The European Commission on Thursday launched a new EU agenda to ensure that the digital economy is taxed in a fair and growth-friendly way. The Communication adopted by the Commission sets out the challenges Member States currently face when it comes to acting on this pressing issue and outlines possible solutions to be explored.

The aim is to ensure a coherent EU approach to taxing the digital economy that supports the Commission’s key priorities of completing the Digital Single Market and ensuring the fair and effective taxation of all companies. Today’s Communication paves the way for a legislative proposal on EU rules for the taxation of profits in the digital economy, as confirmed by President Juncker in the 2017 State of the Union. Those rules could be set out as early as spring 2018. Today’s paper should also feed into international work in this area, notably in the G20 and the OECD.

Andrus Ansip, Vice-President for the Digital Single Market said, “Modern taxation rules are essential to leverage the full potential of the EU’s Digital Single Market and to encourage innovation and growth. This means having a modern and sustainable tax framework which provides legal certainty, growth-friendly incentives and a level playing field for all businesses. The EU continues to push for a comprehensive revision of global tax rules to meet the new realities.”

According to Valdis Dombrovskis, Vice-President for the Euro and Social Dialogue, “There is broad agreement that the growing digitalisation of the economy creates huge economic opportunities. At the same time, our tax systems should evolve to capture new business models while being fair, efficient and future-proof. It’s also a question of sustainability of our tax revenues as traditional tax sources come under strain. Not least, it’s about maintaining the integrity of the Single Market and avoiding fragmentation by finding common solutions to global challenges.”

Pierre Moscovici, Commissioner for Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs added that, “The goal of this Commission has always been to ensure that companies pay their fair share of tax where they generate profits. Digital firms make vast profits from their millions of users, even if they do not have a physical presence in the EU. We now want to create a level playing field so that all companies active in the EU can compete fairly, irrespective of whether they are operating via the cloud or from brick and mortar premises.”

The current tax framework does not fit with modern realities. The tax rules in place today were designed for the traditional economy and cannot capture activities which are increasingly based on intangible assets and data. As a result, the effective tax rate of digital companies in the EU is estimated to be half that of traditional companies – and often much less. At the same time, patchwork unilateral measures by Member States to address the problem threaten to create new obstacles and loopholes in the Single Market.

The first focus should be on pushing for a fundamental reform of international tax rules, which would ensure a better link between how value is created and where it is taxed. Member States should converge on a strong and ambitious EU position, so we can push for meaningful outcomes in the OECD report to the G20 on this issue next spring. The Digital Summit in Tallinn will be a good occasion for Member States to define this position at the highest political level.

In the absence of adequate global progress, the EU should implement its own solutions to taxing the profits of digital economy companies. Today’s Communication outlines the Commission’s long term strategy, as well as some of the short term solutions that have been discussed at EU and international level so far. The Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in particular offers a good basis to address the key challenges and provide a sustainable, robust and fair framework for taxing all large businesses in the future. As this proposal is currently being discussed by Member States, digital taxation could easily be included in the scope of the final agreed rules. However, short term ‘quick fixes’ such as a targeted turnover tax and an EU-wide advertising tax will also be assessed

At the United Nations General Assembly in New York the European Union and the United Nations on Wednesay launched a EUR 500 million Spotlight Initiative to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls.

The EU-UN Spotlight Initiative was launched by the EU High Representative / Vice-President of the Commission Federica Mogherini and Commissioner for International Cooperation and Development Neven Mimica, together with the UN Secretary-General António Guterres and the UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed.

Speaking at the launch, UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated: “It is a harsh but true reality – 1 in 3 women will face violence throughout their lifetime. Violence against women and girls devastates lives, and causes pain across generations. “The Spotlight Initiative is truly historic,” he added. “This Fund is a pioneering investment in gender equality and women’s empowerment. When we shine a spotlight on the empowerment of the world’s women and girls, everyone’s future is brighter.”

According to EU High Representative Federica Mogherini, “The European Union is committed to combatting all forms of violence against women and girls, as they undermine our core fundamental rights and values, such as dignity, access to justice and gender equality. We need first to ensure that we keep women and girls safe, in order to empower them to deploy their full potential.”

Commissioner Mimica added: “Violence against women and girls is one of the greatest injustices of our time, which crosses all borders, generations, nationalities and communities. It deeply touches our hearts and our minds. And it is a serious barrier to any society’s full development potential. To make a real change, I invite all partners to join our Spotlight Initiative for a world in which all women and girls can truly shine!”

The EU-UN Spotlight Initiative is supported by a multi-stakeholder trust fund, with the EU as its main contributor in the order of half a billion Euro, which is open to other donors.

Over the next few years, comprehensive programmes will be implemented to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls, such as sexual and gender-based violence and harmful practices; trafficking and economic (labour) exploitation; femicide; and domestic and family violence. Core areas of intervention will include strengthening legislative frameworks, policies and institutions, preventive measures, access to services and improving data gathering in Africa, Latin America, Asia, the Pacific and the Caribbean.

Consistent with the principles of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Spotlight Initiative will apply a rights-based approach, and give particular attention to the most marginalised women and girls in order to ‘leave no-one behind’. It will aim at galvanizing political commitments at the highest level and at providing large-scale targeted support, as well as at building new partnerships. It will also raise awareness of the widespread, persistent and detrimental impact of violence against women and girls.

A sixth man was arrested in Britain early on Thursday as part of the probe into the bomb attack on a London Underground train last week, police confirmed.

The 17-year-old was detained under anti-terrorism powers in Thornton Heath, south of London, where a search is underway, a statement said.

Some 30 people were injured in the September 15 attack at Parsons Green station in west London, which was claimed by the Islamic State group.

The bomb had been hidden in a large white bucket and it apparently failed to detonate fully during the morning rush hour but resulted in what witnesses described as a “fireball”.

Some commuters suffered burns, while others were injured in the stampede to the exit that ensued.

Dean Haydon, an anti-terrorism officer, said the investigation was progressing rapidly.

On Saturday, an 18-year-old man, reportedly an Iraqi refugee, was arrested in the ferry departure terminal of the port of Dover and a 21-year-old man was detained later the same day in west London.

A third man, aged 25, was detained by anti-terror officers in Newport, Wales on Tuesday and two more arrests were made in the same city on Wednesday.

The probe has focused on a foster home in Sunbury-on-Thames, a suburb of London where the 18-year-old is believed to have lived.

The bombing was the fifth terror attack in Britain in six months, which combined have claimed 35 lives.

It prompted authorities to raise the terror alert to its maximum “critical” level on Friday, meaning another attack was believed to be imminent, before being lowered back to “severe” two days later.

Despite the Islamic State group’s claim of responsibility, both British and U.S. officials have cast doubt on the statement, saying there was no evidence any recognized militant group had ordered or organized the bombing.

Original source

The United Nations Security Council on Thursday authorized the establishment of an investigation team to support Iraq’s domestic efforts to hold the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh) accountable for acts that may amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed in the country.

According to the unanimously adopted resolution, the team will be headed by a Special Adviser to be appointed by the Secretary-General, and will consist of both international and domestic experts who will work “on equal footing,” with an initial mandate of two years.

