Americas

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Havana syndrome has ‘dramatically hurt’ morale, US diplomats say

      by

      Havana syndrome has ‘dramatically hurt’ morale, US diplomats sayAmerican Foreign Service Association chief Eric Rubin says syndrome, which remains a mystery, has affected recruitment The spread of Havana syndrome has “dramatically hurt” morale in the US diplomatic corps and affected recruitment, according to the head of the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA).Eric Rubin, whose association represents nearly 17,000 current and former diplomats and foreign aid workers, said it was getting harder to find young people to work abroad, because of concerns about Havana syndrome – and about whether the government would look after them if they got sick.Havana Syndrome could be caused by pulsed energy devices – US expert reportRead more“People have suffered real trauma and real injury, and it has dramatically hurt our morale, our readiness, our ability to recruit new members in the foreign service,” Rubin told the first medical symposium on the syndrome since it began affecting US diplomats and intelligence officers in 2016, organised by the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.The cause of the syndrome, which involves long-term loss of balance and cognitive function, remains a mystery. A report by a US intelligence panel of experts last week found that pulsed electromagnetic energy and ultrasound were plausible causes in at least some cases.A CIA assessment made public last month however determined that the majority of the thousand possible cases reported were most likely not the result of a global campaign by a foreign power, while in some two dozen incidents the cause could not be explained.Rubin did not speculate over the cause, but said that the syndrome was having a potentially serious effect on US diplomacy.“It is getting harder when we recruit people,” the AFSA president said. “I’ve had young members of the cohort that’s coming into the foreign service ask me: ‘If I do this, what am I getting into? And is this going to get worse? Is this going to get solved? If I get attacked and if I get injured, who’s gonna be there for me?’“We’ve got to address that,” Rubin said.Microwave weapons that could cause Havana Syndrome exist, experts sayRead moreRubin said that care was improving for US officials who have been affected, but that the AFSA was still encountering bureaucratic resistance.“We pushed really hard,” he said. “We did succeed, but it’s still case-by-case.”Kenneth Dekleva, a former state department medical officer and psychiatrist who is leading an effort at UT Southwestern to coordinate research on Havana syndrome, said that psychogenic explanations for the spread of the symptoms were not convincing.“Most diplomats – I would say 99% – want to be overseas, they want to serve their country with dignity and honor, and they want to be healthy,” Dekleva told the Guardian. “They don’t want to assume a patient role. And there’s no gain from it. The burden of illness and suffering is very real for the people. And I find that compelling.”TopicsUS foreign policyCubaAmericasUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US could be under rightwing dictator by 2030, Canadian professor warns

      by

      US could be under rightwing dictator by 2030, Canadian professor warnsCanadian political scientist warns in op ed of Trumpist threat to American democracy and possible effect on northern neighbor

