World news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden names Erika Moritsugu as Asian American liaison amid rise in hate crime

      by

      The White House announced on Wednesday that Erika Moritsugu will serve as the administration’s Asian American and Pacific Islander senior liaison and deputy assistant to the president.The appointment is a part of multiple initiatives Joe Biden announced last month to address the dramatic increase in hate-related incidents against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI).In a statement, the White House said that Moritsugu “will bring her experience and expertise to the Biden-Harris administration where she will be a vital voice to advance the president and administration’s priorities”.Following the shooting of eight people in Atlanta, six of whom were Asian American women, Biden announced he would establish a committee within the administration’s Covid-19 Health Equity Task Force to address racism against Asian Americans.He also said the Department of Health and Human Service will allocate $49.5m to support community services for AAPI domestic violence and sexual assault survivors and the National Science Foundation will dedicate $33m to study bias and xenophobia.Biden came under pressure from the Democratic senators Tammy Duckworth and Mazie Hirono, the sole Asian American members of the US Senate, who criticized the lack of AAPI representation in Biden’s cabinet and vowed to reject any non-diverse cabinet nominee until Biden came up with a plan to address AAPI representation in the White House.Both Duckworth and Hirono praised Moritsugu’s appointment on Wednesday.“I know first-hand that [the White House] will benefit from Erika’s counsel, policy expertise & strong relationship-building skills as he seeks to ensure AAPI leaders are president at the highest levels of government,” Duckworth wrote on Twitter. “I look forward to working with her to protect & empower the AAPI community.”Moritsugu currently serves as vice president of not-for-profit organization National Partnership for Women & Families and has held multiple roles on Capitol Hill, including general counsel to Duckworth and deputy legislative director for the late Democratic senator Daniel Akaka.Earlier on Wednesday, the Senate advanced on a bipartisan basis legislation, co-sponsored by Hirono, that addresses hate crimes against Asian Americans. The bill, called the Covid-19 Hate Crimes Act, would broaden the federal government’s capacity to respond and track hate crimes. The bill still has to go through a final vote in the Senate, which Democrats hope will take place by the end of the week. More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Ted Cruz threatens to burn John Boehner’s book over criticisms

      by

      Republican senator Ted Cruz has responded to fiery criticism from John Boehner with a tactic beloved of authoritarian regimes: threatening to burn his book.In an email to supporters, the Texas politician said he also might machine-gun or chainsaw the memoir, depending on how much his supporters paid for the privilege to watch.Boehner, a Republican congressman from Ohio for 24 years and House speaker from 2011 to 2015, published his book On the House this week. It contains strong criticism of political figures from Donald Trump to Barack Obama but hits Cruz especially hard.The senator who drove a government shutdown in 2013 is “Lucifer in the flesh”, Boehner has said.On the page, he writes: “There is nothing more dangerous than a reckless asshole who thinks he is smarter than everyone else.”The book also contains a memorable sign-off: “PS, Ted Cruz: Go fuck yourself.”But Cruz, who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016 and may well do so again in 2024, is nothing if not a bomb-thrower himself, as well as a nimble opportunist.“John Boehner doesn’t like me much,” his fundraising email said. “That’s fine, I’m not a big fan of his either.”Calling the speaker-turned-lobbyist a “Swamp Monster” and accusing him of “an unhinged smear campaign”, the email told supporters Cruz had “put this trash right where it belonged, in my fireplace”.“But I didn’t finish it off just yet,” it added. Instead, the Texas senator announced a “72-hour drive to raise $250,000”, in which donors would “get to VOTE on whether we machine gun the book, take a chainsaw to it or burn the book to light cigars!”The email also said Cruz would livestream the evisceration or incineration.There is nothing new about American politicians shooting or eviscerating texts they don’t like in order to raise campaign dollars. Ask the Democratic senator Joe Manchin, who has both taken aim at Obamacare and fired his gun to defend it.But it could also be pointed out that Cruz’s attempt to stoke outrage – and dollars – might only succeed in bringing Boehner’s book to wider attention.As Ray Bradbury, author of the classic novel Fahrenheit 451, about a society which bans books, once said: “You don’t have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.”On Thursday morning, On the House was the No 1 seller on Amazon. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Hillbilly Elegy author JD Vance quits AppHarvest board after voting law tweets

      by

      The author of Appalachian memoir Hillbilly Elegy, author JD Vance, has resigned from the board of a company that uses green technology to mass-produce food in the region, days after sending some controversial tweets.Vance was an early investor in AppHarvest, a mega-greenhouse company that produced its first tomatoes this year at a 300-employee facility in Morehead, Kentucky, the Herald-Leader reported.An AppHarvest spokesman, Travis Parman, said “it would not be appropriate for me to discuss his motivation” for leaving the board.But Vance is also being floated in Ohio as a Republican candidate for the US Senate, and he has drawn criticism in recent days for his opposition to corporate leaders who have stood up against anti-voting rights legislation brought by GOP legislators in several states.Last weekend, more than 100 CEOs joined a call to discuss how to respond to recent proposals in state legislatures to restrict voting rights, most notably in Georgia. Vance said in a recent tweet states should “raise their taxes and do whatever else is necessary to fight these goons”.One recent proposal from the CEOs was to pull back donations for politicians who support such legislation. Republicans have been the overwhelming backers of anti-voting rights legislation and would disproportionately benefit from them. GOP legislators have often cited falsehoods about election fraud pushed by former president Donald Trump as justification for the new restrictions.Vance’s most monied donors are well-known Trump supporters. A super Pac supporting Vance’s US Senate bid received a $10m donation from Peter Thiel, his former employer and, at one time, an enthusiastic Trump supporter. The donation is Thiel’s largest ever political gambit.Vance has also received donations from the hedge fund magnate Robert Mercer. The billionaire Trump supporter is perhaps best known for backing uber-conservative Breitbart News and Cambridge Analytica, a firm embroiled in a controversial data-mining operation to manipulate voter sentiment.Vance also praised the Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Twitter, calling him “the only powerful figure who consistently challenges elite dogma on both cultural and economic questions”.Carlson has been recently embroiled in a battle with the Anti-Defamation League, which accused Carlson of using his show to mount, “an impassioned defense of the white supremacist ‘great replacement theory’”. After the letter from the ADL, Carlson again argued on his show that Democrats were, “importing a brand new electorate” through immigration. More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in World Politics

