Quantcast
Channel: Eurasia Review
Viewing all 79180 articles
Browse latest View live

Texas Governor Perry To Deploy National Guard To Border

$
0
0

The governor of the U.S. state of Texas said he is planning to send 1,000 troops from the state’s National Guard to its southern border with Mexico to boost security during a surge in illegal immigration by children.

Governor Rick Perry said Monday the guard troops are necessary because the influx of unaccompanied children illegally entering the United States has diverted resources away from the federal border patrol.

He said the decision was made after repeatedly asking the Obama administration to send National Guard troops to the region and getting no positive response.

More than 57,000 children, mostly from Central America, have illegally crossed into the United States since October, triggering a political and border crisis in the country.

Perry is regarded as a potential Republican candidate for the 2016 presidential race and has been a vocal critic of the White House’s response to the influx of child immigrants.

Earlier this month, President Obama asked Congress for $3.7 billion in emergency funding to deal with the immigration surge of unaccompanied children.

Republicans in Congress have not approved the money and say Mr. Obama’s immigration policies have encouraged the flood of children across the border.

The president, along with the U.S. Senate, has championed immigration reforms that would allow the 11 million immigrants already in the United States
illegally to eventually obtain American citizenship. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives is opposed and says it will not vote on the issue this year.

The post Texas Governor Perry To Deploy National Guard To Border appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Peace Wins In Colombia – OpEd

$
0
0

By Margaret Boehme

June was a good month for Colombia. Its streak of World Cup wins suffused the country with a euphoric patriotism. The yellow-blue-red stripes of the Colombian flag appeared on apartment buildings, the front grills of trucks, and painted on people’s cheeks.

Even with game-day alcohol bans designed to inhibit reckless behavior, Colombians crowded into neighborhood bars to cheer on their team. They whooped, jumped up and down, and clapped together in an impressive show of highly emotional sobriety. “We’re making history,” many said as their national soccer team made it to the World Cup quarterfinals for the first time ever.

And in June, peace won the vote in Colombia’s presidential elections. The country took one giant step closer to ending its 50-year-old armed conflict.

Colombian citizen carrying national flag

Incumbent Juan Manuel Santos and challenger Oscar Zuluaga have plenty in common. Ideologically, Santos is considered center-right and Zuluaga stands further to the right. Both were educated in England. Both have enjoyed at some point in their political career the support of the most powerful and polarizing man in Colombia, ex-President Alvaro Uribe.

They differ on one major question: What’s the best way to quell the armed conflict pitting the government against the FARC guerrillas?

Santos wholeheartedly supports negotiating peace accords to end this insurgency.

Zuluaga opposes dialogue with the rebels and said he would end the current negotiations. He offered military might as a solution, believing it would force the FARC to surrender from a complex conflict in which battles for strategic territory and a tough counterinsurgency doctrine have killed 218,000 people, displaced 5.7 million others and left 25,000 Colombians “disappeared.”

The choice was stark. On June 15, the majority of Colombians cast their votes for Santos. The next day, news headlines declared: “Peace won.”

Three days after the election, I was sitting on the sidewalk in front of the U.S. embassy in Bogotá visiting some former General Motors workers camped out there, when a parade of identical black Suburbans turned into the embassy’s driveway to deliver U.S. Vice-President Joe Biden.

“We fully support you at the negotiating table,” Biden told Santos. “In war and peace, Mr. President, we stand with Colombia.”

Washington isn’t merely “standing with” Colombia in its time of war, it’s bankrolling that war. Our country has spent $6.8 billion since 2000 on aid to Colombia’s armed forces.

All that U.S. military training, weapons, and equipment has aggravated Colombia’s conflict and made it more deadly. A Colombian Congressman, Alirio Uribe, put it this way: “The U.S. sees our house is burning and they come over and throw gasoline on our house.”

Colombian soldiers lured innocent civilians out to remote areas, executed them, and dressed their dead bodies up as guerrilla fighters. The soldiers did this to increase the number of enemy casualties and thereby show that the Colombian military was winning the war. Soldiers who participated were rewarded with extra vacation time and promotions.

The Colombian Attorney General’s office and human rights groups have investigated or documented 5,763 cases like this.

One Colombian general who confessed to participating in the murder of 24 young men said that he was just following orders and that this strategy of killing civilians and framing them as guerrillas was developed by his boss, Mario Montoya, then-commander of the Colombian army.

The general also testified that his commander said, “I don’t want to see puddles of blood. I want to see rivers.”

Colombians are tired of war. Juan Manuel Santos’s victory gives him a mandate for peace.

Instead of funding Colombia’s military, the Obama administration should direct aid dollars to support Colombia’s civilian institutions, vulnerable populations, and sustainable economic initiatives. Only with strong civilian governance and guarantees for truth, justice and integral reparations will Colombians be able to begin the task of constructing the vibrant, inclusive, peaceful country in which all have a voice.

That’s worth more than any World Cup triumph, no matter how historic.

Margaret Boehme is a member of the Witness for Peace Colombia team based in Bogotá. WitnessforPeace.org

The post Peace Wins In Colombia – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The Rise Of The Non-Working Rich – OpEd

$
0
0

In a new Pew poll, more than three quarters of self-described conservatives believe “poor people have it easy because they can get government benefits without doing anything.”

In reality, most of America’s poor work hard, often in two or more jobs.

The real non-workers are the wealthy who inherit their fortunes. And their ranks are growing.

In fact, we’re on the cusp of the largest inter-generational wealth transfer in history.

The wealth is coming from those who over the last three decades earned huge amounts on Wall Street, in corporate boardrooms, or as high-tech entrepreneurs.

It’s going to their children, who did nothing except be born into the right family.

The “self-made” man or woman, the symbol of American meritocracy, is disappearing. Six of today’s ten wealthiest Americans are heirs to prominent fortunes. Just six Walmart heirs have more wealth than the bottom 42 percent of Americans combined (up from 30 percent in 2007).

The U.S. Trust bank just released a poll of Americans with more than $3 million of investable assets.

Nearly three-quarters of those over age 69, and 61 per cent of boomers (between the ages of 50 and 68), were the first in their generation to accumulate significant wealth.

But the bank found inherited wealth far more common among rich millennials under age 35.

This is the dynastic form of wealth French economist Thomas Piketty warns about. It’s been the major source of wealth in Europe for centuries. It’s about to become the major source in America – unless, that is, we do something about it.

As income from work has become more concentrated in America, the super rich have invested in businesses, real estate, art, and other assets. The income from these assets is now concentrating even faster than income from work.

In 1979, the richest 1 percent of households accounted for 17 percent of business income. By 2007 they were getting 43 percent. They were also taking in 75 percent of capital gains. Today, with the stock market significantly higher than where it was before the crash, the top is raking even more from their investments.

Both political parties have encouraged this great wealth transfer, as beneficiaries provide a growing share of campaign contributions.

But Republicans have been even more ardent than Democrats.

For example, family trusts used to be limited to about 90 years. Legal changes implemented under Ronald Reagan extended them in perpetuity. So-called “dynasty trusts” now allow super-rich families to pass on to their heirs money and property largely free from taxes, and to do so for generations.

George W. Bush’s biggest tax breaks helped high earners but they provided even more help to people living off accumulated wealth. While the top tax rate on income from work dropped from 39.6% to 35 percent, the top rate on dividends went from 39.6% (taxed as ordinary income) to 15 percent, and the estate tax was completely eliminated. (Conservatives called it the “death tax” even though it only applied to the richest two-tenths of one percent.)

Barack Obama rolled back some of these cuts, but many remain.

Before George W. Bush, the estate tax kicked in at $2 million of assets per couple, and then applied a 55 percent rate. Now it kicks in at $10 million per couple, with a 40 percent rate.

House Republicans want to go even further than Bush did.

Rep. Paul Ryan’s “road map,” which continues to be the bible of Republican economic policy, eliminates all taxes on interest, dividends, capital gains, and estates.

Yet the specter of an entire generation who do nothing for their money other than speed-dial their wealth management advisors isn’t particularly attractive.

It’s also dangerous to our democracy, as dynastic wealth inevitably accumulates political influence.

What to do? First, restore the estate tax in full.

Second, eliminate the “stepped-up-basis on death” rule. This obscure tax provision allows heirs to avoid paying capital gains taxes on the increased value of assets accumulated during the life of the deceased. Such untaxed gains account for more than half of the value of estates worth more than $100 million, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Third, institute a wealth tax. We already have an annual wealth tax on homes, the major asset of the middle class. It’s called the property tax. Why not a small annual tax on the value of stocks and bonds, the major assets of the wealthy?

We don’t have to sit by and watch our meritocracy be replaced by a permanent aristocracy, and our democracy be undermined by dynastic wealth. We can and must take action — before it’s too late.

The post The Rise Of The Non-Working Rich – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

MH17 And Putin’s Recklessness In Ukraine – OpEd

$
0
0

The shooting down of Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 over Ukrainian separatist-held territory yesterday represents an unfathomable, heartbreaking horror – the second tragedy to strike the carrier within months, while almost certainly changing the course of history in the current conflict if not the wider post-Soviet space.

While not all the facts are clear at the moment, almost three hundred people have lost their lives just one day after tougher sanctions went into effect against many of Russia’s top companies and financial institutions. MH17 was flying in approved airspace almost 20 miles above the Donetsk region, and was most likely struck SA-17 Buk 2 surface-to-air missile system. Both Russia and the separatists deny their involvement, claiming they would lack the sophisticated armament to take down a plane, however a June 17 report by ITAR-TASS reported that the rebels had seized control of a Buk system, and two other Ukrainian military cargo planes had been brought down in recent weeks.