The Council underscored that the team should operate with full respect for the sovereignty of Iraq and its jurisdiction over crimes committed in its territory. In addition, evidence of crimes collected and stored by the team in Iraq should be for eventual use in fair and independent criminal proceedings conducted by competent national-level courts, with the relevant Iraqi authorities as the primary intended recipient.

Another Member State may request the team to collect evidence of acts committed by ISIL on its territory, but only with the approval of the Security Council, which may request the Secretary-General to submit separate terms of reference.

The Council requested the Secretary-General to establish, as a supplement to financing by the UN, a trust fund to receive voluntary contributions to implement the resolution.

By Maxime Jacob

(EurActiv) — Polish judges opposing the justice reforms started by Warsaw ask for a solution to the crisis without Europe’s intervention.

“I am devastated by the thought that the EU could command sanctions under article 7 of the Treaty [of the European Union]”, said Jerzy Stępień a former judge on Poland’s constitutional court.

The old magistrate was invited by the bar association of Paris, after his government initiated reforms that the Commission and human rights groups say threaten the rule of law in Poland.

Jerzy Stępień shared his anxiety on the possible isolation of his country by the EU: “Polish feel very linked to Europe. Enacting sanctions against Poland could be used by my government to reverse this opinion”, he warned.

Justice needs to catch up

The possibility of European sanctions on Poland has been raised by a justice reform proposed by Warsaw. Affirming some “deficiencies” in the judiciary, the conservative party PiS (Law and Justice), in power since October 2015, has presented a series of reforms which aim to put the judiciary under the control of the executive power.

This attack on the separation of powers has been denounced in Brussels by the vice-president of the European Commission Frans Timmermans, in charge of the dossier.

On 24 July 2017, after numerous demonstrations, Polish President Andrzej Duda vetoed two of these reforms. Plans to have the president appoint constitutional judges directly, as well as new rules for selecting members of the national judiciary council, will have to be reviewed.

Avoiding power struggles

But the Polish president has not vetoed the rule on the appointment of ordinary judges, a reform that, according to the president of the Warsaw bar, Mikolaj Pietrzak, recalls USSR methods:

“The ministry of justice will be able to choose this or that judge that favours him and that will assist him in any given process. For instance, during the process on a political opponent, or of a journalist that has been a little ‘too’ critical.”

The lawyer is also worried about the two vetoed reforms, that are currently being reviewed by the majority: “The text is modified behind closed doors, there is no public debate allowing the opposition to influence the text”, he regretted.

For now, the European Union has not launched the sanctions procedure under Article 7 of the Treaty of Lisbon. In case the Union’s fundamental values are violated by a member state, the state could see its vote in the European Council suspended. A qualified majority is necessary to trigger the sanction, and Poland is always backed by the Višegrad group – particularly by Victor Orban’s Hungary.

Polish magistrates do not think Article 7 is a good way out of the crisis.

Mikolaj Pietrzak prefers to explore the legal routes: “after the exhaustion of domestic measures, we do not exclude resorting to the European Court of Human Rights or the Court of Justice of the EU to have these freedom-destroying laws annulled.”

(Civil.Ge) — The Russian Federal Customs Service (FTS) is to open a new special customs post in Abkhazia, according to the September 12 order signed by Vladimir Bulavin, head of the FTS.

The new post, to be located in Sokhumi, will belong to the Federal Customs Service, and its staffing table (five persons) has already been defined and included in Bulavin’s order. Entire Abkhazia is to be included in its jurisdiction area.

The order, which is to come into force on November 1, specifies that the decision to open the special customs post in Abkhazia is based on Moscow’s October 2010 “agreement on cooperation and mutual help in customs affairs” with the Russian-backed Sokhumi authorities.

The text of the agreement allows Russia to establish a “specialized customs agency” in Abkhazia, for the purpose of “customs registration and customs control of the goods and (or) means of transportation,” transferred from or through Abkhazia to Russia. It also allows such “specialized customs agency” to “implement measures” in Abkhazia, directed at “discovering and suppressing violations of law related to the transportation of such goods.”

According to the agreement, the customs post will conduct customs registration and control in accordance to the customs law of the Russian Federation.

Besides, the “specialized customs agency” will enjoy the same status as the one envisioned for diplomatic missions by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961. The status and immunity for the post’s employees and their family members is also to be covered by the Vienna Convention.

Creation of the Moscow-controlled customs post with jurisdiction over Abkhazia follows the establishment of the “Joint Information-Coordination Center of Internal Affairs Agencies”- another agency that envisions permanent stationing of the Russian security personnel in Abkhazia.

“We must not sleepwalk our way into nuclear war.” -— UN Secretary General António Guterres, Sep 19, 2017

Having gone soft on the United Nations in his initial remarks, US President Donald Trump returned to stupendous form with the language of annihilation in his address to the 72nd session of the General Assembly. Jaws dropped; heads were covered by hands; arms were resolutely folded. It was exactly the sort of “hate speech,” snorted Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, that belonged to the medieval age, “unworthy of reply.”[1]

In one fundamental sense, Trump’s spiky language resembled that of a previous US president, one whose simplicity remained innocent to the deep greyness of international politics. George W. Bush, whose childish rendering of the world into friends and those of the “axis of evil”, would have found little to disagree with.

“Authority and authoritarian powers seek to collapse the values, the systems, and alliances that prevented conflict and titled the world toward freedom since World War II.”[2] Trump’s tone of menace proved particularly apocalyptic, painting a truly hideous world for member states. “International criminal networks traffic rugs, weapons, people; force dislocation and mass migration; threaten our borders; and new forms of aggression exploit technology to menace our citizens.”

Nothing is ever to scale in such Trumpian performances. North Korea’s “depraved regime” had killed millions by means of starvation, with millions more tortured, and killed (presumably by other means), and oppressed. Pyongyang was responsible for the looming spectre of mass death, its “reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons and missiles” threatening the globe “with unthinkable loss of human life.”

The next stage of the Korean gamble shows the public front of delusion and self-denial. Trump retains the cobwebbed view a growing number of US strategists disagree with: that denuclearisation at the moment is pure fantasy. Take it off the table, as the Kim Jong-un regime will never have a bar of it.

Not so Trump: “No nation on earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles.” Indeed, Trump felt that “Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and his regime.” The noble, restrained United States, with its “great strength and patience” would, if forced to defend itself or its allies, “totally destroy North Korea.” Such suitable restraint.

Iran also reserved a special spot in the Trump show of rancour. “It is time for the entire world to join us in demanding that Iran’s government end its pursuit of death and destruction.” Iran, supporter of terror, enemy of peaceful Israel, an impoverished rogue state which should never have received international blessing in “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.”

Without any glimmer of contradiction, Trump noted a visit to that great standard bearer of peace and moderation, Saudi Arabia, where he was “honored to address the leaders of more than 50 Arab and Muslim nations.” The theme? Combating terrorism and Islamist extremism. No better place, perhaps, than Riyadh to address these niggling points.