      The New York Times Predicts Our Future

      by

      The banner headline on the front page of Wednesday’s New York Times contained what can be interpreted as either a promise, a prophecy, a wild hope or a meaningless truism. It read: “Withdrawal of U.S. Troops in Afghanistan Will End Longest American War.” The headline linked to an article with a slightly less assertive title: “Biden to Withdraw All Combat Troops From Afghanistan by Sept. 11.” Nevertheless, it quickly returned to the prophetic tone, while adding one significant dramatic detail: “President Biden will withdraw American combat troops from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, declaring an end to the nation’s longest war and overruling warnings from his military advisers.” Instead of the traditional tactic of divide and rule, Biden will be applying a new one: withdraw and overrule.

      Japan’s Art of Forgetfulness

      READ MORE

      How can The New York Times promise that an event “will” happen months before the date? Does The Times, as the “paper of record,” have the authority to report future events? Expressions of intention, even by a sitting president, are not predictions. Is The Times now in the business of publishing prophetic journalism? More likely its certainty about what will happen in the future should be branded a wild partisan hope. The Times has been willing to go overboard to give the Biden administration credit long before credit is due. It has become a pattern since the election in its reporting and even the opinions of its Republican editorialists.

      The Times’ initial affirmation can nevertheless be justified as a truism. Though it fails to refer to a real event, its meaning is undeniably true. The withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan at any time in the future — whether it’s September 2021 or even 2051 — will effectively end the longest war in US history, simply because in April 2021 it is already the nation’s longest war.

      To underline the very real seriousness of President Joe Biden’s resolution and to support the idea that the future will happen as reported, The Times cites a significant fact: “A senior Biden administration official said the president had come to believe that a ‘conditions-based approach’ would mean that American troops would never leave the country.”

      Today’s Daily Devil’s Dictionary definition:

      Conditions-based approach:

      A tactic that allows a government to promise to carry out an action and then, at the critical moment, announce that it is justified in refusing to carry out that action

      Contextual Note

      The resolution of any serious problem in the realm of geopolitics is subject to conditions on the ground. That is why negotiations are important. But the situation in Afghanistan has always been so complex and asymmetrical that even attempting to negotiate is doomed to failure. The current situation involves three parties: the US, which is seeking to withdraw after 20 years of failed military efforts; the Taliban, who control most of the territory of a country traditionally administered by local warlords; and the so-called legitimate Afghan government initially put in place and supported economically and militarily by the US.

      Barack Obama and Donald Trump both announced plans to withdraw from the conflict. But as soon as discussions began, the US insisted that certain conditions must be met. Those conditions were always framed as minimal criteria of political stability and a guaranteed role for the official government, even in a power-sharing arrangement with the Taliban. There was never any serious chance of realizing those objectives. Withdrawal dates could only be formulated as a target, not as a predefined moment. It also meant that those who opposed withdrawal simply needed to make sure that things on the ground remained suitably unstable.

      Embed from Getty Images

      President Biden has clearly, even shockingly, innovated by unilaterally canceling the criterion of conditions. It appears to be a move designed to counter not the actors in Afghanistan, but his political opponents in Washington and the Pentagon. He has done so because in every case from the past, Congress and the Pentagon have managed to declare that the sacrosanct conditions were not met. The US economy thrives on military engagement. The Afghan government has had a permanent incentive to maintain the presence of the US, which guarantees the billions of dollars funding of the government’s operations. Once the US leaves, even while promising to provide aid to a new composite regime, the Taliban will undoubtedly have the upper hand in a negotiated power-sharing arrangement.

      In other words, there are two actors in the drama who have used the idea of conditions to oppose withdrawal: the NATO-supported Afghan government and the Pentagon. Obama and Trump failed in their plans to withdraw because they placed all their trust in the Pentagon. That is why the Biden administration’s decision to abandon a conditions-based approach may not only be constructive but absolutely necessary to achieve a goal ardently desired by the American public but opposed by the military-industrial complex that includes the Pentagon, the defense industry and members of Congress who depend on the defense industry for funding their campaigns and providing jobs in their jurisdictions.

      How inevitable is The New York Times’ bold prophecy that withdrawal will effectively happen in September? Already, powerful senators who can stop it from happening, both Republican and Democrat, are beginning to speak up to condemn what they call a shameful and humiliating retreat from an engagement that began 20 years ago. The lobbyists are mobilizing to make sure the interests of the defense industry and the Pentagon continue to exercise effective control of US foreign policy.

      But on April 14, Biden himself made it clear that there actually is a condition. The Times reports that he warned the Taliban “that if American forces are attacked on the way out of the country, ‘we’re going to defend ourselves and our partners with all the tools at our disposal.’” That certainly sounds like a condition.

      Historical Note

      When running for president in 2000, George W. Bush asserted that he wanted the US to avoid any temptation of nation-building. Eight months into his presidency, using the pretext of the 9/11 attacks, Bush initiated a foreign policy that obliged the US to engage actively in nation-building, first in Afghanistan, then in Iraq.

      The foreign policy of the past three presidents has transformed both Afghanistan and Iraq into examples of what may be called “government-creating and defending” rather than “nation-building.” After toppling an existing regime and putting in its place a puppet government committed to Western liberal values, the game has consisted of ensuring the minimum required to keep such governments from collapsing as they take on the impossible burden of defeating America’s designated enemy.

      It is a recipe for geopolitical failure that worries presidents, who prefer being thought of as winners. But it comforts everyone else in a system with its own internal logic. Spending money on weapons, selling those weapons to a captive client government and deploying them operationally whenever necessary in real, non-simulated wartime situations constitute a major factor of motivation for all parties concerned.