Russia gains absolutely nothing from this terrible tragedy, while the Donetsk separatists in fact stand to lose the most, so the argument that the aircraft was intentionally taken down is not very plausible. Russia’s state media is busy pushing a “false flag” accusation that Kiev shot down MH17 with the intention of blaming it on the rebels, but this has not been supported by any of the facts thus far.

 

Early on in this crisis, social media accounts belonging to the separatists boasted of the shooting down of what they thought was a Ukrainian military aircraft, with the chilling message: “We have issued warnings not to fly in our airspace.” The posts were later removed.

If in fact it turns out that MH17 was mistakenly shot down by Ukraine’s Russia-backed separatists, both Europe and the United States will have to seriously rethink their strategy of working with President Vladimir Putin, who ultimately is responsible for at least indirectly creating the situation in Eastern Ukraine, where sophisticated armaments have fallen into the hands of irresponsible, stateless actors.

For so many years, Western policymakers and businesses have been willing to work on the “presumption of regularity” with Putin’s Russia, the false assurance of a shared value system when in fact the Kremlin has exploited this space to institute a nihilistic power structure of astonishing corruption.

The criminal recklessness on display in Ukraine is not at all accidental, but is rather a hallmark of Putin’s style, which places elite interests and the prestige of the state above the welfare of the individual. It’s happened over and over again – from the refusal of international assistance to the sinking Kursk submarine, the handling of terrorist atrocities both at Beslan and Nord Ost, not to mention decades of conflict in the North Caucasus where warlords have been handed legitimacy and impunity to keep a tight lid on a problem rather than finding a solution.

Putin’s strategy of warming up frozen conflicts along its periphery serves a number of purposes. Beyond just establishing and reinforcing a perceived sphere of influence, the galvanising force of nationalism that came with the first wave of pro-Crimea enthusiasm has distinct short term domestic benefits. But the failure to account for consequences or any sort of long-term planning is the key sign of this criminal recklessness that comes along with the vertical of corruption.

Serious structural reforms are needed in Russia, but this has not been possible in an environment of assumed impunity for any variety of criminal activities. And should the West really be surprised? British Petroleum was falling over itself to make deals even after its CEO Bob Dudley was interrogated by police and nearly incarcerated. Morgan Stanley and Exxon can’t wait to do more and more business with Rosneft despite the fact that the entire value of the company was stolen from Yukos. For months these lobbying forces in both Brussels and Washington DC have fought off tougher sanctions on Russia, and here we see the result of these mistakes.

The changes that will come to these complex geopolitical relationships in coming weeks will be breathtaking – but in many ways, it is long overdue.

The post MH17 And Putin’s Recklessness In Ukraine – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Ralph Nader: On Creating An Ombudsman For General Motors – OpEd

$
0
0

The simplest solution to avert the culture of avoidance or cover-up inside GM regarding their discovery of product defects is for the CEO to establish an independent Ombudsman office, authorized to receive, in total confidence, the assertions of conscientious engineers and other employees about safety defects without fear of retaliation or losing their jobs. The Ombudsman, outside the GM chain of hierarchical command, would report directly to the CEO. The CEO would then have the responsibility to follow up on the report and decide whether it is at a level of gravity to warrant triggering the federal regulation on reporting the discovery to the Department of Transportation. The company may want to introduce a monetary reward for reports by its engineers and other employees to the Ombudsman that could prevent death and injuries and save the company a ton of headaches and expenditures. Giving assembly line workers rewards for proposing more efficient ways to manufacture products has been a long time incentive program by many companies.

For more information contact: Ralph Nader 202-387-8034

The post Ralph Nader: On Creating An Ombudsman For General Motors – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Guantánamo Hunger Striker Abu Wa’el Dhiab’s Wife Calls For Videos Of His Force-Feeding To Be Made Public – OpEd

$
0
0

Regular readers will know that one of the most prominent Guantánamo prisoners at present is Abu Wa’el Dhiab, a Syrian national, separated from his wife and his four children for over 12 years, who recently persuaded a US judge to order the government stop force-feeding him as a response to the hunger strike that he embarked on last year. Soon after, Judge Gladys Kessler reluctantly rescinded her order, as she feared that Mr. Dhiab might die if he was not force-fed, but she also ordered the government to release videotapes of Mr. Dhiab’s force-feeding — and of him being forcibly extracted from his cell — to his lawyers.

This was the first time a judge had ordered evidence of force-feeding and cell extractions to be released to any of the prisoners’ lawyers, and when lawyers watched the videos, in the secure facility in Virginia where they must travel to view  all classified, one of his legal team, Cori Crider of Reprieve, said, “While I’m not allowed to discuss the contents of these videos, I can say that I had trouble sleeping after viewing them.” Although the men’s lawyers are the only people allowed to see the videos, 16 mainstream media organizations recently submitted a motion calling for them to be made public.

Abu Wa’el Dhiab, who is confined to a wheelchair as a result of his treatment in US custody, is one of 75 prisoners still held who were cleared for release in January 2010 by the high-level, inter-agency Guantánamo Review Task Force that President Obama established shortly after first taking office in January 2009. This disgraceful situation has arisen because of Congressional obstruction, a refusal by President Obama to spend political capital overcoming that obstruction, even though he has the means to do so, and the US establishment’s collective unwillingness to release Yemeni prisoners, who make up the majority of the cleared prisoners, because of unreasonable fears about the security situation in that country.

This unacceptable situation continues to drag on, poisoning America’s claims to be a nation that believes in justice, and while it now appears that Abu Wa’el Dhiab will be released in the not too distant future — to Uruguay, at the request of President Mujica, along with five other men cleared for release who cannot be safely repatriated — Mr. Dhiab is not yet a free man, and, as a result, I am delighted to make available a powerful article about his situation, written by his wife and recently published on the Huffington Post.

Umm Wa’el Dhiab’s article about her husband is below:

The Obama Administration Must Let the American People See Footage of My Husband Being Force-Fed in Their Name
By Umm Wa’el Dhiab, Huffington Post, July 15, 2014

Last week, Obama administration lawyers filed a stack of documents in a case about my husband — including sealed videos of him being taken to be force-fed at Guantánamo Bay. I don’t think I could bear to see those videos. It shocks me, though, that the American people may never be given the opportunity to see for themselves what is happening in their name.

Sixteen of America’s biggest media organizations have asked for the right to air them, judging them to be in the public interest. The government is fighting their request, scrabbling to cover up what is going on every day in the prison.

Indeed, when I read their documents last week, I was struck by how hard these government lawyers have tried to keep everything about my husband from public view, and not just by suppressing the videos of his abuse but by avoiding describing the man himself. At no point amidst all the legal jargon did they write anything about him: who he actually is or why he might be on hunger strike. I want to tell them.

More than a decade has passed since Abu Wa’el was taken from us in the night. I had just given birth to our fourth child; our other children were just toddlers. My husband is a kind man and a superb cook. I miss the dishes he learned to prepare in his father’s restaurant. He is guilty of no crime, has never been charged, and was told by President Obama five years ago that he would be released from Guantánamo.

This year has been one of the hardest to be without him. Last July we were still living in Syria. The civil war forced us to leave for Lebanon, and then to seek shelter in Turkey. I tried to rejoin my family in Jordan but was immediately taken in for questioning at the border and refused entry because of Abu Wa’el’s detention at Guantánamo. The stigma travels. We’ve made it back to Istanbul now. I’m proud that the children are registered in school, and that their teachers tell me that they have already caught up in their studies.

I had to do all that alone. Abu Wa’el is nearing his 13th year at Guantánamo Bay. When I speak to his American lawyers, I can tell that they are shocked and appalled by his case. I’m not so shocked. I was a teacher in Syria. The government locked me up twice in the past just because of Abu Wa’el’s detention, so I know what it means when politics disregards the law.

The children always ask me about their father. I cry when I think about the fact that he has missed their whole childhood now. He has missed kissing them, stroking their hair, telling them stories to help them drift off to sleep. Maria has carried his picture around with her for years now. Ahmad keeps telling me that he will travel to free his father when he gets older.

I promised my husband that I would get them to safety, after we lost so many loved ones in the civil war. Abu Wa’el promised me in return that he would come and join us by whatever means he could. So, 12 years after his arrest, with no movement on his case, he decided to stop eating. I hate the thought of him doing this. But I understand. The rest of us are safe now, waiting for him. We’ve dealt with enough over the last decade. It’s time for our family to be reunited and for us to start living again.

None of this appears in the government documents. Abu Wa’el is named simply as “petitioner.” Over 45 pages, the Obama administration’s lawyers use every possible argument to explain why the way they force-feed him should not be examined in detail. At one point, apparently, they even say that the former senior medical officer — the man who once approved forcing a tube in and out of my husband’s nose twice a day — should not be questioned because it would interrupt his annual vacation.

In the past, I wouldn’t have expected this kind of secrecy of America. But over the past few months, I’ve seen it repeatedly. First, the government fought to prevent our lawyers from seeing the force-feeding videos. Now they forbid our lawyers from even discussing their content with other security-cleared lawyers in secret. Then they opposed the request from 16 of their country’s most reputed media groups for access to the material. They are doing their best to make sure that what has happened — is happening — to my husband never sees the light of day.

What is even more confusing to me is that the solution to all this appears to be within the government’s grasp. The US media has recently been reporting that my husband is one of six Guantánamo prisoners who might be resettled, and that the transfer documents are on the desk of the secretary of defense. I read those articles repeatedly. It is hard to believe that our family might actually be one signature away from seeing each other again.

