” says Abdallah Labidi, a former diplomat. “It starts a debate and quickly becomes a quarrel between political actors.”

Interference in Tunisian affairs is on the rise as political parties construct their own networks with foreign embassies. Tunisia, lodged between Algeria with its natural resources and Libya in raging crisis, is also about 150 kilometers from Europe through the Strait of Sicily. Meetings with foreign representatives without notifying authorities once would have triggered investigations, but are now a common occurrence. Some party representatives outline stances opposed to national foreign policy, voicing them before official policies are public – bound to confuse the international community. In the ongoing Qatar–Gulf Cooperation Council crisis, for example, Tunisia opts for neutrality while the Ennahdha Party voices support for Qatar.

Some confusion is understandable in the aftermath of Tunisia’s 2011 revolution, and the country confronts concerns as they emerge, trying to establish occasional alliances. On paper, the government out of habit enumerates diplomacy principles put in place decades ago: positive neutrality, noninterference, respect of international legality and primacy of national interests. Tunisia must also establish a sound foreign-policy framework for the long term.

Another diplomat who requested anonymity suggests the country has no plan for five years from now because of fragmentation: “it is too difficult to make such plans.” Molding a coherent narrative ended when Tunisia’s two major political parties formed a coalition in 2014 even while sporting paradoxical ideologies:  Nidaa Tounes, the liberal party created by the president, feeds on glorification of the nationalist era, from 1956 to 1987 when Habib Bourguiba led Tunisia, and unfulfilled promises to restore the country’s prestige. Ennahdha, on the other hand, supports new regional order and closer ties with Turkey and Qatar while incorporating religious ideology into politics. Such aspirations were somewhat tamed following Ennahdha’s 2016 announcement that it was parting ways with political Islam to become a national democratic party – an announcement greeted with skepticism inside and outside of Tunisia. Together, Nidaa Tounes and Ennahdha make up 63 percent of the parliament of 217 seats, made up of 15 parties and three independent lists.

Hafedh Caid Essebsi, the president’s son and leader of Nidaa Tounes, stated in an interview that a coalition with the Islamist party was in Tunisia’s best interest. But the alliance is problematic for development of sound foreign policy. Ennahdha’s external relationships do not necessarily correspond with official positions, and ideological interests among Islamist movements transcend borders.

Libya offers a prime example of the challenges. The Tunisian government works to position itself as a mediator among three factions competing for dominance over its eastern neighbor. But forces cultivating ties with their favorite factions undermine efforts to appear neutral. Islamist groups of Libya cultivate ties with Tunisian Islamic groups, mainly Ennahdha. Furthermore, Ennahdha’s ongoing support of parties affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood across the Middle East clashes with the country’s principles of positive neutrality and noninterference. For former diplomat Labidi, sanctioning Ennahdha for defying those principles would be improper, if not counterproductive: After all, “the hungry cannot be positively neutral.”

Amid ongoing ideological debate, the coalition is in the unenviable position of failing to take an explicit position on most issues. The foreign affairs minister may occasionally express exasperation with Ennahdha, but a source concedes that for determining actual positions, the office must “keep Ennahdha satisfied – not full satisfaction, but we have to take that into consideration.”

In December 2017, the Tunisian diaspora in Germany held an impromptu election of its representative following the resignation of the Nidaa Tounes candidate. As expected, Ennahdha chose not to run, instead supporting Nidaa Tounes’ candidate as representative for both parties. Voters shunned the elections, and the liberal candidate lost to revolutionary activist Yassine Ayari.  Nidaa Tounes leadership, alarmed by the erosion of its electoral base, expressed the need to review its alliance with Ennahdha, which rejected any responsibility for the defeat. Signs of trouble for this relationship could usher in a reshaping of Tunisian foreign policy. The divide within Nidaa Tounes, instability of Liberal parties in general, makes that goal difficult enough without Ennahdha. Amidst the quarrels and disorganization, the Islamist party may have opted to let the divide play out and afterward reshape foreign policy in tune with Ennahdha’s ideology.

Tunisia held its first municipal elections since 2011 in early May, a long time coming as dissatisfaction peaked with management of local governance by unelected special councils. Voters could sanction the parties that have failed them. Indeed, preliminary results suggest that Tunisians sent a strong message to parties they once trusted: With an alarming 35 percent participation rate, the majority voted for independent lists, a possible sign of ending a marriage to which Tunisians never gave their blessing.

*Amina El Abed is an expert on public diplomacy, governmental communication and Tunisian foreign affairs. She is currently director of communications for OXCON Frontier Markets and Fragile States Consulting.

Sri Lanka’s Ports Authority (SLPA) said that the Colombo Port received 1.7 million twenty foot equivalent units (TEUs) in the first quarter of 2018, which is a 16.2 percent growth from a year earlier, making it one of the fastest growing ports globally.

Colombo Port’s transshipment volumes grew 20.9 percent to 1.32 million TEUs, with March volumes up 19.4 percent to 477,043. Only Singapore grew at a faster rate of 16.5 percent among major ports, the SLPA said, quoting a ranking by Alphaliner Monthly, a shipping publication. Other fast growing ports in the region were Xiamen, China 11.6 percent, Antwerp, Belgium 10.7 percent and Ningbo-Zhoushan, China at 10.4 percent.

Sri Lanka’s Ports Minister, Mahinda Samrasingha said recently, that the Colombo Port expects to handle 7.0 million containers in 2018, up 12.9 percent from the 6.2 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU) handled in 2017 with joint marketing by the Jaya Container Terminal of the SLPA, South Asia Gateway Terminal of the John Keells Holdings and Colombo International Container Terminal (CICT) of China’s CM Ports.

Samarasingha said all three terminals had inked a deal to jointly promote the port.Sri Lanka’s Colombo Port was ranked the 13th best connected port in the world in 2017, moving up five places from 18, a year earlier, according to an index compiled by Drewry, a UK based shipping and maritime consultancy.Under South Asia, Colombo Port was ranked the best connected.

By Marcus Tanner

Britain’s heir to the throne, Prince Charles, was due on Wednesday to meet Romanian President Klaus Iohannis and other Romanian officials in Bucharest, as he furthers his long love affair with the Balkan country.

A passionate environmentalist, the Prince has often talked of his deep fascination with Romania’s unspoiled countryside, and he has bought several traditional cottages in the Transylvania region.

He made several trips to Romania last year alone, including one for the funeral of Romania’s last king, Michael, a cousin of his mother’s, Queen Elizabeth.

Even private visits by senior UK royals, unless the purpose is strictly personal, tend to be conducted in alignment with the UK foreign office – and usually target countries with which the UK seeks to bolster relations.

With its anti-Russian outlook, British sees Romania as an important partner in Southeast Europe, and as a bulwark against Russian penetration.

Its importance in UK eyes has grown fast in recent years, given Greece’s slide into unpredictability and the more pro-Russian mindsets of leaders in Bulgaria, Hungary, Serbia and elsewhere.

Moreover, Romanians now form the second largest non-British community in the UK after Poles, numbering around 400,000, mostly working in construction, retail and hospitality.

Initially, this generated such negative headlines as: “The Mafia bosses who can’t wait to flood Britain with beggars”, “We want to get into your country before someone locks the door” and “An immigration calamity looms”.

However, the mood has since changed, and these days the big Romanian community attracts little attention.

Meanwhile, Charles recently commissioned 36 artists from around the world to record the flowers of Transylvania, lending the paintings to the Romanian Cultural Institute in London for a show this week.

Artist Fay Ballard told the UK Guardian on May 22 she shared the prince’s love for rural Romania.