Then came another regime to target with an expansive tongue lashing: “The socialist dictatorship of Nicolas Maduro has inflicted terrible pain and suffering on the good people of [Venezuela].” Across the country were instances of starvation, democratic corrosion, an “unacceptable” situation that demanded intervention, military, if necessary.

Trump’s address ticked the boxes of a very distinct nomenclature, the sort alien to the diplomatic corps and dogmatists of the liberal market credo. Swedish foreign minister Margo Wallström found his performance barely believable. “It was the wrong speech, at the wrong time, to the wrong audience.”

In other respects, Trump foisted upon his UN audience a brand thinning with each speech and press release: the America First label, the art of the necessary deal centred on a responsibility for citizens. “For too long, the American people were told that mammoth multinational trade deals, unaccountable international tribunals, and powerful global bureaucracies were the best way to promote their success.”

Trump preferred the necessary deal, America First as a warming vision of cosy affluence, a form of nostalgia in action, an effort to restore those vanished jobs running into the millions and confront those who “gamed the system and broke the rules.” In so doing, the middle class received a historical caning, forgotten in a bout of mass amnesia. Never again, he intoned, would they be forgotten.

It was a speech insistent on the supremacy of sovereignty while also praising the UN as a forum where disputes and challenges could be resolved. “If we are to embrace the opportunities of the future and overcome the present dangers together, there can be no substitute for strong, sovereign, and independent nations”. This is Trump pure and simple, unable to reconcile the dictates of stomping sovereign will with the notion of calm collective action, thereby undermining both.

Notes:
[1] https://twitter.com/JZarif/status/910205888677470208

[2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/09/19/remarks-president-trump-72nd-session-united-nations-general-assembly

Do you know how safe it is to use your finger as a security login? And have you wondered how your cell phone knows if your finger is real or a fake?

Michigan State University biometric expert Anil Jain and his team are working to answer these questions and solve the biggest problems facing fingerprint recognition systems today: how secure they are and how to determine whether the finger being used is actually a human finger.

In an effort to test and help solve this problem, Jain, a University Distinguished Professor, and doctoral student Joshua Engelsma have for the first time designed and created a fake finger containing multiple key properties of human skin. Commonly called a spoof, this fake finger has been used to test two of the predominant types of fingerprint readers to help determine their resilience to spoof attacks. Watch the finger being made in this video.

The fake fingers developed at MSU were created using a combination of carefully chosen materials, including conductive silicone, silicone thinner and pigments. In addition to determining the materials, the entire fabrication process, using a molding and casting technique, was designed and implemented by the team.

“What makes our design unique is that it mimics a real finger by incorporating basic properties of human skin,” said Jain. “This new spoof has the proper mechanical, optical and electrical properties of a human finger. Compared to current fake fingers that only contain one or two of these properties, our new version could prove much more challenging to detect. It will help motivate designers to build better fingerprint readers and develop robust spoof-detection algorithms.”

Developing more resilient fingerprint readers is important because they are now abundantly used for authentication in cell phones, computers, amusement parks, banks, airports, law enforcement, border security and more.

One specific way the synthetic fingers will be used is for testing the recognition accuracy between different types of fingerprint readers. The readers differ based on the type of sensors used to record the digital fingerprints, such as optical (using light rays to capture an image) or capacitive (using electrical current to create an image).

Currently, recognition accuracy declines when the same fingerprint taken using two different types of fingerprint readers is compared. For example, if a capacitive reader was used to capture a fingerprint, but an optical fingerprint reader was used later to authenticate that same fingerprint, it’s less likely the print will be accurately identified. By using MSU’s new spoof, companies could develop methods to improve the accuracy.

“Given their unique characteristics, we believe our fake fingers will be valuable to the fingerprint recognition community,” said Jain. “Consumers need to know their fingerprints and identity are secure, and vendors and designers need to demonstrate to the consumers the technology is not only accurate but also resilient to spoof attacks.”

Jain and his team have begun work on the next phase of this research: designing and building a fingerprint reader to test spoof-detection capabilities. Once ready, this low-cost reader could be easily built in a couple of hours by others in the fingerprint recognition community to test for real versus fake fingerprints. Jain’s lab is additionally working on algorithms that will make this fingerprint reader more resilient to spoof presentation attacks.

A new study estimates employer-sponsored health plans spent at least $6 billion extra on infants born prematurely in 2013 and a substantial portion of that sum was spent on infants with major birth defects.

Birth defects affect 1 in 33 babies and are a leading cause of infant mortality in the United States. More than 5,500 infants die each year because of birth defects. The babies who live with birth defects are at increased risk for developing many lifelong physical, cognitive and social challenges that also affect their families.

The study, by researchers at the University of Utah and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), illustrates the substantial burden on insurers of premature births as well as the challenges in assessing the potential financial benefit of new interventions to prevent early births.

Pediatrics published the study, “Employer-Sponsored Plan Expenditures for Infants Born Preterm,” on Sept. 21.

Lead authors are Scott D. Grosse, research economist at the CDC’s National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, and Norman J. Waitzman, professor and chair of the Department of Economics at the University of Utah.

Approximately 1 in 10 infants in the U.S. are born prematurely — at less than 37 weeks’ gestation — which affects survival and quality of life. While many infants are healthy despite not being full term, a small percentage of premature infants who survive require extraordinary and expensive medical care that can extend beyond infancy.

The researchers found that employer-sponsored plans included in the study spent about $2 billion on care of infants born in 2013. Of that total, just over one-third was spent on 8 percent of the infants born prematurely.

Drilling into the data showed infants with major birth defects accounted for less than 6 percent of the premature births, but a quarter of expenditures.

“The contribution of this study is to start to tweak out the contribution of birth defects to that overall cost burden so we can start to prioritize efforts at prevention of both preterm births and birth defects,” Waitzman said. “This is a multi-billion-dollar burden. In order to prioritize interventions, we have to have an accurate estimate of what the costs are and how those are broken down because often times interventions are tailored to specific populations.”

Grosse, the study’s lead author, said good preconception health can help to prevent both birth defects and preterm birth.

“Before getting pregnant, women should talk to their doctor and follow their guidance about eating healthy, including enough folic acid, and avoiding tobacco and alcohol around the time of conception as well as throughout pregnancy,” Grosse said.

The researchers also said more studies are needed that link vital records, birth defect data and administrative data to refine the per-infant costs of preterm births and interaction of preterm births of infants with major birth defects. Utah, which has the highest birth rate in the nation, is an ideal location for that additional work because of the feasibility of linking the Utah Population Database with the state All Payer Claims Database, Waitzman said.

Though not all birth defects can be prevented, a woman can take steps to increase her own chance of having a baby with the best health possible.

Men and women with shorter, wider faces tend to be more sexually motivated and to have a stronger sex drive than those with faces of other dimensions. These are the findings from a study led by Steven Arnocky of Nipissing University in Canada. The research investigates the role that facial features play in sexual relationships and mate selection and is published in Springer’s journal Archives of Sexual Behavior.

The study adds to a growing body of research that has previously shown that certain psychological and behavioral traits are associated with particular facial width-to-height ratios (known as FWHR). Square-faced men (who therefore have a high FWHR) tend to be perceived as more aggressive, more dominant, more unethical, and more attractive as short-term sexual partners than their thinner and longer-faced counterparts.