      The Steal: stethoscope for a democracy near cardiac arrest
      The US could be under a rightwing dictatorship by 2030, a Canadian political science professor has warned, urging his country to protect itself against the “collapse of American democracy”.America is now in fascism’s legal phase | Jason StanleyRead more“We mustn’t dismiss these possibilities just because they seem ludicrous or too horrible to imagine,” Thomas Homer-Dixon, founding director of the Cascade Institute at Royal Roads University in British Columbia, wrote in the Globe and Mail.“In 2014, the suggestion that Donald Trump would become president would also have struck nearly everyone as absurd. But today we live in a world where the absurd regularly becomes real and the horrible commonplace.”Homer-Dixon’s message was blunt: “By 2025, American democracy could collapse, causing extreme domestic political instability, including widespread civil violence. By 2030, if not sooner, the country could be governed by a rightwing dictatorship.”The author cited eventualities centered on a Trump return to the White House in 2024, possibly including Republican-held state legislatures refusing to accept a Democratic win.Trump, he warned, “will have only two objectives, vindication and vengeance” of the lie that his 2020 defeat by Joe Biden was the result of electoral fraud.A “scholar of violent conflict” for more than four decades, Homer-Dixon said Canada must take heed of the “unfolding crisis”.“A terrible storm is coming from the south, and Canada is woefully unprepared. Over the past year we’ve turned our attention inward, distracted by the challenges of Covid-19, reconciliation and the accelerating effects of climate change.“But now we must focus on the urgent problem of what to do about the likely unraveling of democracy in the United States. We need to start by fully recognising the magnitude of the danger. If Mr Trump is re-elected, even under the more optimistic scenarios the economic and political risks to our country will be innumerable.”Homer-Dixon said he even saw a scenario in which a new Trump administration, having effectively nullified internal opposition, deliberately damaged its northern neighbor.“Under the less-optimistic scenarios, the risks to our country in their cumulative effect could easily be existential, far greater than any in our federation’s history. What happens, for instance, if high-profile political refugees fleeing persecution arrive in our country and the US regime demands them back. Do we comply?”One in three Americans say violence against government justified – pollRead moreTrump, he said, “and a host of acolytes and wannabes such as Fox [News]’s Tucker Carlson and Georgia representative Marjorie Taylor Greene”, had transformed the Republican party “into a near-fascist personality cult that’s a perfect instrument for wrecking democracy”.Worse, he said, Trump “may be just a warm-up act”.“Returning to office, he’ll be the wrecking ball that demolishes democracy but the process will produce a political and social shambles,” Homer-Dixon said.“Still, through targeted harassment and dismissal, he’ll be able to thin the ranks of his movement’s opponents within the state, the bureaucrats, officials and technocrats who oversee the non-partisan functioning of core institutions and abide by the rule of law.“Then the stage will be set for a more managerially competent ruler, after Mr Trump, to bring order to the chaos he’s created.”TopicsUS politicsDonald TrumpRepublicansUS elections 2024US foreign policyThe far rightCanadanewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Could Chile show the United States how to rebuild its democracy? | Tony Karon