“Medieval villages are nestled in the valleys. The agriculture goes back to medieval times. Nothing has changed for hundreds of years. Prince Charles’s botanist said that this is how parts of England would have looked in Shakespeare’s time. Everything is so beautifully kept. Prince Charles adores the place. I can see why.”

The new field of biohybrid robotics involves the use of living tissue within robots, rather than just metal and plastic. Muscle is one potential key component of such robots, providing the driving force for movement and function. However, in efforts to integrate living muscle into these machines, there have been problems with the force these muscles can exert and the amount of time before they start to shrink and lose their function.

Now, in a study reported in the journal Science Robotics, researchers at The University of Tokyo Institute of Industrial Science have overcome these problems by developing a new method that progresses from individual muscle precursor cells, to muscle-cell-filled sheets, and then to fully functioning skeletal muscle tissues. They incorporated these muscles into a biohybrid robot as antagonistic pairs mimicking those in the body to achieve remarkable robot movement and continued muscle function for over a week.

The team first constructed a robot skeleton on which to install the pair of functioning muscles. This included a rotatable joint, anchors where the muscles could attach, and electrodes to provide the stimulus to induce muscle contraction. For the living muscle part of the robot, rather than extract and use a muscle that had fully formed in the body, the team built one from scratch. For this, they used hydrogel sheets containing muscle precursor cells called myoblasts, holes to attach these sheets to the robot skeleton anchors, and stripes to encourage the muscle fibers to form in an aligned manner.

“Once we had built the muscles, we successfully used them as antagonistic pairs in the robot, with one contracting and the other expanding, just like in the body,” study corresponding author Shoji Takeuchi said. “The fact that they were exerting opposing forces on each other stopped them shrinking and deteriorating, like in previous studies.”

The team also tested the robots in different applications, including having one pick up and place a ring, and having two robots work in unison to pick up a square frame. The results showed that the robots could perform these tasks well, with activation of the muscles leading to flexing of a finger-like protuberance at the end of the robot by around 90°.

“Our findings show that, using this antagonistic arrangement of muscles, these robots can mimic the actions of a human finger,” lead author Yuya Morimoto said. “If we can combine more of these muscles into a single device, we should be able to reproduce the complex muscular interplay that allow hands, arms, and other parts of the body to function.”

Sunny California may be getting too sunny. Increasing summer temperatures brought on by a combination of intensifying urbanization and warming climate are driving off once common low-lying morning clouds in many southern coastal areas of the state, leading to increased risk of wildfires, says a new study.

“Cloud cover is plummeting in southern coastal California,” said Park Williams, a bioclimatologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and lead author of the research. “And as clouds decrease, that increases the chance of bigger and more intense fires.” Williams said the decrease is driven mainly by urban sprawl, which increases near-surface temperatures, but that overall warming climate is contributing, too. Increasing heat drives away clouds, which admits more sunlight, which heats the ground further, leading to dryer vegetation, and higher fire risk, said Williams. The study appears this week in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

The research follows a 2015 study in which Williams first documented a decrease in cloud cover around the sprawling Los Angeles and San Diego areas. Urban pavement and infrastructure absorb more solar energy than does the countryside, and that heat gets radiated back out into the air–a major part of the so-called heat-island effect, which makes cities generally hotter than the rural areas. At the same time, overall temperatures have been rising in California due to global warming, and this has boosted the effect. In the new study, Williams and his colleagues have found a 25 to 50 percent decrease in low-lying summer clouds since the 1970s in the greater Los Angeles area.

Normally, stratus clouds form over coastal southern California during early morning within a thin layer of cool, moist ocean air sandwiched between the land and higher air masses that are too dry for cloud formation. The stratus zone’s altitude varies with weather, but sits at roughly 1,000 to 3,000 feet. But heat causes clouds to dissipate, and decades of intense urban growth plus global warming have been gnawing away at the stratus layer’s base, causing the layer to thin and clouds to burn off earlier in the day or disappear altogether. Cloud bases have risen 150 to 300 feet since the 1970s, says the study. “Clouds that used to burn off by noon or 1 o’clock are now gone by 10 or 11, if they form at all,” said Williams.

Williams and others have demonstrated a strong link between warming climate and increased wildfire in the western United States. But in southern California the link is more subtle, and clouds are a rarely studied part of the system.

While few scientists have looked in detail at clouds, many California airports large and small have been collecting hourly cloud observations since the 1970s, not for research, but rather for navigational safety. Williams and his colleagues decided to tap this trove to develop a fine-grained picture of changing cloud cover over the region. They then compared it to a separate large database kept by the U.S. Wildland Fire Assessment System, whose researchers have regularly measured vegetation moisture in the hills outside Los Angeles for decades. By comparing the two sets of data, the team found that periods of less cloud cover during the summer correlated neatly with lower vegetation moisture, and thus more danger of fire.

However, the study did not find that total area burned in summer has increased as a result of decreases in cloud shading. There are too many other factors at play, said Williams. These include yearly variations in rainfall, winds, locations where fires start, and perhaps most of all, decreases in burnable area as urban areas have expanded, and the increased effectiveness of fire-fighting. “Even though the danger has increased, people in these areas are very good at putting out fires, so the area burned hasn’t gone up,” he said. “But the dice are now loaded, and in areas where clouds have decreased, the fires should be getting more intense and harder to contain. At some point, we’ll see if people can continue to keep up.”

The catastrophic California-wide fires that consumed over 550,000 acres in fall of 2017 were probably not strongly affected by the reductions in summer cloud cover, said Williams. Although he did find that vegetation is drier in fall seasons that follow summers with few clouds, the fall 2017 fires were driven mainly by extreme winds and a late onset of the fall rainy season. And ironically, part of this record wildfire wave resulted not from a recent record four-year drought driven in part by climate change, but rather from record rains that followed the drought, which produced a surfeit of flammable vegetation. Things will vary year to year, but Williams said he expects to see overall fire danger increase in California, as long as there is adequate vegetation to burn.

The other authors of the study are Pierre Gentine of Columbia’s Department of Earth and Environmental Engineering; Max Moritz and Dar Roberts of the University of California, Santa Barbara; and John Abatzoglou of the University of Idaho, Moscow.

At a cost of thousands of dollars per pound, truffles are an expensive food. The fungi are prized for their distinctive aroma, and many foods claim truffles or their aromas as ingredients. But some of these foods may actually contain a much less pricey synthetic truffle compound.

To help detect food fraud, researchers report in Analytical Chemistry that they have developed a technique that discriminates between these natural and synthetic compounds.

White truffles (Tuber magnatum Pico) are the most valuable species of the fungus, and researchers have previously identified bis(methylthio)methane as the key compound responsible for white truffle aroma. Synthetic bis(methylthio)methane, produced from petrochemicals, has been approved by the World Health Organization as a food additive, yet some foods made with this cheaper compound may still command a premium price if consumers believe that they contain authentic white truffles.

Current methods cannot reliably discriminate between natural and synthetic bis(methylthio)methane. To help fight food fraud, Luigi Mondello and colleagues wanted to develop a new approach.

The researchers exploited the differences in carbon isotope ratios between plant- and petroleum-derived versions of bis(methylthio)methane. After optimizing the technique of multidimensional gas chromatography coupled to combustion-isotope ratio mass spectrometry, they used the method to compare the carbon isotope ratios of bis(methylthio)methane from 24 genuine white truffles harvested at different locations in Italy, two commercial intact truffles and 14 commercial samples of foods flavored with truffles or truffle aroma. The approach could clearly discriminate foods that contained synthetic truffle aroma or a mixture of synthetic and natural aromas, and it could distinguish among products containing white truffle and those containing other species of the fungus.