America was shocked by the images from Abu Ghraib. These films from Guantánamo threaten to do the same. The American people should be given the chance to see them, and to decide whether they accept what is being done daily to my husband. I am certain that if they are given the chance, they will see the reality: the simple desperation of an innocent man, held without charge or trial, using the only means at his disposal to get back to his wife and children.

The post Guantánamo Hunger Striker Abu Wa’el Dhiab’s Wife Calls For Videos Of His Force-Feeding To Be Made Public – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

23 Killed In Gaza In Two Hours

$
0
0

Israeli artillery shelling and airstrikes across the Gaza Strip killed 23 Palestinians over only two hours late Monday, bringing the day’s death toll to over 100.

Spokesman for the ministry of health Ashraf al-Qidra said 11 Palestinians including five children were killed, and others were injured in an Israeli strike on Israa tower in central Gaza City.

Eight of them were identified as Ibrahim Deeb Ahmad al-Kilani, 53, Yasir Ibrahim Deeb al-Kilani, 8, Elias Ibrahim Deeb al-Kilani, 4, Sawsan Ibrahim Deeb al-Kilani, 11, Reem Ibrahim Deeb al-Kilani, 12, Taghrid Shabaan Mohammad al-Kilani, 45, Mahmoud Shabaan Mohammad Dirbas, 37 and Ayda Shabaan Mohammad Dirbas, 47.

A Ma’an reporter said they included a father, mother their four children, and the mother’s brother and sister.

Meanwhile Jihad Mahmoud al-Mughrabi, 22, died of injuries sustained in Khan Younis, while Fadi Bashir al-Abadla, 22, was killed in a separate attack.

Medical sources said that three others were killed as Israeli forces targeted a group of people in Deir al-Balah in central Gaza. Al-Qidra identified them as Fadi Azmi Bureim, Othman Salim Bureim, and Salim Abdul Majid Bureim.

As Palestinians broke their Ramadan fasts Monday evening, two people were killed in a strike near the al-Shamaa mosque in the al-Zaytoun neighborhood in southern Gaza City.

The Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine said one of its leaders, Zakaria Abu Daqqa, was killed in a drone strike in Khan Younis.

Two others were injured in a strike on a motorbike in al-Qarara.

Three more Palestinians were killed in an airstrike on Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, where Israeli airstrikes destroyed the al-Dahlan family house in the al-Nasr neighborhood.

One Palestinian died of injuries sustained in the head in strikes on Rafah.

Also, Rajai Jihad Abu Daghma, 38, died in a hospital in Cairo on Monday.

The post 23 Killed In Gaza In Two Hours appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Colombia: Former President Uribe To Head Opposition In Senate

$
0
0

Alvaro Uribe, who served as president of Colombia from 2002 to 2010, has returned to the political scene as a newly minted senator and leader of the opposition to the new government of his former Defence minister Juan Manuel Santos, confirmed President in June for a second term.

Uribe won a senatorial seat in the March 9 vote with a highly critical speech concerning peace talks, promoted by Santos, underway in Cuba between the government and FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) guerrilla group. Uribe’s right-wing Democratic Center party won 20 percent of the 102 Senate seats, just behind Santos’s U Party that won 21 seats.

Uribe, former mayor of Medellín (1982-1983), district adviser (1984-1985), senator (1986-1994) and governor of the north-western department of Antioquia (1995-1997), was hard-hit by the killing of his father, the wealthy farmer and landowner Alberto Uribe Sierra, by the FARC in his attempted abduction. This caused the former president to opt for a military solution to the conflict. As governor of Antioquia, he promoted the Convivir, private security cooperatives, which gave way to the paramilitary death squads of the AUC (Civilian Self-Defence Forces of Colombia).

He took office in 2002, after the failed peace talks opened with the guerrilla by the administration of former president Andrés Pastrana (1998-2002) in Caguán. He since launched his “democratic security policy” based on Plan Colombia, an ambitious US financed plan against drug-trafficking and the guerrilla, that inflicted severe losses on the FARC. Despite the scandals that involved numerous of his ‘loyalists’ – the latest case that of his minister of Agriculture Andres Felipe, sentenced last week to 17 years in prison for embezzlement – Uribe remains a very popular figure. He is the first former president to win a seat in senate, where he will attempt to hinder Santos’s bid to sign final peace with the FARC.

The post Colombia: Former President Uribe To Head Opposition In Senate appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Afghanistan Government Force Offensive After Taliban Attacks

$
0
0

Afghani security forces launched an offensive in various provinces, after attacks last week against the Kabul airport and Saturday by Taliban against police checkpoints in the Qaysar district, in the northern Faryab province, far from the capital but a strategic area.

According to the defence ministry, 31 militants were killed, 15 injured and one captured in the past 24 hours of sweeping operations, while 3 were kileld among the government forces. The military and police operations are also underway in the Khost, Kandahar, Helmand and Parwan provinces.

After a relative truce during the presidential vote, the Taliban offensive appears to be re-emerging to reaffirm their presence in many areas of the nation from where NATO and US troops are set to withdraw by the end of the year, passing security over to Afghani forces.

Some 50,000 foreign troops are still in the country, down from the 130,000 of four years ago. Washington and Kabul aim to maintain a large US contingent of under 10,000 troops in the nation after the pull out.

The post Afghanistan Government Force Offensive After Taliban Attacks appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Uganda And Beyond Political Indifference: Dealing With Past Wrongs – OpEd

$
0
0

All of Uganda needs to acknowledge their duty and responsibilities to advocate for the plight of war affected victims and advance their agenda in the national to international arena.

By Otim Denis Barnabas

Since independence Uganda has experienced a number of violent conflicts. These conflicts have been characterized by crimes against humanity – rape, torture, disappearances and others – and human rights abuses, most notably those committed by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels. However, Uganda has not made any deliberate attempt to respond to the wrongs and crimes of the past committed against ordinary citizens. This has created a vicious circle of impunity and atrocities not only in northern Uganda, but throughout the country.

Taking the responsibility to acknowledge that past wrongs and crimes have been committed has been one the greatest obstacles successive governments have faced. Yet historically little has been done. However, a shift is being registered in Uganda as a number of transitional justice discourses begin to emerge.

On the 26th January 2014, the President of Ugandan made an unprecedented public statement stating that the government will institute an investigation into the crimes committed by the National Resistance Army – now the Uganda Peoples Defense Forces – soldiers  in Acholi and Teso sub region, and perpetrators will be brought to justice. Some have questioned how genuine this statement is, coming 20 years after the events, but it at least provides a political space for debating and advancing the transitional justice discourse in this country.

Following the January 26th 2014 Presidential statement, a number of development projects have been initiated. No matter the methodology and the conceptualization of these development projects, they all aim at rebuilding the lives of the people affected by violent conflict in post-conflict northern Uganda. The jeopardy is that these development projects it is unclear as to if these are specific state-sponsored development projects or regular state duties and responsibilities.

The most recent project is the 20 billion Uganda shillings earmarked by the Office of the Prime Minister for cattle restocking in Northern Uganda. The restocking program has been received with a much criticism for being centrally imposed and not taking a participatory approach. To some critics it seems to be business as usual for the Office of the Prime Minister to use such projects to collect money meant for development programs. These perceptions are drawn from previous corruption scandals and the mismanagement of the Peace Recovery and Development Program fund meant for the recovery of northern Uganda.

If the Uganda National Transitional Justice Policy was in place to guide these policies, this confusion, misconception, and suspicion, may have been avoided. However the creation of this policy has been long delayed. Without this guide in place the practice and implementation of transitional justice in this country is likely to drag for some time.

Characterized by doubts, the transitional justice debate has begun to make progress in Ugandan Parliament. A recent motion put forward by Hon. Reagan Okumu on the plight of persons affected by LRA rebellion drew collective support in parliament across political divides. This was a significant move that restored hope of many affected victims. The motion recommended collective reparation, such as infrastructure development, improved access to health care, and skills training. Though this sounds interesting, much work remains to be done to get the motion through the executive and legislative parts of the Ugandan government. Buying the political will is imperative as other stakeholders focuses on the technicality and the contextualization of the matter at hand.

There is a need for a critical analysis to provide targeted responses to victim needs. Some of these targeted responses could be:

  • the need to a clear distinction between development projects and regular state responsibilities, and specific reparation programs;
  • a concerted effort to promote a bottom up approach while also taking into consideration the gender analysis of the impact of the atrocities on the victims;
  • the need for psychosocial support; and
  • provision of financial support to improve livelihoods, and physical rehabilitation of the victims.

Most importantly, all of Uganda needs to acknowledge their duty and responsibilities to advocate for the plight of war affected victims and advance their agenda in the national to international arena.

Otim Denis Barnabas works for the Refugee Law Project, a Ugandan peacebuilding organisation.

This article was originally published by Insight on Conflict and is available by clicking here.

The post Uganda And Beyond Political Indifference: Dealing With Past Wrongs – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Saudi King Abdullah, Moroccan King Review Palestine Situation

$
0
0

Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah held talks in Jeddah Monday with Morocco’s King Mohammed on major regional and international developments, including the situation in Palestine.

They also discussed prospects of expanding cooperation between the two Arab countries.

Crown Prince Salman, deputy premier and minister of defense, Deputy Crown Prince Muqrin, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, secretary-general of the National Security Council, Prince Khaled bin Bandar, chief of intelligence, and Prince Miteb bin Abdullah, National Guard minister attended the talks.