Researchers attributed differences in facial proportions to variations in testosterone levels during particular developmental periods, such as puberty. This hormone plays a role in forming adult sexual attitudes and desires.

In this paper, Arnocky and his colleagues report two separate studies conducted among students. In the first, 145 undergraduates who were in romantic relationships at the time completed questionnaires about their interpersonal behavior and sex drive. The researchers also used photographs of the participants to determine their facial width-to-height ratio. The second study involved 314 students and was an extended version of the first study, which included questions about participants’ sexual orientation, the chances of them considering infidelity, and their sociosexual orientation. The latter is a measure of how comfortable participants are with the concept of casual sex that does not include love or commitment.

According to Arnocky, their findings suggest that FWHR can be used to predict a measure of sexuality in both sexes. Men and women with a high FWHR (therefore, square and wide faces) reported a greater sex drive than others.

“Together, these findings suggest that facial characteristics might convey important information about human sexual motivations”, said Arnocky.

It was also found that men with a larger FWHR not only have a higher sex drive than others, but also are more easy-going when it comes to casual sex and would consider being unfaithful to their partners.

By Saji Thomas

Government officials in a remote area of central Indian Madhya Pradesh state have impounded the property of a Catholic mission and forced its priest out of the premises, allegedly under pressure from right-wing Hindu activists.

The 20-year-old mission in Mohanpur village of Guna district was “sealed” over a land title dispute and Father Siljo Kidangan forced out on Sept. 12, local Bishop Anthony Chirayath told ucanews.com.

Father Kidangan said government officials acted under pressure from members of hard-line Hindu groups who are opposed to the mission’s work and accuse it of trying to secure religious conversions.

The mission aims to help poor villagers by coordinating several welfare projects.

Mohanpur and some 40 nearby villages are provided with basic amenities and a hostel for about 15 boys studying at a nearby government school.

A Hindu right-wing activist group on Sept. 11 went to the mission demanding that the priest and schoolboys vacate or face dire consequences, Bishop Chirayath said.

The priest refused to move.

However, the next morning government officials, a village headman and two police constables threatened the priest and confiscated the hostel by locking and sealing it.

Local Sub-Divisional Magistrate Dinesh Shukla confirmed with ucanews.com that the government has taken over the land and the hostel building as the Church “lost a case” with the Land Revenue Board on Sept. 8.

Two local Hindus filed a case in 2005 claiming that the Church did not have mandatory title deeds for the mission land, which was donated to a tribal Catholic priest by a local tribal villager.

Permission from a district official known as the ‘Collector’ was said to be mandatory to transfer a title deed for tribal land.

However, local missionaries had apparently been unaware of the requirement and did not apply for it, the bishop said.

Bishop Chirayath said the mission has now sought intervention on the matter by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

“If the church authorities get any relief from a court of law, we will return it, but currently the land belongs to the government,” Shukla told ucanews.com.

Father Kidangan, who has taken shelter in a nearby mission, said right-wing Hindu activists had been constantly making false accusations that his mission was using fraudulent means to win tribal converts.

He said a local law prohibiting conversions without informing government officials was being used as a tactic by people who are opposed to the presence of the mission.

The law also criminalizes conversion from one religion to another by use of purported force or allurement or fraud.

Christian leaders such as Father Kidangan say the law is being unfairly used to target church welfare services.

Bishop Chirayath said the 41 villages under the mission had about 30 Catholic families living in fear as Hindu hardliners tried to force them to give up their Christian faith.

The state, where the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party has been in power for past 14 years, has witnessed increased harassment of Christians, including attacks on pastors, places of worship and educational institutions.

Church leaders complain that some fanatical groups see scaring tribal people away from Christianity as a way of furthering their agenda to enshrine Hindu dominance.

Manchester United announced record revenue on Thursday, September 21 after a successful season in which they won the Europa League and the League Cup and qualified for the Champions League, AFP reports.

The Old Trafford club earned revenues of £581.2 million ($783 million, 659 million euros) in the 12 months to the end of June and made an operating profit of £80.8 million.

Debt, linked to the purchase of the club by the Glazer family, dropped to £213.1 million from £260.9 million a year previously.

The Premier League joint leaders, managed by Jose Mourinho, expect simliar revenues during the current financial year.

Earlier this year, financial analysts Deloitte revealed United had returned to the top of football’s rich list for the first time since 2005, supplanting Real Madrid thanks to revenues of £515 million.

“We concluded a successful 2016/17 season with a total of three trophies (including the Community Shield) and a return to Champions League football,” said executive vice chairman Ed Woodward.

“We are pleased with the investment in our squad and look forward to an exciting season.”

A new study reveals that cosmic rays with the highest energies that make their way to Earth originated from outside our Milky Way galaxy.

The results, derived from more than a decade of data collection, shed light on the origin of these rare ultra-high-energy particles.

Cosmic rays are atomic nuclei arriving from outer space that can reach the highest energies observed in nature – far beyond the capabilities of man-made particle accelerators. Those with the highest (exa-electronvolt) energies are especially sparse and difficult to detect; cosmic rays with such ultra-high energies have been known for more than 50 years, but the sites and mechanisms of their production remain a mystery.

The Pierre Auger Observatory, consisting of an array of particle detectors and a connected set of telescopes, was built near the city of Malargüe, Argentina, to investigate these particles. The large international collaboration which operates the observatory has analyzed data collected between January 2004 and August 2016.

During this time, thousands of cosmic rays with ultra-high energies were detected. Intriguingly, their arrival directions are not evenly distributed across the sky, but favor a certain direction. This alignment direction indicates that these ultra-high energy particles must have originated in other galaxies, the authors say. John S. Gallagher III and Francis Halzen discuss these results in a related Perspective.

Adversaries of “Islamic State” (IS) use the crumbling of the “Caliphate” to move their pawns forward in Iraq and Syria, raising the spectre of simultaneous conflicts. Will military victories over IS be a tactical success but a strategic failure?

By Romain Quivooij*

Past and ongoing offensives in Mosul, Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor city mark a turning point in the campaign against IS. The combination of flashpoints at the local, national and international levels nonetheless jeopardises the likelihood of peace and stability in Iraq and Syria. In fact, “liberated” territories are fraught with the risk of IS resurgence and the looming threat of infighting.

Rather than pacifying the region, the impending collapse of the self-declared Caliphate is likely to work as a catalyst for tensions between belligerents and the communities some warring parties claim to represent. Iran, on the one hand, and Kurdish authorities in Northern Iraq and Syria, on the other, are emerging as the winning local players of civil wars. The rise of these stakeholders shifts the balance of power and increases the chances of conflagrations between various competitors in the Middle East.

Internecine Strife

Years of armed struggles have brought political and ideological fault lines within religious and ethnic groups to new levels. Syria’s Sunni and Christians populations provide a picture of contrasting allegiances that reflects this evolution.

Both sects and their offshoots include supporters and opponents of the Assad regime. Iraqi Sunni tribal leaders and fighters have also joined the predominantly Shia militias known as the Popular Mobilisation Units (PMU), despite widespread Sunni mistrust towards these armed groups.