The researchers conclude that the improved technique can help validate foods that claim to contain truffles or natural truffle aroma.

Roseanne Barr has been making vile comments for years, so why—all of a sudden—has she crossed the line? In 1990, when she grabbed her crotch, spit on the ground, and gave a screeching rendition of our national anthem at a baseball game, the cultural elites who now hate her were fine with her stunt. It’s not America bashing they despise—it’s racism.

It sure isn’t anti-Catholicism that bothers them, either. Now that the media are rediscovering some of Barr’s past bigoted statements, they seem to be unaware of, or just don’t care about, her anti-Catholic bigotry.

In 2012, Barr said that Catholic employers should include psychiatric coverage for the children of women workers because the kids “might get molested by Catholic priests.” Two years earlier she said, “I am starting to think that any parent who takes their kids to Catholic churches from now on should lose custody. Taking your kids where you know sex offenders hang out is inexcusable.” No one blinked an eye in New York or Hollywood.

But when Barr made a racist remark this week about a black woman, the alarms went off. ABC entertainment president Channing Dungey called Barr’s comment “abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values.” That is demonstrably untrue. Neither ABC nor its parent company, Disney, has found bigoted comments to be inconsistent with their values. To prove it, consider the following summary of ABC’s tolerance for anti-Catholic bigotry.

Valerie Jarrett may be a prominent woman, but she is not exactly in the same class with Mother Teresa. When the saintly nun died in 1997, ABC anchor Peter Jennings allowed anti-Catholic bigot Christopher Hitchens to rant and rave against Mother Teresa at her funeral Mass. That it took place during the consecration of the Host made it all the more offensive.

In 1996 and 1997, ABC launched “Nothing Sacred,” a drama series about a radical Catholic priest who excoriated the Church for its teachings on sexuality. He engaged in violence in and out of the church, and was surrounded by Buddha-worshipping nuns and dysfunctional priests. ABC kept the show alive to spite our protest, moving it around to different days and times, but finally succumbed to our pressure. It would never do a show about a discordant rabbi or imam.

On April 7, 1998, ABC debuted “That’s Life,” a show that mocked Christ’s crucifixion, the Host, transubstantiation, Holy Water, Catholic prayers, Midnight Mass, salvation, Catholic rituals, the Vatican, the New Testament, the Stations of the Cross, Confession, nuns, priests, and practicing lay Catholic men and women. This was intentionally aired during Holy Week.

In 2002, ABC presented “Miracles,” a show about a man who studies for the priesthood and leaves before taking his vows. He engages in a personal search for God but concludes that the Church is “extraneous and even a hurdle in the spiritual quest.” He parts company with the Church hierarchy because “he feels its leaders do not really believe in miracles.”

In 2005, ABC treated viewers to a segment, “On the Trail of Pope Joan,” about a pope that never existed. Earlier in the year, “20/20” correspondent Elizabeth Vargas told viewers that the resurrection of Jesus was either “physical, metaphysical, or simply a hallucination—the dreams of grieving followers.”

No show on ABC has been more relentlessly bigoted than “The View,” co-hosted and co-produced by Barbara Walters for many years. She allowed Joy Behar, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, and Whoopi Goldberg to make the most vicious and sweeping comments about priests, the pope, the sacraments, and Catholic rituals. Never once did she find fault with their bigotry. If anything, she led them on, provoking even more vitriol.

More recently, ABC gave viewers “The Real O’Neals,” a cruel caricature of an Irish Catholic family based on the life of one of its producers, Dan Savage. He is an obscene anti-Catholic bigot. We fought it and eventually it crashed.

Family shows are big at ABC. Gays love “Modern Family,” Jews love “The Goldbergs,” Asians love “Fresh Off the Boat,” and African Americans love “Black-ish.” And what do Catholics get? “The Real O’Neals.”

Looks like they can’t get enough of Irish Catholic families at ABC. This fall viewers will be treated to “The Kids Are Alright,” a show about a “traditional Irish-Catholic family” of working-class stock. They live like animals: ten people sharing three bedrooms and one bathroom. The oldest son enters a seminary but quits so he can “save the world.” ABC boasts that “the times are changing and this family will never be the same.” They will make sure of that.

This show, following “The Real O’Neals,” is based on the life of its producer, in this case Tim Doyle. Guess which show he just finished doing? “Roseanne.”

In the May 30 edition of the New York Times, it says that Disney “has been widely praised in recent years as a leader in efforts to combat racial stereotypes through its movies and [ABC] TV series”; it offered several examples. That’s true. Disney even pulled a Halloween costume in 2016 that depicted a Polynesian figure featured in the movie, “Moana.” They didn’t want to offend Pacific Islanders.

Why doesn’t Disney/ABC find religious stereotypes as offensive as racial ones? Actually, it does, as long as its Jews or Muslims who are being considered for stereotyping. But not Catholics—they’re fair game.

When a pilot was ordered in January for “The Kids Are Alright,” ABC entertainment chief Channing Dungey said the network was “going to continue to sort of push the boundaries of what a family comedy actually means.”

She surely did not mean that ABC would push the boundaries of acceptability for gays, Jews, Asians, or blacks. That would be bigoted. They save that kind of fun for Catholics.

Contact: Channing.Dungey@abc.com

For some reason there seems to be a big market in efforts to confuse the public about the relationship between unemployment and the trade deficit. Robert Samuelson gives us yet another example in his column today.

“By now, it must be obvious that U.S. trade deficits are connected loosely, if at all, with the unemployment rate, which is now 3.9 percent — the lowest since 2000. Meanwhile, the U.S. trade deficit in 2017 was $566 billion.

“The explanation for the apparent paradox is the dollar’s role as the major international currency, used to conduct trade and investment among many (non-U.S.) countries. The extra demand for dollars raises its exchange rate, making U.S. exports costlier and imports cheaper. The result is a structural U.S. trade deficit.”

This one makes pretty much zero sense. First of all, pointing to the low unemployment rate coinciding with a large trade deficits as evidence there is no link between unemployment and a trade deficit makes as much sense as pointing to a very underweight person suffering from the late stage cancer as an argument against any link between being seriously overweight and bad health.

This is not a serious argument. A trade deficit reduces demand in the economy. It means that some of our spending is creating demand in Europe or Mexico, rather than in the United States. Other things equal that means less demand in the United States and higher unemployment.

We can offset this lost demand with additional demand in the United States. We can have large budget deficits, as we do now. And we can have bubbles as we did in the late 1990s with the stock bubble and in the last decade with the housing bubble. That is why we can have a large trade deficit and low unemployment. It really is not hard.

The idea that the dollar’s position as a reserve currency forces it to run large trade deficits is also badly off. First, it is important to note that the dollar is a reserve currency, not the sole reserve currency. While it is the most important currency, countries also hold euros, pounds, yen, and even Swiss francs as reserve currencies. This does not force all of these countries (or blocs in the case of the euro) to run trade deficits.

More importantly, many countries, such as China and South Korea, hold hugely more dollars and other reserve currencies that can possibly be necessary to conduct their trade and protect them from unexpected fluctuations in capital flows. They do this to keep the value of the dollar up against their currency, which gives them a competitive advantage in trade. That is a deliberate policy that can be changed if we had a president who was concerned about currency management or “manipulation” as some presidential candidates called it.

Samuelson then goes on to complain about China’s development policy, which has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty:

“As part of this program, China coerces technology transfers from American and other multinational companies to local businesses. Foreign companies receive a choice that is hard to refuse: Transfer your technology or lose access to China’s vast local market. In effect, Chinese businesses are being trained and financed by their foreign competitors. It’s high-technology extortion.”