The post Saudi King Abdullah, Moroccan King Review Palestine Situation appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Malaysian Airlines Disaster Has Been Politicized – OpEd

$
0
0

By Linda S. Heard

When I first glimpsed the wreckage of a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 on TV, my immediate thought was at last they’ve discovered the mystery of the missing plane. My surprise turned to incredulity as soon as I understood that the airline had suffered yet another tragedy, this time over the skies of eastern Ukraine. And then to heartbreak at the thought of sheer terror those passengers, including 80 children, must have experienced, as the aircraft descended sharply into a field near the village of Grabovo that is smack in the middle of a conflict zone.

Nobody can comprehend the agony of the victims’ families and friends, who will never see their loved ones again and, worse, are unable to retrieve their bodies for burial and may never know with absolute certainty what happened because the crash site extending over many miles has been tampered with. It’s believed that bodies have been taken by emergency personnel to morgues in Donetsk, inaccessible to family members. Valuables have been stolen; mobile phones are not in evidence. Until now, there’ve been conflicting reports concerning who is holding the black boxes containing most of the secrets.

Malaysian Airlines that’s been bleeding revenue since the disappearance of Flight 370 has been vindicated for routing flights over a war-torn region because numerous international airlines have taken the same flight path without incident and there were no alerts from aviation authorities. Malaysia’s national carrier is in dire financial straits and may require a government rescue package to stay in the air. Nevertheless, it has been sensitive to passengers’ fears by agreeing to ticket refunds.

At the time of writing, there is little factual evidence because investigators have had little access to the scene and the data contained inside the black boxes has not been studied. But, unfortunately, this absence of hard facts has not deterred government finger pointing in align with their respective political stances vis-à-vis the crisis in Ukraine.

The US and the EU, which have thrown their backing behind the new government in Kiev, have made concerted efforts to verbally indict pro-Russian rebels and Moscow, which they accuse of training and arming separatists who’ve declared their region as the Donetsk People’s Republic.

The conclusion, which remains unsubstantiated, is that the plane was shot down by a sophisticated surface-to-air missile from a BUK launcher that could only be operated by experienced military personnel. However, during a CNN news report in the initial hours following the tragedy when videos of the actual crash showing black smoke billowing upwards were aired, at least one expert pointed out that there was no smoke trail in the sky which would be the case if the aircraft had been aflame while still in the air.

But let’s go with the missile theory. Both the Ukrainian government and the rebels are in possession of such missiles. Of course, the likely culprits are the insurgents, who have been downing Ukrainian military planes and helicopters. It’s probable that this passenger plane was shot down in error because it’s not in the rebels’ interests — and definitely not in the interest of Moscow being slammed with US and EU economic sanctions — for this cataclysmic event to have occurred. But, it’s surely wrong for leaderships to jump the gun before an investigation has even begun in order to score political points. In many countries, even official speculation on an ongoing criminal court case is frowned-upon.

President Obama, roundly criticized for his flippant “It looks like a terrible tragedy” comment on Thursday, before switching to a jokey tack for the benefit of a Delaware audience, is now building a circumstantial case against Russia. Furthermore, he’s exerting pressure on President Putin to guarantee safe access to the site for observers and investigators but it’s far from certain just how much influence Russia has over the various rebel groups. Predictably, President Putin has laid the blame on Kiev’s doorstep for stoking tensions and is urging a cease-fire.

Politics cannot be divorced from this catastrophe which will certainly impact already strained international relations, but isn’t it unseemly that the political aspect is shrouding what is, after all, a humanitarian calamity deserving of respect? When so many around the world are grieving the loss of mothers, fathers, sons and daughters the US and Russia should be pulling together in a spirit of cooperation, not trading insults. There is plenty of time for a blame game once the victims are transported to their respective home countries and the truth — or at least the most reliable version of it — is made public.

Email: Sierra12th@yahoo.co.uk

The post Malaysian Airlines Disaster Has Been Politicized – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

US Hypocrisy On Ukraine – OpEd

$
0
0

Much finger-pointing has occurred on the downing of Malaysia flight MH-17 over separatist-held territory in Ukraine. The American media—still reflexively anti-Russian even though the Cold War has been over for almost a quarter-century and heaping blame on Russia and its leader, Vladimir Putin, since even before his annexation of Crimea—have gone hog wild with recrimination after the downing of the aircraft.

And Russia and Putin are easy targets. In America, our story line goes much like this: After the Cold War ended, the United States benevolently showered Russia with assistance, acceptance into the G-8 talkshop of industrial democracies, and “experts” on creating a democracy (I was on one of those trips), but the Russian people let the dour Vladimir Putin ruin our efforts to export democracy there by re-instituting autocratic rule. Americans feel rejected, because the Russians just didn’t want to be like us. And with our usual assumed benevolence, we just don’t understand why Russia is behaving in a “20th century manner,” by annexing Crimea and funneling training and weapons to Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, when the rest of the world, including America, has moved on to a new era in the next millennium. Americans—always very ahistorical, even more so with the advent of 24-7-365 cable “news”—have amnesia about any role the United States might have had in bringing U.S.-Russian relations to their current sad state of affairs.

After the Cold War ended, the then-democratizing Russia, still inducing suspicions in the West, was excluded from the expanding NATO and European Union. After the Berlin wall fell, in a verbal promise to then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to coax him to agree to the reunification of Germany, then-President George H. W. Bush pledged to Gorbachev that NATO, a military alliance hostile to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, would not expand into the territory of the now defunct Soviet-led Warsaw Pact (that is, Eastern Europe). In violation of that promise, the outdated NATO alliance, instead of going the way of the Cold War, repeatedly expanded and is now on Russia’s borders. In fact, during the latest crisis over Ukraine, the United States has reinforced forces near Russia and increased their “training” activity. In addition, since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been trying to win increased influence in the oil and gas-rich former Soviet Central Asian states on Russia’s borders. The Cold War ended but the U.S. containment noose around Russia just moved eastward and northward toward a weaker Russia.

This U.S. tack was very unwise. After the Napoleonic Wars, at the Congress of Vienna, European nations welcomed France back into the community of European nations; a century with no European-wide war ensued. Yet the triumphalist behavior of the United States and NATO after the Cold War more resembled what the allies did to a defeated Germany after World War I; Germany was unfairly blamed for starting the war and required to pay reparations, thus leading to the rise of Adolf Hitler and World War II. The United States keeping post-Cold War Russia out of Europe and humiliating it, instead of being more inclusive, has made Putin’s nationalism resonate in Russia.

So Russia has experienced a shrinking protective buffer in surrounding areas. But isn’t such a protective buffer so last century? To the Russians, who know history all too well, not in the least. In the past, for example, Russia has been invaded by Napoleonic France and Nazi Germany, and it lost a staggering 25 million people in World War II—with total dead a quantum leap above that of any other country. The Russians see their critical buffer zone eroding and are trying to salvage what they can of it. For Russia, Ukraine has always been the crown jewel of Eastern Europe and is very important economically for Russia. Prior to a coup induced by street protests (not the way a democracy is supposed to work), a Russian-friendly government existed in Ukraine. Now that that is gone, Russia’s unacceptable annexation of Crimea and military aid to the Russian separatists in the eastern part of the country should at least be put in perspective. Furthermore, U.S. hypocrisy in criticizing Russia for such assistance to shore up its withering buffer zone is nothing short of amazing.

I believe that Latin American countries would say that the United States’ Monroe Doctrine is still alive in a U.S. sphere of influence that consists of the entire Western Hemisphere. And fairly recently, the United States decided to help the Kosovo Liberation Army rip off a province of Kosovo from Serbia, a traditional ally of a weakened Russia. Also, Russia felt double crossed by the Americans when the West overthrew Muammar Gaddafi of Libya after getting the Russians to vote for a United Nations Security Council Resolution that only allowed military actions for humanitarian reasons to save the lives of Libyan rebels. Finally, the CIA has attempted to aid many rebellions around the world, far from the U.S. sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere—even perhaps in Ukraine’s street protests against the former pro-Russian government, which is not out of the realm of possibility.

In Ukraine, one other parallel exists with World War I. One of the events that led to the unnecessary U.S. entry into World War I was the German torpedoing of the British passenger ship Lusitania, killing almost 1,200 people, including 128 Americans. Yet the German embassy in the United States had put an ad in newspaper warning Americans not to sail on the Lusitania and the ship was carrying munitions through a declared war zone.

The Malaysian aircraft shot down was civilian, but like the Lusitania, it was unbelievably traversing a war zone (regardless of who you want to win the war in eastern Ukraine). Unless it can be proven that the Ukrainian separatists or the Russians shot down the plane intentionally (which is doubtful, given that it would be in neither party’s interest to do so, Ukrainian-released communications among the separatists indicating surprise that the aircraft was civilian, and the Russian experience of heavy international fallout from the downing of a Korean airliner during the Cold War in the 1980s), there is not much substance to the cries of “war crime” in the West. It is the Ukrainian government’s fault for an incredible failure to completely close its airspace to civilian airline traffic (some other airlines had wisely rerouted their planes anyway). The separatists or Russians may have been incompetent in shooting down a civilian plane, but incompetence can happen in the chaos of war.

And the hypocrisy of U.S. foreign policy—famous in the world for criticizing other countries for the same things it has done—is again on display. Do Americans remember the Iranian civilian airliner the world’s most sophisticated U.S. Aegis air defense system blew out of the sky, without an apology, in the Persian Gulf during U.S. meddling in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s on behalf of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq? Of course not, because the sad fact is that most Americans don’t care about history.

This article appeared at and is reprinted with permission.

