Amid urgent climate warnings, EPA gives coal a reprieve

Abstract: WASHINGTON - Amid scientists’ increasingly urgent warnings, the Trump administration ordered a sweeping about-face Wednesday on Obama-era efforts to fight climate change, easing restrictions on coal-fired power plants in a move it predicted would revitalize America’s sagging coal industry. As miners in hard hats and coal-country lawmakers applauded, Environmental Protection Agency chief Andrew Wheeler signed a measure that scraps one of President Barack Obama’s key initiatives to rein in fossil fuel emissions. The replacement rule gives states more leeway in deciding whether to require plants to make limited efficiency upgrades. Wheeler said he expects more coal plants to open as a result. But one state, New York, immediately said it would go to court to challenge the action, and more lawsuits are likely. The EPA move follows pledges by candidate and then President Donald Trump to rescue the U.S. coal industry, which saw near-record numbers of plant closings last year in the face of competition from cheaper natural gas and renewables. It’s the latest and one of the biggest of dozens of environmental regulatory rollbacks by his administration. It came despite scientists’ cautions that the world must cut fossil fuel emissions to stave off the worst of global warming and the EPA’s own analysis that the new rule would result in the deaths of an extra 300 to 1,500 people each year by 2030 compared to the never fully enacted Clean Power Plan, owing to additional air pollution from the power grid. “Americans want reliable energy that they can afford,” Wheeler declared at the signing ceremony, with White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney alongside to underscore Trump’s approval. There’s no denying “fossil fuels will continue to be an important part of the mix,” Wheeler said. Lawmakers and industry representatives from coal states blamed federal regulation, not the market, for the decadeslong trend of declining U.S. coal use and said Wednesday’s act would stave off more coal plant closings. “We’re not ready for renewable energy … so we need coal,” declared Rep. David McKinley, a West Virginia Republican. But rather than a sensible economic move, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi described the change as a “dirty power scam” and “a stunning giveaway to big polluters.” She called climate change “the existential threat of our time” and said the administration was ignoring scientific studies and yielding to special interests. Obama’s 2015 Clean Power Plan is currently stayed by the Supreme Court while challenges play out from more than two dozen states that contend it exceeded authority under the federal Clean Air Act. Environmental advocates and Obama-era EPA officials involved in drafting the now-repealed plan said Trump’s replacement rule will do little to cut climate-damaging emissions from coal-fired power plants, at a time when polls show Americans are increasingly paying attention to global warming. “I can’t think of a single rule that would do more to set back the effort to do what we need to do to address the critical threat of climate change,” said Joe Goffman, who helped draft the repealed Clean Power Plan. The Obama plan aimed at encouraging what already had been market-driven changes in the nation’s electrical grid, pushing coal-fired power plants out and prodding utilities to rely more on natural gas, solar, wind and other lower- or no-carbon fuels. Obama EPA head Gina McCarthy said Trump officials had “made painfully clear that they are incapable of rising to the challenge and tackling this crisis. They have shown a callous disregard for EPA’s mission, a pattern of climate science denial and an inexcusable indifference to the consequences of climate change.” Burning of fossil fuels for electricity, transportation and heat is the main human source of heat-trapping carbon emissions. Trump has rejected scientific warnings on climate change, including a dire report this year from scientists at more than a dozen federal agencies noting that global warming from fossil fuels “presents growing challenges to human health and quality of life.” Administration officials argue climate science is imperfect, and that it’s not clear climate change would have as great an impact as forecast. Democrats pledge to make combating climate change a major issue in the presidential race. They condemned Wednesday’s act. Presidential contender Elizabeth Warren called for broad action to reduce emissions, saying “the climate crisis is endangering our country, our health, our economy and our national security.” New York Attorney General Letitia James quickly tweeted a pledge that her state would sue, an early signal of what environmental groups said would be more court challenges. Wheeler told reporters after the signing that he expected new coal plants to open as a result. “We’re leveling the playing field” in terms of regulations on various energy sources “to allow that investment to occur,” he said. “We are trying to address climate change, but we’re doing it with the authorities we have.” The Trump administration also is proposing to roll back an Obama-era mileage rule requiring tougher mileage standards for cars and light trucks. Environmental groups promise court challenges there, too. An Associated Press analysis Tuesday of federal air data showed U.S. progress on cleaning the air may be stagnating after decades of improvement. Despite Trump’s repeated false claims that America’s air is the cleanest it’s ever been, there were 15% more days with unhealthful air both last year and the year before than on average from 2013 through 2016, the four years when America had its fewest number of those days since at least 1980.

pollution
climate
coal
emissions
climate change
environment


Hope Hicks won't talk about Trump White House in interview with House panel

Abstract: WASHINGTON - Former top White House adviser Hope Hicks is refusing to answer questions related to her time in the White House in an interview with the House Judiciary Committee, dimming Democrats’ chances of obtaining new or substantive information about President Donald Trump as part of their investigation into obstruction of justice. Less than an hour into the interview, frustrated Democrats taking breaks from the meeting said Hicks and her lawyer were following White House orders to stay quiet about her time there working for Trump. She was answering some questions about her time on Trump’s campaign, the lawmakers said. “She’s objecting to stuff that’s already in the public record,” said California Rep. Karen Bass. “It’s pretty ridiculous.” Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., called her answers “a farce.” California Rep. Ted Lieu tweeted about the interview, writing that Hicks refused to answer even innocuous questions such as whether she had previously testified before Congress. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., declined comment on the substance of the interview so far, saying “all I’ll say is Ms. Hicks is answering questions put to her and the interview continues.” Republicans had a different perspective, saying she was cooperative and that the interview was a waste of time. The top Republican on the panel, Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, said they were “simply talking about things that are already out there in public or getting the same answers over and over.” It was so far unclear whether Democrats would take Hicks or the administration to court to challenge the claim of immunity. In a letter Tuesday to Nadler, White House counsel Pat Cipollone wrote that Trump had directed Hicks not to answer questions “relating to the time of her service as a senior adviser to the president.” Cipollone said Hicks, as one of Trump’s former senior advisers, is “absolutely immune” from compelled testimony with respect to her service to the president because of the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches. The White House has similarly cited broad executive privilege with respect to many of the Democrats’ investigative demands, using the president’s power to withhold information to protect the confidentiality of the Oval Office decision-making process. Democrats say they disagree that Hicks’ answers are covered by such immunity or privilege, especially since she has already cooperated with Mueller. Jayapal said that at one point Hicks started to answer a question, and the lawyers jumped in and said “we’re starting executive.” “Basically, she can say her name,” Jayapal said. As Hicks spoke to the lawmakers, Trump tweeted that the investigation is “extreme Presidential Harassment.” He wrote that Democrats “are very unhappy with the Mueller Report, so after almost 3 years, they want a Redo, or Do Over.” Hicks is expected to answer some questions about her time on Trump’s campaign, but it was unclear how cooperative she will be. Jayapal said she told lawmakers that she would tell the truth. The interview marks the first time lawmakers are hearing from a person linked to Trump’s inner circle since the release of Mueller’s report. Obtaining the testimony Wednesday from Hicks, former White House communications director and a close and trusted former Trump aide, was a victory for the committee, given that Trump has broadly stonewalled their investigations and said he will fight “all of the subpoenas.” But given the White House orders, it is unclear how much new information Hicks will provide. Testimony from witnesses such as Hicks is one step in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s methodical approach to investigating Trump. More than 60 lawmakers in her caucus — including around a dozen on the Judiciary Committee — have called for opening an impeachment inquiry, but she has said she wants committees to investigate first and come to a decision on impeachment later. While Trump has continued to block their requests, Democrats have made some minor gains in recent weeks with Hicks’ appearance and the Justice Department’s agreeing to make some underlying evidence from Mueller’s report available to committee members. The Judiciary panel wanted a higher-profile interview with Hicks, subpoenaing her for public testimony. But they agreed to the private interview after negotiations. A transcript of the session will be released in the days afterward. The committee has also subpoenaed Hicks for documents, but she has only partially complied. She agreed to provide some information from her work on Trump’s campaign, but none from her time at the White House because of the administration’s objections. Hicks was a key witness for Mueller, delivering important information to the special counsel’s office about multiple episodes involving the president. Mueller wrote in his 448-page report released in April that there was not enough evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia, but he said he could not exonerate Trump on obstruction of justice. The report examined several situations in which Trump attempted to influence or curtail Mueller’s investigation. Democratic aides said they plan on asking Hicks about several of those episodes, including efforts to remove Mueller from the investigation, pressure on former Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the firing of FBI Director James Comey. The aides spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss their plans for the closed-door meeting. The aides said that lawmakers also plan to ask about Hicks’ knowledge of hush-money payments orchestrated by former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen to two women who claimed to have had affairs with Trump — the porn actress Stormy Daniels and model Karen McDougal. Trump has denied the allegations. Cohen is now serving three years in prison partly for campaign violations related to the payments. The Democrats plan to use some of Hicks’ answers to those questions to inform a committee hearing with experts to review Mueller’s report on Thursday.