Okay, let’s follow the bouncing ball here. Did anyone put a gun to the heads of our companies and force them to invest in China?

If so, our news outlets have neglected to report on it. As best I can tell, Boeing, Apple, and the rest have decided that it was in their interest to invest in China even with the conditions on technology transfer imposed by the Chinese government.

It’s sort of like when the Supreme Court ruled that workers voluntarily sign away their right to have a class action suit against an employer when they take a job with a company that requires individual arbitration as an alternative. The difference is that we might think that Boeing or Apple are a bit better situated to protect their interests than a typical worker negotiating with a large employer.

The rest of Samuelson’s story is also dubious. Let’s carry this one through. China takes advantage of technology developed by U.S. corporations to produce goods better and cheaper than our corporations. This allows people in China, other countries, and even the United States to benefit from lower cost goods and services. What’s the problem?

Yes, our corporations have lower profits than would otherwise be the case. This may also reduce the pay of some highly skilled engineers, technicians, and scientists. As we say in advanced economics, so what?

Yeah, Samuelson is upset about practices of the Chinese government that may benefit the bulk of the world’s population at the expense of some U.S. shareholders and highly paid workers. That’s not a concern for the U.S. economy, it’s a concern for the rich in the United States.

This column originally appeared in Beat the Press.

By José Niño*

Leftist political commentators continue to be in denial about Venezuela.

On his show, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, comedian John Oliver recently covered Venezuela’s current economic crisis.

Like any leftist analysis of Venezuela’s economic disaster, Oliver’s segment completely misses the mark.

To rationalize Venezuela’s catastrophic state, Oliver engaged in a series of mental gymnastics that could easily qualify him for the 2020 Olympics. This entire episode was an empty display of leftist journalism hiding behind the guise of comedy.

And, sadly, it was filled with many of the same excuses socialist apologists use to rationalize the failures of their nasty experiments.

Yet Again, We’re Indulging in the “No True Scotsman” Fallacy

Starting at 2:46, Oliver asserts that there are “Plenty of socialist countries that look nothing like Venezuela.”

What countries is he actually be referring to?

North Korea and Cuba? Some of the most durable communist regimes in the modern era, and possible scenarios that Venezuela will face if it continues along this economically destructive path.

Or is he referring to the supposedly socialist Scandinavian countries? The same countries featuring mixed economies that originally became wealthy through capitalism before the welfare state came along.

Vague in details and actual research, Oliver starts off by avoiding any direct discussion of socialism’s horrid track record.

But that’s to be expected from leftist intellectuals that quickly dismisses any blatant case of socialist failure as “not true socialism”.

The No True Scotsman Fallacy has just entered the building.

The Mismanagement Cop-Out

In the same vein, Oliver downplays the Venezuelan crisis by claiming it’s not a question about socialism but rather a case of “epic mismanagement”.

A convenient excuse to explain away the natural consequences of central planning, Oliver fails to recognize that mismanagement is an inherent feature of socialism.

Venezuela’s notorious shortage crisis is the result of a country with no functioning market to freely determine prices. Oliver at least acknowledges the negative impact of price controls at 9:07, but he embellishes this with the claim that Venezuela’s price controls “were unrealistic”.

Basic economics demonstrates that price controls are unrealistic by default.

Under a free market, consumers and producers use prices as signals to determine how much of a product must be demanded or supplied.

However, when price controls enter the equation, the entire price system is thrown out of whack. Artificially low prices incentivize consumers to demand more of a good than producers are able to supply. When demand exceeds supply, shortages emerge.

Make no mistake it about it, price controls are part and parcel of the socialist system.

Economist Ludwig von Mises acknowledged this in his essay Middle-of-the-Road Policy Leads to Socialism :

“No branch of industry can be omitted from this all-round fixing of prices and wages and from this obligation to produce those quantities which the government wants to see produced. If some branches were to be left free out of regard for the fact that they produce only goods qualified as non-vital or even as luxuries, capital and labor would tend to flow into them and the result would be a drop in the supply of those goods, the prices of which government has fixed precisely because it considers them as indispensable for the satisfaction of the needs of the masses.

But when this state of all-round control of business is attained, there can no longer be any question of a market economy. No longer do the citizens by their buying and abstention from buying determine what should be produced and how. The power to decide these matters has devolved upon the government. This is no longer capitalism; it is all-round planning by the government, it is socialism.”

Still Don’t Believe Venezuela is a Socialist Country?

For those that remain skeptical about Venezuela’s socialist status, they can look no further than the second section of the Communist Manifesto, “Proletarians and Communists,” to understand the government’s true nature. Marx sums up with the socialist program with ten essential tenets:

1. Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose.

Under Hugo Chávez’s regime, the Venezuelan government has expropriated over 6 million acres of farmland and has extended this crusade to large supermarket chains and factories, putting property rights in jeopardy.

2. A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax.

Venezuela features a progressive income tax, topping out at 34% for the highest income earners.

3. Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance.

While rights of inheritance are not completely abolished in Venezuela, the government still taxes the largest inheritances at a hefty rate of 55% .

4. Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels.

The Venezuelan government has expropriated the assets of foreign companies such as ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.

5. Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly.

Founded in 1939, the Venezuelan Central Bank has played a substantial in Venezuela’s collapse by monetizing its debt and increasing the money supply at unprecedented rates. The result? Hyperinflation .

6. Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State.

Venezuela’s National Commission of Telecommunications (CONATEL) regulates and controls all media in the country. It has gained notoriety for its censorship campaigns , which has earned Venezuelan media the classification of “ not free ” according to Freedom House.

7. Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State.

Government-sponsored labor organizations have taken over abandoned factories in the name of the state. Foreign conglomerates weren’t exempt from this as Chávez’s government took over Argentine and Japanese owned factories for state purposes.

8. Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.

In response to food shortages, Nicolás Maduro signed a forced labor law requiring “all workers from the public and private sector with enough physical capabilities and technical know-how” to help the government boost food production.

9. Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country.

Originating in Cuba, the Venezuelan government attempted to implement organoponics , a system of urban agriculture using organic gardens, with the aim of achieving agricultural self-sufficiency in urban centers like Caracas.

10. Free Education for All Children in Public Schools.

Compulsory education was established by decree in 1880. Public schools in Venezuela now function as indoctrination centers, where millions of youth read the works of Communist figures like Che Guevera and Fidel Castro in order to “cleanse” themselves of capitalist thought.

In sum, Venezuela meets the majority of the requirements that Marx spelled out for a country to be on the path to socialism.

Sadly, many will continue to ignore this unbearable truth.

How many more failed socialist experiments will it take for the Left to recognize socialism’s penchant for destruction?

John Oliver’s viewers can giggle all they want, but whitewashing socialism’s failures in Venezuela is no laughing matter when countless people are dying due to socialist induced starvation.

About the author:
*Jose Nino is a Venezuelan-American political activist based in Fort Collins, Colorado. Contact: twitter or email him here.

Source:
This article was published by the Mises Institute.

As Earth orbits the sun at supersonic speed, it cuts a path through the solar wind. This fast stream of charged particles, or plasma, launched from the sun’s outer layers would bombard Earth’s atmosphere if not for the protection of Earth’s magnetic field.

Just as a motorboat creates a bow-shaped wave ahead of itself as the hull pushes through the water, Earth creates a similar effect–called a bow shock–as it pushes through the solar wind. Scientists have sought to explain how Earth’s magnetic field can shove aside the powerful solar wind without unleashing calamity. They have known part of the answer for a long time: the bow shock converts energy from the solar wind to heat stored in electrons and ions. But now, researchers have important new clues about how this process occurs.