The post US Hypocrisy On Ukraine – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

How To Play A Weak Hand In Iraq – Analysis

$
0
0

By Abram N. Shulsky, Eric B. Brown and Hillel Fradkin

Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki knows what he wants: a third term in office for himself and U.S. military help in defeating ISIS (now the Islamic State). Political reconciliation between Iraq’s Shiites and Sunnis, and between Arabs and Kurds, can wait. In the words of one of his colleagues in the State of Law Coalition: “Things on the ground are much more important. Solving them will help solve the political problem for us.” But, of course, the current crisis has its origins in the sectarianism that the Maliki government exhibited well before “things on the ground” got as bad as they are now.

Maliki had one bright shining moment as a national leader—his impetuous but (thanks to U.S. support) ultimately successful campaign to redeem Basra from Sadrist chaos in the spring of 2008 and his bucking Iranian pressure by agreeing, later that year, to a Status of Forces Agreement with the United States. Since then, however, it has been downhill toward sectarianism—and its inevitable result, overreliance on Iranian support to stay in power. Maliki may not yet be as dependent on Iran, and on Qassem Suleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, but he is moving in that direction.

The Obama administration recognizes this situation, to some extent. It wants to use its military aid as leverage to force Maliki to govern in a less sectarian manner. It has even suggested that this process would be facilitated by replacing Maliki with some other Shiite leader who could deal with the Sunnis and Kurds unimpeded by memories of the last five years.

Unfortunately, this posture, while well intentioned, reflects a serious underestimation of the difficulties of the situation and of the damage that has been done to the dream of a united, democratic, and federal Iraq. Given the collapse of U.S. influence, the type of military aid Obama might conceivably provide is simply insufficient to effect the political changes he wants. (In any case, the actual leverage could come only from the threat to withdraw that military support, a threat that would be implausible and almost impossible to implement in the middle of the fight.)

Even when the United States had a large number of troops in Iraq, it found it challenging to dampen sectarianism and was often unable to do so. The United States could insist, for example, that the defense minister be a Sunni—but it could not prevent Maliki from bypassing the Ministry of Defense and asserting operational control of the Iraqi Army directly (through such innovations as the Office of the Commander in Chief and the provincial Operation Commands).

Similarly, the United States was unable to support adequately the members of the Awakening movement among Sunnis in Anbar Province and elsewhere, which was so important for the success of the surge. The Sons of Iraq—the Sunnis who rallied to the anti-al-Qaeda banner—were supposed to be integrated into the Iraqi security forces or otherwise employed. As long as the United States had a big presence in Iraq, it could ensure that they at least received monthly salaries. But as the U.S. presence was drawn down, it proved impossible to force the Iraqi government to take a generous approach toward them.

The United States was involved in reaching the 2010 agreements by virtue of which Maliki was elected to a second term as prime minister. As U.S. influence waned, however, the power-sharing mechanisms called for in the agreement were never put into place. Instead, Maliki concentrated even more power in his own hands, helped out by a friendly court that, for example, gave him direct control of the Central Bank and the High Electoral Commission and gave the government a monopoly on the introduction of bills in the Iraqi parliament.

Thus, the struggle against sectarianism and for an Iraq strong enough to withstand Iranian meddling has to be conducted in a new way. Iraq can’t go back to the old model of prolonged wrangling which produces a paper power-sharing agreement that the prime minister is then able to ignore. And, under current circumstances, the United States certainly can’t be content with an agreement of the sort it was unable to enforce even when its military presence in Iraq was orders of magnitude greater.

The United States needs leverage, but it won’t come from bargaining with a central government that will insist on our help in defeating its enemies first. Rather, the leverage will come if the United States is able to change facts on the ground, so as to ensure that the various segments of Iraqi society have the ability to withstand Baghdad’s centralizing tendencies. The United States can militarily support the central government’s resistance to further advances by ISIS, but it shouldn’t allow Maliki to constrain its contacts with other segments of Iraqi society.

This means several things. The United States shouldn’t automatically side with Baghdad in its disputes with Erbil, the capital of the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG). Despite much U.S. prodding, Iraq has never been able to pass a hydrocarbons law outlining the specific powers of the KRG with respect to oil and gas resources in its area. The current U.S. policy of trying to block the KRG’s sales of oil via the Turkish pipeline no longer makes sense: If it wants leverage to force Baghdad to pay more attention to the concerns of the non-Shiite population of Iraq, maintaining a discreet silence on the oil sales issues will speak volumes.

The United States needn’t support Kurdish independence from Iraq, and the KRG is unlikely to expect such explicit support, at least any time soon. But the United States must be much more supple and sophisticated in allowing current tendencies to play themselves out, if it wants to recreate the Iraqi political system on a sustainable basis.

The United States should also be trying to revive the connections with Sunni tribal and other leaders that it had during the days of the Awakening. The armed forces of the Islamic State are in fact a coalition, including old Baathists and various tribal groups, many of which do not share ISIS’s religious extremism. The possibility of conflict within the coalition is real, and there have already been some manifestations of it. The United States will need to find allies among these Sunni groups and stand ready to help them when and if they decide they have had enough of religious extremism. It won’t be able to do that if it tells them the only alternative to the religious extremism of the Islamic State is a sectarian government in Baghdad dependent on Iran.

In short, our ability to influence events in Iraq has diminished severely over the past years. Therefore, the first step is to build up our influence with and support for those groups that are amenable to it. The United States can then try to help these groups rebuild the Iraqi government on a new basis that will resist the centralizing tendencies we have seen. This would not necessarily require a change in the Iraqi constitution—the current document, for example, would allow the Sunni provinces to form a regional government similar to the KRG and thereby gain a great deal of autonomy—but it would require a new mindset in Baghdad political circles.

Perhaps a political genius will arise on the Iraqi scene who will be able to balance all the political forces of the country, play them off against each other, and reunite them on a democratic, federal basis. Unfortunately, no such leader—who would have to have the political skills of a de Gaulle at least—has appeared on the horizon. So, in the more likely event that Iraq will have to muddle through with something like its current system, direct ties to the various communities of Iraq will give the United States some hope of influencing its course in a less sectarian, or at any rate less centralized, direction.

About the authors:
Abram N. Shulsky
Senior Fellow

Eric B. Brown
Senior Fellow

Hillel Fradkin
Director, Center on Islam, Democracy and the Future of the Muslim World

Source:
This article appeared at the Hudson Institute, and originally at the Weekly Standard, and may be accessed here.

The post How To Play A Weak Hand In Iraq – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Children Illegally Crossing US Border: Responding Requires Policy Changes – Analysis

$
0
0

By David Inserra

In the past several months, the issue of immigration has been dominated by the influx of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) and families crossing the border. These unlawful immigrants are primarily from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. Immigration policies that are selectively enforced and not properly administered—together with high levels of crime and endemic rates of violence in these countries—have led to this current crisis. Additionally, other U.S. laws against human trafficking are inadvertently contributing to this problem by making it more difficult to return unaccompanied children to Central America.

Reforming such policies is beneficial, but Congress should first:

  • Understand how UAC are handled under existing law,
  • Recognize the role that anti-enforcement policies play in encouraging illegal immigration, and
  • Affirm the importance of both protecting the children and sending a clear message that U.S. immigration laws are being enforced.

Unintended Consequences

The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (TVPRA) set up special procedures for handling UAC from non-contiguous nations. The result has been that when Central American children enter the U.S., drawn by hopes of amnesty and fleeing violence (or even simply poverty) in their countries, they are entitled to special processing by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that attempts to reunite them with their families in the U.S.—and is successful about 85 percent of the time.[1] While they are put in formal removal proceedings, this policy is overwhelming the ability of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Department of Justice, and HHS to screen, house, and adjudicate cases.

Indeed, many immigrants—regardless of age—will disappear into the U.S. and never appear before an immigration judge. For those who do enter the system, an overwhelmed judicial system could take years to finish the process. Many children can request asylum, though most will not qualify.[2] Many can also request Special Immigrant Juvenile status, which is available to those children whose reunification with one or both parents is impossible due to abuse, abandonment, or neglect and for whom it is determined that “it would not be in the alien’s best interests to be returned to the alien’s or parent’s previous country of nationality.”[3] Even if the process does lead to a deportation order, many illegal immigrants are simply never removed. In 2013, 858,779 immigrants were under a final order to be removed but were not in custody.[4] Needless to say, few unlawful immigrants turn themselves in to be removed.

According to the Los Angeles Times, only 1,669 children were deported in 2013 despite 26,206 UAC apprehensions at the southwest border—a figure that, according to revised government estimates, may rise to 90,000 this year alone.[5]

Enforcing the Law

While TVPRA has played a role in making it more difficult for the immigration system to deal with this situation, it did not have to be this way. Section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) explicitly allows for the expedited removal of “any or all aliens” who have not been legally “admitted or paroled in the U.S.” and have not been in the U.S. for more than two years. The use of section 235 is up to the “sole and unreviewable discretion of the Attorney General [now granted to the Secretary of Homeland Security] and may be modified at any time.”[6] President Obama could arguably use it to deal with this growing problem “at any time.”

Rather than use discretion as it is intended—to better administer the U.S. immigration system—the Obama Administration has used its discretion to lessen enforcement of U.S. immigration laws, which creates an incentive for illegal immigration. Most notable is the Administration’s “enforcement priorities” and “prosecutorial discretion” to exempt large groups of illegal immigrants from deportation.

The most specific example of such discretion used to not enforce the law is President Obama’s unilateral Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which provides work authorization and protection from immigration enforcement to individuals who were brought unlawfully as children before June 2007. Essentially a temporary and Administration-dictated amnesty, DACA harms the rule of law by ignoring the clear text and intent of current immigration law.