u.s .
congress
robert mueller
donald trump
russia probe
hope hicks
jerrold nadler


'Time and patience are running out' for Robert Mueller testimony, says Adam Schiff

Abstract: NEW YORK - Democratic U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, on Wednesday said U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller must testify before Congress about his Russia investigation. “In terms of Bob Mueller, he is going to have to testify. And, he can testify voluntarily or he can testify under subpoena, but it is going to have to happen,” the prominent congressman said at a National Press Club event in Washington. “I don’t think a two-year investigation of this magnitude, followed by a written report and a 10-minute statement without questions, satisfactorily answers the many, many questions we have about the investigation,” Schiff said, adding “time and patience are running out on that front.” Mueller’s report, released publicly in April, found Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and that Trump’s election campaign had multiple contacts with Russian officials. But the report found insufficient evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy between the campaign and Moscow. The report, which was partially redacted, also outlined instances in which the Republican president tried to interfere with Mueller’s investigation but declined to make a judgment on whether that amounted to obstruction of justice. Attorney General William Barr said there was insufficient evidence in Mueller’s report to conclude that Trump obstructed justice, but some Democrats have said the president should be removed from office through impeachment proceedings because of Mueller’s findings. Schiff also criticized Trump for saying in a recent ABC News interview that he would see nothing wrong in accepting damaging information on a U.S. political opponent if it were offered to his re-election campaign by a foreign government. Trump’s comments sent a message to the Russians that they “are free to intervene in the next election as long as they intervene on the president’s side, and he will not have the guts to call them out on it,” Schiff said. “He may even be grateful.” Schiff also warned of Russia potentially interfering in the November 2020 election, saying Moscow could try to damage Democratic Party presidential candidates by disseminating forged documents or altered videos of them known as “deepfakes.” Other nations, like North Korea, or even U.S. citizens could also adopt those tactics and seek to influence the election, Schiff said. “We speed towards the 2020 elections in an environment in which there are new technologies like deepfakes that are potentially hugely disruptive, and even less attributable than a hacking and dumping operation, and we are not nearly as prepared as we should be,” Schiff said.

u.s .
congress
robert mueller
donald trump
adam schiff
russia probe


Russia slams 'unfounded allegations' as four are charged in absentia over MH17 jetliner downing

Abstract: THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS - International investigators on Wednesday charged three Russians and a Ukrainian with murder over the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, the first people to face justice over the tragedy five years ago in which 298 people were killed. The trial of the four men with military and intelligence links will start in the Netherlands next March, although they are likely to be tried in absentia as neither Russia nor Ukraine extradites their nationals. Moscow slammed the “absolutely unfounded accusations” over the downing of the plane, which was traveling between Amsterdam and Kuala Lumpur when it was hit by a missile over part of eastern Ukraine held by pro-Russian rebels. The Dutch-led inquiry team said international arrest warrants had been issued for Russian nationals Igor Girkin, Sergei Dubinsky and Oleg Pulatov, and Ukrainian Leonid Kharchenko, all of whom are suspected of roles in the separatist Donetsk People’s Republic. Dutch prosecutor Fred Westerbeke said the four were to be held responsible for bringing the BUK missile system from Russia into eastern Ukraine “even though they have not pushed the button themselves.” “We won’t demand their extradition because Russian and Ukrainian law forbids the extradition of their nationals. But we ask Russia once more to cooperate — many of our questions remain unanswered,” he told a press conference. The same investigation team said in May 2018 that the BUK anti-aircraft missile that hit the Boeing 777 had originated from the 53rd Russian military brigade based in the southwestern city of Kursk. Relatives of those killed aboard MH17 welcomed the news. “It’s a start. I’m satisfied,” Silene Fredriksz, whose son and daughter-in-law were killed in the disaster, told reporters. “I am happy that the trial is finally going to start and that the names have been announced.” Asked if she personally blamed anyone for the crash, Fredriksz said: “Mr. (Russian President Vladimir) Putin. Because he made this possible. He created this situation. He is the main responsible person.” Piet Ploeg, president of a Dutch victims’ association who lost three family members on MH17, told AFP that it was “very important news. “The relatives of the victims have been waiting for this for nearly five years,” he said. Girkin, 48, is the most high-profile suspect, having previously been the self-proclaimed defense minister in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic in eastern Ukraine before apparently falling out with the Kremlin. Girkin, who is thought to be living in Moscow, denied the separatists were involved. “I can only say that rebels did not shoot down the Boeing,” he told Russia’s Interfax news agency. Dubinskiy, 56, who was formerly in the Russian military intelligence agency GRU, was head of the intelligence service of the Donetsk People’s Republic, while Pulatov, 52, an ex-soldier in the GRU’s Spetznaz special forces unit, was one of his deputies. Kharchenko was a military commander in Donetsk at the time, the Dutch prosecutors said. During the press conference by the investigators, number of telephone intercepts were played that they said showed the four were involved. Russia vehemently denied all involvement, and complained that it had been excluded from the probe. “Once again, absolutely unfounded accusations are being made against the Russian side, aimed at discrediting Russia in the eyes of the international community,” the foreign ministry said in a statement on its website. Russia insisted last year that the missile was fired by Kiev’s forces, adding that it was sent to Ukraine in the Soviet era. Despite claims by Ukraine’s government and Dutch media that senior Russian officers would also face charges, none were named by the prosecutors on Wednesday. The Joint Investigation Team (JIT) probing the attack includes Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine, representing the countries hardest hit by the disaster. The Netherlands and Australia said in May last year that they formally “hold Russia responsible” for the disaster. Of the passengers who died, 196 were Dutch and 38 Australian. Australia said Wednesday’s announcement was a “significant step” toward achieving justice, while NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg said it was “an important milestone in the efforts to uncover the full truth. Ukraine’s foreign ministry urged Russia to “acknowledge its responsibility,” while the office of President Volodymyr Zelensky’s said he hoped to see “everyone who is to blame for the murder of innocent children, women and men” go on trial. The war in eastern Ukraine and the MH17 disaster continue to plague relations between Russia and the West. Since 2014, some 13,000 people have been killed. Kiev and its Western backers accuse Russia of funneling troops and arms to back the separatists. Moscow has denied the claims despite evidence to the contrary.

conflict
vladimir putin
russia
ukraine
hague
malaysia airlines
donetsk
mh17
air accidents


Trio guilty in Kenya Garissa University terror attack that killed 148

Abstract: NAIROBI - A Kenyan court Wednesday found three people guilty of conspiracy to commit a terror attack after phone records and handwriting linked them to the 2015 Garissa University assault that killed 148 people. Mohamed Abdi Abikar, Hassan Aden Hassan and Rashid Charles Mberesero will be sentenced on July 3, Chief Magistrate Francis Andayi said. These are the first convictions of the attack. A fourth person, Sahal Diriye Hussein, was acquitted. Kenyan court processes take time due to the backlog of cases that the judiciary is working to clean up. Defense counsel Mbugua Mureithi said he will appeal. The Garissa University attack saw four gunmen with the al-Shabab extremist group based in neighboring Somalia force their way onto campus. The gunmen were killed. The attack is al-Shabab’s deadliest attack on Kenyan soil. Al-Shabab is al-Qaida’s affiliate in the region. Al-Qaida carried out Kenya’s deadliest attack when it bombed the U.S. Embassy building in Nairobi in the August 1998 killing more than 200 people. The U.S. Embassy in Dar es Salaam was targeted by the group on the same day in a near simultaneous attack. Al-Shabab has carried out numerous attacks inside Kenya since 2011, calling it retribution for Kenya sending troops into Somalia to counter the al-Qaida-linked fighters. The group attacked a luxury hotel complex in Nairobi in January.