Alliances mirror growing rifts among communities that are portrayed as monolithic blocs pitted against each other. Similar factionalism can be observed amongst Shia militias. According to researchers the PMU have gradually become an epicentre of intra-Shia dissensions in Iraq.

Volunteers of the PMU’s 50 to 60 organisations fall under the distinct leaderships of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iraq’s Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Supporters of Khamenei are closely aligned with Tehran, while followers of Sistani and Sadr harbour a common suspicion towards Iran.

Divisions between the pro-Khamenei and pro-Sistani/Sadr factions could intensify over the coming months, as IS retreat to its last strongholds and Iraq’s 2018 provincial and parliamentary elections provide ample opportunities for leaders of opposing camps to assert themselves.

Intergroup Violence

The apparent redrawing of demographic maps in crucial regions further impedes short and long term prospects for post-Caliphate recovery.

Numerous observers and analysts have accused Syrian and Iranian soldiers, Iran-backed militias as well as Syrian and Iraqi Kurdish forces of expelling Arab Sunnis and Turkmens from their homes. Entire communities would be prevented from returning and replaced with Shia or Kurdish families.

Instances of ethnic cleansing were reported in Damascus and Homs where the growth of regime-loyal Shia populations would broaden Bashar al-Assad and Iran’s mutual base of support in the border region adjacent to Lebanon and Israel.

The same process was described in Syria’s Northern city of Tal Abyad and Iraq’s governorates of Nineveh, Kirkuk and Diyala. The Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and Iraqi Kurdish fighters or Peshmergas would both look to expand territories under their control and influence in these locations.

This is evident in some areas of Iraq where crises between the Peshmergas and Shia militias are prone to escalation. The occupation of the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and its surroundings by Kurdish forces is the most obvious source of friction.

Hostilities with the PMU have so far been contained, but the controversial decision of the authorities in Kirkuk to raise the Kurdistan flag alongside the Iraqi one over public buildings and the militias’ objective to “protect” Shia Turkmens living in the region, carry the potential for a greater Kurdish-Shia confrontation.

International Clashes

On the wider scale, Iran’s increasing reach as well as progress made by Iraqi and Syrian Kurds towards independence and autonomy reflect divergent trends that fundamentally reshape the post-IS milieu.

Iran is steadily extending its interests in Iraq and Syria, as illustrated by the efforts deployed by the Syrian army and Iran-linked groups to tighten their grip in villages and towns located along key routes between Tehran and the Mediterranean coast. This advance lowers the threshold of military intervention from countries alarmed at Tehran’s ambitions, including Israel and Saudi Arabia.

The Iranian momentum does not appear to be stoppable over the short term. US president Donald Trump’s policy in Syria remains mired in contradictory statements and one-shot measures, making it unlikely to provide a credible and effective counterbalance.

Initiatives taken by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq and Kurdish forces in Syria for carving out their respective state and provincial entities foster an additional dynamic of instability. Tehran is primarily concerned with the impact of the upcoming independence referendum that the KRG plans to hold, while Ankara is at war with Syrian Kurdish militias.

The shrinking of the Caliphate is expected to trigger a renewed cycle of crisis, open or latent, between states and non-state actors, where challenges posed by the Iranian expansion and the Kurdish question will be essential keys to the future of the regional security landscape.

*Romain Quivooij is an Associate Research Fellow with the Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS), a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

The United States and its allies must project forceful arguments on democracy’s appeal, and citizens must be wary of propaganda efforts.

By Agnia Grigas and Seth Freeman*

The Cold War is back. And this time it’s personal.

A quarter century ago America won the Cold War. After a long, patient, cohesive diplomatic campaign, the West prevailed in the early 1990s, and the Soviet Union collapsed. A decade later Russia became intent on re-establishing itself as a great power on the world stage. Now Russia is resurgent, with greater ambitions than ever and a sophisticated 21^st-century foreign policy toolbox blending the techniques of military, cyber and information warfare.

On September 14, Russia began Zapad 2017 joint strategic military exercises, the largest since the Cold War with up to 100,000 Russian troops mobilizing on the European Union’s eastern borders. NATO is appropriately concerned about these maneuvers on the ground, but generals and other military experts warn that Russia’s propaganda tactics – exercised through the channels of online, social and traditional media – may be more effective than conventional weapons.

Evidence continues to pile up of Russian hackers meddling in elections and referendums of Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, France and most notably the 2016 US presidential race with data hacking, denial-of-service attacks, phishing schemes that lure campaign workers to click on bad links, and release of fake news to inspire outrage or induce apathy. Ongoing reports suggest that Russia’s campaign in the United States was far more extensive than initially understood – jeopardizing voter data in numerous local races, creating fictional Twitter and Facebook users, posting online events indicating surging xenophobia, launching bots and purchasing online ads.

Russia’s interference continues. After troubling protests by white supremacists, counter-protests and lethal violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, Russia added to the chaos with a flood of tweets produced by bots masquerading as regular folks and spreading fake news stories about the counter-protestors.  ProPublica reports that Angee Dixson joined Twitter on August 8 and began a flurry of tweets, as many as 90 a day, defending President Donald Trump, criticizing the removal of Confederate monuments, and spreading unproven rumors about violence from counter-protestors. But Dixson was fake, and Twitter removed the account and hundreds of other fictional creations.

Crafting messages to target youth or the marginalized, triggering outrage and despair about issues, is easy. One of the authors grew up behind the Iron Curtain in propaganda-ridden, Soviet-controlled Lithuania. To get reliable news, she and her family surreptitiously listened to Voice of America broadcasts. Today, in a sardonic irony of history, this expert and author on Russian foreign policy in Washington watches Russia Today, the Kremlin’s television network known as RT, blast fake news from American televisions.

Russia couldn’t accomplish its Tsarist or Soviet goals through armed conflict, crude propaganda or a coercive energy policy, but now realizes once unimaginable success through soft power, cyberwarfare and a tsunami of manipulated news and messaging. Russian influence penetrates deep into Europe and the United States, altering public opinion and the course of political developments.

Former US President Barack Obama – intent on avoiding the appearance of political favoritism – warned his Russian counterpart during the 2016 campaign against hacking, but otherwise remained quiet about the dangers of growing foreign influence in the US political system. In retrospect, this approach was a mistake. Another mistake: The current administration’s striking lack of will to address the threat. Clearly, another strategy is required and the United States and other democracies must rethink their posture toward Russia.

A critical first step is to abandon complacent, misguided assumptions that the West had ever definitively won the soft-power and influence contest with Moscow. Even now, the United Kingdom’s 2016 Brexit vote – an outcome abetted by covert and overt Russian influence and propaganda – has substantially weakened the European Union. Initial EU efforts to confront the challenge have been no match, even against RT alone, with a self-reported annual 2016 budget of more than $300 million, available to 700 million viewers worldwide in more than 100 countries. Meanwhile, the US State Department has been slow to make use of the some $80 million earmarked for fighting Russian and terrorist group disinformation, reportedly out of fear of upsetting Moscow.