The Obama Administration, with DACA and other adverse uses of “discretion,” is creating a powerful magnet for more illegal immigration, since children and their families have hope that they might receive some sort of amnesty, or at least not be deported, if they make it into the U.S. Such magnets are made even stronger by various proposals for amnesty such as the mass amnesty in S. 744, which passed the Senate in June 2013, and the Encourage New Legalized Immigrants to Start Training (ENLIST) Act, which would provide illegal immigrants with access to near-instant citizenship in exchange for military service.[7]

Return and Protect the Children

The TVPRA was designed to protect children from human trafficking—a noble objective—but has been used in ways not imagined when passed. Congress should:

  • Allow for the expedited return of UAC. The TVPRA should be reformed so as to remove the burdensome process that applies to UAC from non-contiguous countries. This would allow the U.S. to enter into agreements with other countries to more rapidly return UAC while maintaining key protections for the safety of trafficked children. While this approach is not a silver bullet, it is an important step to clarifying U.S. law.
  • Defund DACA. Through the normal and currently ongoing appropriations process, Congress should end DHS’s ability to carry out the DACA program. Such action would stop one of the elements that are driving the current surge of unlawful immigrants.

President Obama should:

  • Use his authority to enforce the law. At any point during this crisis, DHS could revise its regulations on the use of expedited removal in section 235 of the INA. Rather than more anti-enforcement executive actions, President Obama should rescind DACA and use his authority to faithfully administer the U.S. immigration system.

The Right Way Forward

While President Obama asked for $3.7 billion in funding for immigration, he did not ask for important policy changes. The President already has the authority to quickly remove these children. Congress should send a clear message by amending the TVPRA but maintaining critical anti-human-trafficking policies. These actions, together with stopping amnesty-centric policies and improving partner capacity in Latin America, can help the U.S. deal with the influx of unlawful immigrant children in a responsible manner.

About the author:
David Inserra is a Research Associate for Homeland Security and Cybersecurity in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign and National Security Policy, of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy, at The Heritage Foundation.

Source:
This article was published by The Heritage Foundation, and may be accessed here.

Notes:
[1] Lisa Seghetti, Alison Siskin, and Ruth Ellen Wasem, “Unaccompanied Alien Children: An Overview,” Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, June 23, 2014, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43599.pdf (accessed July 12, 2014).

[2] See Brett Schaefer, David Inserra, and Steven Groves, “The U.S. Should Dismiss UNHCR Opinion That the Migrants Are Refugees,” The Daily Signal, July 10, 2014, http://dailysignal.com/2014/07/10/u-s-dismiss-unhcr-opinion-migrants-refugees/.

[3] Deborah Lee et al, “Update on Legal Relief Options for Unaccompanied Alien Children Following the Enactment of the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008,” Immigrant Legal Resource Center, February 19, 2009, pp. 2–4, http://www.ilrc.org/files/235_tvpra_practice_advisory.infonet.pdf (accessed July 12, 2014).

[4] Jessica Vaughan, “Deportation Numbers Unwrapped,” Center for Immigration Studies, October 2013, http://cis.org/ICE-Illegal-Immigrant-Deportations (accessed July 12, 2014).

[5] Brian Bennett, “Deportation Data Won’t Dispel Rumor Drawing Migrant Minors to U.S.,” Los Angeles Times, July 5, 2014, http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-deport-children-20140706-story.html (accessed July 12, 2014). See also U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “Southwest Border Unaccompanied Alien Children,” http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-border-unaccompanied-children (accessed July 12, 2014), and David Rogers, “Johnson Ramps Up Border Projections,” Politico, July 10, 2014, http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/jeh-johnson-immigrant-children-how-many-border-crisis-108772.html?hp=l8 (accessed July 12, 2014).

[6] 8 U.S. Code 1225, (b)(1)(A), http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1225 (accessed July 14, 2014), and 8 U.S. Code 1103, http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1103 (accessed July 14, 2014).

[7] Charles Stimson, “The ENLIST Act: A Back Door to Instant Citizenship,” Heritage Foundation Legal Memorandum No. 124, May 27, 2014, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/05/the-enlist-act-a-back-door-to-instant-citizenship, and The Heritage Foundation, “The Senate’s Comprehensive Immigration Bill: Top 10 Concerns,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2819, June 21, 2013, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/06/the-senates-comprehensive-immigration-bill-top-10-concerns.

The post Children Illegally Crossing US Border: Responding Requires Policy Changes – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.


Yemen: Land Of Forgotten Battles – Analysis

$
0
0

By Mohamed Mansour Kadah

The vicissitudes of time cannot be more revealing. Yemen is known as the homeland of Qahtan, the fount of all “true Arabs”. Long before Christ, it was named “Arabia Felix” – Happy Arabia – by the Greeks and Romans, who became aware of the then riches of these lands thanks to trade in spices and coffee beans. Although Yemen has often been politically unstable throughout its history, old Yemeni civilizations such as Sheba, Himyar, Hadramawt and Ma’in achieved power and prosperity. The fascinating stories of Queen of Sheba are but one example. With the passage of time and the uprooting of Yemenis for various reasons, civilizations in Yemen reverberated across its region, leaving indelible marks and historical influence as far as the lands of present-day Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Iraq and Syria.

This has changed. Today, Yemen is the poorest country in the Arabian Peninsula. Its Human Development Index ranking in 2012 was 160 out 187 countries. It also makes the UN list of 48 least developed countries. In real terms, Yemen faces daunting security, political, economic and developmental challenges. Rival tribal, sectarian and political allegiances fragment the Yemeni society and state institutions, including the military and security apparatus.

State resources are brazenly looted by a small clique of dominant tribal figures. State authority is generally weak, and mostly absent out of the capital and major urban centers. If you live in Yemen, you simply have no sense of security. Especially since the so-called youth revolution of February 2011, hardly a single day goes by without bloodshed. Notably, Yemenis are the most heavily armed population in the world after the Americans,1 and they are inclined to mete out their own form of justice directly. Over and above, lack of rule of law and impunity further complicate matters, leaving little hope of improvement in the security situation.

The youth revolution of February 2011 has plunged Yemen into deeper chaos, which makes it a stiffer thorn in the back of the Arabian Peninsula and most directly across its long, porous borders with its biggest neighbor, Saudi Arabia. Yet, at best, Yemen is considered a secondary priority by regional and international powers, in comparison with the face-off in the Arabian Gulf, the war in Syria, the Palestinian cause and other flashpoints in the Middle East. Likewise, developments in Yemen are usually glossed over by regional and international media. No doubt, Yemen is worth more attention, not least given its significance as the most populous country in the Arabian Peninsula, its strategic location and sprawling coasts on Bab-el-Mandeb strait, the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea.

The main source of hope in Yemen today lies with the Gulf initiative that brokered peace in the country after the revolution of February 2011, with its subsequent national dialogue conference and extended transitional process. However, there is a host of internal, regional and international factors suggesting Yemen is heading toward continued chaos and, perhaps, disintegration. In particular, there are four heated battles that are likely to shape the future of Yemen.

First, the violent rebellion in the south of the country. Second, the kindling war between Houthis on one side and al-Ahmar tribesmen, Muslim Brothers and Salafis on the other side. Third, the continuing war against Ansar al-Sharia, al-Qaeda’s affiliate in the Arabian Peninsula. Fourth, the tug of war between the revolutionaries and the old regime.

Rebellion in the South

Public affairs in southern Yemen used to be more institution-driven, until the unity with the north in 1990, thanks to the legacy of a long British occupation in the south (1839 to 1967). And southerners are generally more progressive than their northern peers. The national liberation front that precipitated the end of the British occupation openly aligned with the defunct Soviet Union and controlled the state of South Yemen throughout its life. However, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the south voluntarily hurtled toward unity with the north in 1990. By 1994, fomenting grievances and frustration with the central government in Sana’a led to a short war to quell a rebellion in the south. In 1997, a host of southern groups launched the so-called Southern Movement, with demands ranging from rectifying the unity to immediate disengagement. Ultimately, the youth revolution of 2011 offered a historical window of opportunity for southerners to project their cause in the international arena.

The 2011 Gulf initiative acknowledged the legitimacy of the southern cause within the framework of united Yemen. However, it is clear today that public opinion in the south sharply tilts toward independence. This dilemma took center stage in the national dialogue conference that ended in late January 2014. Most of the key leaders of the Southern Movement rebuffed invitations to participate in the conference. Ultimately, the delegation of the south set its bottom line as a transitional two-region federal union with the north, leading to a referendum on self-determination. However, President Hadi – a southerner himself – worked out a dampened formula that ignored the demand for self-determination and relegated decision on the number of federal regions to subsequent deliberations. Later on, the committee on regions decided on a six-region federal union, with the southern governorates brought under two regions, Aden and the Eastern region. But this was only possible after sidelining two obstructive heads of the southern delegation. On the other side, a few days before the end of the conference, a letter signed by several influential southern leaders arrived at the UN Security Council. The letter rejected the conference’s outcome on the southern cause and called for further negotiations on the issue, in the presence of foreign observers.

Shortly afterward, the so-called Southern Resistance has declared an armed struggle against what it perceives as northern occupation, leading to a marked increase in violence throughout the south.