A University of Maryland-led study describes the first observations of the process of electron heating in Earth’s bow shock. The researchers found that when the electrons in the solar wind encounter the bow shock, they momentarily accelerate to such a high speed that the electron stream becomes unstable and breaks down. This breakdown process robs the electrons of their high speed and converts the energy to heat.

The results add an important new dimension to scientists’ understanding of Earth’s magnetic field and its ability to protect the planet from harmful particles and radiation. The research paper was published in the journal Physical Review Letters on May 31, 2018.

“If you were to stand on a mountaintop, you might get knocked over by a fast wind,” explained Li-Jen Chen, lead author of the study and an associate research scientist in the UMD Department of Astronomy. “Fortunately, as the solar wind crashes into Earth’s magnetic field, the bow shock protects us by slowing down this wind and changing it to a nice, warm breeze. We now have a better idea how this happens.”

The scientists obtained their data from NASA’s Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission. The MMS mission consists of four identical satellites that carry instruments to study the physics of Earth’s magnetic field as it interacts with the solar wind. The satellites obtained three-dimensional measurements every 30 milliseconds, resulting in hundreds of measurements within the bow shock layer. These high-frequency, precise measurements from the MMS mission were critical to the study.

“The extremely fast measurements from MMS allowed us finally to see the electron heating process in the thin shock layer,” said Thomas Moore, a senior project scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center and a co-author of the study. “This is groundbreaking because now we have the ability to identify the mechanism at work, instead of just observing its consequences.”

Scientists have known for some time that the bow shock is somehow able to convert the energy in electrons to heat without any direct collisions between the electrons. This means that friction–a common way to generate heat here on Earth–is not responsible for electron heating in the bow shock.

“The new observations of electron acceleration at the bow shock rewrite the current understanding of electron heating,” said Chen, who is also a research scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. “For example, researchers didn’t expect that the bow shock could accelerate the solar wind electron stream to the speeds that we observed.”

In an earlier phase of the MMS mission, the satellites typically orbited much closer to Earth, so they usually missed the bow shock. However, an unexpected outburst of solar wind pushed the bow shock closer to Earth, allowing the satellites to capture rare and informative data.

Seizing on this advantage, the researchers observed the solar wind’s electron stream before, during and after meeting with the bow shock. The electron stream accelerated by the shock only took 90 milliseconds to destabilize and fully break down.

“The study of electron heating is important not just for understanding how the bow shock protects Earth, but potentially for satellites, space travel and maybe exploring other planets in the future,” Chen said.

By giving the first clear picture of what electrons at the bow shock are doing, Chen and her collaborators hope to encourage other scientists to perform computer simulations, further space observations and laboratory experiments on electron heating. Chen also looks forward to delving further into the mechanisms by which the bow shock accelerates the electron stream.

“Typically, scientists have simulations or theories to predict what is happening and then they design experiments to measure it,” Chen said. “This time it’s the opposite: the measurement came first. The simulation and theory will have to catch up.”

Myanmar announced Thursday it would set up an independent commission to probe alleged rights violations that occurred during a military crackdown on Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine state that left more than 1,000 dead and drove almost 700,000 into neighboring Bangladesh.

The Myanmar government has come under heavy fire from the United Nations, human rights groups and other international community members for its denials of widely documented atrocities by the army, in which the stateless Rohingya were targeted after Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) insurgents carried out deadly assaults on police outposts last August.

“The independent commission will investigate the violation of human rights and related issues following the terrorist attacks by ARSA,” President Win Myint’s office said in a statement on Thursday.

The commission is part of a “national initiative to address reconciliation, peace, stability and development” in ethnically and religiously divided Rakhine state, it said.

The body will be composed of three members, including an international representative and will be assisted by domestic and international legal and technical experts, the statement said, while giving no further details.

“This decision has also taken into consideration the interim recommendations of the Advisory Board for the Committee for the Implementation of the Recommendations of Rakhine state,” the statement said, referring to an international panel set up in December to advise the government on the suggestions submitted by an earlier commission led by former U.N. chief Kofi Annan, regarding the situation in Rakhine.

The Annan commission’s final report called for a review of the country’s 1982 Citizenship Law, which prevents the Rohingya from becoming citizens, an end to restrictions on the Muslim minority in order to prevent further violence in the region, and the closure of internally displaced persons camps in Rakhine state.

In January, veteran U.S. diplomat Bill Richardson, a member of the 10-person advisory panel, abruptly resigned from the board, which he said was conducting a “whitewash” of the Rohingya crisis, adding that Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi had demonstrated an “absence of moral leadership” over the problem.

Richardson also questioned the commitment of advisory board chairman Surakiart Sathirathai, a former deputy prime minister of Thailand, in implementing the Annan commission’s recommendations and had expressed concern over Myanmar’s attitude towards the U.N., rights groups, and citizenship for the Rohingya, who are considered illegal immigrants from Bangladesh though many have lived in Myanmar for generations.

A ‘proper’ investigation

The U.N., which has said that the campaign against the Rohingya amounted to ethnic cleansing, has also raised concerns along with rights groups about the safety of Muslim refugees who will return voluntarily to Rakhine state under an agreement Myanmar signed with Bangladesh in November.

Myanmar previously refused to allow a U.N.-appointed committee to investigate reports of atrocities involving the Rohingya in Rakhine. But in late April and early May, a delegation of envoys from the U.N. Security Council toured refugee camps in Bangladesh and visited violence-scarred northern Rakhine state to assess the on-the-ground situation.

They called on Myanmar to conduct what they called a “proper” investigation into atrocities against the Rohingya during the crackdown.

At the time, Karen Pierce, Britain’s ambassador to the U.N. and a member of the delegation, told reporters that a proper probe was necessary for there to be accountability and that Myanmar could set up such a probe through an International Criminal Court (ICC) referral, or by holding its own comprehensive inquiry.

An ICC prosecutor asked the international tribunal in April to rule on whether the court could exercise jurisdiction over the alleged expulsion of the Rohingya from Myanmar to Bangladesh, even though Myanmar is not an ICC member.

Though Myanmar has verified hundreds of Rohingya eligible for repatriation from a list of more than 8,000 provided by Bangladesh, official returns have not yet begun. Myanmar officials say they have been ready to accept back refugees since Jan. 23, but they have blamed delays in the process on their Bangladeshi counterparts.

Memorandum ‘initialed’

Also on Thursday, the office of State Counselor Aung San Suu Kyi said Myanmar’s Ministry of Labor, Immigration and Population had “initialed” a memorandum of understanding with the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) and U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) to help the government with repatriating the refugees from southeastern Bangladesh.

“The U.N. agencies will cooperate with the government for the repatriation of displaced persons, who have been duly verified so that they can return voluntarily in safety and in dignity,” the statement said.

“The UNDP and UNHCR have been invited to take part in various stages of return and resettlement, and to support access to livelihoods through the design and implementation of community-based intervention,” it said.

No date was given for the actual signing of the memorandum, though the statement said it would take place soon.

The U.N. already had signed a similar agreement with Bangladesh.

UN official: Conditions for repatriation not yet safe

Meanwhile in Dhaka on Thursday, UNHCR Assistant High Commissioner George Okoth-Obbo told reporters that conditions for the safe, voluntary and dignified return of the Rohingya had yet to be created in Rakhine state.

“Right at the moment, we don’t believe conditions have been created for safe return. [Favorable] conditions don’t exist,” he said while wrapping up a 5-day visit to refugee camps in Ukhia and Teknaf sub-districts.

On Monday, Okoth-Obbo had described the Kutupalong refugee camp, which houses 660,000 Rohingya, as “the largest in the world.”