terrorism somalia kenya al-shabab garissa


Joe Biden refuses to apologize for comments about segregationists

Abstract: WASHINGTON - Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden on Wednesday refused to apologize for comments about his dealings with two segregationist senators in the 1970s, and said that Sen. Cory Booker and other critics among his Democratic rivals were being disingenuous. “Apologize for what? Cory should apologize. He knows better,” Biden said at a Maryland fundraiser. “There’s not a racist bone in my body, I’ve been involved in civil rights my whole career. Period. Period. Period.” Biden was responding to criticism from Booker, who had demanded that he ask forgiveness for saying that he was able to work with segregationists in an atmosphere of “civility” in the U.S. Senate more than four decades ago. Speaking on CNN on Wednesday night, Booker said he wouldn’t apologize to Biden. “What matters to me is that a guy running to be the head of our party, which is a significantly diverse and wondrous party, doesn’t understand or can’t even acknowledge that he made a mistake,” Booker said. “I know Joe Biden. He is better than this. And this is a moment he should have spoken to the issue, allowed everybody to learn from it and move on.” The back and forth shattered what largely had been a nonaggression pact between the Democratic presidential hopefuls and could signal the beginning of a more confrontational phase of the campaign. The dispute is likely to gather steam this weekend, when 22 Democratic candidates converge on South Carolina to court the African-American vote and will be looking for a way to break out of the pack. Biden, who benefits from his standing as former vice president to President Barack Obama, leads both nationally and in the few polls that have been conducted in South Carolina, which is seen as particularly important for Sen. Kamala Harris and Booker, the major African-American candidates for the Democratic nomination. Harris also sharply criticized Biden for his remarks at the fundraiser. And any conflicts in South Carolina could carry over to the first Democratic debates just days later in Miami. Harris and Biden will appear on the same stage on the second night of the forums, which will take place June 26 and 27. The controversy erupted Tuesday after Biden recalled his interactions during his early years as senator from Delaware with the two prominent advocates of segregation. Sen. James Eastland of Mississippi, Biden said with a heavy Southern drawl, “never called me boy, he always called me son.” Sen. Herman Talmadge of Georgia, he added, was “one of the meanest guys I ever knew, you go down the list of all these guys” but “at least there was some civility.” Both senators were Democrats. Biden said Wednesday that the anecdote was meant as a way of saying that sometimes politicians need to work with those they disagree with. “We had to put up with the likes of Jim Eastland and Herman Talmadge and all of those segregationists and the fact of the matter is that we were able to do it because we were able to win,” he said at a fundraiser. “We beat them on everything. Everything they stood for, we in fact detested what they stood for in terms of segregation and all the rest.” Booker, who has languished in the low-to-mid single digits in Democratic primary polls, said earlier Wednesday that it was “wrong” for Biden to use the two late senators as “examples of how to bring the country together.” Biden’s comments about being called “son” and not “boy” by Eastland were also inappropriate, Booker said. Biden’s “relationships with proud segregationists are not the model for how we make America a safer and more inclusive place for black people, and for everyone,” Booker said. “You don’t joke about calling black men ‘boys.’ Men like James O. Eastland used words like that, and the racist policies that accompanied them, to perpetuate white supremacy and strip black Americans of our very humanity,” he said. Harris, a California senator, also took a swipe at Biden. “Let’s be very clear that the senators that he is speaking of with such adoration are individuals that made and built their reputations on segregation,” she said outside the Capitol on Wednesday. “The Ku Klux Klan celebrated the election of one of them.” Talmadge and Eastland were harsh critics of the landmark 1954 Supreme Court decision that outlawed public school segregation and also opposed civil rights legislation. Talmadge served for 24 years in the Senate until his defeat in 1980, and Eastland served for about 36 years until he resigned in 1978. Democrats have in the recent past criticized Biden for praising the late Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, another segregationist, as well as a string of Republicans who he’s described as decent people despite not sharing his political views. In February, Biden called Vice President Mike Pence a “decent guy,” but after complaints from gay rights groups, Biden tweeted that there “is nothing decent about being anti-LGBTQ rights, and that includes the vice president.” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, another candidate for the Democratic nomination, tweeted his own condemnation of Biden’s latest remarks, accompanied by a photo of himself with his African-American wife and children. “It’s 2019 & @JoeBiden is longing for the good old days of ‘civility’ typified by James Eastland,” de Blasio wrote. “He repeatedly demonstrates that he is out of step with the values of the modern Democratic Party.”

u.s .
congress
racism
joe biden
cory booker
segregation
james easton


Majority worry about foreign meddling in 2020 U.S. election, poll shows

Abstract: WASHINGTON - A majority of Americans are concerned that a foreign government might interfere in some way in the 2020 presidential election, whether by tampering with election results, stealing information or by influencing candidates or voter opinion, a new poll shows. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds Democrats far more likely to express the highest level of concern, but Democrats and Republicans alike have at least some concerns about interference. Overall, half of Americans say they’re extremely or very concerned about foreign interference in the form of altered election results or voting systems, even though hackers bent on causing widespread havoc at polling places face challenges in doing so. An additional quarter is somewhat concerned. Similarly, about half are very concerned by the prospect of foreign governments influencing political candidates or affecting voters’ perceptions of the candidates, along with hacking candidate computer systems to steal information. In total, the poll, conducted Thursday through Monday, shows 63 percent of Americans have major concerns about at least one of those types of foreign election interference, including 80 percent of Democrats and 46 percent of Republicans. The results make clear that despite the efforts of U.S. officials to ward off election interference and to urge public awareness and calm, Americans remain anxious that some of the same tactics Russia used to meddle in the 2016 presidential election could surface again in the next race. Those include the spread of disinformation online to sow divisions among American voters, and the hacking by military intelligence officers of Democratic emails that were then published by WikiLeaks in the run-up to the election. The efforts were aimed at helping Republican Donald Trump over Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, according to special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. “I think that it’s been pretty well-documented that people have been influenced in the past by social media,” said Luci Dvorak, 32, an Illinois teacher. She said she found it concerning that Trump has been “very casual” about getting foreign help and even seemed to invite it. Trump said in a television interview last week that he would be open to receiving a foreign government’s help in the next election. He slightly walked back those comments in a follow-up interview, saying that though he would want to look at foreign dirt on an opponent to assess if it was correct, he would “of course” also report it to the FBI or the attorney general. U.S. officials are on high alert to protect against interference like what occurred in 2016. FBI Director Chris Wray has said the bureau regards last November’s midterm elections as a “dress rehearsal for the big show in 2020.” He has said efforts to undermine democracy and influence public opinion through social media, propaganda and false personas have continued unabated and are “not just an election-cycle threat.” “We saw that, therefore, continue full speed in 2018, in the midterms,” Wray said in April at a Council on Foreign Relations event. “What we did not see in 2018 was any material impact or interference with election infrastructure or, you know, campaign infrastructure.” The decentralized nature of the country’s elections, which are run on a local level and rely on different and varied voting systems, would make it hard for hackers to cause widespread problems. But concerns remain: Russian hackers gained access to voter databases in two Florida counties ahead of the 2016 election. Federal officials are also conducting a forensic analysis of electronic poll books to see if Russian military hackers who targeted a software provider may have tampered with registration information to disrupt voting in a North Carolina county. The poll was conducted roughly two months after the release of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on his investigation into potential coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia. That report did not establish a criminal conspiracy between Trump associates and the Kremlin to sway the outcome of the election. It did not reach a conclusion on whether the president had criminally obstructed justice, citing a Justice Department legal opinion that says sitting presidents cannot be indicted. Trump has repeatedly said the report found “no collusion” and claimed vindication in Attorney General William Barr’s announcement that he found Mueller’s evidence insufficient to establish an obstruction charge. The poll shows about half of Americans think the Mueller report did not completely clear Trump of obstruction, while many also think it didn’t clear him of coordinating with Russia. Overall, 48 percent said they think the report didn’t clear Trump of obstruction, while just 20 percent think it did. Another 30 percent say they don’t know enough to say. Many Americans — 44 percent — also think the report did not clear Trump of coordination with Russia “It’s the twisting of the opposition party that’s given him all this static, where he’s not able to move or do what he’d like to do,” said 88-year-old Dennis Halaszynski, who is retired and lives in McKeesport, Pennsylvania. “They said at the beginning that he’s going to go to jail, and they’re doing their best to put him in jail,” he added. “He’s just not having the time, the proper time, to do what he’d like to do.” The AP-NORC poll of 1,116 adults was conducted June 13-17 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.0 percentage points. Respondents were first selected randomly using address-based sampling methods, and later interviewed online or by phone.