      .custom-post-from {float:right; margin: 0 10px 10px; max-width: 50%; width: 100%; text-align: center; background: #000000; color: #ffffff; padding: 15px 0 30px; }
      .custom-post-from img { max-width: 85% !important; margin: 15px auto; filter: brightness(0) invert(1); }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h4 { font-size: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-h5 { font-size: 14px; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 22px; margin-bottom: 15px; }
      .custom-post-from input[type=”email”] { font-size: 14px; color: #000 !important; width: 240px; margin: auto; height: 30px; box-shadow:none; border: none; padding: 0 10px; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-pen-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: center right 14px; background-size:14px;}
      .custom-post-from input[type=”submit”] { font-weight: normal; margin: 15px auto; height: 30px; box-shadow: none; border: none; padding: 0 10px 0 35px; background-color: #1878f3; color: #ffffff; border-radius: 4px; display: inline-block; background-image: url(“https://www.fairobserver.com/wp-content/plugins/moosend_form/cpf-email-icon.svg”); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-position: 14px center; background-size: 14px; }

      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox { width: 90%; margin: auto; position: relative; display: flex; flex-wrap: wrap;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label { text-align: left; display: block; padding-left: 32px; margin-bottom: 0; cursor: pointer; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px;
      -webkit-user-select: none;
      -moz-user-select: none;
      -ms-user-select: none;
      user-select: none;
      order: 1;
      color: #ffffff;
      font-weight: normal;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox label a { color: #ffffff; text-decoration: underline; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input { position: absolute; opacity: 0; cursor: pointer; height: 100%; width: 24%; left: 0;
      right: 0; margin: 0; z-index: 3; order: 2;}
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:before { content: “f0c8”; font-family: Font Awesome 5 Free; color: #eee; font-size: 24px; position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0; line-height: 28px; color: #ffffff; width: 20px; height: 20px; margin-top: 5px; z-index: 2; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:before { content: “f14a”; font-weight: 600; color: #2196F3; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input:checked ~ label:after { content: “”; }
      .custom-post-from .cpf-checkbox input ~ label:after { position: absolute; left: 2px; width: 18px; height: 18px; margin-top: 10px; background: #ffffff; top: 10px; margin: auto; z-index: 1; }
      .custom-post-from .error{ display: block; color: #ff6461; order: 3 !important;}

      The beauty of it is that they can count on the US taxpayer to foot the bill. In the parlance of sports, the Middle East and now parts of Africa have become the equivalent of the expensive training facilities of a professional sports franchise motivated to push competition to its extreme and emerge as uncontested champions. Training can be carried on at all times and can endure decades, but when things get hot, these exotic locations also serve as the stadium itself, where the games are played and the scores tabulated.

      It took decades after World War II to build such a coherent system. For multiple reasons, however, this system is incompatible with the idea of democracy and the morality of a civilized society dedicated to the idea of human rights and responding to human needs. It is coherent to the extent that those who exercise power — in government, industry, the media and academe — share a common interest. The system provides them with the lifeline they need to maintain their activities. The problem is that the only parties left out and left holding the bag are… the people.

      Today’s economico-political situation reflects a “conditions-based approach.” The condition is that the interests that control the machine must never be forced to lose their control, because the result would be anarchy. And no civilized person — apart from the late anthropologist David Graeber — can seriously defend the idea of anarchy.

      *[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devil’s Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Daily Devil’s Dictionary on Fair Observer.]

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Andrew Yang leads the New York mayoral race despite missteps. But can he win?