During his visit, Okoth-Obbo also expressed concern about the safety of the refugees as monsoon rains started in southeastern Cox’s Bazar.

UNHCR issued a statement on May 29 warning that an estimated 200,000 Rohingya could be in danger of facing landslides and flooding.

Habibul Kabir Chowdhury, chief of the Rohingya unit at Bangladesh’s ministry of disaster management, told BenarNews that at least 30,000 refugees had been relocated.

He said up to 100,000 Rohingya now living in Cox’s Bazar district would be moved to Bhashanchar, an island at the Bay of Bengal.

But Okoth-Obbo said relocating the Rohingya to the island in Noakhali district would not be realistic right now, as he expressed doubts that facilities have been put in place for the refugees.

“So, my own impression would be, since we talk now, I don’t really think it will be realistic that the island will be a solution,” Okoth-Obbo said.

Okoth-Obbo, who visited the camps in September last year, said UNHCR and partner agencies had raised only 20 percent of the U.S. $950 million they were seeking from the international community and donors to meet the immediate humanitarian needs of the Rohingya refugees and Bangladeshis living in surrounding communities, after having launched a special fund-raising campaign for 2018 on March 16.

‘Colder’ relations with US, EU

Despite the two announcements by Myanmar on Thursday, its image has continued to deteriorate in the eyes of the U.S. and other Western countries, which had expected Aung Sa Suu Kyi’s civilian government to make great strides in guaranteeing basic freedoms and resolving ethnic and military conflicts in the developing democracy.

But relations with the U.S. and European Union have chilled because of their disapproval of Myanmar’s handling of the Rohingya crisis, Myint Thu, permanent secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said Thursday at a press conference in Naypyidaw.

Though the National League for Democracy (NLD) government had improved Myanmar’s international standing during its first year in power following the party’s landslide victory at the polls in November 2015, pressure from the U.S. and the E.U. mounted after the August 2017 ARSA attack and a smaller attack by the same group in Rakhine state in October 2016, he said.

“We had good relationships with the U.S. and other European countries during the first year of the NLD government, but they have been getting colder because of misunderstandings over the Rohingya crisis,” Myint Thu said.

Myanmar has accused some members of the international community of being biased and one-sided in their assessments of the Rohingya crisis.

“Though Myanmar is facing this problem, the international community still supports our democratic transition and the peace and national reconciliation process,” he said, referring to the government’s efforts to end decades of civil war in the country.

The Myanmar government has been responding to and trying to resolve these challenges and pressures, while at the same time working on advancing the country’s policies, he said.

“Myanmar is working together with China and Russia on the Rakhine problem, but it is not a give-and-take [situation],” Myint Thu said. “We are working on it based on our long relationships. We will also work together on any issue with any country that understands us.”

This report was largely produced by Radio Free Asia (RFA), a sister entity of BenarNews. Sharif Khiam in Dhaka contributed to the report.

The NATO-Russia Council had an open exchange on several topics, including the situation in and around Ukraine, issues related to military activities, transparency and risk reduction, as well as asymmetric techniques as aspects of doctrine and strategy, according to NATO.

NATO and Russia both briefed on major upcoming exercises.

NATO said its “approach to Russia is consistent.”

Practical cooperation was suspended in 2014 due to Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine. At the same time, channels for political dialogue are open and the NATO-Russia Council is an important forum. NATO and Russia also maintain open military-to-military lines of communication. NATO Allies welcomed the April meeting in Baku between the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Scaparrotti, and the Russian Chief of the General Staff, General Gerasimov.

The dialogue between NATO and Russia contributes to more predictable relations and enhanced mutual security, NATO said.

By Jim Garamone

US Defense Secretary James N. Mattis stressed the importance of the Indian Ocean region of U.S. Pacific Command’s area of responsibility and announced that the Defense Department is renaming the combatant command as U.S. Indo-Pacific Command.

Mattis made the announcement at the change-of-command ceremony where Navy Adm. Philip S. Davidson relieved Navy Adm. Harry B. Harris Jr., who had commanded Pacom for the last three years.

“In recognition of the increasing connectivity between the Indian and Pacific oceans, today we rename the U.S. Pacific Command to the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command,” the secretary said. “Over many decades, this command has repeatedly adapted to changing circumstance and today carries that legacy forward as America focuses west.”

‘From Bollywood to Hollywood’

The command stretches “from Bollywood to Hollywood, and from penguins to polar bears,” Mattis said, and it plays an important part in America’s National Defense Strategy. “The 2018 National Defense Strategy – the first of its kind in a decade – acknowledges Pacific challenges and signals America’s resolve and lasting commitment to the Indo-Pacific,” he said.

The region has benefitted greatly from the international order put in place at the end of World War II, the secretary said. Most nations in the region recognize the benefits of the current order, he added, which has raised quality of life across the region.

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command seeks to strengthen the bonds across the region and is a cornerstone of “a region open to investment and free, fair and reciprocal trade, not bound by any nation’s predatory economics or threat of coercion, for the Indo-Pacific has many belts and many roads,” Mattis said, alluding to China’s “One Belt, One Road” policy for the region.

The command will give U.S. diplomats the security anchor they need to negotiate with all nations in the region, Mattis said, adding that America will continue to work with allies and seek to strengthen bonds and build new ones in the region. Diplomats will continue to work for peace, but will do so “from a position of strength,” he said.

“Relationships with our Pacific and Indian Ocean allies and partners have proven critical to maintaining regional stability,” the secretary said. We stand by our partners and support their sovereign decisions, because all nations, large and small, are essential to the region if we are to sustain stability in ocean areas critical to global peace.”

(RFE/RL) — Washington says that it is moving ahead with tariffs on aluminum and steel imports from Canada, Mexico, and the European Union — ending a two-month exemption and potentially setting the stage for a trade war between the United States and some of its top allies.

U.S Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and a 10 percent tariff on aluminum imports from the EU, Canada, and Mexico would go into effect on June 1.

“We look forward to continued negotiations, both with Canada and Mexico on the one hand, and with the European Commission on the other hand, because there are other issues that we also need to get resolved,” Ross said.

But French President Emmanuel Macron rejected the suggestion of negotiations with Washington, saying Trump’s decision to impose the tariffs against U.S. allies effectively “closes the door on other talks.”

Macron, who said he would speak with Trump by telephone about the tariffs late on May 31, described the move as “an illegal decision” and “a mistake.”

Financial markets fell after the announcement by Ross raised fears of a trade war between Western allies.

The trade actions have also opened the United States to criticism that it is alienating allies and trading partners at a time when their support is needed behind Trump’s bid to rid North Korea of nuclear weapons and help stabilize the Middle East.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on May 31 that the EU would announce “counter-balancing measures” within hours to retaliate against the U.S. tariffs.

Juncker said the U.S. tariffs were “protectionism, pure and simple.”

European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said the EU was now ready to “trigger a dispute-settlement case” at the World Trade Organization (WTO) over Washington’s move.

Britain responded promptly to the announcement, with a government spokesman saing London was “deeply disappointed” the United States decided to apply the tariffs on imports from the EU on “national security grounds.”

“The U.K. and other European Union countries are close allies of the U.S. and should be permanently and fully exempted,” the British spokesman said.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the EU “will respond in an intelligent, decisive, and joint way.”

Merkel said on May 31 that the EU had made plain to Washington that the planned tariffs are incompatible with WTO rules.

French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire accused the Trump administration of treating global trade like a Hollywood western, saying the U.S. tariffs were “unjustified, unjustifiable, and dangerous” to the world economy because they risk causing a trade war that will hurt growth everywhere.

“Global trade is not a Gunfight At OK Corral’,” Maire said on May 31. “It’s not about who attacks whom, and then wait and see who is still standing at the end.”