russia
republicans
democrats
donald trump
2020 u.s. presidential election


'Why not now?' for slavery reparations, House panel is told

Abstract: WASHINGTON - Lawmakers on Wednesday held the first congressional hearing in more than a decade on reparations, spotlighting the debate over whether the United States should consider compensation for the descendants of slaves in the United States. The witnesses at the House Judiciary subcommittee included actor and activist Danny Glover, writer Ta-Nehisi Coates and Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, a Democratic presidential candidate. Coates, who drew new attention to the issue with his essay “The Case for Reparations,” published in The Atlantic magazine in 2014, told the panel “it’s impossible to imagine America without the inheritance of slavery. “The matter of reparations is one of making amends and direct redress but is also a question of citizenship,” Coates said. But another writer, Coleman Hughes, who at times testified over boos from the audience, said black people don’t need “another apology,” but safer neighborhoods, better schools, a less punitive criminal justice system and better health care. “None of these things can be achieved through reparations for slavery,” said Hughes, who added that he is the descendant of blacks enslaved at Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello. The hearing comes amid a growing discussion in the Democratic Party about reparations. Several of the party’s presidential candidates have endorsed looking at the idea, though they have stopped short of endorsing direct payouts for African-Americans. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, who became the sponsor of a measure to study reparations after the retirement of Rep. John Conyers, said black Americans “are the only group that can singularly claim to have been slaves under the auspices of the United States government.” She said Wednesday’s hearing “is not a symbolic action,” but about legitimate legislation that should be signed into law. “I just simply ask: Why not and why not now?” she said to a packed hearing room. Visitors lined up to attend. Abibat Rahman-Davies, 20, from Southern California, said she was waiting more than two hours. “I think that this has been a part of history that we’ve ignored for too long so it’s very important for me to be here and to see this part recognized,” she said. While reparations has been moving toward the mainstream of the Democratic Party, the idea remains far from widely accepted, both among Democrats and the public at large. Booker, who testified first, said the U.S has “yet to truly acknowledge and grapple with the racism and white supremacy that tainted this country’s founding and continues to cause persistent and deep racial disparities and inequality.” “The stain of slavery was not just inked in bloodshed, but in policies that have disadvantaged African-Americans for generations,” he said. In a Point Taken-Marist poll conducted in 2016, 68 percent of Americans said the country should not pay cash reparations to African-American descendants of slaves to make up for the harm caused by slavery and racial discrimination. About 8 in 10 white Americans said they were opposed to reparations, while about 6 in 10 black Americans said they were in favor. Rep. Mike Johnson of Louisiana, the top Republican on the panel, said he respects the beliefs of those who support reparations. He called America’s history with slavery “regrettable and shameful.” But he said paying monetary reparations for the “sins of a small subset of Americans from many generations ago” would be unfair, difficult to carry out in practice and, in his view, likely unconstitutional. Rep. Steny Hoyer on Wednesday called reparations a “serious issue” and said he expects the resolution will see a vote in the House, but it appears to have no chance of advancing in the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday that he opposes reparations, telling reporters: “I don’t want reparations for something that happened 150 years ago. We’ve tried to deal with the original sin of slavery by passing civil rights legislation” and electing an African-American president, Barack Obama. “It would be hard to figure out who to compensate” for slavery, the Kentucky Republican said, and added: “No one currently alive was responsible for that.” Top Democrats pushed back Wednesday on McConnell’s comments, with one calling his remarks “sad.” Rep. Kathleen Clark, D-Mass., a member of the leadership team, said the country’s history of slavery is a “stigma and a stain” that continues to be felt today. That McConnell wants to “write that off,” she said, is ignoring the impact and legacy of the country’s history. “We cannot look to him for any sort of moral authority or guidance on how we should be addressing the issues of slavery and the impact today on income inequality, curtailing opportunity and civil rights and voting rights,” she said. House Democrats discussed reparations behind closed doors ahead of the hearing and the caucus chairman, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said setting up the commission to study what he called “one of the worst crimes against humanity” is completely reasonable. “Mitch McConnell has zero credibility on questions of racial, social and economic inequality,” Jeffries said. Republicans invited two witnesses to Wednesday’s hearing. One is Hughes, the young columnist who has rejected reparations and affirmative action. The other is Burgess Owens, a former Oakland Raiders football player and Super Bowl champion, who recently wrote a Wall Street Journal editorial eschewing reparations. “Proponents of reparations act as though black Americans are incapable of carrying their own burdens, while white Americans must bear the sins of those who came before,” he wrote. The debate over reparations for black Americans began not long after the end of the Civil War, and was long defined as financial compensation for ex-slaves and their descendants. Opponents of reparations often frame the issue as an unfair solution that places the blame or burden of the legacy of slavery on white Americans who were not alive at the time and were therefore not responsible. Supporters point to racial disparities across Americans society as proof that while whites living today were not responsible for what came before, they have nonetheless benefited, just as black Americans have experienced the lingering effects of the slave system. A resolution to study reparations was first proposed in 1989 by Conyers of Michigan, who put it forward year after year. The hearing Wednesday coincides with Juneteenth, a cultural holiday commemorating the emancipation of enslaved black people in the United States.

u.s .
congress
racism
civil war
slavery
cory booker
african-americans
reparations
mitch mcconnell


Labour's Jeremy Corbyn backs second referendum in Britain on any Brexit deal

Abstract: LONDON - British opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said on Wednesday it was “right to demand” a second referendum on any Brexit deal, his strongest backing yet for a vote he said must offer “real choices” for both those who want to leave and stay in the EU. Corbyn, an instinctive critic of the European Union, has been under growing pressure to back unequivocally a second referendum to satisfy many members and lawmakers in his party who say it is the only way to break the Brexit deadlock. He has previously showed his preference for a new national election, almost three years since Britain voted to leave the EU, which left both his party and the governing Conservatives deeply split over how, when and whether Brexit should happen. Corbyn has come under fire for trying to keep happy both the “Leave” and “Remain” sides of the debate by maintaining a deliberately vague strategy. His latest shift may ease strains for some, but for others, it will be too little, too late. Addressing his top policy team, Corbyn set out his position more clearly than before: “I have already made the case … that it is now right to demand that any deal is put to a public vote. That is in line with our conference policy which agreed a public vote would be an option. “A ballot paper would need to contain real choices for both leave and remain voters. This will of course depend on parliament,” he said in a statement. But in a sign that Labour’s discussion over Brexit is by no means complete, Corbyn also called on others in Labour and trade unions to express their views. “Then I want to set out our views in public,” he said. Corbyn, who led Labour to a much stronger than expected showing in a 2017 parliamentary election, has long wanted to move the conversation away from Brexit, seeing his anti-austerity message as a vote winner. But Labour and the Conservatives were punished in European elections last month, with many of their supporters either turning to a new movement led by veteran euroskeptic Nigel Farage or the pro-EU message of the Liberal Democrats. That result has prompted soul-searching, with many Labour lawmakers saying the only way for the party to recover is to embrace a second referendum and then campaign to remain in the EU. Earlier Corbyn’s spokesman declined comment when asked whether Labour would campaign for remain in any new vote. “As Jeremy said after the EU election results, he is engaging in a process of consultation on our Brexit position and that will continue,” the spokesman told reporters.

eu
u.k .
conservatives
labour
brexit
jeremy corbyn


Sudan's army calls for unconditional talks with protesters

Abstract: KHARTOUM - Sudan’s military council on Wednesday urged opposition leaders to resume negotiations on the transition of power, without preconditions, but the comments could further complicate the already stalled transition process as protest organizers continue their nighttime demonstrations demanding civilian rule. Negotiations collapsed in the wake of a violent crackdown of a protest camp in the capital Khartoum. At least 128 people have been killed across the country since security forces moved in to clear the sit-in area outside the military’s headquarters on June 3. Authorities offer a lower death toll of 61, including three from security forces. Gen. Abdel-Fattah Burhan, head of the council, told a gathering of health workers in Khartoum that the council did not have preconditions for returning to the negotiating table with the Forces for Declaration of Freedom and Change, which has represented protesters, so neither should the protesters. “I repeat our invitation to all political forces and the FDFC to come (for talks), and there is no need for preconditions. … We do not deny their role in the uprising and the popular revolution …, but the solution should be satisfactory to all Sudanese factions,” he said. Protests leaders could not be reached immediately for comment. Ahmed Rabie, a protest leader and spokesman for the Sudanese Professionals’ Association, said Saturday they would stick to their demands of an international probe, resumption of internet service and removal of all military and militias from the cities before talks could resume. The military council has rejected the idea of an international probe and said it had started its own investigation along with another one by prosecutors. Meanwhile, an Ethiopian initiative to resume talks apparently failed to make progress in the deadlock. A top general in the military council pushed back last week against a key demand from the protest leaders to have the majority in a transitional legislative body. The protest leaders also called for daily night-time demonstrations and marches on Thursday, saying they feared the military council intended to stay as a dominant power in the transition. Burhan warned of the possibility of another coup as the country “cannot afford being without a government” more than three months after the military ousted autocratic president Omar al-Bashir in April. “We do not want that things (to get) out of control. Another coup could be carried out because of the country’s impasse,” he said. The country’s ruler criticized the sit-in, which was central in Sudan’s uprising because it encouraged the military to step in and remove al-Bashir. “The political agenda were visible in the sit-in square. We have seen diplomats, intelligence agencies and suspicious groups. All of them were present in the sit-in,” Burhan said. He did not elaborate. Amid the political impasse, protesters took to the streets late Tuesday in Khartoum and elsewhere in the country in response to the FDFC call to pressure the military to hand over power. Protesters avoid daytime demonstrations for fear of being quashed by security forces heavily deployed in Khartoum. The Sudanese Professionals’ Association, which has been spearheading the protests since December, posted several videos and images it said were from different parts of the country. Protesters were seen shouting “Just fall,” which was the same chant used in the protests against al-Bashir.