      by

      Two days before Andrew Yang announced he was running to be New York City’s next mayor, he made a remarkable admission.As Covid-19 ravaged the city – more than 50,000 people have succumbed to the virus – the tech entrepreneur had left town, retreating to his second home north of New York.“We live in a two-bedroom apartment in Manhattan,” Yang told an interviewer to explain his decision. “And so, like, can you imagine trying to have two kids on virtual school in a two-bedroom apartment, and then trying to do work yourself?”Many New Yorkers couldn’t just imagine it, they had lived it – as Yang’s mayoral rivals were quick to point out. But if New York election watchers were expecting that moment to torpedo Yang’s campaign, they were wrong.Despite a slew of other missteps – Yang’s ill-advised plan to crack down on unlicensed street vendors, many of whom are impoverished immigrants, and his enthusiastic National Pet’s Day confession that he had given away his pet dog – Yang has led his Democratic competitors in polling since he announced his candidacy.Yang’s name recognition has undoubtedly helped. The 46-year-old might have failed in his 2020 presidential bid, but along the way he became one of the most talked-about candidates, winning a diehard “Yang Gang” group of supporters through his effervescent personality and his bold commitment to a universal basic income, which would grant $1,000-a-month to US citizens.A New Yorker who doesn’t keep a keen eye on local affairs is still likely to have heard of Yang, but might be less aware of rivals like Eric Adams, Scott Stringer, Maya Wiley and Dianne Morales, who have spent their careers working largely away from the headlines in local New York politics or activism.Yang’s position as frontrunner has put a target on his back, even if “undecided” remains the number one choice for New Yorkers. With the first Democratic primary debates scheduled for 13 May, the race is beginning to heat up, and as New Yorkers begin to pay more attention, Yang has found himself attacked on all sides.First Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president who is polling second, wrongly said Yang had “never held a job in his entire life” and accused him of abandoning New York City at “its darkest moment”. Yang’s campaign said Adams had “crossed a line with his false and reprehensible attacks”.Then, on Monday, Scott Stringer, New York City’s comptroller, slammed Yang’s street vendor crackdown proposal – something Yang has since said he regrets.“We can’t have a leader who tweets first and thinks second,” Stringer, who has also criticized Yang’s transport ideas, said. He added: “Cracking down on street vendors is part of the criminalization of poverty.”At times it has felt like open season on Yang, who has also been criticized by Maya Wiley, who if elected would be New York City’s first female mayor. “New York is not another startup where Andrew Yang can play with other people’s money and fail up,” Wiley said in a scathing statement.Yang’s first startup, which aimed to help celebrities give money to charity, failed, but his involvement with a testing preparation company called Manhattan GMAT was more successful, and made him a millionaire.For all the mudslinging, Yang has plenty going for him. He’s the best known, and an affable, engaging campaigner with a knack for making headlines, even if sometimes for the wrong reasons. He has managed to engage New Yorkers where others have struggled, whether by releasing a campaign rap video – Yang does not rap in it – or pitching pie-in-the-sky ideas like building a casino on New York’s Governors Island, a concept explicitly barred by a federal deed.He has plenty of money too, although the projected $6.5m he raised in the first two months of his campaign is less than the $8m Adams had on hand in mid-March. On Tuesday Politico reported that three political action committees – groups which support, but are officially unconnected to a politician’s campaign – were coalescing behind Yang, aiming to raise $6m for TV ads. At least one other committee has also started fundraising against Yang.So can he win?“My gut instinct is to say no,” John Mollenkopf, distinguished professor of political science at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, said. “He doesn’t really have much of a solid organic connection to constituencies in New York City. He may have a kind of name recognition, a public popularity, [he’s a] fun guy, [and] I think New Yorkers do like people who rock the boat, who are a little bit insouciant in the way they consider the political establishment.”Mollenkopf added: “But that’s not the same thing as sufficiently deep political support to mobilize the kind of forces that are necessary to turn out a majority in a Democratic primary election.”While Yang has dominated the headlines, other candidates have been gobbling up endorsements from key unions and progressive groups. On Wednesday the Working Families party, a progressive party which endorses Democratic candidates, chose Stringer as its first choice, Dianne Morales as second choice, and Maya Wiley as third choice. Yang was not mentioned.Wiley, who previously served as counsel to the current mayor, Bill de Blasio, also won the coveted endorsement of 1199SEIU, the union which represents New York City’s healthcare workers and comprises a majority of women of color. Adams has been endorsed by more than a dozen unions and organizations, as has Stringer.If those groups can turn out members, it could spell trouble for Yang, who will be fearful of repeating his last election bid.In 2020 Yang became one of the most talked about figures in the Democratic presidential primary, but couldn’t translate that into votes. He finished a distant sixth in Iowa and an even more distant eighth in New Hampshire, before dropping out of the race.In New York City mayoral elections, being the frontrunner can be a poisoned chalice. At this stage in 2013, De Blasio was far from being the favorite, while Michael Bloomberg came from behind to win in 2001.To add to the uncertainty, this year the Democratic mayoral candidate will be selected by ranked choice voting for the first time, further muddying the waters. When the Democratic primary takes place on 22 June, Yang will hope to buck the previous trends. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden to unveil Russia sanctions over SolarWinds hack and election meddling

      by

      The US is set to announce new sanctions against Russia as soon as Thursday in retaliation for Moscow’s elections interference, alleged bounties on US soldiers in Afghanistan, and cyber-espionage campaigns such as the SolarWinds hack, according to reports in US and international media.Ten Russian diplomatic officials are to be expelled from the US and up to 30 entities will be blacklisted, officials said, in the largest sanctions action against Russia of Joe Biden’s presidency.Additionally, the White House may issue an executive order barring US financial institutions from purchasing rouble bonds issued by Russia’s government, targeting the country’s sovereign debt and its broader economy. That could begin as soon as June, according to some reports.Q&AWhat was the SolarWinds hack?ShowIn early 2020, malicious code was sneaked into updates to a popular piece of software called Orion, made in the US by the company SolarWinds, which monitors the computer networks of businesses and governments for outages.That malware gave hackers remote access to an organisation’s networks so they could steal information. Among the most high-profile users of the software were US government departments including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the state department, and the justice department.Described by the Microsoft president, Brad Smith, as “the largest and most sophisticated attack the world has ever seen”, US intelligence agencies have accused Russia of launching the attack.SolarWinds, of Austin, Texas, provides network monitoring and other technical services to hundreds of thousands of organisations around the world, including most Fortune 500 companies and government agencies in North America, Europe, Asia and the Middle East.Its compromised product, Orion, is a centralised monitoring tool that looks for problems in an organisation’s computer network, which means that breaking in gave the attackers a “God view” of those networks.Neither SolarWinds nor US cybersecurity authorities have publicly identified which organisations were breached. Just because a company or agency uses SolarWinds as a vendor does not necessarily mean it was vulnerable to the hack.Kari Paul and Martin BelamUnnamed officials told the New York Times the new sanctions were meant to cut deeper than previous attempts to punish Moscow for its attacks on US institutions and allies. Some Russian officials have laughed off being added to the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctions lists, comparing it to being elevated to an elite club. The threat of the ban on purchasing Russian debt has already depressed prices on the rouble and rouble-denominated OFZ treasury bonds.The sanctions will add tension to an already strained relationship between Russia and the US. Since last month, Moscow has been engaged in the largest troop buildup on its border with Ukraine since the 2014 annexation of Crimea, provoking fears of an invasion. Biden called Vladimir Putin on Tuesday to urge him to de-escalate tensions with Ukraine and proposed a summit in a third country. The Kremlin gave a frosty account of the telephone call, and did not say whether Putin had agreed to the meeting.Earlier this year, Biden had agreed with a reporter when asked if Putin was “a killer”. Those remarks were replayed widely on Russian television. Putin responded by wryly wishing Biden “good health”, which was seen as a nod to Biden’s age.The US president’s tough approach differs considerably from that of the Trump administration, which largely sought to avoid confronting Russia over a CIA assessment that Moscow had offered and paid bounties for foreign fighters to kill US troops in Afghanistan. Trump said he doubted the evidence behind the reports.He similarly sided with Putin over an FBI assessment that Russia had interfered in the 2016 elections during a summit in Helsinki two years later.The planned sanctions were said to be retaliation for Russian interference in the 2020 elections, during which US intelligence agencies concluded that the Kremlin had backed Trump over Biden.Sign up for the Guardian’s First Thing newsletterThe sanctions would also be a response to a massive and sophisticated cybersecurity breach against SolarWinds Corp that affected software used by US government agencies. The US has blamed Russia for the attack.Peskov this week said that “the hostility and unpredictability of America’s actions force us in general to be prepared for the worst scenarios”. More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden outlines Afghanistan withdrawal: ‘It’s time for American troops to come home’ – live

      by

      Key events

      Show

      5.50pm EDT
      17:50

      Local US mosques caught in pandemic crunch turn to online fundraisers

      5.19pm EDT
      17:19

      ‘Terrible days ahead’: Afghan women fear the return of the Taliban

      5.00pm EDT
      17:00

      Today so far

      4.39pm EDT
      16:39

      Chauvin trial: defense claims bad heart and drug use killed Floyd

      3.36pm EDT
      15:36

      Biden visits Arlington National Cemetery after announcing Afghanistan troop withdrawal

