The Malaysian government’s move not to ratify the International Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) despite an earlier decision to do so has dominated headlines. The events surrounding the ICERD imbroglio reveals three new political developments in post-election Malaysia.

By Prashant Waikar*

At the September 2018 United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad announced that Malaysia would be ratifying the remaining human rights accords it had yet to sign on to. The most notable of these was the International Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

Mahathir’s announcement sparked uproar from opposition groups and parties at home. Their fear was that ICERD would undermine Malay rights and thus catalyse a process of pushing Malay-Muslims to the margins of society. In an about turn in November, Mahathir said that Malaysia would no longer be ratifying ICERD due to its racial sensitivities. The two-month long ICERD-related developments reveal three twists in “New Malaysia” ushered in by the 9 May general election which overthrew the 61-year rule of the UMNO-led Barisan Nasional (BN).

UMNO’s Non-racialists: Counter-currents

The politics of race remains entrenched in Malaysia. Leaders from UMNO and the Islamist PAS pounced on Mahathir’s announcement. Having insisted for months that Pakatan Harapan’s (PH’s) election victory will lead to the erosion of Malay-Muslim rights – especially with the Chinese-dominated Democratic Action Party (DAP) finally in government – UMNO and PAS believed they had proof at last of a conspiracy at play.

More intriguing, though, is the admittedly small segment of UMNO members in particular who either want nothing to do with race-based politics, or have a different vision of what Malay rights should entail. These individuals were not interested in rallying against Mahathir’s ICERD announcement. They believe that narratives on Malay rights should be reconfigured into discourses of social confidence, political moderation, and economic empowerment – not the politics of fear.

That said, they have not yet figured out how to articulate these ideas in ways that would not alienate the party’s natural base of support. They also have to contend with leaders who are intent on consolidating electoral support through ethno-nationalism. The more successful efforts to galvanise people around ethno-nationalist issues prove to be, the more difficult for these non-racialist members to oppose the leadership.

Whether or not they can stop UMNO from veering further to the right will depend on the extent to which senior party members allied to their cause – some of whom are former ministers, as well as current and former parliamentarians – can adequately support them in the party’s backroom politics. Failure will lead to further disillusionment and greater outflow from the party.

ICERD and Coalition Politics

Critics have argued that Mahathir’s U-turn on the ICERD ratification is a sign of him tanking under pressure from opposition groups and parties. This, however, may be an oversimplification. The potency of ethno-nationalist politics in Malaysia renders it unsurprising that UMNO and PAS exploited the announcement to ratify the convention. Given Mahathir’s experience, he would have seen this coming – so why did he make the declaration in the first instance?

Some quarters within PH believe that coalition politics could be a factor. The Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) and the DAP have nearly 100 parliamentary seats between them. Mahathir’s Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (PPBM) has 16, and Amanah has 11. Superficially, this would imply that PKR and DAP should have more bargaining power within the coalition than PPBM.

According to these pundits, Mahathir used the ICERD episode to signal to PKR and DAP that they ought not to overestimate their clout. Using an issue important to them – the notion of a ‘Malaysian Malaysia’, which ratifying ICERD would symbolise –to show how it could undermine their interests was a cautionary signal to both parties of the dangers of overreach. It was also a reminder that the two parties should accept that the PPBM has an important role to play in dealing with issues relating to ethno-nationalism.

More Challenges Ahead

The earlier decision to announce the ratification of ICERD enabled PH to project itself as distinct from past Barisan Nasional (BN) governments. To shun the BN 2.0 label, PH needs to consistently show that it is pro-reform. Yet, the ‘U-turn’ on ICERD is double-edged.

On the one hand, it may not necessarily hurt PH’s credibility with progressive voters. Indeed, PH has already blamed ethno-nationalist groups for rescinding on its commitment to ratify ICERD. PH is thus likely to urge progressive members of its support base to exercise patience towards the fact that the reform agenda is proving challenging to implement. On the other hand, it has emboldened and encouraged the opposition, who will now know that they can mobilise the ground against the government.

That said, whatever the motivations that drove the decision to make the ICERD announcement, it is clear that the government has inadvertently handed a political victory to UMNO and PAS. Some will argue it is a godsend to UMNO in particular. UMNO is still getting used to the fact that it is no longer in government and is trying to regain its footing post-GE.

The PH government will now have to regroup and will need to learn the lessons from this episode. How this will impact on the reform process remains to be seen. What it means for coalition dynamics will also bear some watching. 2018 has been a dramatic year for Malaysia but the recent events herald more challenges in the new year.

*Prashant Waikar is a research analyst with the Malaysia Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.

By Frédéric Simon

A European Commission proposal to phase-out regulated prices of electricity looked set to win approval from EU member states until the ‘yellow vest’ movement swept across France and nipped it in the bud.

Did Emmanuel Macron personally pick up his telephone? Versions diverge, but the ‘yellow vests’ undoubtedly killed all hopes of passing the reform, according to several French sources in Brussels.

“Telephone calls were passed from the Elysée,” affirmed one source in the European Parliament, who explained the gist of the message coming from the French president’s office: in the midst of the protests, any attempt to deregulate electricity prices at EU level is a non-starter.

The ‘yellow vest’ protests started in mid-November to complain against the French carbon tax, which added about 10 euro cents to the litre of petrol and diesel. It then morphed into a wider anti-government movement, which saw riots erupting in Paris and other cities across the country.

For Paris, that was the last nail in the coffin. “Politically, the yellow vests episode gave weight to the French position calling for member states to keep the possibility of proposing regulated electricity tariffs,” said a French energy industry source in Brussels.

Regulated energy prices are politically sensitive in France. People there widely perceive them as a necessary shield against abusive practices from energy companies. Brussels, on the other hand, argues they hold back attempts to create a European energy market and discourage investments into cleaner forms of electricity, like wind and solar.

The European Commission’s initial proposal was to phase out regulated electricity prices over a five-year period for all consumers.

Under pressure from Paris and Sofia, the two loudest opponents of the reform, subsequent drafts referred to a phase-out over a seven- or ten-year period for all households.

A possible extension was also considered for specific segments of the population like vulnerable consumers and households in energy poverty, triggering a debate in Brussels about the lack of a common definition of energy poverty across Europe.

Regulated tariffs maintained, even for the wealthy

But all references to a phase-out, time limitations or restrictions to certain population groups were deleted during a final round of talks on Tuesday (19 December), which sealed an EU-level agreement on the reform of Europe’s electricity market.

The scope of regulated energy tariffs was even broadened at the last moment to include micro-enterprises in addition to households. The last-minute addition came at the request of Paris to ensure French farmers can also benefit from regulated tariffs, according to a source in the European Parliament.

Martina Werner, a German lawmaker, described the EU agreement as “a big victory” for the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) group in the European Parliament, which came out in support of regulated energy tariffs. “We managed to ensure regulated prices so that member states can guarantee affordable energy prices,” she said in a statement.

In fact, the deal probably went too far for the socialists because it preserves regulated tariffs for all customers, including the wealthiest households. “I would have preferred these [regulated tariffs] to target the more vulnerable and energy-poor households,” Werner admitted, saying “these are the customers who really need it.”

Regulated energy prices have indeed come under fire when they are applied to all customers with no distinction of income.

“This results in a policy that not only fails to target vulnerable and energy poor consumers, but also ends up giving the greatest potential benefit to richer households, as these households are the ones consuming the largest amounts of energy under regulated prices,” said Klaus-Dieter Borchard, a senior official at the European Commission.

But amid all the noise of the ‘yellow vests’, any argument in favour of reining in regulated tariffs had become inaudible.

“In light of the recent events, notably the ‘yellow vests’ movement in France, it is politically justified to carry on with regulated prices at this stage,” says Florent Marcellesi, a Spanish lawmaker for the Green group in the European Parliament.

“However we should be honest: regulated prices have nothing to do with the protection of the energy poor. We need stronger structural measures to fight energy poverty, notably a large-scale building renovation programme that would allow the most vulnerable part of the population to be kept warm at affordable cost,” Marcellesi told EURACTIV.

Despite those shortcomings, consumer groups continue to see regulated tariffs as a protective shield for vulnerable households.

“Member states should keep the option of regulated prices open,” said Monique Goyens, director general of BEUC, the European consumer organisation. “The argument to get rid of them is not convincing enough as long as energy markets are not truly competitive,” she wrote just before the agreement was passed.

Lessons for the ‘just transition’

Still, green campaigners believe there are valuable lessons to be learnt from the French protests.