sudan
omar al-bashir
abdel-fattah burhan
fdfc


Trump's coal-rich U.N. choice to step back from some climate talks

Abstract: WASHINGTON - President Donald Trump’s pick for ambassador to the United Nations promised Wednesday to allow climate diplomacy to move forward despite her family’s fortune in coal. Kelly Craft, at a Senate hearing to confirm her for the high-profile post that has been vacant for nearly half a year, said she would not participate personally in discussions at the United Nations in which coal is discussed. “I will give you my commitment that where coal is part of the conversation within climate change at the U.N., I will recuse myself,” she told Democratic Sen. Ed Markey, a leading environmentalist. “I understand that this is an issue that needs to be addressed. I also understand that fossil fuels has played a part in climate change,” she said. But she showed no daylight with Trump on his decision to pull the United States out of the U.N.-backed Paris climate accord, which covers virtually every other country, saying: “We don’t have to be part of an agreement to be leaders.” She also stopped short of saying she would step back from talks involving all fossil fuels, saying that she was still sorting out details of an ethics agreement. U.N. scientists say that the world must drastically curb its use of coal, oil and other fossil fuels by 2030 to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, including intensifying droughts, growing disasters and rising sea levels that could devastate low-lying areas. Craft, a longtime Republican donor who is married to billionaire coal executive Joe Craft, is serving as ambassador to Canada. Robert Menendez, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, pressed Craft at the hearing to provide records on how much time she has devoted to her current job. The news site Politico, quoting State Department records, found that Craft has been absent for more than 300 days since becoming ambassador, or more than half the time since her confirmation. Craft insisted at the hearing that she was hard at work and was regularly consulting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on a revised North American free trade pact. Trump’s first ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, left at the end of last year as her star power grows rapidly within the Republican Party. Trump chose Heather Nauert, a former Fox News anchor who was then the State Department spokeswoman, to succeed her, but the nomination was never formally submitted and Nauert withdrew from consideration.

climate
u.s .
u.n .
coal
climate change
renewables
environment
donald trump
paris agreement
kelly craft


Iran suspected as rocket strikes near foreign oil firms in Iraq, prompting staff evacuations

Abstract: BASRA, IRAQ - A rocket hit a site in southern Iraq used by foreign oil companies on Wednesday, including U.S. energy giant ExxonMobil, wounding three people and threatening to further escalate U.S.-Iran tensions in the region. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack near Iraq’s southern city of Basra, the fourth time in a week that rockets have struck near U.S. installations. A second rocket that landed in another nearby area did not explode, one official said. Three previous attacks on or near military bases housing U.S. forces near Baghdad and Mosul caused no casualties or major damage. None of those incidents was claimed. An Iraqi security source said it appeared that Iran-backed groups in southern Iraq were behind the Basra incident. “According to our sources, the team (that launched the rocket) is made up of more than one group and were well trained in missile launching,” the security source said. He said they had received a tip-off several days ago the U.S. Consulate in Basra might be targeted but were taken by surprise when the rocket hit the oil site. Iranian officials have made no comment about the attack but have strongly denied all other allegations against them of attacking energy tankers and facilities in the region. Abbas Maher, mayor of the nearby town of Zubair, said he believed “groups linked to regional powers,” a reference to Iran, had specifically targeted Exxon to “send a message” to the United States. U.S.-Iranian hostility has risen since President Donald Trump withdrew Washington from a 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and other world powers in May last year. Trump has since reimposed and extended U.S. sanctions on Iran, forcing states to boycott Iranian oil or face sanctions of their own. Tehran has threatened to abandon the nuclear pact unless other signatories act to rein in the United States. The U.S. faceoff with Iran reached a new pitch following attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf in May and June that Washington blames on Tehran. Iran denies any involvement. While the long-time foes say they do not want war, the United States has reinforced its military presence in the region and analysts say violence could nonetheless escalate. Some Western officials have said the recent attacks appear designed to show Iran could sow chaos if it wanted. Iraqi officials fear their country, where powerful Iran-backed Shiite Muslim militias operate in close proximity to some 5,200 U.S. troops, could become an arena for escalation. The United States has pressed Iraq’s government to rein in Iran-backed paramilitary groups, a tall order for a Cabinet that suffers from its own political divisions. Iraq’s military said three people were wounded in Wednesday’s strike by a short-range Katyusha missile. It struck the Burjesia site, west of Basra, which is near the Zubair oilfield operated Italy’s Eni SpA. Police said the rocket landed 100 meters from a part of the site used as a residence and operations center by Exxon. Some 21 Exxon staff were evacuated by plane to Dubai, a security source said. Zubair mayor Maher said the rocket was fired from farmland around 3-4 km (2 miles) from the site. A second rocket landed to the northwest of Burjesia, near a site of oil services company Oilserv, but did not explode, he said. “We cannot separate this from regional developments, meaning the U.S.-Iranian conflict,” Maher said. “These incidents have political objectives … it seems some sides did not like the return of Exxon staff.” Exxon had evacuated its staff from Basra after a partial U.S. Baghdad embassy evacuation in May and staff had just begun to return. Burjesia is also used as a headquarters by Royal Dutch Shell PLC and Eni, according to Iraqi oil officials. The officials said operations including exports from southern Iraq were not affected. A separate Iraqi oil official, who oversees foreign operations in the south, said the other foreign firms had no plans to evacuate and would operate as normal. A Shell spokesman said its employees had “not been subject to the attack … and we continue normal operations in Iraq.” Eni said its operations were also proceeding as normal after the rocket exploded “several kilometers” from its facilities. Wednesday’s rocket strike fits into a pattern of attacks since May, when four tankers in the Gulf and two Saudi oil pumping stations were attacked. They have been accompanied by a spate of incidents inside Shiite-dominated Iraq, which is allied both to the United States and fellow Shiite Muslim Iran. The attacks in Iraq have caused less damage but have all taken place near U.S. military, diplomatic or civilian installations, raising suspicions they were part of a campaign. A rocket landed near the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad last month causing no damage or casualties. The United States had already evacuated hundreds of diplomatic staff from the embassy, citing unspecified threats from Iran. Iran backs a number of Iraqi Shiite militias which have grown more powerful after helping defeat Islamic State. Iraqi officials say threats from Iran cited by Washington when it sent more forces to the region last month included the positioning by Iran-backed militias of rockets near U.S. forces. Rockets hit on or near three separate military bases housing U.S. forces near Baghdad and in the northern city of Mosul in three separate attacks since Friday. Iraq and Kuwait issued a joint statement during a visit by Kuwaiti ruler Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah calling for “wisdom” to avoid an escalation in the region.

conflict
u.s .
oil
iran
iraq
basra
exxonmobil


Iran says Revolutionary Guard shot down U.S. drone

Abstract: TEHRAN - Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said Thursday it shot down a U.S. drone amid heightened tensions between Tehran and Washington over its collapsing nuclear deal. The U.S. military declined to immediately comment. The reported shootdown of the RQ-4 Global Hawk comes after the U.S. military previously alleged Iran fired a missile at another drone last week that responded to the attack on two oil tankers near the Gulf of Oman. The U.S. blames Iran for the attack on the ships, which Tehran denies. The attacks come against the backdrop of heightened tensions between the U.S. and Iran following President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from Tehran’s nuclear deal with world powers a year ago. The White House separately said it was aware of reports of a missile strike on Saudi Arabia amid a campaign targeting the kingdom by Yemen’s Iranian-allied Houthi rebels. Iran recently has quadrupled its production of low-enriched uranium and threatened to boost its enrichment closer to weapons-grade levels, trying to pressure Europe for new terms to the 2015 deal. In recent weeks, the U.S. has sped an aircraft carrier to the Mideast and deployed additional troops to the tens of thousands already in the region. Mysterious attacks also have targeted oil tankers as Iranian-allied Houthi rebels launched bomb-laden drones into Saudi Arabia. All this has raised fears that a miscalculation or further rise in tensions could push the U.S. and Iran into an open conflict, some 40 years after Tehran’s Islamic Revolution. Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, which answers only to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said it shot down the drone Thursday morning when it entered Iranian airspace near the Kouhmobarak district in southern Iran’s Hormozgan province. Kouhmobarak is some 1,200 kilometers (750 miles) southeast of Tehran and is close to the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, citing the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, identified the drone as an RQ-4 Global Hawk. Capt. Bill Urban, a U.S. Central Command spokesman, declined to comment when asked if an American drone was shot down. However, he told The Associated Press: “There was no drone over Iranian territory.” Meanwhile, White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said Trump had been “briefed on the reports of a missile strike in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.” “We are closely monitoring the situation and continuing to consult with our partners and allies,” Sanders said. A Saudi-led coalition has been battling the Houthis since March 2015 in Yemen, the Arab world’s poorest nation now pushed to the brink of famine by the conflict. Saudi state media and officials did not immediately report a missile strike Thursday.