      3.09pm EDT
      15:09

      Obama applauds Biden’s decision to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan

      2.52pm EDT
      14:52

      ‘It’s time to end the forever war,’ Biden says of Afghanistan

      Live feed

      Show

      5.50pm EDT
      17:50

      Local US mosques caught in pandemic crunch turn to online fundraisers

      Lizzie Mulvey reports:
      The building facade is deteriorating. The heating system is a fire hazard. When it rains outside, it also rains inside – a plastic container near the prayer area collects water. Masjid An-Noor, a mosque serving the Muslim community of Bridgeport, Connecticut, for over 30 years, is barely holding on – and it is part of a trend of mosques across America facing dire financial problems during the Covid-19 pandemic.
      In April last year, as states across America went into lockdown, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan was just beginning. The holy month is a time when mosques open their doors each night, welcoming members and guests for iftar – a communal meal to break the day’s fast. It’s also one of the most fruitful times of year for fundraising, particularly for local mosques, which cover the majority of expenses through individual donations.
      But as in-person worship was put on hold, congregants could no longer share their nightly meal. And throughout the rest of 2020, families were barred from going to Friday prayers, or Jum’ah, another robust time for fundraising. And with unemployment rising, many Muslims families faced their own financial hardship. As a result, donations to mosques across the country declined dramatically – for some places of worship, annual funding fell by 40-60%.
      Larger, regional mosques in the US, usually based in urban areas, are connected to large Muslim communities and a network of other mosques that provides financial security. Smaller neighborhood mosques, sometimes called mahallah mosques, in cities and suburban and rural areas, lack the same safety net. There is also little financial support offered by federal and state governments and many of them turn to GoFundMe efforts to survive – with mixed results.
      “We are extremely in financial debt, we owe a lot of money to people,” said Atif Seyal, an executive committee member of the mosque in Connecticut, who helped organize a GoFundMe fundraiser for the mosque, which sought to raise $100,000 but has so far accrued only $12,200.
      “We have a lot of children in the community and we want to teach them our religion,” said Seyal, explaining why it was important to him that the mosque continues to exist. The mosque also provides a service to people in the town of all ages, supporting “people in need, people who don’t have a job. When a family member passes we help them to get them buried in the proper way.”
      According to Tariq Reqhman, the secretary general of the Islamic Circle of North America, a non-profit in Queens, New York, “99% of mosques in New York City have community support, and do not have grants or public or government funding. Everything comes from the community.”
      Read more:

      5.48pm EDT
      17:48

      A bill to address hate crimes against Asian Americas advanced through the Senate – but faces potential roadblocks ahead.
      With a 92-6 vote, the Covid-19 Hate Crimes Act passed a procedural vote, and will be up for final passage this week. The bill, introduced by Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii would create a new Justice Department position to oversee the review of hate crimes related to the pandemic.
      Six Republicans – Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Ted Cruz of Texas, Josh Hawley of Missouri, Roger Marshall of Kansas, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Tommy Tuberville of Alabama — voted against advancing the measure.
      Republicans were generally unenthusiastic about the bill and had hoped to introduce nearly two dozen amendments to it.

      5.19pm EDT
      17:19

      ‘Terrible days ahead’: Afghan women fear the return of the Taliban

      Akhtar Mohammad Makoii (in Herat) and Michael Safi report:
      Outside a college from which their mothers were banned, the women waited for friends finishing exams they fear will be some of the last they can take. “The Americans are leaving,” said Basireh Heydari, a Herat University student. “We have terrible days ahead with the Taliban. I’m worried they won’t let me leave the house, let alone what I’m doing now.”
      The Biden administration’s decision to withdraw all US troops from Afghanistan by 11 September will bring an end to the US’s longest war. With Nato allies such as Germany already announcing on Wednesday that they will follow Washington’s lead and exit the country, Afghans fear an intensification of fighting between the national government and the Taliban, who were ousted by the US-led intervention two decades ago.
      Violence against civilians, especially women and children, has surged over the past year, according to UN statistics released on Wednesday, and Taliban control of the country is greater than at any point in the past two decades. The benefits of an ongoing foreign military presence in the country are unclear.
      But a return to hardline Islamist rule could mean the rollback of one of the intervention’s least disputed achievements – the lifting of a Taliban prohibition of female education.
      Read more:

      5.00pm EDT
      17:00

      Today so far

      That’s it from me today. My west coast colleague, Maanvi Singh, will take over the blog for the next few hours.
      Here’s where the day stands so far:

      Joe Biden announced all US troops will be withdrawn from Afghanistan by September 11. “It’s time for American troops to come home,” the president said in a speech at the White House. “It’s time to end the forever war.” Biden said the troop drawdown will begin next month and be completed by the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.
      Barack Obama praised Biden’s troop withdrawal decision. “After nearly two decades of putting our troops in harm’s way, it is time to recognize that we have accomplished all that we can militarily, and that it’s time to bring our remaining troops home,” Obama said in a statement. Biden spoke to Obama and former president George W Bush yesterday about his decision on Afghanistan.
      The police officer who fatally shot Daunte Wright will be charged with second-degree manslaughter. The announcement comes three days after Officer Kim Potter shot and killed Wright, a 20-year-old Black man, during a traffic stop. Potter and the Brooklyn Center police chief, Tim Gannon, submitted their resignations yesterday.
      Derek Chauvin’s defense team called a forensic expert to testify that George Floyd died because of his heart condition and drug use. Experts called by prosecutors last week testified that Floyd only died because Chauvin kept his knee on the Black man’s neck for more than nine minutes.
      A new poll showed lingering coronavirus vaccine hesitancy among Americans, amid a “pause” in administering the Johnson & Johnson vaccine due to six reports of blood clots among the more than 6 million people who have received the vaccine. A new poll from Monmouth University found that 21% of Americans say they will never get a coronavirus vaccine if they can avoid it.