More recently, the US Justice Department advised RT that it must register as a foreign agent for its US operations, requiring periodic disclosure of the relationship with the Russian government as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.  The same requirements should be made of the Russian government news agency Sputnik.

US citizens must also study up on ongoing propaganda strategies – and take time to seek confirmation for outrageous claims in any news source. The movie Wag The Dog imagined media experts and a film producer conspiring to invent a war with faked footage of conflict. Government-controlled Russian TV often relies on techniques which could have been lifted from the movie, such as using a single actor to play three different people with different names and fictional histories such as spy, bystander and heroic surgeon in “news” broadcasts on Rossia 1 national news (Vesti), NTV National News and the National Independent News of Crimea.

Russian media skillfully blend entertainment, disinformation and propaganda into a seamless, convincing whole. Over several decades, the distinctions between fiction and reality – and perhaps more importantly the distinction between “reality” television and reality – have become increasingly blurred in US media.  Many viewers do not fully appreciate the extent to which “reality” television is not real at all. Participants are carefully cast, their stories and “drama” shaped by producers, their dialogue if not written out word for word, craftily encouraged by producers and writers. The characters in these “reality” dramas are recorded on video equipment. Everything they say and do on the show is artificially lit and staged and, tellingly, observed by a crew of up to 100 staff members hovering nearby although hidden from TV viewers. The fictional series Unreal, depicting behind-the-scenes action on an “unscripted” show like The Bachelor may be a fairly accurate wheels-within-wheels evocation of just how constructed and confected such shows are – or illustrate just how hopelessly blurred the lines have become.

The Apprentice, as artificial and concocted as any series, created the fictional character of Donald Trump as boss, which he parlayed into a winning presidential campaign. It’s hard to imagine that Trump could have become US president without this manufactured “reality” television show, name recognition and celebrity status included.

To counter Russia’s manipulation, the United States and its allies need, at minimum, to project a forceful unified vision of the appeal of liberal democracy and its values. In contrast, it’s self-defeating for the West to watch the US president spend a private tête-à-tête with Vladimir Putin at a G20 state dinner.

The Russians may or may not have kompromat with which to blackmail Trump. There may or may not have been collusion among members of the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Regardless, the dangerous impression that this foreign power holds some nefarious means of influencing the presidency disrupts global affairs and weakens the United States and the West.

The American people must begin to hear thoughtful, impassioned statements from their leaders, if not their president, condemning interference in the election process. The United States and other democratic countries must commit the full resources of their governments to preventing such activities in the future. And the factions within Washington and other capitals must find the unity, will and vision necessary to win the new Cold War being waged in the media, social networks and cyberspace.

If the United States doesn’t respond quickly and definitively to the ominous threat, history books will mark this era as the pivotal moment when world power shifted from liberal democracy to authoritarian dictatorship.

*Agnia Grigas is senior fellow at the Atlantic Council and the author of Beyond Crimea: The New Russian Empire. Seth Freeman is a multiple Emmy-winning writer and producer of television, a journalist and a playwright.

There is a great irony in the fact that Israel is seeking a seat at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

Since its establishment atop the ruins of Palestinian cities and villages in 1948, Israel has had the most precarious relationship with the world’s largest international body.

It has desperately sought to be legitimized by the UN, while it has done its utmost to delegitimize the UN.

Following a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) condemning Israel’s human rights abuses in the Occupied Palestinian Territory in March 2014, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, then accused the UN of being ‘absurd’. He vowed to “continue to denounce and expose” the UN “procession of hypocrisy.”

For many years, Israeli leaders and government officials have made it a habit of undermining the UN and its various bodies and, with unconditional support from Washington, habitually ignored numerous UN resolutions regarding the illegal occupation of Palestine.

To a certain extent, the Israeli strategy – of using and abusing the UN – has worked. With US vetoes, blocking every UN attempt at pressuring Israel to end its military occupation and human rights violations, Israel was in no rush to comply with international law.

But two major events have forced an Israeli rethink.

First, in December 2016, the US abstained from a UN resolution that condemned Israel’s illegal settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

By breaking with a decades-long tradition of shielding Israel from any international censure, it appeared that even Washington’s seemingly undying allegiance to Tel Aviv was uncertain.

Second, the rise of the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement began changing the dynamics of international politics regarding the Israeli occupation.

The movement, which began as a call by Palestinian civil society to hold Israel accountable for its violations of Palestinian human rights, grew rapidly to become a global movement. Hundreds of local BDS groups multiplied around the world, joined by artists, academicians, union members and elected politicians.

Within a few years, BDS has registered as a serious tool of pressure used to denounce the Israeli occupation and demand justice for the Palestinian people.

UNHRC quickly joined in, declaring its intention to release a list, thus exposing the names of companies that must be boycotted for operating in illegal Israeli settlements.

The human rights group’s efforts were coupled by repeated condemnations of Israel’s human rights violations as recorded by the UN cultural agency, UNESCO.

This meant that UN bodies that do not allow for veto-wielding members grew in their ability to challenge the UN Security Council.

The actions of UNHRC and UNESCO spurred a determined Israeli-American campaign to delegitimize them.

Since the Donald Trump Administration’s advent to power, and with the help of his ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, Washington has waged a war against the UN, using intimidation and the threats of withholding funds.

UNESCO insisted on its position, despite the cutting off of funds. Meanwhile, UNHRC decided to go along with publishing the list of companies, despite US threats to pull out of the human rights body altogether.

According to Israel’s Channel 2, the list includes Coca-Cola, TripAdvisor, Airbnb, Priceline and Caterpillar. It also includes national Israeli companies and two large banks.

Israeli officials fumed. Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely charged that “The UN is playing with fire”, threatening that such initiative will cause further loss of UN budget.

She even declared that the US and Israel are working together to start a ‘revolution’ at the Human Rights Council through a joint ‘action plan.’

Signs of this oddly termed ‘revolution’ are already apparent. Aside from choking off UN bodies financially, Israel is lobbying countries in the South that have traditionally exhibited solidarity with Palestinians due to the common historical bonds of foreign oppression and anti-colonial struggles.

Netanyahu had just concluded a trip to Latin America, considered the first by a sitting Israeli Prime Minister. In the last leg of his trip in Mexico, he offered to ‘develop Central America.’

The price is, of course, for Latin American countries to support Israel’s occupation of Palestine and turn a blind eye to its human rights violations in Palestine.

The irony that, fortunately, did not escape everyone is that last January, Netanyahu declared his support of Trump’s promise to wall off the US-Mexico border and force Mexico to pay for it.

It remains to be seen how Israel’s efforts will win Latin America to Israel’s side, considering the latter’s terrible record of supporting fascist regimes and subverting democracy.

The Israeli Prime Minister’s charm offensive was planned to include Togo in October to attend the Israel-Africa Summit. Thanks to the efforts of South Africa, Morocco, among other countries, the summit was cancelled due to the fact that over half of African countries were planning to boycott it.

The setback must have been a major diplomatic embarrassment for Tel Aviv as Netanyahu has made African diplomacy a pillar in his foreign policy. Last June, he visited Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Rwanda. He was accompanied by a large delegation of business executives. Earlier in June, he promised African leaders at the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) summit in Liberia to supply them with agricultural technology that would stave off droughts and food scarcity.