The eruption of wider violence in the south was no surprise, taking into consideration that there were several precursors. To cite only one, the government has given too little too late on long-standing demands by moderate southerners to address the grievances of those who suffered real-estate disappropriation or arbitrary dismissals after the 1994 war, perhaps due to lack of finance and the sophistication of the claims involved. In response, it seems that the strategy of some southern opposition leaders is to cause as much damage as possible to northern interests, so as to attract world attention and force Sana’a to reconsider the settlement of the southern cause. Indeed, over the last few months, southern militia launched unprecedented attacks against military targets and oil and gas facilities in the south. In contrast, a wiser approach could have been to dedicate more time to the southern cause, together with more effort to make deliberations more inclusive, while addressing upfront the grievances of southern citizens and investing in the unity through targeted policies, programs and projects that could bear fruit quickly.

Yet, another decisive factor in the southern cause is the policies of regional and international powers. While Iran is said to support the most radical separatist faction, that of former Deputy President Ali Salem al-Beidh, Iran’s regional rival, Saudi Arabia, is vacillating between unionists and separatists. Other powers, including the United States, seem wary of the idea of partition in Yemen. Two main factors appear to raise concerns: the absence of a united southern front and the involvement of Iran. Indeed, southern Yemen suffers from political heterogeneity and tribal rivalries that threaten with further fragmentation in case of an independent southern state. In addition, the role of Iran, along with the support of its main proxy in Yemen, Houthis, to the Southern Movement, carries a threat to western strategic interests in the south, with its dominant position on Bab al-Mandeb strait and crucial maritime routes. Bereft of wider international support, radical southern factions seem all the more determined to change the equation through armed struggle.

War between Houthis and al-Ahmar Tribesmen

Zaydi-Shiites ruled most of northern Yemen for about eleven centuries. Their last dynasty infuriated the free world with its dark-ages-like despotism, until it was overthrown by revolutionary forces supported by Egypt in 1962. In the early 1990s, Houthis, a Zaydi sect close to the Iranian Twelver Shiism, rapidly penetrated traditional Zaydi areas to grow into a threat to the state. From 2004 through 2010, Houthi strongholds in the north endured six consecutive war rounds with the Yemeni state; Saudi Arabia joined in the last round. It was basically thanks to lavish Iranian support that Houthis persevered and maintained de facto control over most of these areas. Since the youth revolution of 2011, Houthis have been vigorously exploiting security vacuums and political impasses to further consolidate and expand their control in the north.

Although they were not signatory to the Gulf initiative of 2011, Houthis were brought onboard in the transitional process. The rationale incess. The rationale in Sana’a for such a move was that “Yemen needs Houthis more than Houthis need Yemen”.

Ambivalence, or rather purposeful ambiguity, is the key to understanding Houthi participation in the transitional process. Since the outset of the transitional process, Houthis actions take two parallel tracks. While they have a seat at the table, they continue to act like a state inside the state in areas under their control. There are also indications that they are building up their arsenal of advanced and heavy weaponry. In addition, they have been expanding their presence and proselytizing activities in areas as far southward as the capital Sana’a, where their famous slogan, “death to America, curse on Jews, victory for Islam”, has become commonplace. Thus, it appears Houthis are exploiting the transitional process to help achieve an ambitious expansionist project in areas that were previously under Zaydi imamate control.

But this is not only about historical ambitions. It is also a reaction to discrimination they suffer, especially from the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis. While Muslim Brothers, in particular, are increasingly penetrating political, civil-service and military hierarchies, Houthis are either excluded or unwilling to join. Ironically, only three years ago, these groups joined hands to topple the regime of President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Now, they are not only at odds, they are at war.
In October 2013, war erupted between Houthis on one side and al-Ahmar tribesmen, Muslim Brothers and Salafis on the other side, after Houthis imposed a siege on Salafi Dar al-Hadith institute in Damaj in northern Yemen, with claims that it is a terrorist incubator.

After more than three months of fierce confrontations, Houthis prevailed and a negotiated settlement forced Salafis to flee from the site, mostly to Sana’a. Notably, al-Qaeda’s affiliate in the Arabian Peninsula, Ansar al-Sharia, acknowledged that it came across to fight against the Houthis briefly. The battlefield also widened to engulf most of the northern areas, before reaching the mountainous periphery of Sana’a. Sana’a also suffered assassinations, rocket attacks and bombings in connection with the war. A particularly important battle took place in early February 2014 in Imran governorate, birthplace of al-Ahmar leaders of Hashed tribe – the most influential Yemeni tribe –, where al-Ahmar-backed militia suffered a humiliating defeat and surrendered precious territory to Houthis. The ailing Yemeni state could only try to mediate an end.

And while Iran stood firmly by Houthis, the sour relationship between the Saudi Arabian regime and the Muslim Brotherhood deprived it of traditional Saudi support. Hence, Houthis were poised for a sweeping victory.

The timing of the last war round risked undermining the transitional process. While Muslim Brothers have been in the driver’s seat of this process from the outset, Houthis have shown more reluctance to cooperate after the war. For instance, they refused to sign on the final outcome document of the national dialogue conference. They also rejected the decision on the regional division of the future federal union. Notably, this decision joins Sa’ada, the main Houthi stronghold, and most other areas under Houthi military control, together with Sana’a, in one region, Azal. Probably, Houthis did not want the areas under their control to be bundled with Sana’a in one federal region, to avoid related political constraints. There are also indications that Houthis wanted to have an access to the Red Sea in addition to the oil-reserve rich governorate of al-Jawf.

Fortunately, the war has subsided in recent weeks. But bitterness remains underneath the surface, and tensions are flaring around the city of Imran, capital of Imran governorate, with marked bigger involvement of the Yemeni armed forces against Houthis. Clearly, Houthis’ ambitions seem unlimited. Thus, the potential for more war rounds is high, especially around Imran and Sana’a.

To defuse the peril, in addition to bolstering the transitional process at large, Houthis should be fully brought onboard as soon as possible. Specifically, they should be pressured to lay down arms, with a comprehensive disarmament, rehabilitation and reintegration program to deal with their militia. In exchange, Houthis should be fully integrated in the political sphere, in accordance with their representative weight and rights and obligations as Yemeni citizens.

At the same time, the Yemeni state needs to reestablish its authority across all Yemeni territory, including in areas under Houthi dominance.

War against al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula

Ansar al-Sharia, or al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), represents one of the most ferocious affiliates of al-Qaeda worldwide. Notably, AQAP has shown remarkable resilience in the context of the global war on terror, in spite of relentless US drone attacks and field operations by Yemeni security forces.In addition, the group has expanded its presence from traditional hotbeds in southern Yemen to central and northern areas.

Moreover, over the last few months, AQAP has delivered astounding blows to Yemeni security forces. In September 2013, its elements stormed the headquarters of the second Yemeni army command in Hadramawt, and were not forced out until three days later. In December 2013, it raided the headquarters of the Ministry of Defense in Sana’a, stayed in control of the con-joined military hospital and an adjacent administrative building for a few hours and carried out more than sixty random executions. In February 2014, it launched an attack that lead to the liberation of 29 prisoners from Sana’a central prison.

Over and above, AQAP has markedly increased and escalated its attacks against Yemeni security elements, foreigners, state infrastructure and commercial facilities. In an overdue move, last April, Yemeni security forces have launched extended operations against AQAP camps in the southern governorates of Abyan and Shabwa. Official Yemeni sources speak highly of the results of these operations so far. However, a corollary damage of them is more severe shortage of electricity and fuel as well as further militarization of the capital, Sana’a.

Although the US and its western allies have largely reduced the capability of AQAP and al-Qaeda at large to conduct operations in the US and Europe, terrorism has in fact grown more potent in several areas of the Middle East and Africa. There are several reasons for this, including lack of state authority, receptive environments, mountainous topography, culture of violence, tribal nature and vested interests. In the Yemeni case in particular, there are at least three other significant reasons.

First, the double-edged effect of drone attacks, where innocent civilians at times fall victim, stokes sympathy with extremist agendas in host communities.

Second, an increasingly lucrative business in Yemen today is kidnapping, and AQAP has accrued millions of US dollars over the last year in ransoms.

Third, besides a heavily armed society, all major Yemeni political forces have paramilitary forces that are often deployed to settle political conflicts, which gives AQAP the opportunity to form vicious alliances of objectives.

Yemen pays a heavy toll for terrorism. Most of those hunted down by drones are Yemeni. In turn, reprisals mostly hit Yemeni ground forces. In economic terms, attacks on oil and gas pipelines, for instance, weigh heavily on the state budget. Official Yemeni sources estimate a loss of US$4.7 billion in the oil and gas sectors over the last three years. In addition, lack of security deprives Yemen of much needed investments and development projects, whereas Yemeni entrepreneurs themselves prefer to invest in neighboring countries and overseas. Moreover, UN and other development agencies find themselves often bogged down by security restrictions, with no consolation for the huge population in need of help.

At the regional level, Yemen has become famous for exporting terrorists and radical elements to countries across the region, especially to hotspots such as Syria, Iraq, Libya and Egypt. At the global level, threats to western interests emanating from Yemen continue to cause fear and incur heavy costs in counteracting measures. As a result, the world tends to look at Yemen only from the prism of terrorism. But to combat terrorism, Yemen needs more than drone attacks and logistical military support. Notably, the current Yemeni government has prepared a comprehensive antiterrorism strategy that provides a holistic approach to combat efforts, including in education, media and economic domains. Now the question is how best to help Yemen put this strategy into practice.

Tug of War between the Revolutionaries and the Old Regime

The 2011 initiative that ended the tenure of President Saleh is indeed a unique case of the so-called Arab Spring. Most importantly, this initiative prevented what was projected to be immense bloodshed, not least because of Yemen’s heavily armed society.