      Maanvi will have more coming up, so stay tuned.

      4.39pm EDT
      16:39

      Chauvin trial: defense claims bad heart and drug use killed Floyd

      Chris McGreal

      A leading forensic pathologist has told the Derek Chauvin trial that George Floyd was killed by his heart condition and drug use.
      Dr David Fowler, testifying for the defence, also introduced the idea that vehicle exhaust may have played a part in Floyd’s death by raising the amount of carbon monoxide in his blood and affecting his heart.
      Fowler, Maryland’s former chief medical examiner who trained in South Africa during the apartheid era, said the combination of cardiac disease, methamphetamine use and carbon monoxide killed the 46-year-old Black man while Chauvin, who is white, was arresting him last May in Minneapolis.
      “All of those combined to cause Mr Floyd’s death,” he said.
      Fowler is a controversial witness. He is being sued by the family of a Black teenager, Anton Black, killed by the Maryland police in 2018 after being held face down by three police officers.
      Fowler certified that Anton Black died from natural causes, with his bipolar disorder a contributing factor.
      The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has accused Fowler of “creating false narratives about what kills Black people in police encounters”.
      Last week, medical experts testified for the prosecution that Floyd died because the way that Chauvin and the other police officers pinned him to the ground in the prone position caused brain damage and heart failure.

      4.18pm EDT
      16:18

      Republican Senator Lindsey Graham criticized Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw all US troops from Afghanistan, saying he was “heartbroken” over the announcement.
      “I beg you, President Biden, re-evaluate this,” Graham said at a press conference.
      The South Carolina senator cited one study indicating a withdrawal of American troops will lead to a new threat to the US homeland within three years.
      “With all due respect, President Biden. you have not ended the war — you have extended it,” Graham said.

      3.56pm EDT
      15:56

      The Guardian’s Dan Sabbagh in London and Julian Borger in Washington report:
      Addressing the world from the White House, Joe Biden said 2,500 US troops plus a further 7,000 from “Nato allies” including 750 from the UK would gradually leave the country starting on 1 May. “The plan has long been in together, out together,” he added.
      “We cannot continue the cycle of extending or expanding our military presence in Afghanistan, hoping to create ideal conditions for the withdrawal and expecting a different result,” Biden said in his late afternoon speech.
      The plan was debated at a Nato summit in Brussels earlier on Wednesday. Member states did not oppose the plans for a full withdrawal once the US has made its intentions clear earlier this week, partly because they cannot guarantee the security of their own forces without the presence of the US.
      Minutes after Biden’s confirmation of the withdrawal plan, all Nato members, including the UK, put out a joint statement, confirming they would join in with an “orderly, coordinated, and deliberate” removal of troops alongside the US.
      The alliance said that it had achieved a goal to “prevent terrorists from using Afghanistan as a safe haven to attack us” but acknowledged also there was no good reason to stay on. “There is no military solution to the challenges Afghanistan faces,” Nato members said.

      3.36pm EDT
      15:36

      Biden visits Arlington National Cemetery after announcing Afghanistan troop withdrawal

      Joe Biden just paid a visit to Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery, where servicemembers who died fighting in America’s recent wars, including the war in Afghanistan, are buried.
      The president laid a wreath in honor of those lost troops. He noted it is now difficult for him to visit a cemetery and not think of his late son Beau, who fought in Iraq and later died of brain cancer.
      “Look at them all,” Biden said of the rows of headstones before him.

      JM Rieger
      (@RiegerReport)
      REPORTER: Was it a hard decision to make, sir?BIDEN: No it wasn’t. … It was absolutely clear … we went for two reasons: Get rid of bin Laden and to end the safe haven. … I never thought we were there to somehow unify … Afghanistan. It’s never been done. pic.twitter.com/gVHixStVdi

      April 14, 2021

      Asked by a reporter whether it was a difficult decision to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan, Biden said it was not.
      “To me, it was absolutely clear,” Biden said. “We went for two reasons: get rid of bin Laden and to end the safe haven. I never thought we were there to somehow unify … Afghanistan. It’s never been done.”

      3.26pm EDT
      15:26

      Joe Biden spoke with Barack Obama and George W Bush yesterday about his decision to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan, the White House press secretary said.
      “While we are not going to read out private conversations, he values their opinions and wanted them both to hear directly from him about his decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan,” Jen Psaki said on Twitter.

      Jen Psaki
      (@PressSec)
      @potus spoke with both President Bush and @BarackObama during separate calls yesterday. While we are not going to read out private conversations, he values their opinions and wanted them both to hear directly from him about his decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan.

      April 14, 2021

      Biden mentioned his phone call with Bush in his speech formally announcing the troop withdrawal. The president did not mention his separate conversation with Obama, although Psaki has previously said the two men speak often.
      Biden said that, despite their policy differences, he and Bush are “absolutely united in our respect and support” for the troops who have served in Afghanistan over the past 20 years.

      CBS News
      (@CBSNews)
      Biden says he spoke with former President Bush about plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan, and they were “absolutely united” in respect for Americans who served there”Less one 1 percent of Americans serve in our armed forces. The remaining 99 percent — we owe them.” pic.twitter.com/4N9BqoFtT8

      April 14, 2021

      3.15pm EDT
      15:15

      It’s worth noting that Barack Obama and Joe Biden have not always seen eye to eye on the war in Afghanistan.
      Biden opposed then-President Obama’s decision in 2009 to approve a troop surge to Afghanistan, a point that he repeatedly brought up on the campaign trail last year.
      However, Biden also opposed launching the raid that resulted in the killing of Osama bin Laden, which Obama approved.