Although it’s tempting to conclude that the ‘yellow vest’ movement is part of a bottom-up backlash against climate action, it rather demonstrates the need for “a fair, just, and managed transition” to sustainable energy, argued Sanjeev Kumar, the founder of Change Partnership, a think tank focused on solving the politics of climate change.

“The yellow vest movement has shown that the energy transition must be socially fair, it cannot penalise the poorest,” agreed Clémence Hutin, climate justice campaigner at Friends of the Earth Europe.

“This is why the role of regulated prices must be clarified: they must be designed to protect low-income families who are facing rising energy costs, not subsidise dirty energy,” she told EURACTIV.

Sri Lanka Tourism is targeting four million tourist arrivals and US$ 5 billion foreign exchange earnings for 2019 with the launch of the long-delayed Global Tourism Promotion campaign in March next year, the Minister of Tourism Development, Christian Affairs and Wildlife, John Amaratunga announced.Amaratunga yesterday assumed duties as the Minister of Tourism Development and Christian Affairs and Wildlife in Colombo.After assuming duties, he noted that Sri Lanka Tourism may fall short of the tourist arrival target of 2.5 million for this year due to almost two months of political turmoil that persisted in the Island nation, which pushed several key tourism source markets of Sri Lanka Tourism to issue travel advisories fearing the safety of their citizens in Sri Lanka.

“Our original estimate was 2.5 million tourist arrivals with almost US$ 4 billion in tourism earnings for 2018. However, due to the political upheaval, there were travel advisories, and as a result I have been informed that there have been many cancellations. I am confident that we can regain the lost opportunities for Sri Lanka tourism,” he said.

The tourist arrivals for the first 11 months of the year stood at little over 2.08 million, up 11.2 percent Year-on-Year and Sri Lanka is likely to end up with around 2.3 million tourists for the year.Moreover, Amaratunga added that industry stakeholders had informed him about a slowdown in tourist bookings for January and February.
According to industry stakeholders, the industry has seen a slowdown of around 20 percent YoY in tourist bookings for January- February period.

The minister emphasised that as an immediate measure, he would meet with all foreign ambassadors in Sri Lanka to ensure the safety of tourists visiting the country, and will urge them to withdraw the travel advisories. “I intend to speak to all ambassadors and explain them that Sri Lanka has returned to normalcy and we still have authenticity, diversity and security to offer to all tourists coming here,” he said.

Speaking of tourism promotion campaigns, Amaratunga said the global promotional campaign will be launched at ITB in Berlin in March 2019 as scheduled earlier, while noting that the tourism promotional activities were in limbo during past couple of weeks.

He stressed that in order to reach targets of Sri Lanka’s tourism, the government would appoint ‘capable and able persons’ to top posts at Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau (SLTPB), Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority (SLTDA), Sri Lanka Institute of Tourism & Hotel Management (SLITHM) and Sri Lanka Convention Bureau.
The minister is expected to send a list of nominations for the Chairman post of these four intuitions for Prime Minister’s approval shortly. “The best people who can contribute to the development of the industry will be appointed, and no political henchman will be appointed,” he stressed.

Meanwhile, the former Secretary to the ministry prior to October 26 is likely to be reappointed as the Secretary to the Ministry of Tourism Development and Christian Affairs, while the Secretary to the Ministry of Tourism Development and Wildlife in the dissolved Cabinet, S. Hettiarachchi is likely to be appointed as the Secretary to the Ministry of Wildlife.

The minister also revealed that a new programme will be launched to promote home-stays among locals, to trickle down the benefits of tourism to the grassroots level, in particular, targeting hill country and some of coastal areas.

Cher joined the prestigious class of artists receiving recognition from the Kennedy Center for their lifetime contributions to American culture this year. With an Oscar, a Grammy, an Emmy and three Golden Globes, the legendary performer has plenty of hardware to show for her career spanning more than 50 years. To this day, few artists embody superstardom like her.

From her Malibu house overlooking the Pacific Coast, the place Cher has called home for the past 20 years, the iconic performer tells “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King that there’s a distinction between who she is here and who she is on stage.

“I don’t like going up to strangers. I don’t like going into restaurants … but when I’m working, I’m just another person. I’m this person who gets to be free. Cher, onstage, has no boundaries and when I go on stage … I have to go from my height to, like, 15 feet tall,” she said.

Born Cherilyn Sarkisian – her father was Armenian – Cher grew up in El Centro, California, and always loved singing. Her mother, Georgia Holt, is one of her strongest influences, someone she said she sounds just like.

Surprisingly, for a woman famous for her pipes, Cher said she doesn’t like her voice. “Well, it’s not my favorite thing,” she said.

But there are a few songs that she does enjoy hearing, like “You Haven’t Seen the Last of Me” and “Song For The Lonely.”

The one that she is over hearing, especially when others try to sing it is her iconic, “If I Could Turn Back Time.”

“It just always makes me crazy because everyone thinks they can do it, and nobody does it,” Cher said.

And nobody has a No. 1 song on the charts for six consecutive decades – except Cher. The 1960s would mark the start of her professional career. She still remembers meeting the man who would change the course of her life.

Viktor Orbán of Hungary is not to be hectored to. Arching with fury at the EU’s September motion to sanction Hungary for bad behaviour under the Article 7 process, he was resolved to ratchet things up. The motion, while getting 448 votes concerned about judicial independence, corruption, freedom of expression, academic freedom, the rights and migrants, amongst others did have 197 opponents. (48 abstained.) Spot, as it were, the east-west European divide.

There was a time when Hungary was known as the “merriest barracks in the socialist camp” dominated by more tempered form of “goulash communism”. The merriment, not to mention any gastronomic softness, has long soured, substituted by a more patriotic, state-centred sludge. Protesters are now being given the treatment that would not have been unseemly in the times of the Cold War.

A week-and-a-half of protests against the overtime law passed by the Fidesz majority yielded the police forces fifty arrests. Orbán’s ruling party could not see what the fuss was all about. The law in question increases the number of overtime hours employees can be made to work from 250 to 400, a calculation to be made after three years. Pity for those workers, given the exodus of Hungarian employees to western Europe.

Opposition members of Parliament keen to get more coverage from the state media on the protests have also been frogmarched out of the broadcaster’s headquarters. In future, they can expect even less in the way of discussion, given the decree of December 5 exempting the Central European Press and Media Foundation from regulatory oversight. That particular conglomerate is the result of a merger of some 480 pro-government media outlets.

All strong men need hearty, well-rounded enemies, and the Viktator’s latest efforts also feature a final decision on the subject of the Central European University. The university’s presence in Budapest offers Orbán a target of lightning rod value, given its link to the wily financier George Soros and US-accredited courses run at the university that has his backing.

In April 2017, a bill was passed imposing a requirement on foreign-funded universities to have a home country campus, and in the capital. But negotiations between the CEU and the government stuttered and stalled, prompting a move to Vienna effective from September 2019. “CEU has been forced out,” lamented the university’s president and rector Michael Ignatieff. “This is unprecedented. A US institution has been driven out of a country that is a NATO ally. A European institution has been ousted from a member state of the EU.”

The CEU-Orbán tussle illustrates the convoluted nature of central European politics and its association with US and European political forces. Fine for Ignatieff to complain about NATO and EU ties being ignored, but the Hungarian leader is a creature of confusing plumage happy to make the necessary, if costly sacrifices.

The confusion was given added succour with the remark made by Hungarian State Secretary Zoltán Kovács that, “The Soros university is leaving but staying. It’s common knowledge that a significant number of its courses will still be held in Budapest.” The CEU’s warnings were “nothing more than a Soros-style political bluff, which does not merit the attention of the government.”

While he speaks of a common heritage to be defended against the door banging barbarians from the east, Orbán is also very much the self-proclaimed leader of its protection, something that gives him bullyboy status in such matters as immigration.

Eyeing the Trump administration across the pond on how it would respond to the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, the Hungarian government followed suit and demonstrated cold indifference when the final draft was approved by all UN member states in July 2018. (In so doing, it also kept company with Israel, Austria, Poland, and Australia, all similarly reluctant to subscribe to its spirit.)

It says much that the GCM could cause such agitation, notwithstanding its non-binding nature. Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó went so far as to insist that, in exiting the adoption process related to the GCM, “the Global Compact is not binding with relation to Hungary.” Migration, he suggested, should not be organised but stopped. “Assistance must be taken to where the trouble is, and people in need must be given support to enable them to remain as close as possible to their homes, and return home at the earliest opportunity.”