conflict
u.s .
military
drones
iran
iran nuclear deal


91,600 killed just in fighting during Yemen civil war since 2015, database says

Abstract: CAIRO - Yemen’s civil war has killed at least 91,600 people so far, a database tracking violence said Wednesday, presenting a new estimate after completing reporting for the first months of fighting in 2015. The conflict began with the 2014 takeover of northern and central Yemen by the Iranian-backed rebels, driving out the internationally recognized government from the capital, Sanaa. Months later, in March 2015, a Saudi-led coalition launched its air campaign to prevent the rebels, known as Houthis, from overrunning the country’s south. In the relentless campaign, Saudi-led airstrikes have hit schools, hospitals and wedding parties and killed thousands of Yemeni civilians. The Houthis have used drones and missiles to attack Saudi Arabia and have targeted vessels in the Red Sea. Civilians have borne the brunt of the conflict, which has created what the United Nations says is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project, or ACLED, said that in 2015, about 17,100 people were reported killed — the second-most lethal year after 2018, which was the deadliest one on record. ACLED said 11,900 people were killed this year, compared to 30,800 in 2018. The group said the Saudi-led coalition and its allies were responsible for more than 8,000 of about 11,700 deaths resulting from the direct targeting of civilians, while the Houthis and their allies were responsible for the rest. The group said it recorded over 18,400 killed in the southwestern province of Taiz since 2015, placing Taiz as the most violent province in Yemen, largely due to a four-year siege by the Houthis, the group said. Hodeida and Jawf followed Taiz as the next most violent provinces in Yemen, with almost 10,000 in total combat fatalities, reported in each region since 2015, according the group. ACLED said the U.N.-brokered cease-fire for the Red Sea port city of in Hodeida contributed to a partial drop in reported fatalities in recent months. That cease-fire has since crumbled. “These data are both a tool and a warning: the international community must use them to help understand, monitor, and ultimately resolve the conflict before the situation spirals even further out of control,” said ACLED executive director Clionadh Raleigh. The data cover everything from airstrikes, shelling and ground battles between the various forces to militant bombings and violence at protests. But their numbers do not include those who have died in the humanitarian disasters caused by the war, particularly starvation. Sam Jones, a spokesman for the ACLED, told The Associated Press that their estimates for civilian fatalities exclude “collateral damage,” meaning the total civilian death toll for the war is likely significantly higher. Jones said their figures also don’t include the first months of the war after September 2014, when the Houthis moved from their northern stronghold in Saada province to take control of the capital. The group, which receives funding in part from the U.S. State Department and Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, builds its database on news reports from Yemeni and international media and international agencies.. Also on Wednesday, Yemeni security officials said tensions flared on Yemen’s remote island of Socotra in the Gulf of Aden near Somalia, two days after forces backed by the United Arab Emirates stormed the office of Socotra Gov. Fahmi Mahrus. The officials said clashes erupted between Fahmi guards and forces from the Security Belt, a force equipped and trained by the UAE, wounding one from each side. They said the governor refused to unload an Emirati cargo vessel carrying weapons to the Security Belt forces. Troops loyal to Yemen’s internationally recognized government of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi took control of the port Tuesday and rebelled against the UAE-backed forces, according to a statement from Socotra authorities. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity under regulations. Hadi’s government is at odds with the UAE, formally an ally in the war against the Houthis. The Emiratis have been expanding their influence in southern Yemen. In the Shabwa province, officials and witnesses said clashes between the UAE-funded Shabwa Elite Force and other forces loyal to Hadi in the the city of Ataq, killed at least three troops and wounded five others. The officials said the clashes erupted after the Elite Force seized control of government offices and buildings in the city. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to brief media and the witnesses for fear of reprisals.

conflict
u.s .
yemen
saudi arabia
uae
houthis
abed rabbo mansour hadi


Tanker attack mine bears 'striking resemblance' to those shown by Iran, says U.S. Navy expert

Abstract: U.S. NAVY 5TH FLEET BASE NEAR FUJAIRAH, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES - The limpet mines used to attack a Japanese-owned oil tanker near the Strait of Hormuz last week bore “a striking resemblance” to similar mines displayed by Iran, a U.S. Navy explosives expert said Wednesday, stopping short of directly blaming Tehran for the assault. Iran has denied being involved in the attack last Thursday that hit the Japanese tanker Kokuka Courageous and also the Norwegian-owned Front Altair. The comments by Cmdr. Sean Kido came as the Navy showed reporters pieces of debris and a magnet they say Iran’s Revolutionary Guard left behind when they spirited away an unexploded limpet mine after the June 13 attack in the Gulf of Oman. Iran has also not acknowledged taking the mine. Kido also stressed that the damage done to the Kokuka Courageous was “not consistent with an external flying object hitting the ship,” despite the ship’s owner blaming “flying objects” for the damage in the attack. Meanwhile, a rocket hit an oil-drilling site in Iraq’s southern Basra province early on Wednesday, striking inside a compound housing energy giant Exxon Mobil and other foreign oil companies and wounding three local workers, one seriously, Iraqi officials said. The attack on the oil tankers came against the backdrop of heightened tensions between the U.S. and Iran that take root in President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from Tehran’s nuclear deal with world powers a year ago. Iran recently has quadrupled its production of low-enriched uranium and threatened to boost its enrichment closer to weapons-grade levels, trying to pressure Europe for new terms to the 2015 deal. In recent weeks, the U.S. has sped an aircraft carrier to the Mideast and deployed additional troops to the tens of thousands already here. Mysterious attacks also have targeted oil tankers as Iranian-allied Houthi rebels launched bomb-laden drones into Saudi Arabia. All this has raised fears that a miscalculation or further rise in tensions could push the U.S. and Iran into an open conflict, some 40 years after Tehran’s Islamic Revolution. The U.S. Navy briefed foreign journalists on Wednesday at a 5th Fleet base near Fujairah, an Emirati port city some 210 km (130 miles) northeast of the capital, Abu Dhabi. There, they showed journalists debris recovered from the Kokuka Courageous, which they described as including aluminum and composite metals. They also showed a magnet they described as being left behind by the Revolutionary Guard — one of six apparently used to stick the unexploded limpet mine to the ship’s hull. Sailors said it took two of them and a crowbar to pry it off the ship. Those pieces put together have U.S. sailors suspecting the limpet mine came from Iran. They showed a picture previously shared among weapons experts of a limpet mine on display in Iran, which they said resembled the one they suspected was used on the ship. That picture showed a conical mine, some 42 kg (90 pounds) in weight, on display with a sign next to it identifying it as being produced by a research company affiliated with the Revolutionary Guard. “The limpet mine that was used does bear a striking resemblance to that which has been publicly displayed in Iranian military parades,” Kido said. “There are distinguishing features.” Kido declined to elaborate. Iran’s mission to the U.N. declined to comment, referring reporters instead to remarks by Iranian Defense Minister Gen. Amir Hatami, who said allegations about Tehran’s involvement in the tanker attacks was an unfair accusation and “totally a lie” meant to tarnish Iran’s image. According to the semi-official Fars news agency, Hatami questioned the authenticity of a grainy video released by the U.S. following the attack and purporting to show Iranian Revolutionary Guard forces removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the tankers. “The date and the location shown in the footage have not been authenticated,” he said. The Americans “can show any footage … but it cannot be used as evidence.” The mines were placed above the vessel’s water line. One exploded, punching through the double-hulled ship and sparking a brief fire. The placement of the mines on the vessel makes it “not appear that the intention was to sink the vessel,” Kido said. “The damage we observed is consistent with a limpet mine attack; it is not consistent with an external flying object hitting the ship,” Kido said. Authorities also recovered a hand print and fingerprints, he said. “We recovered biometric information … which can be used to build a criminal case to hold the individuals responsible accountable.” He did not offer more details. The second vessel involved in the attack, the Norwegian-owned Front Altair, caught fire and sent black smoke up into the air that was visible from space by satellites. Kido did not explain why the U.S. had no immediate evidence from that vessel. Both are now anchored off the eastern coast of the United Arab Emirates. He also declined to discuss an earlier, May 12 attack on four oil tankers off the coast of Fujairah near the U.S. base, which America similarly blames on an Iranian limpet mine attack. Analysts also believe those attacks came from limpet mines. In Iraq on Wednesday, a Katyusha rocket landed at dawn in the Zubair and Rumeila oil fields camp, operated by the Iraqi Drilling company, where Exxon Mobil and other companies have caravans housing their workers, security official Mahdi Raykan said. Exxon Mobil, based in Irving, Texas, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In May, it evacuated staff from the West Qurna 1 oil field in Basra province. As Washington-Tehran tensions escalated, there have been concerns that Iraq could once again get caught in the middle between its two top allies. The country hosts more than 5,000 U.S. troops, and is home to powerful Iranian-backed militias, some of whom want those U.S. forces to leave. In May, the U.S. evacuated nonessential diplomatic staff from Iraq. That came before a missile landed in Baghdad’s Green Zone, near the sprawling U.S. Embassy. No one claimed responsibility for Wednesday’s attack and Iraqi oil exports were unaffected.