      3.09pm EDT
      15:09

      Obama applauds Biden’s decision to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan

      Barack Obama has released a statement praising Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw all US troops from Afghanistan by September 11.
      “President Biden has made the right decision in completing the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan,” the former president said.

      Barack Obama
      (@BarackObama)
      After nearly two decades in Afghanistan, it’s time to recognize that we have accomplished all that we can militarily, and bring our remaining troops home. I support @POTUS’s bold leadership in building our nation at home and restoring our standing around the world. pic.twitter.com/BrDzASXD3G

      April 14, 2021

      Obama acknowledged there will be “very difficult challenges and further hardship ahead in Afghanistan,” and he urged the US to remain involved in diplomatic efforts to ensure the human rights of Afghan people.
      “But after nearly two decades of putting our troops in harm’s way, it is time to recognize that we have accomplished all that we can militarily, and that it’s time to bring our remaining troops home,” Obama said.
      “I support President Biden’s bold leadership in building our nation at home and restoring our standing around the world.”

      3.03pm EDT
      15:03

      The White house has released a readout of Joe Biden’s call with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani earlier today.
      “They discussed their continued commitment to a strong bilateral partnership following the departure of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and affirmed shared respect and gratitude for the sacrifices made by American forces, alongside NATO allies and operational partners, as well as by the Afghan people and Afghan service members over the past two decades,” the White House said.
      “President Biden emphasized that the United States will continue to support the Afghan people, including through continued development, humanitarian, and security assistance. President Biden and President Ghani reaffirmed their shared conviction that every effort should be made to achieve a political settlement so that the Afghan people can live in peace.”
      Ghani said earlier today that he “respects” Biden’s decision to withdraw US troops, promising to help ensure a “smooth transition” as the drawdown begins.
      “Afghanistan’s proud security and defense forces are fully capable of defending its people and country, which they have been doing all along, and for which the Afghan nation will forever remain grateful,” Ghani said on Twitter.

      2.52pm EDT
      14:52

      ‘It’s time to end the forever war,’ Biden says of Afghanistan

      Joe Biden offered assurances that the US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan would be handled very carefully over the next several months.
      “We will not conduct a hasty rush to the exit. We’ll do it responsibly, deliberately and safely,” the president said. “And we’ll do it in full coordination with our allies and partners.”

      CBS News
      (@CBSNews)
      BREAKING: President Biden announces U.S. will begin its final withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan on May 1.”We will not conduct a hasty rush to the exit. We’ll do it responsibly, deliberately and safely.” https://t.co/qp2ZY191EH pic.twitter.com/Crd9zV1yjq

      April 14, 2021

      Explaining his decision to withdraw all US troops, Biden noted there are servicemembers currently deployed in Afghanistan who were not alive when the September 11 attacks occurred.
      Some servicemembers even have parents who served in the same war that they are now fighting, the president said.
      “The war in Afghanistan was never meant to be a multi-generational undertaking,” Biden said. “It’s time to end the forever war.”
      The president has now concluded his prepared remarks. He is next scheduled to visit Arlington National Cemetery to pay his respects to some of the servicemembers who died in Afghanistan.

      2.45pm EDT
      14:45

      Joe Biden argued the original reasons for the deployment of US troops to Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks no longer apply.
      “We went to Afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago. That cannot explain why we should remain there in 2021,” the president said.
      Biden added, “We’ll be much more formidable to our adversaries and competitors in the long term if we fight the battles of the next 20 years, not the last 20.”
      The president acknowledged some people disagreed with his decision to withdraw all US troops because, despite the widespread desire to end the war, there were lingering doubts that now was the right time to leave.
      “When will it be the right moment to leave?” Biden asked. “One more year? Two more years? Ten more years?”

      2.40pm EDT
      14:40

      Joe Biden said he spoke to former president George W Bush yesterday about his decision to withdraw all US troops from Afghanistan by September.
      Despite their policy differences, Biden said he and Bush are “absolutely united in our respect and support” for the service members who have been deployed to Afghanistan over the past 20 years.
      The president said the drawdown of US troops in Afghanistan will begin in May and wrap up by September 11, which will mark the 20th anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

      Updated
      at 3.25pm EDT

      2.37pm EDT
      14:37

      ‘It’s time for American troops to come home,’ Biden says in Afghanistan speech

      Joe Biden is now delivering a speech on his plan to withdraw all US troops from Afghanistan in the Treaty Room of the White House.
      Biden said his many visits to Afghanistan over the past two decades, including as vice-president to Barack Obama, had convinced him that “only the Afghans have the right and responsibility to lead their country”.

      President Biden
      (@POTUS)
      It is time to end America’s longest war. It is time for American troops to come home from Afghanistan.

      April 14, 2021

      The president noted the US originally deployed troops to Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks, to ensure the country could not again be used as a launchpad to attack America.
      “We did that. We accomplished that objective,” Biden said.
      It has now been ten years since Osama Bin Laden was killed, the president noted, and the terrorist threat has evolved greatly in the decade since his death.
      “Since then, our reasons for remaining in Afghanistan have become increasingly unclear,” Biden said. “It’s time for American troops to come home.”

      Updated
      at 2.42pm EDT More

    • 91 Shares189 Views

      in World Politics

      Why Joe Biden Must Act on Myanmar

      by

      Burma, as Myanmar was known then, won its independence from the British in 1948. Since then, bilateral relations between the US and Myanmar can at best be described as lackluster. They have lacked what experts would call “strategic compulsions.” Western allies of the US lack strategic calculus in dealing with Myanmar. They have viewed it from the narrow prism of moralistic Western standards of democracy, human rights, rule of law, corruption and the trafficking of humans, drugs and weapons.

      Myanmar: What Comes Next for Minority Groups?