It is convenient, more than anything, to assume that the Hungary that emerged from the Cold War thaw was somehow more liberal, hopeful for a caring state of mind open to consultation and deliberation. Authoritarianism was in retreat; the democrats could finally come out. More on all fours with reality, it always retained an authoritarian default position, one that makes an Orbán figure less incongruous than imagined.

The first post-communist government was more than accommodating to communists; subsequent political arrangements fed a more nationalist orientation. Orbán sold himself as the appropriate central force to deal with the lingering ailments of socialism while also curing the problems arising from the post-1989 transition. Now, he is proving what a certain type of European can do to that oft-misguided notion of “shared values”. Shared, yes, but by whom?

The December 17 UN Security Council meeting, on the announced creation of a Kosovo armed forces, featured some noticeable contrasts.

In accordance with Kosovo not being a UN member state and the Serb position on UN Security Council Resolution 1244 (recognizing Kosovo as a continued part of Serbia), the disputed former Yugoslav territory wasn’t formally represented at the discussion as a nation. Kosovo’s leader, Hashim Thaci, sat with a nameplate having his name, as opposed to Kosovo. Countries recognizing Kosovo’s independence made it a point to state Thaci as the president of Kosovo and Aleksandar Vučić as president of Serbia. Nations not recognizing Kosovo’s independence referred to Thaci as either Mr. Thaci or Mr. Hashim Thaci and Vučić as the president of Serbia.  

The UK was excessively biased against Serbia. Vučić noted the difference between the UK’s stance, versus a comparatively more objective approach among some other countries that recognized Kosovo’s independence. Kosovo’s independence is partly premised on a non-binding 2010 International Court of Justice advisory opinion, which said that Kosovo’s declaration of independence didn’t violate international law, while not saying whether Kosovo is properly independent, or should be independent. Having the right to declare independence doesn’t by itself mean that such a declaration should be fully recognized by others.     

The Serb and Kosovo leaders expressed differences of opinion on the conflict in Kosovo over the years. Vučić was the more even handed. Not mentioned was the casualty figure in Kosovo before the 1999 Clinton administration led NATO bombing campaign against Yugoslavia (then consisting of Serbia and Montenegro). In that period, the Serbs had the disproportionately greater casualty number. Within a 18 to 24 month period before the NATO action, 1,500-2,000 were killed out of a Kosovo population put at about 2 million. Serb casualties were in the 500-600 range. At the time, Kosovo had an Albanian population that was listed as high as 90%, with Serbs being somewhere around 10%. Serb sources note that their proportionate number in Kosovo has dwindled over the decades for several reasons, which include Albanian nationalist terrorism, some Serbs finding better opportunities elsewhere, a comparatively higher Albanian birthrate and a migration of Albanians from Albania to Kosovo.  

Thaci stated a wildly unproven figure of 20,000 raped in Kosovo by Serb forces. In the former Yugoslav wars, the purpose of number trumping casualties was for the losing party/parties to make the suffering look worse than reality, for the purpose of goading foreign military support for their side. In addition to Kosovo, this tactic was evident in the earlier Bosnian Civil War.  

In that Bosnian conflict, I very much recall the claims of a 200,000-350,000 casualty figure range, as well as some far fetched rape figures, said without meaning to diminish the seriousness of such a crime, regardless of the ethnicity of the perpetrator and victim. At the end of the Bosnian Civil War, others like myself, deduced that the actual fatality number was somewhere between 75,000-125,000. Years later, there has been a universal acknowledgement that the Bosnian Civil War death toll was in the area of 100,000. Those who wrongly hedged on the higher 200,000-350,000 figure, are nevertheless more likely to get greater Western mass media access, than the ones that got it right from the get go. (A related Bosnian Civil War fatality issue, concerns the different numerical takes of summary executions in and near Srebrenica.)  

As the UN Security Council discussed Kosovo, the UN General Assembly voted in favor of a non-binding pro-Kiev regime resolution on the Azov Sea. Notwithstanding, most of the UN member states didn’t vote for that resolution, with numerous abstentions and some no shows. Regarding the recent Kerch Strait incident (where the Azov Sea and Black Sea meet), a December 13 Consortium News feature, includes some comparisons that you’ll be hard pressed to find in US mass media circles.  

Excerpt

“As I said, I think the Russians had every right to be suspicious of the intent of the Ukrainian vessels. The Ukrainians know that these are Russian territorial waters. They know that the only way to go through the Kerch Strait is by making use of a Russian pilot. They refused to allow the Russians to pilot the ships through the strait. Whatever the Ukrainians’ ultimate intent was—whether it was to carry out an act of sabotage, to provoke the Russians into overreaction and then to demand help from NATO, or simply to go through the strait without a Russian pilot in order to enable President Poroshenko to proclaim the strait as non-Russian—whatever Kiev’s intent was, the Russians were entitled to respond. The force the Russians used was hardly excessive. In similar circumstances, the US would have destroyed all of the ships and killed everyone on board. Recall, incidentally, Israel has seized Gaza flotilla boats and arrested everyone on board. In 2010, the Israeli Navy shot nine activists dead during a flotilla boat seizure, and wounded one who died after four years in a coma.”  

I’m not so sure about the aforementioned US hypothetical. The Israeli example underscores that Russia acted in a peacefully responsible way, followed by some hypocrisy against it at the UN. Nikki  Haley is right about a biased element at the UN.  The likes of her don’t acknowledge their contribution to some of the unfair biases.  

This excerpt from the Consortium News feature brings into play the matter of Kosovo –  

“During the recent incident, the Ukrainian Navy acted provocatively, deliberately challenging the Russians. As for what the UNSC accepts, how would NATO respond if Serbia entered Kosovo on some pretext or other?”  

The last thought hits home on a point I repeatedly make on how the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia has served to impress Russia that pious BS aside, might essentially makes right. BTW, Kosovo doesn’t stand out as being socioeconomically and multi-ethnically better off than Crimea.

*Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic. This article first appeared at the Strategic Culture Foundation’s website on  December 21.

In a predictable development on Thursday, James Mattis has offered his resignation over President Trump’s announcement of withdrawal of American troops from Syria, though he would continue as the Secretary of Defense until the end of February till a suitable replacement is found. Speculations about replacing him were rife for several months, therefore the news doesn’t come as a surprise.

It would be pertinent to note here that regarding the Syria policy, there is a schism between the White House and the American deep state led by the Pentagon. After Donald Trump’s inauguration as the US president, he had delegated operational-level decisions in conflict zones such as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria to the Pentagon.

The Secretary of Defense James Mattis and the former National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster represented the institutional logic of the deep state in the Trump administration and were instrumental in advising Donald Trump to escalate the conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria.

They had advised President Trump to increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan from 8,400 to 14,000. And in Syria, they were in favor of the Pentagon’s policy of training and arming 30,000 Kurdish border guards to patrol Syria’s northern border with Turkey.

Both the decisions spectacularly backfired on the Trump administration. The decision to train and arm 30,000 Kurdish border guards infuriated the Erdogan administration to the extent that Turkey mounted Operation Olive Branch in the Kurdish-held enclave of Afrin in Syria’s northwest on January 20. Remember that it was the second military operation by the Turkish forces against the Kurdish-held areas in northern Syria. The first Operation Euphrates Shield in Jarabulus and Azaz lasted from August 2016 to March 2017.

Nevertheless, after capturing Afrin on March 18, the Turkish armed forces and their Free Syria Army proxies have now set their sights further east on Manbij, where the US Special Forces are closely cooperating with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, in line with the long-held Turkish military doctrine of denying the Kurds any Syrian territory west of River Euphrates.

After Donald Trump’s announcement of withdrawal of American troops from Syria on Wednesday, clearly an understanding has been reached between Washington and Ankara. According to the terms of the agreement, the Erdogan administration released the US pastor Andrew Brunson on October 12, which had been the longstanding demand of the Trump administration, and has also decided not to make public the audio recordings of the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, which could have implicated another US-ally the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman in the assassination; and in return, the Trump administration has given a free hand to Ankara to mount an offensive in the Kurdish-held areas in northern Syria and has also decided to withdraw 2000 US troops from northern and eastern Syria.

Another reason why the Trump administration has given a free hand to the Erdogan administration to mount an offensive against the Kurdish-held areas in northern Syria is that Ankara has been drifting away from Washington’s orbit into the Kremlin’s sphere of influence.

Turkey, which has the second largest army in NATO, has been cooperating with Russia in Syria against Washington’s interests since last year and has placed an order for the Russian-made S-400 missile system, though that deal too has been thrown into doubt after Washington’s recent announcement of selling $3.5 billion worth of Patriot missile systems to Ankara.