      by

      Could Chile show the United States how to rebuild its democracy?Tony KaronThe US once helped destroy Chilean democracy. Now, a constitutional reform movement in Chile could teach the US how to fix its own Chile always gave the lie to the cold war claim that the United States stood for democracy. When its voters in 1970 showed the temerity (“irresponsibility”, Henry Kissinger called it) to elect socialist Salvador Allende as president, Washington helped orchestrate the coup that toppled him, and backed the resulting dictatorship.It seems those “irresponsible” Chilean voters are at it again – on Sunday, they elected leftist Gabriel Boric as president by a 12-point margin, on the back of a campaign for a new constitution. But if Chilean democracy seems on the road to recovery from its Washington-backed disfiguration, prospects for democracy in the United States look rather bleak.Sunday also saw Joe Manchin brandish the veto power the US system grants a senator representing fewer than 300,000 voters to tank the agenda of a president chosen by 80 million. And that was but the latest reminder that Americans are not governed by the democratic will of the citizenry. The US supreme court looks ready to strike down abortion rights supported by about two-thirds of the electorate, while Democrats in office seem unable or unwilling to deliver on basic social programs supported by a majority of voters, whether on drug prices or childcare or public health, and much more – or to prevent Republicans brazenly reengineering state-level laws and procedures to prevent voters of color from ever again making the difference they made in 2020.Minority rule is a feature, not a bug of the US constitutional system.Donald Trump was legitimately elected president in 2016 despite losing by 3m votes. And 6 January notwithstanding, the Republican party needs no coup to lock itself into power for the foreseeable future, even if it represents a diminishing minority of voters. The US constitution provides all the tools they’ll need: the electoral college; the US Senate (two seats per state means it can be controlled with less than 20% of the national vote); the supreme court the Senate effectively picks; and the state houses empowered to set voting laws and rules, and even redraw districts to partisan advantage.The framers of the constitution never intended that every American would have a vote, much less a vote of equal value. They created a system to regulate a society ruled by and for wealthy white male settlers engaged in the conquest and subordination of the country’s Indigenous and Black populations.Decades of bitter struggle on the streets have won Black and Brown people far more access to the US political system than the founders ever intended. Still, even the gains codified in the civil rights era are being consciously rolled back by a billionaire-funded white nationalist party looking to cement its hold on power for the foreseeable future against any demographic headwinds.Ineffectual appeals to “save our democracy” reflect the paralysis of mainstream Democrats in the face of the Republican offensive that has weaponized a minority-rule constitutional system.Nor is a majority of citizens easily able, within its rules, to change these anti-democratic provisions of the US constitution: even minor changes require agreement by two-thirds of each house of Congress, and three-quarters of the 50 states.Democratizing the United States – creating a system of government shaped by every citizen having the right to a vote of equal value – would require a different constitution, democratically adopted by a national community quite different from the one imagined by the founding fathers. But that’s what Chileans are attempting.Boric is a product of a student rebellion a decade ago that fed into a broader social justice movement focused on issues ranging from austerity, a failing social safety net, healthcare and economic inequality to gender violence and Indigenous rights. While even center-left governments were stymied from delivering on voter expectations, many in this parliament of the streets recognized that their grievances were products of the democracy deficit built into the dictatorship’s 1980 constitution to ensure continuity of its economic model.Although it allowed Chileans to elect their president and lower house of parliament, that constitution built in minority vetoes, such as appointing one-third of senators and much of the judiciary, as failsafe mechanisms to prevent democratically elected politicians from enacting the systemic changes demanded by voters. Thus the emergence of a democracy movement based outside formal political parties, which in late 2019 won a referendum to have a new constitution democratically drafted. That movement’s energy also propelled Boric to power.So, does Chile have lessons to teach US progressives? It’s a question worth investigating. Sure, the US is nowhere near a point where public opinion recognizes the need for a new constitution. But it’s equally clear that the US fails as a democracy – and the morbid implications of US minority-rule-with-a-democratic-face can’t credibly be avoided.Curiously enough, US conservatives have never been shy to follow Chilean examples: the shrink-government campaign that began in the Reagan era was road-tested by Chile’s dictatorship under the tutelage of US “free-market” ideologues. And President GW Bush, in his 2005 effort to privatize social security, cited Chile as the model to emulate.But the Chilean popular rebellion against that same neoliberal model, and the potential it has raised for a democratic reordering of power and of that country’s social contract, suggests that the right are not the only Americans who may have something to learn from Chile.
      Tony Karon is a South African-born journalist and former anti-apartheid activist. He is currently the Managing Editor of AJ+
      TopicsChileOpinionUS politicsAmericascommentReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      US expected to remove Farc from international terrorist list