The price? According to African News Agency (ANA), “Israeli technology would solve Africa’s most urgent issues – as long as African nations opposed UN resolutions critical of Israel’s occupation of Palestine.”

Not all African leaders allowed themselves to be manipulated by Tel Aviv.

But the Israeli tactic is certainly becoming more defined and emboldened. Tel Aviv’s aim is to undercut the support of Palestinians at the UN General Assembly, and sabotage the work of UN bodies that exist outside the realm of US power.

Meanwhile, it also wants to secure a seat for itself at the UN Security Council. The assumption is that, with the support of Haley at the UN, such a possibility is not far-fetched.

In addition to the five-permeant veto-wielding UN Security Council members, ten-member countries are elected on a two-year term basis. Israel’s charm offensive in Latin America, Africa and Asia is meant to ensure the needed vote to grant it a seat in the 2019-2020 term.

The vote will take place next year, and Israel will stand against Germany and Belgium.

Israel’s strategy of elevating its status at the UN can also been seen as an admission of failure of Tel Aviv’s antagonistic behavior.  However, if Israel wins that seat, it is likely to use the new position to strengthen its occupation of Palestine, as opposed to adhering to international law.

It is unfortunate that the Arabs and the Palestinian Authority are waking up to this reality quite late. Israel has been plotting for this moment for years – since 2005 under the premiership of Ariel Sharon – yet the PA is only now requesting an Arab League strategy to prevent Israel from reaching that influential position.

What Palestinians are counting on, at the moment, is the existing historical support that the Palestinian people have among many countries around the world, especially in the global South.

Most of these nations have experienced colonization, military occupation and had their own costly and painful liberation struggles. They should not allow a colonialist regime to sit atop of the UN, obstructing international law while preaching to world about democracy and human rights.

US President Donald Trump on Thursday issued a new Executive Order imposing additional sanctions with respect to North Korea.

According to the White House, the new Executive Order is a result of the “provocative, destabilizing, and repressive actions and policies of the Government of North Korea constitute a continuing threat to the national security, foreign policy, and, economy of the United States and a disturbance of the international relations of the United States.”

In a letter to the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate, Trump said that he has “now found that the provocative, destabilizing, and repressive actions and policies of the Government of North Korea, including its intercontinental ballistic missile launches of July 3 and July 28, 2017, and its nuclear test of September 2, 2017, which violated its obligations pursuant to numerous UNSCRs and contravened its commitments under the September 19, 2005, Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks; its commission of serious human rights abuses; and its use of funds generated through international trade to support its nuclear and missile programs and weapons proliferation, constitute a continuing threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States and a disturbance of the international relations of the United States.”

The Executive Order targets all means used by North Korea to earn, access, and transfer funds that North Korea uses to further its WMD programs.

“We must maximize pressure on North Korea to demonstrate to its leadership that the best and only path is to return to denuclearization,” the White House said.

Specifically, the new Executive Order targets individuals and entities that engage in trade with North Korea, as well as the financial institutions that facilitate this trade.

The Executive Order directly targets North Korea’s shipping and trade networks and issues a 180-day ban on vessels and aircraft that have visited North Korea from visiting the United States. This ban also targets vessels that have engaged in a ship-to-ship transfer with a vessel that has visited North Korea within 180 days. North Korea is dependent on its shipping networks to facilitate international trade.

The Executive Order also authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to impose sanctions on persons involved in:

• Industries: The construction, energy, financial services, fishing, information technology, manufacturing, medical, mining, textiles, or transportation industries in North Korea;
• Ports: Ownership, control, or operation of any port in North Korea, including any seaport, airport, or land port of entry;
• Imports/Exports: at least one significant importation from or exportation to North Korea of any goods, services, or technology.

Additionally, the Executive Order provides the authority to impose sanctions on any foreign financial institution that knowingly conducts or facilitates any significant transaction on behalf of certain designated individuals and entities, or any significant transaction in connection with trade with North Korea, on or after the date of the Executive Order.

Under this new authority, the sanctions measures can be either restrictions on correspondent or payable-through accounts or blocking sanctions.

By Rashid Hassan

Saudi smartphone users were calling out with joy this week after the government lifted a ban on apps that allow video and voice services.

Minister of Communications and Information Technology Abdullah Al-Swaha earlier this month issued a directive to unblock calling apps that have met regulatory requirements, with users able to access them from Wednesday.

The move will make the likes of FaceTime, Snapchat, Skype, Line, Telegram and Tango available to smartphone users across the Kingdom.

Mohammed Ali, a Sri Lankan national who works in Saudi Arabia as a senior accountant, said he was happy about the move.

“I tried the apps Line and YeeCall, and was able to talk to my relatives back home,” he told Arab News.

“Many of us were spending a lot on calls in order to speak to relatives and friends.”

Iffat Aabroo, another Riyadh resident, said: “WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger calling was unblocked too as I made calls using both the online apps on Thursday … the voice quality is also better.”

Zafar Hasan, a software engineer working in Saudi Arabia, told Arab News that he made calls using Imo, Skype and Tango. But despite repeated attempts, Viber appeared to remain blocked in the Kingdom, he added.

According to ministry sources, online calls will be monitored following the lifting of the ban.

Scientists from the RUDN University have analyzed historical sources and revealed the foreign policy views of Russian liberals from the 1850s to the early 1890s. The researchers came to the conclusion that the views of modern liberals have nothing to do with the views of their predecessors. The study is published in The International History Review.

“We have shown the foreign audience how the first liberals understood Russian foreign policy and what the essence of the “real” liberalism is. Liberal foreign policy views of the second half of the XIX century combined the ideas of freedom and sovereignty with patriotic sentiments and their own understanding of national interests. Modern liberals do not share these views,” said one of the authors of the study Konstantin Kurylev, doctor of historical sciences, associate professor of the Department of Theory and History of International Relations of the RUDN University.

The article deals with the relations between European countries and Russia during the Crimean War of 1853-1856, the foreign policy crisis of the 1870s, relative international stability and military alliances in Europe in the 1880s and early 1890s.

The defeat of Russia in the Crimean War prompted Emperor Alexander II to turn to large-scale reforms of the 1860s and 1870s. These reforms affected virtually all aspects of life in the Russian Empire, contributing to its modernization. After the death of Alexander II at the hand of terrorists, his heir Alexander III came to power. The new extremely conservative emperor began to pursue a policy of counter-reforms. Thus, the liberal forces that could develop under Alexander II were in opposition under Alexander III.

The scientists analyzed the views of the liberals who were published in the ‘Vestnik Evropy’ magazine and found out what their political stance was during the reign of Alexander II and Alexander III.

Historians have found out that the counter-reforms of Alexander III, which caused a lull in public life, were unable to force the liberals to abandon their ideas. The scientists have described the demands of the liberals rejecting the active foreign policy in Europe, the interference in the internal affairs of other countries, and the alliances that could draw Russia into war. The liberals saw Russia as a European country that would eventually reach the level of advanced European states.