Regarding the Kurdish factor in the Syrian civil war, it would be pertinent to mention that unlike the pro-America Iraqi Kurds led by the Barzani family, the Syrian PYD/YPG Kurds as well as the Syrian government have been ideologically aligned because both are socialists and have traditionally been in the Russian sphere of influence.

The Syrian civil war is a three-way conflict between the Sunni Arab militants, the Shi’a-led government and the Syrian Kurds, and the net beneficiaries of this conflict have been the Syrian Kurds who have expanded their areas of control by aligning themselves first with the Syrian government against the Sunni Arab militants since the beginning of the Syrian civil war in August 2011 to August 2014, when the US policy in Syria was “regime change” and the CIA was indiscriminately training and arming the Sunni Arab militants against the Shi’a-led government in the border regions of Turkey and Jordan with the help of Washington’s regional allies: Turkey, Jordan and the Gulf states, all of which belong to the Sunni denomination.

In August 2014, however, the US declared a war against one faction of the Sunni Arab militants, the Islamic State, when the latter overran Mosul and Anbar in early 2014, and Washington made a volte-face on its previous “regime change” policy and started conducting air strikes against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Thus, shifting the goalposts in Syria from the impossible objective of “regime change” to the realizable goal of defeating the Islamic State.

After this reversal of policy by Washington, the Syrian Kurds took advantage of the opportunity and struck an alliance with the US against the Islamic State at Masoud Barzani’s bidding, thus further buttressing their position against the Sunni Arab militants as well as the Syrian government.

More to the point, for the first three years of the Syrian civil war from August 2011 to August 2014, an informal pact existed between the Syrian government and the Syrian Kurds against the onslaught of the Sunni Arab militants until the Kurds broke off that arrangement to become the centerpiece of Washington’s policy in the region.

In accordance with the aforementioned pact, the Syrian government informally acknowledged Kurdish autonomy; and in return, the Kurdish militias jointly defended the areas in northeastern Syria, specifically al-Hasakah, alongside the Syrian government troops against the advancing Sunni Arab militant groups, particularly the Islamic State.

Fact of the matter is that the distinction between Islamic jihadists and purported ‘moderate rebels’ in Syria is more illusory than real. Before it turned rogue and overran Mosul in Iraq in June 2014, Islamic State used to be an integral part of the Syrian opposition and it still enjoys close ideological and operational ties with other militant groups in Syria.

It’s worth noting that although turf wars are common not just between the Islamic State and other militant groups operating in Syria but also among rebel groups themselves, the ultimate objective of the Islamic State and the rest of militant outfits operating in Syria was the same: to overthrow the government of Bashar al-Assad.

Regarding the Syrian opposition, a small fraction of it is comprised of defected Syrian soldiers who go by the name of Free Syria Army, but the vast majority has been comprised of Islamic jihadists and armed tribesmen who have been generously funded, trained, armed and internationally legitimized by their regional and global patrons.

Islamic State is nothing more than one of numerous Syrian militant outfits, others being: al-Nusra Front, Ahrar al-Sham, Jaysh al Islam etc. All the militant groups that are operating in Syria are just as fanatical and brutal as the Islamic State. The only feature that differentiates the Islamic State from the rest is that it is more ideological and independent-minded.

The reason why the US turned against the Islamic State is that all other Syrian militant outfits only have local ambitions that are limited to fighting the Syrian government, while the Islamic State established a global network of transnational terrorists that includes hundreds of Western citizens who have become a national security risk to the Western countries.

A new study by researchers at the Universities of Montana, Valle de México, Boise State, Universidad Veracruzana, Instituto Nacional de Pediatría and Paul-Flechsig-Institute for Brain Research heightens together with German company Analytik Jena concerns over the evolving and relentless Alzheimer’s pathology observed in young Metropolitan Mexico City (MMC) urbanites.

These findings are published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.

Mexico City children have lifetime exposures to concentrations of air pollutants above the current USA standards, including fine particulate matter (PM _2.5). Metropolitan Mexico City is an example of extreme urban growth and serious environmental pollution and millions of children are involuntarily exposed to harmful concentrations of PM _2.5 every day since conception.

This study focused on studying 507 CSF normal samples from children, teens and young adults average age 12.8±6.7 years from MMC and control cities with low levels of air pollutants, using a high affinity monoclonal non-phosphorylated tau antibody (Non-P-Tau) as a potential biomarker of AD and axonal damage. In 81 samples, researchers also measured total tau (T-Tau), tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-Tau), amyloid-β _1-42, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), insulin, leptin and inflammatory mediators. Authors documented by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) myelinated axonal size, and the pathology associated with combustion-derived nanoparticles-iron rich, highly oxidant CDNPs- in anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) white matter in 6 young residents (4 MMC, 2 controls). Non-P-Tau showed a strong increase with age significantly faster among MMC versus controls. Anterior cingulate cortex showed significant decrease in the average axonal size and CDNPs were associated with organelle pathology in MMC residents.

Non-P-Tau exhibited significant increases with age, an important finding in a young population where axonal changes are present and AD hallmarks are evolving steadily in the first two decades of life.

Non-P-Tau is potentially an early biomarker of axonal damage and AD axonal pathology in highly exposed young populations.

Drs.Lilian Calderón-Garcidueñas and Lachmann commented air pollution is a serious public health issue and exposures to concentrations of air pollutants at or above the current standards have been linked to neuroinflammation and high risk of Alzheimer’s disease. Jung et al., 2015 found a 138% risk of increase of AD per increase of 4.34 μg/m³ in PM _2.5 suggesting long-term exposure to PM _2.5, as well as ozone above the current US EPA standards are associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease. In the USA alone, 200 million people live in areas where pollutants such as ozone and fine particulate matter exceed the standards.

The international team of researchers stated efforts should be aimed to identify and mitigate environmental factors influencing the development of Alzheimer’s disease and neuroprotection of children and young adults ought to be a public health priority to halt the development of Alzheimer in the first two decades of life.

Dozens of Turks at risk at home from their affiliation with the man accused of mounting a failed coup against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan have found haven in Albania. But ‘brotherly’ ties between Ankara and Tirana keep them on their toes.

By Vladimir Karaj

Early one August morning in 2016, Esin and Huseyin Sakinmaz filled their car with canned food and left their home in Istanbul. They headed south, but had little idea where they would end up.

Fearing highway cameras would record their licence plates, they took country roads for hundreds of kilometres. For three days and three nights, they ate, slept and lived in their car. They did not ask anyone for directions so as not to attract attention.

“As my husband drove I felt paralysed, unable to murmur a word; my mind was numb, I couldn’t feel anything,” Esin recalled two years later, seated on a park bench on Tirana’s central Skenderbej square, named after the medieval Albanian warrior prince who rebelled against the Ottoman Turks.

A mother of three young children, Esin worked as a communications specialist at an Istanbul office of the Gulen Movement, created by the US-based Muslim cleric Fethullah Gulen and operating a vast network of schools around the world.

On July 15, 2016, after crushing a coup, Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, pinned the blame on Gulen and unleashed a withering crackdown.

When 56 friends and colleagues in her office were arrested in mid-August, Esin feared she would be next.

Leaving their children with her parents, Esin and her husband hit the road, eventually reaching Adana in southern Turkey, from where Esin took a flight to the United States on August 30, 2016. More than two years later, in October, the family was reunited in the Albanian capital.

Gulen has denied any involvement in the failed putsch, in which 251 people died.

But Erdogan, in power for 15 years, moved quickly to take revenge. According to Amnesty International, more than 50,000 people accused of links to the Gulen Movement have been jailed, with as many more facing prosecution. More than 130,000 people have been fired from the military, police, civil service and academia.

Many more are believed to have fled fearing persecution, with nearly 14,000 seeking asylum in the European Union last year alone, according to the bloc’s statistics office, Eurostat.

An estimated 60 families have sought refuge in Albania, a predominantly Muslim country once ruled by the Ottoman Turks but now a member of NATO and a candidate for accession to the EU. They have joined a community of Turkish teachers and administrators working in Gulen schools in Tirana since the early 1990s after communism fell.

Esin and her peers are considered ‘terrorists’ by the Turkish government, which has put pressure on the government of Albania and others in the Balkans for their extradition. Tirana has so far resisted, but its Turkish community still lives in fear.

Over a period of several months, BIRN interviewed a number of Gulen followers who escaped Turkey for Albania. Wanted in their homeland, often shunned by their own families, they have not yet sought asylum and fear for their security given the considerable political and economic clout Turkey wields in the Balkans.