      by

      US expected to remove Farc from international terrorist listThe announcement comes five years after the demobilised rebel group signed a peace deal with the Colombian government The US is expected to remove the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc) from its international terrorist list, five years after the demobilised rebel group signed a peace deal with the Colombian government and formed a political party.The announcement is expected to bolster the struggling peace process, which has been implemented haltingly as violence from dissident rebel groups and drug traffickers continues to trouble the South American nation.US officials quoted by Reuters and the Wall Street Journal said the move could happen as early as Tuesday afternoon, while the state department said that it had provided notifications to Congress on “upcoming actions” regarding the Farc.The US added the Farc to its terror list in 1997, when the rebel group was at the height of its power, commanding thousands of fighters and launching large-scale attacks on regional capitals and military bases. The group kidnapped thousands of politicians and ordinary Colombians, and planted landmines across the country.Colombia’s ex-guerrillas: isolated, abandoned and living in fearRead more“Taking the Farc off the list is long overdue, since the group that the state department listed doesn’t exist any more,” said Adam Isacson, the director for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America (Wola), a thinktank. “13,600 guerrillas demobilized and became ex-guerrillas in 2017.”“More than four years later, more than 90% of them remain demobilized and transitioning to civilian life. To keep penalizing and shunning all contact with them is not only absurd, it’s counterproductive,” he said.The Farc took up arms against Colombia’s government in 1964, claiming to fight in defense of peasant farmers. They soon turned to drug trafficking and kidnapping for ransom to bolster their war chest, carrying out massacres and atrocities over decades of civil war that killed more than 260,000 and left more than 7 million displaced. Government forces, state-aligned paramilitary groups and other leftist rebels contributed to the bloodshed.A peace deal was signed in October 2016, formally ending the war and promising rural development, though the accord failed to pass a public referendum. Colombia’s then-president, Juan Manuel Santos, won a Nobel peace prize for his efforts despite the defeat, and subsequently ratified a revised peace deal via Congress the following month.But since the signing of the peace deal, the limitations on Farc members imposed by the terror listing have hindered the accord’s implementation, analysts say, as individually listed former combatants are unable to access the local banking system.“US sanctions have handicapped economic and political reintegration, penalizing ex-combatants who laid down their arms in good faith and continue to remain committed to the process despite enormous challenges,” said Elizabeth Dickinson, a Colombia analyst at the International Crisis Group (ICG). “We have heard testimonies of ex-combatants who have had to go from bank to bank in order to open accounts, a basic requisite to start cooperative agricultural projects.”The terror listing also hamstrung the US government’s ability to support and influence the peace deal, which was negotiated with the backing of then-president Barack Obama’s administration, Dickinson said.“US officials cannot meet with the former Farc, they cannot sit in the same room, USaid cannot provide financing to any projects whose beneficiaries include the Farc, or might include them,” Dickinson said. “Five years after the signing of the accord, these restrictions are illogical and counterproductive.”TopicsFarcColombiaAmericasUS politicsUS foreign policynewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden to reinstate Trump-era ‘Remain in Mexico’ migrant policy

      by

      US immigrationBiden to reinstate Trump-era ‘Remain in Mexico’ migrant policyDoJ says reinstatement depends on approval from MexicoCourt overturned Biden’s initial decision to suspend policy Amanda Holpuch@holpuchFri 15 Oct 2021 14.57 EDTLast modified on Fri 15 Oct 2021 15.55 EDTThe Biden administration said on Friday it plans to reinstate the Trump-era border policy known as Remain in Mexico, which forced at least 70,000 asylum seekers to stay in Mexico, many for extended periods and in deprived and dangerous conditions, while they waited for their cases to be considered US courts.Senior state department official calls Biden’s deportation of Haitians illegalRead moreJoe Biden suspended the policy formally known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) in his first days in office, but a federal judge ordered his administration to put it back into place.In a court filing late on Friday, the US justice department said the program’s reinstatement depended on approval from the Mexican government, which is asking for the asylum cases to be settled in six months and for the US to ensure the people affected have timely and accurate information as well as better access to legal counsel. The program is expected to be back in effect in mid-November.Donald Trump introduced Remain in Mexico in January 2019. From the beginning, advocates criticized the program because it put highly vulnerable migrants, mostly from Central and South America, at serious risk of physical harm and illness as they waited in some of the most dangerous cities in the world. It also fails to address the forces pushing people north to the US-Mexico border and the huge backlogs in US immigration courts.Campaign group Human Rights Watch said in a January report about the policy that affected asylum seekers it interviewed, including children, “described rape or attempted rape and other sexual assault, abduction for ransom, extortion, armed robbery, and other crimes committed against them”.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) immigrants’ rights policy director, Omar Jadwat, said via Twitter that the news was “appalling” and acknowledged the Biden administration was required by a court order to make a “good faith” effort to restart it.“They had a lot of options here, including re-terminating MPP promptly and seeking to vacate the order,” Jadwat said.To restart the program, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to spend $14.1m to reopen temporary courtrooms located in tents in Laredo and Brownsville, Texas, which will cost $10.5m a month to operate, according to a court filing.In June, the DHS secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, formally put an end to the policy and in a memo said: “MPP had mixed effectiveness in achieving several of its central goals and that the program experienced significant challenges.”TopicsUS immigrationMexicoAmericasTrump administrationUS politicsBiden administrationUS-Mexico bordernewsReuse this content More