conflict
u.s .
gas
oil
iran
iraq
u.s. navy
shipping
exxon mobil
hormuz tanker attack


Belgium says it will work toward giving visas to once-missing Uighur family in China

Abstract: BEIJING - Belgium says it is working toward providing visas to a Uighur family that went missing after being escorted out of its embassy in Beijing last week under murky circumstances. The woman and her four children disappeared for weeks, alarming her husband, before reportedly being located back home in Xinjiang. An estimated 1 million ethnic Uighurs and other mostly Muslim minorities are believed to be detained in internment camps in the restive region. Abdulhamid Tursun, a political refugee in Belgium, said he has not heard from his family since May 31, a few days after they left the embassy. “I am worried about their safety,” he told AFP. “I hope they can safely come be at my side as soon as possible, and our family can reunite.” Belgium had said one of its diplomats would travel Tuesday to Xinjiang to ascertain the whereabouts of the family. The Belgian Foreign Ministry said Tuesday evening the family had been located in Xinjiang. “The goal of the mission has changed,” ministry spokesman Karl Lagatie told AFP. “Our embassy is still willing to travel to the region but to finalize the necessary formalities. Certain documents are still needed and must be in order,” Lagatie said, adding that officials were working on arranging the trip. The Belgian Embassy in Beijing has come under fierce criticism for allegedly enabling Chinese police to take the family back to Xinjiang, where they could face detention. “The case exposes the additional risk Uighurs in China face even if they want to seek help from foreign governments,” said Patrick Poon, China researcher at Amnesty International. “The Belgian Embassy set an extremely bad example of how governments put economic interests above human rights,” he told AFP. China’s foreign ministry and the Xinjiang government did not respond to AFP requests for comment. The mother, Horiyat Abdulla, and her children traveled to Beijing at the end of May to complete missing paperwork for their family reunification visas. Tursun said they panicked upon learning it would take at least three months for their visas to be approved and refused to leave the embassy. They were afraid to return to their hotel because police had visited them multiple times since they arrived in Beijing, he explained. “The police came in the middle of the night, asking why they came to Beijing, when they would return,” he said. “They were very scared, they didn’t sleep all night.” The embassy offered to accompany Abdulla and her four children back to their hotel, but they “refused to leave the embassy in a kind of sit-in,” a Belgian ministry spokesman told AFP. In an interview published Tuesday, Belgian Foreign Minister Didier Reynders told Le Soir newspaper the diplomatic police “asked the family to leave the premises” and the situation was explained to the father the next day. An embassy is not intended to “lodge people” applying for visas, he said. In the end, Chinese police escorted them away, the ministry said. “There was a misunderstanding about the procedures to follow,” Lagatie said Tuesday. He said Belgian authorities spoke to the Chinese about “following the correct procedure.” The family did not have Chinese passports when they first showed up at the embassy, Lagatie added. A few days after leaving the mission, Abdulla and her children were taken away by Xinjiang police, her husband said, and he has not heard from her since. The case highlights the barriers Uighurs face in attempting to leave China. According to human rights groups, authorities in Xinjiang have confiscated passports of Uighurs, making it difficult for them to join their relatives overseas. Abdulla applied for a passport in 2017 but never received one, according to receipts seen by AFP. Tursun believes that the family took a risk by traveling outside Xinjiang in the first place. “If my family then returns to (Xinjiang’s capital) Urumqi, it’s very likely that they will be sent to a concentration camp,” he wrote in March in an email to a non-profit helping the family with their visa application.

china
belgium
uighurs
xinjiang
abdulhamid tursun


2020 Tokyo Olympics ticket rules ban your content from social media

Abstract: Attention: Spectators at the Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics next year will be allowed to post their photos on social media but not video and audio. Many who learned they won the right to purchase tickets Thursday may not have noticed a clause on the official 2020 Olympics website that spells out the restrictions. “Ticket holders are not allowed to post videos and sound recordings taken at the venue on TVs, radios and the internet, including social media and other live streaming services along with other digital media, without prior consent from the IOC,” it said, referring to the International Olympic Committee. The revelation went viral, with many calling the ban “not fitting with the times,” and in the era of selfies, it won’t be possible to prevent everyone from posting photos and video. Similar policies have been in place since at least 2012. The organizers of London 2012 inserted a clause in their spectator policy prohibiting people from using images, video and sound recordings of the 2012 Games “for any purpose other than for private and domestic purposes.” “As the policies are put forward by the Organising Committee with review from the IOC, wording for ticket terms and conditions can vary between editions of the Games, but we can confirm that the policy around filming has remained similar for several Games now,” the IOC said in an email. While critics doubt whether the ban is feasible and in line with reality, experts say it is understandable for the Tokyo Olympics organizing committee to protect the high-priced broadcasting rights TV stations around the globe pay to air the games exclusively. “Profits from broadcast rights are needed to support sports global development and constitute an essential funding of the Olympic Games,” the Tokyo Organizing Committee explained in an email response. “If these conditions were not implemented, the revenue would plunge and would have a direct negative effect on the development of various sports around the world and on organizers of the games,” it said. The IOC has garnered $2.3 billion, including broadcasting rights, for two Olympic Games — the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi, Russia, and the 2016 Summer Games in Rio de Janeiro, the organizer said. Yoshiyuki Tamura, a professor at the University of Tokyo’s Graduate School of Law who specializes in intellectual property, said Tokyo’s organizers have ample reason to prevent others from profiting from the quadrennial sports event. “It’s obvious the IOC is concerned about its business,” Tamura said in a telephone interview. “If users kept releasing footage or recordings from sports competitions for free, the IOC’s high price tag for broadcast rights sold to media companies would no longer be justified.” But he was not so sure about another clause in the ticket policy. By applying for tickets, the policy stipulates the holder has agreed that the copyrights on photos, video and sound recordings taken at games venues belong to the IOC. This clause enables both the IOC and the TOC to demand that social media services remove unauthorized content from their platforms. But it also means users won’t have the legal right to freely share their content, including selfies. Generally, the copyrights for photos, video and audio recordings belong to their creators, allowing people to upload freely. Tamura, however, said the clause raises questions about the legal grounds for such restrictions. “I understand the rationale behind the IOC’s stance on protecting their profits but I also understand claims that rights to stream footage and recordings should belong to those who created them,” Tamura said. “It may become an issue, whether (the filming) restrictions apply to Article 90 of Japan’s Civil Code,” Tamura said. Article 90 stipulates that a juristic act, such as a contract, that is against public order and morals is void. This means spectators might be able to challenge the restrictions for the 2020 Games, claiming the agreement between the ticket holder and IOC is contrary to public order, Tamura said. Event organizers often prohibit ticket holders from filming or photographing events. Such regulations, however, are usually for concerts or other live events out of concern that copies of copyrighted works could be illegally distributed via unauthorized physical media or online for commercial gain. But sports events are less likely to contain copyrighted works or content, said Tamura. “Therefore, the clause demanding that spectators give up their rights to, and prohibiting them from sharing filmed or recorded content on social media, may become an issue,” he said. As of April, more than 4 billion people worldwide were believed to be active internet users and 45 percent of the 7.7 billion world population were recognized as using social media, according to Nielsen Corp., the U.S. data analytics company. Are such strict policies in the era of technological advancement needed? “It’s a difficult question,” Tamura said. “In the time before social media, selling broadcast rights to media organizations was an effective way to raise money needed to organize the games, but it is not working as it used to anymore,” he said. “We need to start seeking more effective, alternative ways of raising money, as opposed to relying on profiting from old-style content to make the Olympics happen,” he said.