In countries like Albania, which have weak economies and are desperate for foreign investment, “Erdogan can do many things with money,” said a 43-year-old journalist who fled Turkey for Tirana. He gave his name as Ismail.

“Albanians love Erdogan”

Part of the Ottoman Empire until the early twentieth century, Albania is today pushing for membership of the EU, which has grown increasingly critical of Erdogan’s authoritarian bent.

Tirana, however, has historically had strong ties with Ankara and benefits from Turkish investment. Prime Minister Edi Rama has referred to Erdogan as “our brother and inseparable friend” and his government is working with Ankara on construction of an airport in the southern coastal city of Vlora and creation of a national airline.

Erdogan and his allies have called on Tirana and other Balkan states to shut down any Gulen schools on their territory; Albania has so far resisted, insisting local legislation must be respected, but Rama has referred to the Gulen Movement as “dangerous”.

“When it comes to Albania, we keep under observation people who are supposedly linked to that network,” he said in a television interview in May this year.

Turkey stepped up the pressure in October with a visit by Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu.

“We don’t harbour terrorists from Albania,” Cavusoglu told a Tirana press conference with his Albanian counterpart, Ditmir Bushati. “We expect the same of our Albanian friends.”

In response, Bushati said Albania would adhere to “all international charters for extraditions.”

Public statements aside, Albania is torn between the need to maintain good ties with Ankara and the expectations of the EU that it support the human rights of those who have fled Erdogan’s rule.

A senior Albanian government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told BIRN that concern within the cabinet deepened after Cavusoglu’s visit.

“The Sultan asks of us things we cannot deliver,” the source quoted Bushati as telling Rama during a cabinet meeting after the visit. Rama responded with a nod of his head, the source said.

According to Albania’s Ministry of Interior, 35 Turkish citizens have applied for asylum in Albania since 2016. Several times that number are actually believed to have fled for Albania.

The Gulen followers in Albania who spoke to BIRN said they had not sought official asylum for fear of exposure. They say Rama’s close relationship with Erdogan puts them at risk.

One of them, the journalist called Ismail, made his way to Tirana after the failed coup having been dismissed by text message from the TV station where he worked. Speaking in his rented apartment in a Tirana suburb, Ismail said he had no plans to seek asylum in Albania.

“In the worst case scenario, if circumstances will not be in our favor, I will seek asylum from another European country,” he said.

A Turkish businessman who relocated to Tirana with his family after authorities seized several million of euros of his money said he too feared the warm ties between Rama and Erdogan.

“Erdogan and Rama are close friends,” he said, sipping Turkish tea in a bar on the outskirts of the capital. “Albanians love Erdogan.”

Nevertheless, Mustafa Ustuner, administrator of the Gulen-led Turkish high schools in Albania, said that they had not faced any problems from the authorities. He described his life in Albania as “calm, happy and safe”, but that pressure from the Turkish government had made work more difficult.

“Some of the previous shareholders were Turkish citizens that lived in Turkey,” he told BIRN. “Affected by the pressure and fear present in Turkey, they decided to withdraw from the company, passing their shares to shareholders who live outside Turkey,” he said.  

Turkey unrecognisable

Esin expected to be reunited with her family soon after she flew to the US. With the help of her father, she started a company in Texas, but the money quickly dried up after his Turkish bank accounts were frozen.

Her husband, Huseyin, who had served as a headmaster for a Gulen High School in Istanbul, was refused a US visa. Left alone with their children, he returned to Istanbul, but did not feel safe.

In November 2016, Huseyin moved to Bosnia and later applied for a resident permit in Kosovo, a neighbour of Albania.

Then in January 2017, he returned to Turkey, took the children and relocated to Tirana with the help of an Albanian friend. Esin, meanwhile, travelled to Canada, where she was granted asylum.

 In October she flew to Albania to be reunited with her family. Huseyin also applied for asylum in Canada and was awaiting a response from Canadian authorities when they were interviewed for this story.

Tirana has become a popular destination among Gulen followers due to the low cost of living. But its weak economy means many do not set down roots. Rather, most see it as a transit point to the West. None expect to return to Turkey.

“People became wicked. I don’t understand how it happened,” Esin told BIRN, describing a Turkey where people informed on their neighbours for 5,000 lira.

“There was a feeling of fear, entire families were divided,” she said through tears.

Ismail, too, recalled harrowing days in Turkey before he fled. His neighbours drafted a plan to expel him and his family from their apartment, he said, and would not let their children play together.

Others, he said, were branded, their front doors sprayed with the letter ‘F’, denoting FETO, or the Gulenist Terrorist Organisation, as the authorities refer to the Gulen Movement.

Two years on, Ismail says he is still in touch with his mother but that his brother and neighbours have urged her to cut all ties with him.

“They all see her as the mother of a ‘terrorist’, but I have never touched a gun in my life,” he said.

All those interviewed by BIRN dismissed the accusations made against them and the Gulen Movement. But the pressure is unrelenting, they say.

“You know you are innocent, but the people and society continuously put pressure on you,” said Huseyin Sakinmaz said. “There comes a point when you ask yourself did I maybe make a mistake that I should face such difficulties.”

The long arm of Turkish law

In 2016, the Turkish government instigated a campaign to bring back the so-called ‘escaped enemies’ after the failed coup, but also those who had left years earlier.

Around 100 people have been extradited to Turkey since, including six teachers hastily deported from Kosovo in March 2018 in an operation involving Turkish intelligence and condemned by the country’s own prime minister, Ramush Haradinaj. Bosnia and Macedonia have also come under pressure.

The campaign has worsened already strained relations between Turkey and its Western NATO allies, including Washington, which has refused to interfere in Gulen’s self-imposed exile in Pennsylvania.

Ankara says it has handed Tirana a list of names, but no one has been extradited yet.

“The Turkish government is using every method and tactic,” said Abdullah Bozkurt, the former head of the English service of the Turkish daily Zaman, who was seized and closed by the state in March 2016. Bozkurt left Turkey in July 2016 after 47 colleagues were arrested following the coup. He received asylum in Sweden, where he runs an organisation created by Turkish exiles and called the Stockholm Center for Freedom, which promotes the rule of law, democracy and democratic rights with a focus on Turkey.

 “They are offering contracts, money, favours and intergovernmental agreement in order to make this happen,” he said via Skype.

Bozkurt said Turkish embassies were heading up a campaign of intimidation, targeting Turkish exiles but with an eye on scaring those still in Turkey.

“It’s part of the intimidation campaign to maintain a climate of fear inside Turkey,” he said.

“You could be outside the country but are never secure because we will follow you, will punish you, throw you in jail and you will never see the light of day.”

The Gulen followers BIRN interviewed said they were sure they were under surveillance and never ventured into the city unaccompanied.

Ismail said that though he had not told his Tirana address to anyone, the Turkish police had shown it to his brother in Istanbul, along with other details, during an interrogation.

He said he noticed three Turkish-speaking people close to the apartment where he lived, watching anyone coming and going.   

“Every time we read an article about Erdogan we get scared,” said Ismail. “Barely a week goes by without an adviser or spokesperson of the president declaring that no one should feel secure… ‘We will find a way,’ they say, to pack us up and bring us back.”

For the same reason, Esin and Huseyin initially asked that the not be identified in this article should they still be in Albania when it was published. At the end of October, they sent a short email hinting that they had left the country.

“You can now publish the interview in full,” they wrote. “It’s not a problem for us anymore.”

Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-o-cha has laid the groundwork to entrench the military in power, analysts told BenarNews, as 2018 draws to a close and Thailand prepares for a general election next year – the first since he led an army coup that toppled a civilian government in 2014.

In 2018, after multiple earlier postponements and repeated promises of steering the country back on a democratic path and returning government to civilian rule, the retired general who heads the junta set into motion the final steps for holding national polls between February and May 2019.

But observers likened the past year’s moves to the military stage-managing the country’s first general election since 2011, when Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra came to power.

“This election doesn’t mean a return to democracy, but a return to the same old power structure in the name of democracy,” said Titipol Phakdeewanich, dean of the political science faculty at Ubon Ratchathani University, 611 km (381 miles) northeast of Bangkok.

“It isn’t a real democracy, but just a move by the junta to legitimize its retention of power,” he told BenarNews.

Titipol echoed criticism espoused by opposition figures, academicians and others, who have accused the junta under Prayuth of taking calculated steps to fortify its power base, ensuring the military’s influence over politics even after the 2019 election.

“We can say that the election will not be fair and square,” Titipol said. “To have a fair and square election, there must be transparency and an equal chance for politicians and parties to speak freely. At the moment, we don’t have full freedom of expression.”