However, given the fact that the country’s isolation after the Berlin Congress of 1878 threatened its security, the liberals understood the demand to find an ally. The choice fell on France, which was supposed to help Russia solve two problems: to ensure stable international environment for the internal modernization of the country and to protect its political interests on the world stage. The liberals believed that France could not only become an example of constitutional reforms, but also help Russia solve the “Eastern question” by supporting national liberation movements of the Christian peoples in the Balkans who were under the rule of the Turkish sultans and Russian consolidation in the Balkans.

Historians believe that the liberals planned to restore greatness of Russia and protect its national interests in the Balkans and Central Asia through proposed reform programmes.

“The liberals of the late nineteenth century thought of Russia in terms of a great Power, hoping to regain its greatness, but not by affirming its military power, conquering and instilling terror to neighbors, but as a result of the transformations in the country and its new image that would be attractive to other nations”, – said Konstantin Kurylev.

The scientists came to the conclusion that the views of the ideologists of liberalism of the second half of the XIX century have nothing to do with the views of modern liberals. The liberals of the XIX century advocated the policy that would meet the interests of the nation. They loved Russia and wanted to restore its greatness. This is, according to the authors of the paper, what modern liberals could use, the ones that do not understand the essence of true liberalism.

In the past 540 million years, the Earth has endured five mass extinction events, each involving processes that upended the normal cycling of carbon through the atmosphere and oceans. These globally fatal perturbations in carbon each unfolded over thousands to millions of years, and are coincident with the widespread extermination of marine species around the world.

The question for many scientists is whether the carbon cycle is now experiencing a significant jolt that could tip the planet toward a sixth mass extinction. In the modern era, carbon dioxide emissions have risen steadily since the 19th century, but deciphering whether this recent spike in carbon could lead to mass extinction has been challenging. That’s mainly because it’s difficult to relate ancient carbon anomalies, occurring over thousands to millions of years, to today’s disruptions, which have taken place over just a little more than a century.

Now Daniel Rothman, professor of geophysics in the MIT Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and co-director of MIT’s Lorenz Center, has analyzed significant changes in the carbon cycle over the last 540 million years, including the five mass extinction events. He has identified “thresholds of catastrophe” in the carbon cycle that, if exceeded, would lead to an unstable environment, and ultimately, mass extinction.

In a paper published in Science Advances, he proposes that mass extinction occurs if one of two thresholds are crossed: For changes in the carbon cycle that occur over long timescales, extinctions will follow if those changes occur at rates faster than global ecosystems can adapt. For carbon perturbations that take place over shorter timescales, the pace of carbon-cycle changes will not matter; instead, the size or magnitude of the change will determine the likelihood of an extinction event.

Taking this reasoning forward in time, Rothman predicts that, given the recent rise in carbon dioxide emissions over a relatively short timescale, a sixth extinction will depend on whether a critical amount of carbon is added to the oceans. That amount, he calculates, is about 310 gigatons, which he estimates to be roughly equivalent to the amount of carbon that human activities will have added to the world’s oceans by the year 2100.

Does this mean that mass extinction will soon follow at the turn of the century? Rothman says it would take some time — about 10,000 years — for such ecological disasters to play out. However, he says that by 2100 the world may have tipped into “unknown territory.”

“This is not saying that disaster occurs the next day,” Rothman says. “It’s saying that, if left unchecked, the carbon cycle would move into a realm which would be no longer stable, and would behave in a way that would be difficult to predict. In the geologic past, this type of behavior is associated with mass extinction.”

History follows theory

Rothman had previously done work on the end-Permian extinction, the most severe extinction in Earth’s history, in which a massive pulse of carbon through the Earth’s system was involved in wiping out more than 95 percent of marine species worldwide. Since then, conversations with colleagues spurred him to consider the likelihood of a sixth extinction, raising an essential question:

“How can you really compare these great events in the geologic past, which occur over such vast timescales, to what’s going on today, which is centuries at the longest?” Rothman says. “So I sat down one summer day and tried to think about how one might go about this systematically.”

He eventually derived a simple mathematical formula based on basic physical principles that relates the critical rate and magnitude of change in the carbon cycle to the timescale that separates fast from slow change. He hypothesized that this formula should predict whether mass extinction, or some other sort of global catastrophe, should occur.

Rothman then asked whether history followed his hypothesis. By searching through hundreds of published geochemistry papers, he identified 31 events in the last 542 million years in which a significant change occurred in Earth’s carbon cycle. For each event, including the five mass extinctions, Rothman noted the change in carbon, expressed in the geochemical record as a change in the relative abundance of two isotopes, carbon-12 and carbon-13. He also noted the duration of time over which the changes occurred.

He then devised a mathematical transformation to convert these quantities into the total mass of carbon that was added to the oceans during each event. Finally, he plotted both the mass and timescale of each event.

“It became evident that there was a characteristic rate of change that the system basically didn’t like to go past,” Rothman says.

In other words, he observed a common threshold that most of the 31 events appeared to stay under. While these events involved significant changes in carbon, they were relatively benign — not enough to destabilize the system toward catastrophe. In contrast, four of the five mass extinction events lay over the threshold, with the most severe end-Permian extinction being the farthest over the line.

“Then it became a question of figuring out what it meant,” Rothman says.

A hidden leak

Upon further analysis, Rothman found that the critical rate for catastrophe is related to a hidden process within the Earth’s natural carbon cycle. The cycle is essentially a loop between photosynthesis and respiration. Normally, there is a “leak” in the cycle, in which a small amount of organic carbon sinks to the ocean bottom and, over time, is buried as sediment and sequestered from the rest of the carbon cycle.

Rothman found that the critical rate was equivalent to the rate of excess production of carbon dioxide that would result from plugging the leak. Any additional carbon dioxide injected into the cycle could not be described by the loop itself. One or more other processes would instead have taken the carbon cycle into unstable territory.

He then determined that the critical rate applies only beyond the timescale at which the marine carbon cycle can re-establish its equilibrium after it is disturbed. Today, this timescale is about 10,000 years. For much shorter events, the critical threshold is no longer tied to the rate at which carbon is added to the oceans but instead to the carbon’s total mass. Both scenarios would leave an excess of carbon circulating through the oceans and atmosphere, likely resulting in global warming and ocean acidification.

The century’s the limit

From the critical rate and the equilibrium timescale, Rothman calculated the critical mass of carbon for the modern day to be about 310 gigatons.

He then compared his prediction to the total amount of carbon added to the Earth’s oceans by the year 2100, as projected in the most recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC projections consider four possible pathways for carbon dioxide emissions, ranging from one associated with stringent policies to limit carbon dioxide emissions, to another related to the high range of scenarios with no limitations.

The best-case scenario projects that humans will add 300 gigatons of carbon to the oceans by 2100, while more than 500 gigatons will be added under the worst-case scenario, far exceeding the critical threshold. In all scenarios, Rothman shows that by 2100, the carbon cycle will either be close to or well beyond the threshold for catastrophe.

“There should be ways of pulling back [emissions of carbon dioxide],” Rothman says. “But this work points out reasons why we need to be careful, and it gives more reasons for studying the past to inform the present.”