The Mexican government also announced its own countermeasures, saying it will apply equivalent tariffs on a range of goods “up to an amount matching the level of impact” from the U.S. tariffs.

“Mexico deeply deplores and condemns the decision by the United States to impose these tariffs,” the Mexican Economy Ministry said in a statement. “Mexico has stated repeatedly that this type of measure, based on national security, is neither appropriate nor justified.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau described the U.S. tariffs as “totally unacceptable,” and said Canada would also announce “retaliatory measures” against the United States.

Ross said on May 31 that even if the EU, Canada, and Mexico retaliated against the U.S. metals tariffs, “it is unlikely to have much impact on the U.S. economy.”

But a leading Republican in the U.S. Congress, Representative Kevin Brady, also criticized the tariffs against Canada, Mexico, and the EU, saying they were “hitting the wrong target.”

Brady, who is the chairman of the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee, said Trump’s administration will need to provide answers to Congress about the damage the move will have on local businesses in the United States.

“When it comes to unfairly traded steel and aluminum, Mexico, Canada, and Europe are not the problem. China is,” Brady said.

The U.S. allies initially received exemptions when President Donald Trump declared global tariffs on imported metals earlier in 2018.

Those temporary waivers were extended through May while the White House sought negotiated concessions.

Ross said Australia, Argentina, and Brazil — which also initially received temporary tariff waivers — had agreed to “limitations on the volume” of metal they ship to the United States in exchange for permanent exemptions.

By Seyyed Ali Khorram*

The recent summit meeting of the 28 member states of the European Union in Bulgaria reached remarkable results, which were valuable for both Europe and Iran. This was the first time that Europe demonstrated its unanimity and lent its categorical support to a country in the face of the United States by taking a challenging position at international level. The political support of Europe will defuse the United States’ psychological war against Iran and will dispel fears that other countries and global companies may have about cooperation with Iran. Therefore, if this support does not render the US sanctions against Iran totally ineffective, it will at least reduce their impact to a large extent. I wrote elsewhere that this is for the first time in the 40-year history of the Islamic Republic that Iran is so cornered that despite remaining in compliance with its commitments under the nuclear deal, it is under relentless and brutal US onslaught, which is aimed at making the country choose between war or entering into negotiations to accept Washington’s conditions. The administration of former Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, did not accept to engage in negotiations over the country’s nuclear crisis back in 2012 and this is why at that time Iran was threatened with a possible military confrontation. However, for the past three years, Iran has been on the path to end its nuclear crisis through conclusion of a global accord, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and has complied with all its commitments as confirmed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). However, the evil triangle of the United States, Israel and Saudi Arabia has been raising excessive demands at a time that the United States has largely violated its commitments in a bid to destabilize the political establishment in Iran. As a result, the United States has been adopting a unilateral and bullying approach, threatening Iran that if it does not resume negotiations and accept the United States’ new conditions, it might risk war. Fortunately and due to good performance of President Hassan Rouhani’s administration in complying with its commitments, the rest of the world – especially the big powers that form the P5+1 group – has been standing up against the United States by announcing that it will not give in to Washington’s bullying. This is a historic opportunity for the world and if Iran gets along with Europe, European countries would be able to turn a new leaf in transatlantic relations, and after 73 years, show off their independent will in the face of the United States. Europe knows well that how humiliating it is for the green continent to accept the application of America’s extra-territorial laws to Europe. It is true that the United States helped Europe in World War II, but it does not mean that Europe must always remain unquestioning executioner of the United States’ commands and allow Washington to make decisions for European countries.

As for the issue of Iran, Europe has made large diplomatic efforts to convince the United States that it must not withdraw from an international agreement without good reason. However, the US President Donald Trump has disrespected his French counterpart as well as German chancellor and British prime minister, and has shown no care for what they say. Within framework of international law and state responsibility, when a government in a country is changed, the new government is obligated to respect international commitments of the previous government and implement them. If new viewpoints emerge, the discontent government must resort to available mechanisms stipulated in an international agreement and convince the other party in a peaceful manner. However, if it fails to do this, it must remain committed to obligations undertaken as per that agreement. When the nuclear accord was reached between the P5+1 group of countries and Iran with the European Union being its implementer and impartial observer, all involved parties underlined correctness and wholesomeness of the accord. However, the new administration in the United States seeks to dismantle this agreement through a bullying approach without taking advantage of dispute settlement mechanisms embedded in the JCPOA and has asked for a new deal based on the viewpoints of the new US administration, which is a totally unlawful and undiplomatic approach.

There are many instances in the world in which one party is not satisfied with an agreement, but since it is not able to convince the other party, it has no choice but to continue to comply with its commitments. The world, especially Europe, has understood that behind this claim by the United States is a plot to undermine and destabilize the political establishment in Iran and this approach cannot be taken as a basis for international relations. Such methods were used in the 19th century in which rogue states decided to topple other governments. However, after establishment of the principles of international relations and international law, an end was put to such behavior by rogue states. Therefore, if European countries, Russia and China comply with the United States, they would be also considered as rogue states, who are not committed to principles of international law. If the United States had chosen an appropriate mechanism to announce its viewpoints about the JCPOA, the world would have shown a different reaction and Tehran, for its turn, would have listened to what Washington had to say under better conditions.

* Seyyed Ali Khorram
Professor of International Law

Most analysts speak of Ramzan Kadyrov as a Chechen politician and Vladimir Putin as a Russian one, implicitly suggesting whether they intend to or not that each speaks for the nation he ostensibly heads, Avraam Shmulyevich says. But in fact, neither represents his nation but rather the totalitarian state machine centered on Moscow.

First of all, the Israeli specialist on the North Caucasus says, “one must clearly understand that Ramzan Akhmatovich Kadyrov represents the Chechens in exactly the same degree that Putin represents the Russians, Matviyenko the Ukrainians of Shoygu the Tuvins.” That is, not at all (afterempire.info/2018/05/31/chechnya/).

Kadyrov today is simply “a highly placed official of the Russian powers that be,” Shmulyevich says. He is “not ‘a Chechen politician,’ but rather one of the most influential of Putin’s ‘courtiers.’” He doesn’t make proposals or act in any way that the Kremlin has not directed him to or at least approved in advance.

He is thus “only an element of the Russian siloviki system; and as to the struggle with enemies of the regime, he acts as a subcontractor” to whatever needs the Kremlin has. “Moscow gives him some assignments, and he fulfills them.” Despite having his own siloviki units, “Kadyrov remains part of the Russian terrorist system.”

субподрядчик.

Chechnya today in fact is “an occupied country. Formally, neither a Chechen power nor Chechen siloviki exist. There everything is Russian. These are Russian soldiers and Russian FSB officers of Chechen nationality,” Shmulyevich continues. They should not be ascribed to Chechens or the Chechen people blamed.

By violence and war, Moscow suppressed the Chechen drive for independence and resubordinated Grozny to its will. It allowed Chechen leaders somewhat more independence because they fought and might fight again, but that does not change the fundamental reality that all power in Chechnya is Russian, including that of Kadyrov.

“De facto, Chechnya now is a feudal vassal state, one that it is difficult to say lies within the legal field of the Russian Federation,” Shmulyevich argues. “But in all this, the power of Kadyrov as vassal is maintained only by the presence of an enormous grouping of the rusisan army. Everything that takes place on this territory does so with Putin’s permission.”

Again, “how can one suggest any of this has any relationship to the Chechen people?” That people is “under the toughest pressure of a totalitarian regime,” one where human rights are at the level of Turkmenistan or North Korea than is the case in other regions of the Russian Federation.