Titipol was referring to an array of laws aimed at gagging dissent that were been passed by the junta-backed parliament, in a country that already had Lese-Majeste, a strict anti-royal defamation law that forbids insults to members of the Thai monarchy.

PM: Constitution ‘legitimate’

Prayuth, 64, oversaw the passing of a new constitution just two years after he launched a putsch following months of protests against Yingluck. She is now in self-imposed exile with her older brother Thaksin, a former telecommunications tycoon who served as prime minister from 2001 until he was also overthrown on Sept. 19, 2006.

The new army-drafted constitution essentially installed the military as a permanent powerbroker, analysts said, because the charter allows for an unelected prime minister and a 250-member Senate entirely appointed by the military.

During an interview with Time magazine in June this year, Prayuth defended the constitution, saying it was passed through an August 2016 referendum supported by 60 percent of more than 16 million voters.

“I believe this constitution is legitimate as it has been approved by the public,” Prayuth said. “It has all necessary mechanisms.”

Prayuth told Time that seizing power was “the most difficult decision I ever made in my life,” but he has also kept a long silence on whether he will try to prolong his public life.

In September, local newspapers quoted Prayuth as telling reporters: “I can say right now that I’m interested in politics.”

In early December, the prime minister lifted a four-year ban on political activities ahead of next year’s polls.

Prayuth, in a Royal Gazette statement, said he had determined that now was the time to lift political restrictions because a royal decree on the general election was approaching.

“It is apparent that there will be an election in the near future, which is a crucial transition for the country’s future, therefore, people should take part in choosing political parties to govern the country freely,” he said.

After he toppled Yingluck’s government amid street demonstrations that claimed at least 28 lives and injured 700 others, Prayuth installed himself as prime minister and head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) – the official name of the junta.

Under Prayuth’s leadership, the junta filed charges against Yingluck, who fled Thailand in August 2017 before she was to appear in court to hear the verdict over charges of gross negligence in a failed rice subsidy scheme during her tenure.

Both Yingluck and Thaksin claim that the charges against them were politically motivated. They were photographed on Tuesday outside a noodle house in Singapore.

‘Process is already transparent’

Analysts also foresee that next year’s polls will be tainted with questions about fairness and transparency.

On Wednesday, Thai Foreign Minister Don Pramudwinai clarified his controversial statement over allowing international observers at the upcoming election, explaining that having foreigners monitoring the election would only show that Thailand had internal problems.

“I don’t mean we should reject international observers,” he said. “But we are experienced enough and the process is already transparent.”

Since it took power, the junta has issued and enforced decrees, prohibited parties from conducting political activities and barred more than five people from gathering in public. Then it repeatedly delayed the election on the grounds of constitutional and legislative steps necessary to take place before a balloting.

The NCPO has prosecuted about 100 people since taking power on charges of violating Lese-Majeste, under which offenders can be sentenced to as many as 15 years in prison, according to rights groups. The law, which has been in place since 1908, has been increasingly enforced since Prayuth took power.

Earlier this year, police charged seven pro-democracy activists with sedition and defying a ban on public gatherings for leading a January demonstration that drew about 100 people in downtown Bangkok.

Anusorn Unno, dean of sociology and anthropology at Thammasat University in Bangkok, told BenarNews that the upcoming election was planned “to let some parties take an advantage.”

“It is highly likely that the junta will hold on to power and will not enter politics outright because of the high risk,” Anusorn said. “So they ‘play the chase’ to find all the ways to win the election.”

Views from the people

But Puripong Suthisopapan, a 33-year-old businessman, expressed skepticism by telling BenarNews that he expected Prayuth to enter politics “one way or the other.”

“I believe the election will be most unfair,” Puripong said, citing reports of cash handouts ahead of the election.

“I believe he wants to retain the power through election for his own benefits,” he said, referring to Prayuth.

Three months ago, several members of the junta created the Phalang Pracharat Party, which would field candidates in the parliamentary polls. Analysts said it could provide Prayuth a vehicle for his political ambitions.

By running a pro-military party in the general election and wooing other parties in the race for the parliament’s lower house, the junta could further dominate politics in Thailand even after the election, analysts said.

Despite comments from academicians and analysts questioning the fairness of next year’s balloting, there are still many Thais who believe Prayuth will not manipulate electoral results.

One of them is Kitti Tantivejjanond, 65, a retired businessman who lives in Bangkok

“Prayuth respects the election result and I’m confident he will transfer power to the new government,” Kitti told BenarNews.

On December 10, 1948 the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and proclaimed that “[a]ll human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Specifically, this Declaration spelled out basic human rights, such as the right to life and liberty (Article 3), freedom from slavery (Article 4), freedom from torture (Article 5), freedom of movement and residence (Article 13), among other things. This year marks its 70th anniversary and many events were organized globally in commemoration of the solemn proclamation of the fundamental and inalienable human rights. With the humble recognition that others are entitled to the same rights and equal dignity that we are entitled to, humanity’s future becomes better and brighter for moral growth and spiritual evolution.

But North Korea, or DPRK, has persistently stayed away from human rights for the past 70 years and continues its outlaw behavior in the international community. This pathetic state only knows robbery, hacking, forgery, and deception as virtues, and has worked its way through illegality to sustain its financial portfolio. This sick-minded regime has sent their men overseas for slave labor and even traded their women as sex slaves. Yet the regime’s leader, who has gained excess weight due to indulgence in food and wine consumption, has spent the overworked and starving men and women’s hard-earned money for extravagant imports, such as a brand-new Rolls-Royce Phantom for himself and kinky lingerie sets for the girls in his “pleasure squad,” to which his current wife once belonged also.

This is a regime in which the chubby man is literally a living god, and other humans were born to function as the nuts and bolts of his corrupt system and be servile to him. In this regime people are expandable goods, and human rights are simply unheard of. The regime’s doctrine states that it recognizes only “one person”—the chubby leader—and all others exist on his behalf and for his pleasure. Anyone who displeased him or accidentally touched a nerve has faced their fate before the firing squad. No one shows sympathy with the dead since they were “criminals” having committed the unforgiveable crime of displeasing the leader. The residents in Pyongyang begin their days with humble bows towards the embalmed bodies of the regime’s ruthless back-to-back tyrants, stately laid in the capital’s “Museum of the Dead.”

Kim Jong Un, the regime’s third and current tyrant—and surely the last one—has already surpassed his two predecessors in the use of excess violence and extreme cruelty for oppressive rule. The degree and extent of the barbarity and sadistic cruelty committed by this psychopathic regime constitute a prime case of crime against humanity. It is the responsibility of the civilized world to keep documented evidence of violence done by the regime against its people. The day of judgment is nearing. I will give a summary of Chol Hwan Kang’s report, delivered at a recent human rights forum held at South Korea’s National Assembly, of the public executions carried out in North Korea between 2010 to 2018, during which time Kim Jong Un has been the de facto ruler. Kang was himself a detainee at the notorious Yoduk, North Korea camp for political prisoners but managed to escape.

For the past 8 years, the number of confirmed high-level executions alone has reached 421, including Kim Il Sung’s son-in-law and eldest grandson, and this figure does not include those executed, tortured to death, and incarcerated in concentration camps over the years. This is estimated to be at least 20,000, including the victims’ families. Many were publicly executed in an abhorrible and unprecedented manner: they were shot with anti-aircraft guns, not rifles, and any bodily remains then were burned with flame-throwers. The execution of Jang Song Thaek, the leader’s uncle and Kim Il Sung’s son-in-law made the headline in 2013, as it broke for the first time the regime’s 70-year-old taboo that prohibited Kim’s family members from capital punishment. Jang’s wife, who was Kim Il Sung’s daughter, violently protested her husband’s execution and was later found murdered too. The regime’s first-born grandson and half-brother of Jong Un’s then was murdered at the Kuala Lumpur Airport with military-grade nerve agent. In North Korea their executions would be impossible and unthinkable without orders from Kim Jong Un.

When Kim’s orchestra band members were executed, their unrecognizable bodies riddled with bullets and already reduced to fleshy chunks were then crushed and bulldozed with armored vehicles. Their crime? They gossiped about the appearance of Kim’s wife in adult movies with them when she was a band member. The regime’s defense secretary also became a victim before the firing squad with anti-aircraft guns. His crime? The 66-year-old general dozed when the 31-year-old leader was delivering a public speech. Many victims were executed together with their family members, including infants and children, since it is the regime’s motto to “wipe out the traitors’ roots and DNA permanently,” which is effectively ethnic cleansing. These barbaric executions and cruel handling of political prisoners made the beholders speechless and numb with fears.