However, it delivered a deformed offspring that continues to haunt Yemen and its region today. While former President Saleh and his entourage were granted juridical immunity and given leeway to maintain their presence in political life, with Saleh still holding the powerful position of head of the General People’s Congress Party (GPCP), the opposition was given a 50% share in the post-uprising national unity government. The initiative also maintained the parliament with GPCP majority. Remarkably, incumbent president Hadi was deputy to Saleh in the presidency of both the Yemeni state and the GPCP. Now that Hadi has the upper hand, he has markedly distanced himself from Saleh. Still, Hadi faces the dire challenge of having to handle a fierce tug of war between Saleh and his camp in the GPCP on one side, and the Muslim Brotherhood on the other side.

Clearly, the Muslim Brotherhood appears intent on doing everything possible to slowly but surely rise to the apex of power in Yemen. On the other hand, backed by significant public support, Saleh’s group seeks some kind of reincarnation. While the Muslim Brotherhood has increasingly penetrated state institutions in an attempt to minimize the risk of a backlash scenario similar to what happened in Egypt, Saleh’s group has adamantly opposed loosening its grip on power. The Yemeni society in general is sharply divided along this frontline, especially in northern areas. And in the midst of this duel, there is hardly any consideration of Yemeni national interests.

Notably, this acrimonious rivalry has salient regional dimensions, with Qatar and Turkey said to support the Muslim Brotherhood, while Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait are said to support Saleh. In addition, the collapse of the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt since July 2012 has significant implications on Yemen. Egypt is the core of the Arab world and the collapse of the Muslim Brotherhood there is widely reckoned as a historical turning point that has deprived the transnational political network of its most important bastion.

In a blow to the old regime, the Yemeni national dialogue conference endorsed a constitutional precursor preventing Saleh and his son Ahmed, a former special forces commander with presidential aspirations, from running for high-profile political positions, including the seat of the presidency, for two terms starting from the adoption of the anticipated new constitution. However, it remains to be seen if that precursor will take root in the new constitution.

Consequently, as the constitutional process draws to an end, Yemen might well face a dangerous tipping point. Another blow to the old regime came from the UN Security Council on 26 February 2014, when it recognized that the transitional process requires turning the page from the former presidency and established a sanctions committee entrusted with a mandate to penalize whoever is found to be obstructing the transitional process or involved in violence.

The rationale behind that move was to send a warning message to the old regime among others. However, this is a double-edged tool that has to be used prudently in view of the former regime’s ability to retaliate.

Concluding Remarks

Yemen is historically and demographically the center of gravity in the Arabian Peninsula. It occupies a strategic swathe in the Middle East and it is center-stage for chaos and terror. Since the youth revolution of 2011, Yemen’s political transitional process has depended on a fragile internal balance of powers and critical regional and international engagement.

However, Yemen’s internal conflicts seem irreconcilable and regional and international powers show a great deal of ambivalence about deeper engagement, with the exception of the security domain. Yet, the problems of Yemen go far beyond the transitional process. In fact, this process is only the sine qua non entry point to a maze of deep-rooted, convoluted problems that demand miraculous efforts from Yemeni, regional and international actors. In particular, the survival of Yemen as we know it today is in question given the current risk of disintegration driven by sectarian, nationalistic, ethnic and other factors. In addition, the budding constitutional process and the UN sanctions mechanism could bring Yemen to the verge of the abyss, given the high stakes involved and the lethal capabilities of the concerned stakeholders.

While it is hard to foresee a change of attitude on the side of internal powers in the near future, regional and international powers have a vital role to play to bring Yemen to shore. In particular, Saudi Arabia is the main regional power in the Arabian Peninsula, is the biggest donor to Yemen and has plenty of means to influence its neighbor, including through powerful tribal leaders. However, the Saudi state and public alike tend to view Yemen and Yemenis as a threat to their model of prosperity. On the other hand, Yemenis tend to blame Saudi Arabia for their woes. Otherwise, Iran, the main rival of Saudi Ara- bia, has a powerful proxy in the north, Houthis, and an influential separatist ally in the south, al-Beidh. And Qatar, the rising regional player, is the most important sponsor of the Muslim Brotherhood in Yemen and the region. Thus, it is of utmost importance that Saudi Arabia, Iran and Qatar come to compromise regarding their interests in Yemen. On a wider scale, the international community should consider deeper, more focused engagement in helping Yemenis face their political and developmental predicaments. In other words, the focus of the international community on security concerns emanating from Yemen needn’t divert attention from helping Yemen address underlying problems.

About the author:
Mohamed Mansour Kadah
Affiliated Researcher, IPRIS

Source:
This article was published by IPRIS, as part of its Portuguese Journal
of International Affairs Number 8, SPRING/SUMMER 2014, which may be accessed here (PDF).

Endnote
1. According to Yemen Armed Violence Assessment, a project developed by international, national and local actors in Yemen, www.yemen-ava.org.

The post Yemen: Land Of Forgotten Battles – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Hagel Offers Condolences To Egyptian Defense Minister

$
0
0

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel spoke yesterday with Egyptian Defense Minister Col. Gen. Sedki Sobhy to express his condolences over the recent loss of 22 Egyptian soldiers in an attack near the Libyan border.

In a statement summarizing the call, Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said Hagel thanked Sobhy for Egypt’s efforts to broker a cease-fire to the conflict in Israel and Gaza, and noted that Secretary of State John F. Kerry would be arriving in Egypt shortly to discuss the issue.

Hagel and Sobhy reaffirmed their commitment to a strong bilateral relationship and agreed to continue to engage regularly, Kirby said.

The post Hagel Offers Condolences To Egyptian Defense Minister appeared first on Eurasia Review.

European And US Airlines Suspend Flights To Israel

$
0
0

A number of major US and European airlines are immediately suspending flights to and from Israel after a rocket attack near Ben-Gurion International Airport. US Airways, Lufthansa and Delta are some of the companies grounding their planes.

The decision was taken following a warning from the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), after a rocket fell in the city of Yehud, which is just five kilometers from the airport, Haaretz reported.

The FFA has ordered US airlines not to fly to or from Ben Gurion Airport “for a period of up to 24 hours.” Meanwhile, their European counterparts, the European Air Safety Agency (EASA) says it has issued a ‘strong recommendation’ to avoid Tel Aviv airport until further notice.

A Delta Boeing 747 from New York was flying over the Mediterranean Sea heading for Tel Aviv on Tuesday when it turned around and flew to Paris instead. Flight 468 had 273 passengers and 17 crew on board.

The Russian airline Transaero also decided to turn back a flight that was bound for Tel Aviv. Flight number 311 was en-route to the Israeli city but instead headed back to Moscow. A spokesman for the company said that Wednesday’s flights to Israel have also been cancelled.

US Airways, which has one daily flight from Philadelphia, canceled that flight Tuesday and the return trip from Tel Aviv. It has relocated planes, which are currently at Ben-Gurion airport, according to Haaretz.

The post European And US Airlines Suspend Flights To Israel appeared first on Eurasia Review.

France Ignores US, UK, Criticism, Will Deliver Mistral To Russia

$
0
0

France will go ahead with the delivery of the first of two Mistral warships to Russia – despite protests by the US and UK, prompted by Moscow’s stance in the Ukrainian crisis. The ship is nearly completed and will be presented in October.

French President Francois Hollande said the plan to deliver the two Mistral helicopter carriers was made in Paris and will go forward despite calls from the US and UK.

“The Russians have paid. Should we repay 1.1 billion euros if the ship was not delivered to the purchaser?” he asked while speaking to reporters late on Monday – the night before EU foreign ministers are to meet in Brussels to discuss tougher sanctions on Russia over the Ukrainian crisis.

“For the time being, a level of sanctions has not been decided on that would prevent this delivery,” he said. “The contract was signed in 2011, the boat is almost finished and should be delivered in October.”

On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law exempting the deliveries of France’s Mistral-class helicopter carriers to Russia from value-added tax (VAT) payments, which will be in effect from July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2016. The law was adopted to prevent an increase in the cost of the contract regarding the Mistral ship deliveries.

France will be the first NATO country to supply Russia with military equipment. Under the 1.2 billion euro contract (US$1.6 billion) signed by Russian defnse exporting company Rosoboronexport and French DCNS in June 2011, Russia is to receive two Mistral-class helicopter carriers. The first one, the Vladivostok, will be received in October. The second, the Sevastopol, will be delivered at the end of next year.

The post France Ignores US, UK, Criticism, Will Deliver Mistral To Russia appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Brazil: Opposition Presidential Candidate Hit By Scandal

$
0
0

The administration of the south-eastern state of Minas Gerais – headed by Aecio Neves between 2003 and 2010 – spent around 14 million Reais (over 4 million Euro) in public funds to build an airstrip in the ‘fazenda’ (farm estate) of an uncle of the candidate of the Brazilian Social Democratic Party (PSDB) in the October elections, reported the ‘Folha’ newspaper.

The airstrip, built in the town of Cláudio (150km from Belo Horizonte), just 5km from the governor’s palace – denounces the paper – was completed in 2010 and has since been run by the Neves family members, one of whom former mayor of the town, who hold the keys.

The kilometre-long airstrip has the capacity for 50 passengers. It is entirely run by the Neves family, without any specialized personnel and therefore considered illegal by the ANAC national civil aviation agency. “It is important to remember that airports are public, so if some citizen of Cláudio wants to go for a ride on a helicopter or jet, all he has to do is ask some cousin of Aécio’s for the keys”, the Brazilian media writes ironically.

The post Brazil: Opposition Presidential Candidate Hit By Scandal appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Viewing all 79180 articles
Browse latest View live