Those Chechens who can have fled, although they continue to be pursued by Grozny and Moscow’s agents. Those who can’t leave are being subjected to a new wave of Russification. Many hate the regime, but some give it lip service either out of fear or out of the belief that that is the best course of action under the circumstances.

But there is a lesson here Moscow does not yet seem to have learned: “Every time when the empire has decided that it has completely pacified the Chechens, the fortress of Russian power has fallen apart like a house of cards, and the suppression of Chechnya and the Caucasus has had to begin again, each time with a new wave of bloodshed.”

This cycle will not continue for eternity, Shmulyevich says, adding that “today’s circle is the last” because “after almost 200 years of war, Russia finally will have to leave both the Chechen Republic Ichkeria and then the entire Caucasus. And this will be only for the good of both the Russians themselves and all Caucasians.”

The US announced that starting on June 1, 2018 it will impose additional duties of 25% and 10% respectively on imports of steel and aluminium from the EU.

The EU said it will launch legal proceedings against the US in the WTO on June 1. This was decided by the College of Commissioners on May 29 and Member States were consulted on the same day. The US measures are primarily intended to protect the US domestic industry from import competition, clearly at odds with WTO rules, according to the Commission.

“In addition to the WTO dispute settlement we are launching against the US measures, we have also coordinated action in this field with other affected partners,” the EU said.

Responding to the news, the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker said, “I am concerned by this decision. The EU believes these unilateral US tariffs are unjustified and at odds with World Trade Organisation rules. This is protectionism, pure and simple. Over the past months we have continuously engaged with the US at all possible levels to jointly address the problem of overcapacity in the steel sector. Overcapacity remains at the heart of the problem and the EU is not the source of but on the contrary equally hurt by it. That is why we are determined to work towards structural solutions together with our partners. We have also consistently indicated our openness to discussing ways to improve bilateral trade relations with the US but have made it clear that the EU will not negotiate under threat. By targeting those who are not responsible for overcapacities, the US is playing into the hands of those who are responsible for the problem. The US now leaves us with no choice but to proceed with a WTO dispute settlement case and with the imposition of additional duties on a number of imports from the US. We will defend the Union’s interests, in full compliance with international trade law.”

Commissioner for Trade Cecilia Malmström said: “Today is a bad day for world trade. We did everything to avoid this outcome. Over the last couple of months I have spoken at numerous occasions with the US Secretary of Commerce. I have argued for the EU and the US to engage in a positive transatlantic trade agenda, and for the EU to be fully, permanently and unconditionally exempted from these tariffs. This is also what EU leaders have asked for. Throughout these talks, the US has sought to use the threat of trade restrictions as leverage to obtain concessions from the EU. This is not the way we do business, and certainly not between longstanding partners, friends and allies. Now that we have clarity, the EU’s response will be proportionate and in accordance with WTO rules. We will now trigger a dispute settlement case at the WTO, since these US measures clearly go against agreed international rules. We will also impose rebalancing measures and take any necessary steps to protect the EU market from trade diversion caused by these US restrictions.”

The US measures affect EU exports worth €6.4 billion in 2017.

“While striving to avoid the situation, the EU has been preparing over the last months and stands now ready to react to the US trade restrictions on steel and aluminium in a swift, firm, proportionate and fully WTO-compatible manner,” the EU said.

As regards the US tariff measures, the EU will use the possibility under WTO rules to rebalance the situation by targeting a list of US products with additional duties. The level of tariffs to be applied will reflect the damage caused by the new US trade restrictions on EU products. The list of US products is ready: it was consulted with European stakeholders and supported by Member States. The EU notified its potential rebalancing to the WTO on May 18 and, in line with the Organisation rules, could trigger them 30 days later. The Commission will now in coordination with Member States take a formal decision to proceed with the rebalancing.

The Commission said it is determined to shield the EU steel and aluminium markets from damage caused by additional imports that might be coming into the EU as a result of the closure of the US market. An investigation towards possible imposition of safeguard measures on steel was launched on March 26. The Commission has nine months to decide whether safeguard measures would be necessary. This decision could also be taken much earlier in the proceedings, if the investigation confirms the necessity for swift action. The Commission has also put in place a surveillance system for imports of aluminium to be prepared in case action will be required in that sector.

By Jose Torres Jr.

Philippine lawmakers have finally passed a bill that will pave the way for the creation of a new Muslim region in Mindanao, but critics warned it still does not allow the Moro people the right to self-determination.

The Lower House of Congress overwhelmingly approved the controversial and long-awaited Bangsamoro Basic Law — 227 in favor, 11 against and two abstentions — on May 30 while the Senate passed it before dawn on May 31.

The bill was the result of a 2014 peace deal between the rebel Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Philippine government aimed at ending almost 50 years of conflict that has already killed more than 120,000 people and displaced about two million others.

The purpose behind creating a new entity was purportedly to give the approximately four million Muslim Moro people living in the southern Philippines greater autonomy than the existing Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).

The legislation, which was categorized urgent by President Rodrigo Duterte on May 29, outlines the process to set up a self-administered territory.

Duterte had warned lawmakers that failure to pass the bill could result in resentment and mistrust among Muslims in the region.

The previous administration, which entered into the peace deal, failed to pass the bill.

House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, however, said the bill was not the ultimate legal solution to change the already existing ARMM.

“As a lawyer, I share that doubt,” he told journalists in Manila.

Under the new law, a new political entity will be created to replace the present Muslim autonomous region, created by virtue of the 1987 constitution.

Opposition Congressman Edcel Lagman said passing a bill to replace the ARMM could be “unconstitutional” because the establishment of the present autonomous region was guaranteed by the constitution.

Alvarez, however, said he would leave the legality to the Supreme Court. “Anybody can question the constitutionality of a law, but it’s up to the Supreme Court to decide,” he said.

Lower House Moro legislator Amihilda Sangcopan of the Children of Mindanao party said the proposed law is not “perfectly consistent” with the 2014 comprehensive peace agreement on the creation of the Bangsamoro region.

“But it not only contains the gains of the current autonomous Muslim region … [it] even enhanced it with clearer provision on fiscal autonomy,” she said.

The Mindanao legislator said the Moro people are grateful to Congress “for standing up with us and for us” in passing the bill.

Critics of the proposed political entity to be created by the new law say it will be no better than the present autonomous region established in 1989.

Congressman Ariel Casilao of the Anakpawis party said the Bangsamoro Basic Law does not recognize the Moro people’s right to self-determination, including the right to define their own territories, to have their own justice system, and pass laws for the management of their natural resources, among others.

Youth party lawmaker Sarah Elago said the soon-to-be law only gives the president the license “to exploit and control” the Moro people.

Under the Bangsamoro Basic Law, Duterte has the power to appoint all 80 members of the Bangsamoro Transition Authority, including the chief minister.

The power to take private property for public use by a state and the power to grant rights, privileges, and concessions in the exploration, development and utilization of fossil fuels and uranium will remain with the central government.

The original version of the bill guaranteed 58 exclusive powers for the Bangsamoro government, but at least 12 were removed including land management, distribution and classification, a financial and banking system, Sharia courts and a Sharia justice system.

Samira Gutoc Tomawis, a civil society leader in Mindanao, warned against what she described as a “shallow law that will only create more havoc and divisions.”

She said the present autonomous region is the benchmark. “If they pass a law that has less powers than the ARMM, then it is useless,” she said, adding that the original version of the bill “reflected the needs and requirements” of the Moro people in terms of governance.

The southern region of Mindanao is the most underdeveloped region in the country despite its rich natural resources. Clan wars, lawlessness and conflicts with Moro and communist rebel groups have been blamed for the region’s poor situation.