In North Korea, executions of party officials and military officers need direct approval and hand-signed orders from the leader, which lets us have a glimpse into his psychopathic inner world. The use of excess violence and extreme cruelty against those who displeased him reveal the shaky foundation of Kim’s authoritarianism. His extreme cowardice for his own safety masked his violent behaviors. His fear for public leaks of his shabby past has become sheer paranoia. The cosmetic surgery he underwent to become his grandfather’s lookalike showcases his lack of confidence and psychological instability.

In an interview with a Japanese newspaper, Kim’s murdered half-brother once identified Kim Ok as Jong Un’s biological mother; the few in the family who knew it—Uncle Jang, Aunt Kim, and Jong Nam himself—have all been murdered now. That explosive remark revealed that Jong Un was a product of his father’s extramarital affair with the 21-year-old aide at the time and was raised by his step mother, Ko Yong Hee (who was a Korean-Japanese dancer lured into North Korea and later became his father’s favorite). Like the band members who knew too much about the promiscuous life of Jong Un’s wife, Kim Ok’s father and brother were also brutally executed under Kim’s order; rumor has it that Kim Ok was either executed or imprisoned in a concentration camp.

A North Korean defector who worked at the regime’s Record and Documentation Bureau testified that the documents she handled included a hand-signed order from Kim Jong Il, the current leader’s father, that demanded political prisoners be used as live targets in the shooting range in lieu of animals, where small arms under development had been tested. This maniacal act by the North Korean tyrant, she said, made her blood boil. Her testimony made my blood boil, too.

Anyone with military training can tell how long 7 days in a boot camp feels like. For North Koreans, it was not 7 months or 7 years. They have endured 70 years in the psychopathic Kim family’s insane asylum of maniacal oppression, living their days no better than a writhing heap of maggots inside the body of a dead rat. I consider the chubby Kim’s generational tyranny to be unacceptable contempt for humanity. If the international community does not stand up to rectify this serious situation, that would mean acceptance of the contempt. The people of North Korea are too weak to break free of the statewide web of surveillance and the layers of secrecy that the regime has installed for around-the-clock oppression. If we take no action to help them out of the pit, that would mean acceptance of ourselves as being helpless and deformed beasts. Are we? I say we are not. Food is not what the ordinary North Koreans urgently need. What they desperately want is freedom and liberation from tyranny and endless persecution. North Koreans are strong enough to find ways to live on once they are freed from incarceration and totalitarian oppression. They have been waiting 70 years for the gigantic steel gate to be broken open from the outside. Yes, for 70 years.

*Max S. Kim received his PhD in cognitive science from Brandeis University and taught at the University of Washington and the State University of New York at Albany. Besides his own field of profession, he occasionally writes on regional affairs of the East Asia, including the two Koreas.

President Donald Trump said Sunday that Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan will become the acting Pentagon chief on January 1, replacing Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who announced his resignation last week.

“I am pleased to announce that our very talented Deputy Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan, will assume the title of Acting Secretary of Defense starting January 1, 2019,” Trump tweeted, moving to push current Defense Secretary Mattis out of his post two months early.

Shanahan, a former Boeing executive, was named Deputy Secretary of Defense in 2017.

Mattis’ resignation letter, submitted to Trump in person on Friday, had said he would leave the post on February 28.

The defense secretary’s decision came one day after Trump announced he would withdraw some 2,000 U.S. troops from Syria, a move the Pentagon opposed.

Mattis did not mention the dispute over Syria in his letter, but he did note his “core belief” that U.S. strength is “inextricably linked” with the nation’s alliances with other countries.

President Trump first announced Mattis’s departure on Twitter, saying the former four-star Marine general will retire “with distinction.”

While not mentioning Trump by name, the letter from Mattis outlined sharp differences between his views and those of the president, notably on the importance of allies and the use of U.S. power.

(RFE/RL) — Turkey has begun bolstering its military presence on both sides of its border with Syria, just days after U.S. President Donald Trump announced he would withdraw all 2,000 U.S. troops currently based in Syria.

The move comes as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke with Trump by telephone on December 23, with the two leaders agreeing on military and diplomatic coordination to prevent a power vacuum forming as the U.S. pulls out.

Reuters said an eyewitness saw hundreds of Turkish military vehicles moving into the southern border province of Kilis from neighboring Hatay Province.

Turkey’s IHA news agency reported that a convoy of Turkish forces crossed into Syria during the night of December 22-23.

The Turkish military has not commented on the troop movements.

In a post on Twitter, Trump said he and Erdogan had discussed “the slow & highly coordinated pullout of US troops from the area.”

U.S. troops have been in Syria working with a Kurdish militia to fight the Islamic State terrorist organization. Turkey views the militia as a “terrorist offshoot” of Kurdish militants waging an insurgency inside of Turkey.

The US State Department has issued a warning to tourists planning to travel to Barcelona, Spain over the holiday season of an increased chance of a terrorist attack around Christmas and the New Year.

The State department tweeted its travel warning on Sunday, suggesting that visitors to Spain over the holiday season should be wary of moving vehicles, tourist areas and transport hubs, as “terrorists may attack with little or no warning.”

US travel services’ advisory level for Spain stands at two out of four, just below “Reconsider travel”.

Barcelona and nearby Cambrils were the scenes of two van-ramming attacks in August last year, which killed a total of 16 people and injured over 150. The country’s own terror alert level has been at level four out of five, or “high”, since the January 2015 terrorist attack on the Charlie Hebdo weekly in neighboring France

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani plans to submit his administration’s proposed budget bill for the next Iranian fiscal year (which will begin in March 2019) to the parliament on Tuesday, a lawmaker said.

Speaking to the Tasnim News Agency, Asadollah Abbasi, a member of the parliament’s presiding board, said President Rouhani is slated to attend a meeting of the parliament on Tuesday, December 25, and hand over the national budget bill for the next year.

There has been some delay in submitting the budget bill. According to the internal regulations of the Iranian parliament, the administration should present the annual budget bill by December 5 each year.

It is submitted by the president to the legislature for review and approval.

Once the parliamentarians endorse the government’s proposed budget bill, it will go to the Guardian Council, the constitutional supervisory body, for ratification before becoming law.

By Ismiri Lutfia Tisnadibrata

The tsunami that struck the Indonesian islands of Java and Sumatra late on Saturday has so far claimed 222 lives, injured 843 people and damaged hundreds of buildings. It was thought to have been caused by undersea landslides following the Mount Anak Krakatau volcanic eruption in Sunda Strait, between the two islands.

Indonesian social media was abuzz with criticism toward the country’s official response for downplaying initial reports of a tsunami. 

The Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) tweeted on Saturday night that the waves which hit coastal areas on both sides of the strait were high tidal waves caused by the full moon. It advised people to stay calm and ended its tweet with a sunglasses emoji.

It revised the tweet shortly afterwards and announced that the agency had not recorded any seismic activities that could have triggered a tsunami. It also acknowledged that the emoji on its previous tweet was inappropriate.

The spokesman for the National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB), Sutopo Purwo Nugroho, who has become a reliable source for the series of disasters that have hit Indonesia, announced shortly after midnight on Sunday that tidal waves had swamped beaches in Lampung province on the southern tip of Sumatra and in Banten on the western coast of Java. 

BMKG head Dwikorita Karnawati said in an early morning, televised press conference said the agency’s tide gauges detected a rise on the sea level but could not immediately determine whether it was a tsunami and needed more time to analyze it.

“Further analysis showed that the wave was indeed a tsunami. The pattern of the waves were similar to that in Palu,” Karnawati said, referring to the tsunami triggered by undersea landslide that followed a 7.5 magnitude earthquake and hit Palu and its neighboring districts on Sept 28. The BMKG was also under fire for lifting its tsunami early warning too early following the Palu earthquake.

BNPB’s Nugroho has since apologized for the error in his earlier announcement which stated that the wave was only tidal surge waves instead of a tsunami, saying that BNPB based its announcement on the BMKG’s analysis. 

“The BMKG and the Geology Agency are still examining the undersea landslides,” Nugroho said in a press conference from Yogyakarta on Sunday afternoon. “It was difficult to provide early warning for tsunami caused by undersea landslides,” he added. 

No tsunami warning was issued as the result of the confusion on the agencies’ initial assessment. The BMKG said that, based on the geology agency’s record, the eruption occurred at 9.03pm on Saturday, and the tsunami hit coastal areas in Lampung and Banten at 9.27pm. The authorities have not provided information on the height of the waves.