      READ MORE

      To be fair, the US has not always or entirely been sanctimonious. The historic Kissinger Doctrine integrated China into the liberal postwar order. It facilitated investments into, transferred technology to and trained manpower in China. Under Deng Xiaoping and his successors, China continued its peaceful rise. Xi Jinping, the current Chinese president, has ended that peaceful rise and destabilized the world order.

      Missing Out on Myanmar

      The US approach to Myanmar has been muddled and inconsistent. During the Cold War, Washington was happy to deal with allies in Asia that were military dictatorships. Under President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, the US was happy to deal with a communist regime.

      In contrast, Burma was a parliamentary democracy from 1948 to 1962 when Ne Win led a military coup. For the next 26 years, the country was ruled by the Tatmadaw, the official name of the country’s armed forces. In 1988, nationwide protests broke out. Aung San Suu Kyi, the Oxford-educated daughter of Burmese independence leader Aung San, emerged as the leader of a pro-democracy movement. The National League of Democracy (NLD) went on to win the 1990, 2015 and 2020 parliamentary elections.

      In comparison with China, Myanmar’s regime has been far less oppressive. There is no counterpart to the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution. The Tatmadaw has yielded to public pressure and held largely free and fair elections. In elections, even members of the Tatmadaw have voted for Suu Kyi’s NLD. Yet the US and its Western allies have ignored the strategic importance of Myanmar in the Indian Ocean region in general and the Bay of Bengal in particular.

      Chinese Influence Wanes and Waxes

      In the past, the US and its allies put pressure on the Tatmadaw by imposing sanctions on Myanmar. Instead of weakening the Tatmadaw, sanctions hurt the people and pushed the country into the arms of China. Between 2004 and 2007, a generational change in the Tatmadaw caused a rethink in Myanmar’s relationship with China.

      The younger officers of the Tatmadaw decided to decrease dependence on Beijing. They tried to reduce Chinese influence in political and military governance. They attempted to transition to some form of democracy and improve relations with the West and neighbors like India. In 2011, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton swung by Myanmar. President Barack Obama visited twice in 2012 and 2014. By 2016-17, the persecution of Rohingya Muslims, an ethnic minority in the country’s Rakhine state, was in the news and relations between the US and Myanmar were already souring.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Yet this was a relatively good time for the country. Even financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank opened their purse strings. During this brief honeymoon period with the West, China found itself on the back foot for the first time since 1988.

      In 2011, Myanmar suspended the construction of the Myitsone dam, a controversial hydroelectric project financed and led by a state-owned Chinese company. In 2015, Myanmar’s general elections led to yet another victory for Suu Kyi’s NLD. This was an opportune moment for the West to build relations with Myanmar and counter China. The Tatmadaw had ceded ground to elected officials. Washington could have cultivated both of Myanmar’s centers of power: the NLD and the Tatmadaw.

      But the US missed this opportunity. From 2017, the Rohingya issue clouded Myanmar’s relationship with the West and allowed China to regain its clout in the country. The military coup in February this year strengthens China’s hand further.

      China has already been strengthening its hand by following its tried and tested policy of investing in infrastructure. The China–Myanmar Transport Corridor is connecting the Chinese province of Yunnan to the Bay of Bengal. Roads, railways, river navigation, oil and gas pipelines are deepening economic ties between Myanmar and China. It is part of the Middle Kingdom’s “Look South” policy that seeks to draw Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Pakistan into the Chinese arc of influence.

      The military coup in Myanmar presents a great opportunity to China and represents the first major foreign policy challenge to President Joe Biden’s administration as well as the Quadrilateral Security Alliance, the informal strategic dialogue between the US, Japan, Australia and India known as the Quad.

      The US Still Has Some Cards

      China may be in the ascendant right now, but the West still has clout in Myanmar. Suu Kyi studied at Oxford, lived in the UK for decades and married an Englishman. People from Myanmar have immigrated to Australia, New Zealand, the UK and the US. So, the West commands what Joseph Nye has calls “soft power” in the country. Burmese people want to immigrate not to China but to the US.

      Yet American foreign policy to Myanmar has squandered this soft power prodigally. Obama is the only American president who gave Myanmar the attention it deserved. His foreign policy pivot to Asia was a strategic masterstroke, but Donald Trump abandoned Obama’s outreach not only to Myanmar but the rest of Asia.

      The military coup is a wake-up call for the US to act. China is now firmly in the saddle in Myanmar. The Tatmadaw is finding ferocious resistance on the streets. There is another overlooked problem. Like many postcolonial states, Myanmar is a bewildering patchwork of cultural, ethnic and linguistic groups. Many of them have been fighting for independence or autonomy for years.

      Few in the West realize that a savage conflict might be about to break out. About 20 rebel groups, including the United Wa State Army, Karen National Union, Kachin Independence Army and Arakan Army, control 33% of Myanmar’s territory. Many of them have condemned the coup. In response, the Tatmadaw has launched airstrikes in Karen state. With drugs and arms flush in rebel areas, Myanmar might be about to become the new Afghanistan.

      The Quad leaders’ joint statement on the White House website emphasizes “the urgent need to restore democracy and the priority of strengthening democratic resilience” in Myanmar. This mention is heartening, but the Quad and the US need to do more. Opening dialogue with the Tatmadaw would be a good start. Intelligence sources report that most young officers favor multi-party democracy and are wary of Myanmar turning into a Chinese tributary.

      A carrot-and-stick approach by Washington could still work. The World Bank has halted payments to projects after the military coup. International condemnation has rattled the Tatmadaw. Pressure to reach a political reconciliation might bear fruit. Carrots in the form of infrastructure funding and development assistance could prove attractive. Involving Asian nations such as India, Japan, South Korea and Bangladesh, as well as member states of ASEAN, could pave the path to Myanmar’s transition away from military rule.

      Despite foreign policy blunders, economic woes and internal division, the US is still the undisputed top dog in the world. With the help of its Asian and European allies, Washington can counter China, prevent civil war and restore democracy in Myanmar. The time has come for Biden to act.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More