The worst hit area was the Pandeglang district of Banten, where popular beach resorts were packed with holiday-goers spending the Christmas and New Year holiday season. The western Java transmission unit of the state electricity company, PLN, was having a staff and family outing at one resort and had hired a band called Seventeen. Video footage showed the wave crashing over the stage as the band performed. The band said it had lost its bassist, guitarist and road manager, and that other members, including the wife of the singer, were still unaccounted for.

Nugroho said 164 people were killed in the district, with 446 houses, nine hotels, 350 vessels and boats and 73 vehicles badly damaged. 

“This is a lesson for us because we don’t have early warning system for tsunami triggered by undersea landslides or volcanic activities,” Nugroho said. 

The Mount Anak Krakatau volcano is a new volcano that began to form in 1927 in the caldera of Krakatau, decades after that volcano’s major eruption in 1883 that triggered a mega tsunami and killed about 36,000 people in the then Dutch Indies. The sound of its eruption was heard as far as the western part of Australia and its volcanic ash drifted as far as Europe. 

The volcano, which is one of the 127 active volcanoes that dot the Indonesian archipelago, has continued to form and its activity has increased its height by 4 to 6 meters every year, Nugroho said.

By Cornelia Meyer*

US President Donald Trump’s withdrawal of US troops from Syria and scaling down its military presence in Afghanistan has led to the resignations of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and anti-Daesh coalition envoy Brett McGurk, the former sending a scathing letter of resignation in which he argued strongly in favour of honoring international commitments.

As far as Syria is concerned, there are clear winners and losers from the withdrawal of US troops. The pullout is unconditional, which means that instead of allies having their positions ring fenced, they are now exposed to enemy forces. 

Russia has been playing its cards well. Its support for Bashar Assad secured it a naval base in Tartus, an airbase in Khmeimim and several forward bases. The first is of particular importance because Russia had lost access to the warm-water ports of the Mediterranean in the aftermath of the Cold War. This had been a thorn in the side of the country’s generals for a long time. It did not, then, come as a surprise when President Putin praised Trump’s decision during his mammoth end-of-year international press conference. Iran is the other big winner from Trump’s move. It can now develop its land bridge to the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon without any impediment. This will not bring joy to Israel, which is probably the strongest and most important US ally in the Middle East. Russia and Iran are the allies of President Assad. The latest US move will speed up his army regaining control over much of the remaining territory he had lost in seven years of civil war. 

Turkey is happy too. It opposes the Assad regime, but looked beady-eyed at the support the US and other Western powers gave the YPG Peshmerga Kurds. For the Turkish regime the YPG are related to the banned PKK. They are classed as terrorists by the government of Turkey, which views ideologies propagating an independent Kurdish state as an existential threat. They fear that such ideologies could eventually undermine the territorial integrity of their country. President Erdogan had held back on a full-scale assault on the YPG, because it would have been tantamount to a blue-on-blue assault — one NATO country, Turkey, in direct conflict with the allies of another NATO country, the US. Erdogan also praised Trump’s decision and promised not to invade northern Syria for the time being. It is questionable, however, how long the Turkish restraint will last. In the end fighting will resume in northern Syria with no regard for the civilian population, who are probably the biggest losers from Trump’s announcement.

The French and the British voiced concern. France’s Armed Forces Minister, Florence Parly, made a particularly good point when she countered President Trump’s assertion that the fight against Daesh was over. While the caliphate controls only about 1 percent of the territory it held at the height of its power, Daesh has not been beaten. It has merely retreated and will remerge somewhere else, possibly in a different incarnation. Such is the nature of asymmetric warfare with non-state actors.

Trump’s announcement on Afghanistan left US allies bewildered. Only 7,000 US troops will remain if the US presence is halved. This prompts the question, what can 7,000 soldiers achieve when peace and stability eluded 100,000 US troops? Again, the announcement comes at a critical stage when the government of Afghanistan needs to come to some sort of modus operandi with the Taliban. A strong presence of allied forces would be beneficial to such talks.

Trump’s move in the Middle East and the resignations of senior security officials go well beyond that particular geography. It indicates that the US is no longer the reliable ally that had shaped the post-Second World War international architecture. The president’s open criticism of NATO and one-sided cancellation of military exercises on the Korean Peninsula in the summer were further examples in the military theater — as is exiting the Paris Accord on Climate Change on the civilian front.

Democracies have at their disposal arsenals that go well beyond arms; soft power, diplomacy and reliable partnerships work to the benefit of all concerned. In that sense, a strict “America first” policy threatens to undermine the very foundation that American influence is built on.

• Cornelia Meyer is a business consultant, macro-economist and energy expert. Twitter: @MeyerResources

It was a turbulent year for many investors around the world, as stock markets were shaken by events from Brexit to U.S.-China trade tensions. Amid the uncertainty, many billionaire fortunes shrunk in size.

The biggest loser in the world was Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who had a terrible year amid internal scandals and damaging publicity. He was the only American among the ten biggest billionaire losers, half of whom were from Asia.

Still, there were plenty of billionaires whose fortunes bucked the downward trend – Forbes calculated the biggest gainers and winners in absolute dollar terms.’

Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer were up a combined $6.3 billion, thanks to a higher Microsoft stock price. Several Russians grew richer as profits rose at their oil and gas firms.

But the year’s biggest gainer by a vast margin was Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos, whose fortune calimbed nearly $28 billion to $126.2 billion between December 29, 2017 and December 17, 2018, the dates Forbes used to measure fortunes for the article.

Bezos was worth even more in early September, when his fortune peaked at $167 billion. Altogether the ten biggest gainers in the world added a total of $64 billion to their fortunes in the past 12 months. That was much less of an increase than in 2017, when the combined fortunes of the top ten winners jumped by $204 billion.

Egyptian security forces killed 14 suspected militants in the restive Sinai Peninsula, according to the country’s interior ministry on Sunday.

A ministry statement said the militants were killed in a shootout during a raid on a “terrorist” hotbed planning attacks in the North Sinai city of Arish.

The ministry’s narrative could not be verified from an independent source.

On Thursday, security forces shot dead eight suspected militants in an exchange of fire in Cairo.

Egyptian authorities have stepped up security measures across the country ahead of Christmas, which Egyptian Coptic Christians celebrate on Jan. 7.

The Sinai Peninsula has remained the epicenter of a militant insurgency since mid-2013 when Mohamed Morsi — Egypt’s first freely elected president — was ousted in a military coup.

Coptic Christians are estimated to account for roughly 15 percent of Egypt’s overall population of some 104 million.

Vatican and Vietnamese officials have agreed to upgrade relations through the appointment in the near future of a permanent papal representative to Hanoi.

A Vatican delegation for a  Dec. 18-20 visit, during which the agreement was reached, was led by Monsignor Antoine Camilleri, under-secretary for relations with states. One of the aims of the talks was to help resolve bitter disputes over confiscated church properties.

The Vatican delegation included senior Vietnamese prelates and Archbishop Marek Zalewski, non-resident pontifical representative to Vietnam. The Vietnamese delegation was led by Deputy Foreign Minister Bui Thanh Son.

Father Joseph Dao Nguyen Vu, head of the Office of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Vietnam, said in a statement that two sides “agreed to take detailed steps to raise their diplomatic relationships from the level of non-resident envoy to resident envoy to Vietnam.”

The Vatican started to send a non-resident pontifical representative to Vietnam in 2011, long after Vietnam cut off diplomatic ties with the Holy See in 1975. Archbishop Zalewski is the second non-resident pontifical representative to the Southeast Asian country.

Some church sources said that the local church’s former facilities and properties that were confiscated by the government constituted ongoing obstacles to improving bilateral ties. The communist government has confiscated church-run schools, hospitals, churches and other facilities. The Holy See wants Vietnam to return all former church properties while the government only envisages giving back a few of them.

Sources said during their talks, both delegations also approved episcopal candidates for Ho Chi Minh City Archdiocese and Phan Phiet Diocese. The country’s most active archdiocese has been vacant since Archbishop Paul Bui Van Doc passed away in March.

The latter diocese has been vacant since Bishop Joseph Vu Duy Thong died in 2017. Sources said the Vatican and Vietnam agreed to create a new diocese which will be separated from Vinh Diocese in north central Vietnam. Vinh Diocese serves more than 550,000 Catholics in three provinces.

Father Vu said during their three-day visit to Vietnam, Vatican delegates also met with Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc and officials from the Government Committee for Religious Affairs, which controls all religious organizations in the country. He said the Vatican visitors met with Vietnamese bishops, and attended the installation of the newly-elected Archbishop Joseph Vu Van Thien of Hanoi.