internet
olympics
social media
2020 tokyo olympics


Emperor's succession rite to follow precedent despite constitutional controversy

Abstract: The government approved Thursday the outline of a ritual to be held this fall to proclaim the enthronement of Emperor Naruhito before international guests, following the style adopted by his father in 1990, despite a controversy surrounding the nature of the rite. In the Sokuirei Seiden no Gi enthronement ceremony starting at 1 p.m. on Oct. 22, the emperor will give a speech from a 6.5-meter-high canopied throne, known as the takamikura , and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will deliver a yogoto congratulatory message and lead guests in three banzai cheers to wish for the emperor’s longevity. The ritual, for which 2,500 people will be invited, has previously sparked controversy, with critics claiming the emperor’s proclamation from a height above the prime minister violates the constitutional principle that the sovereignty of the nation resides with its people. Emperor Naruhito ascended to the throne May 1, following the abdication of his father, Emperor Emeritus Akihito, on April 30. He was the first Japanese monarch to do so in about 200 years. Under the latest plan, the prime minister will lead the cheers on the floor of the Pine Chamber state room in the Imperial Palace, following the previous example of the enthronement of Emperor Akihito in 1990. “We will endeavor to make sure every ceremonial function is conducted immaculately and without incident,” Abe said. When the ritual was conducted in 1928 for Emperor Showa, the grandfather of the current monarch, Prime Minister Giichi Tanaka led the cheers in the yard of the Kyoto Imperial Palace. Emperor Naruhito will wear a dark orange robe called “Korozen no goho,” the design of which dates back to the ninth century and is only worn by emperors during important ceremonies. Abe will be dressed in a tailcoat. Following the 30-minute ritual, the emperor and Empress Masako will take part in a parade in the capital in a convertible luxury sedan for around 4.6 kilometers from 3:30 p.m. They will also participate in four banquets to be held on the same day and three other days. The government is considering holding the parade around Oct. 26 if it rains on the planned date. In relation to the previous imperial succession, a number of lawsuits contesting the constitutionality of the rites were filed across Japan. While all of them were dismissed, a 1995 Osaka High Court ruling said doubts remained over whether the staging of the enthronement ceremony breached the postwar Constitution, which bans the state from engaging in religious activities. The government also decided Thursday it will put the takamikura on public display for 20 days each at the Tokyo National Museum between December and January and at the Kyoto Imperial Palace in March. Entry will be free of charge.

royalty
imperial family
abdication
emperor naruhito


Revealed: What happened, physically, to the city of Hiroshima after the A-bomb

Abstract: Everyone in Japan knows what happened on the morning of Aug. 6, 1945. At 8:15 a.m. a nuclear bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. The city had been spared conventional bombing by the United States so that the effects of a nuclear weapon on an undamaged city could be assessed. The device detonated about 600 meters above the city. We know about the terrible effects of the blast, of fire and of radiation, and we know about the horrific cost on human life. At least 66,000 people were killed and around 69,000 more were injured in the explosion alone. The U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey mapped Hiroshima after the explosion and made calculations about the bomb’s yield and destructive capacity. You may have seen photographs of the city before and after the bomb, and pictures of the mushroom cloud rising over Hiroshima in the moments after the blast. But marine ecologist Mario Wannier made a discovery a few years ago that raised a chilling question no one had thought to ask. What happened to Hiroshima? Not what event took place on that day, of course we know that, but what happened, physically, to the buildings of the city? Where did Hiroshima go? The bomb exploded with a force equivalent to around 16,000 tons of TNT. About 70 percent of the city’s buildings were completely destroyed, with almost every structure in a 1.6 kilometer circle under the bomb completely obliterated. Only about 50 buildings of particular strong construction, such as the Bank of Hiroshima, remained intact. Much of the rest of the city was swept up in the vast mushroom cloud. Wannier had taken samples of sand from the Motoujina Peninsula, 6 kilometers south of the hypocenter of the Hiroshima bomb, and was examining them to assess the health of the ecosystem. But what he discovered were tiny glass globules, thousands of them. He took samples from other beaches on the peninsula and examined them using electron microscopy and X-ray analysis. An image of Hiroshima, destroyed after the nuclear bomb of Aug. 6, 1945, with the autograph of ‘Enola Gay’ bomber pilot Paul Tibbets. | VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS (PUBLIC DOMAIN) The glass globules were fallout debris. Wannier estimates that these particles make up around 2.5 percent of the sand of Hiroshima beaches. It is the city itself, torn up in the blast, melted in the inferno of nuclear heat, and scattered. It is now mixed with sand of the beaches. Wannier calls the granules Hiroshimaites, following “trinitites” the name given to fallout granules at the test site for the Trinity nuclear bombs in New Mexico. “Initially I was looking for microorganisms in beach sands as a proxy to gauge the health of shallow marine environments off the beach,” he told me. Instead he discovered a lost city. Wannier found granules of Hiroshima in all six beaches he sampled around Motoujina, estimating the mass of the fallout debris down to a depth of 10 centimeters to be about 36 metric tons for those beaches. He estimates that the total amount of the fallout debris comes to thousands of tons. “We have found fallout debris 12 kilometers to the southeast of the A-bomb explosion hypocenter, around Great Torii Gate, Miyajima island, and also some 30 kilometers to the northeast,” he says. “We assume that the distribution of fallout debris roughly matches the area covered by the atomic cloud.” Examples of the range of nuclear fall-out particles collected from beaches on Motoujima Peninsula, near Hiroshima. | MARIO WANNIER After the bombing of Hiroshima, and Nagasaki a few days later, the emergency responses were naturally focused on rescue and saving lives. Wannier and his colleagues, writing in the journal Anthropocene in April, reflect on the odd fact that no one had thought about what had happened to the city itself. “Somehow, in this situation of extreme emergency,” the authors write, “the question of the whereabouts of the vanished urban built structures was not addressed.” Their publication is the first description of fallout debris from a nuclear explosion in an urban environment. Despite the fact that a more powerful bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, the physical effects of the explosion were not as dramatic as Hiroshima. That’s because the blast at Hiroshima was kept in by the surrounding mountains. However, Wannier expects that if someone looks around Nagasaki they will find similar granules as he found around Hiroshima. “We have no samples from Nagasaki,” he says. “Based on the Hiroshima analogue, it is highly likely that similar melt debris will be found.”

wwii
history
hiroshima
nuclear weapons
atomic bombings


High-profile defector says Kim has shown 'great interest' in meeting Abe, but summit will come at a cost

Abstract: North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has shown “great interest” in meeting with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe — with a major caveat — one of the highest-ranking North Korean diplomats to defect in years told a news conference Thursday in Tokyo. Former Deputy Ambassador to the United Kingdom Thae Yong Ho, who has spoken out against the Kim regime since defecting with his family to South Korea in 2016, said the North Korean leader was open to a summit with Abe, but that Japan must first show that it intends to honor a 2002 agreement, citing economic or humanitarian aid as possible signals of Tokyo’s sincerity. “Maybe not this year, but in his (long-term) goal to become an influential leader in this region, he is willing to meet Prime Minister Abe,” Thae said. “There is no doubt about it.” In a dramatic shift, Abe offered early last month to meet Kim “unconditionally” in a bid to restore diplomatic contacts with North Korea. Abe, viewed by many as a foreign policy hawk, has recently softened his hard-line rhetoric toward Pyongyang, calling for a summit with Kim to resolve the issue of Japanese nationals abducted by North Korean agents in the 1970s and 80s in addition to Japan’s nuclear and missile concerns. “We can’t break the shell of mutual distrust between Japan and North Korea unless I directly face Mr. Kim,” he said. “I hope that he is a leader who can make a decision strategically and flexibly on what is best for his nation.” As one of the newest and youngest leaders in the Asia-Pacific region, Thae said that Kim believes he can only accomplish his goals, including his quest for legitimacy, by meeting the leaders of regional powers. The North Korean dictator has embarked on a coming out tour of sorts over the past 15 months, meeting with the leaders of China, South Korea, Singapore, the U.S., Vietnam, and most recently Russian President Vladimir Putin in late April. “Now he has met all of them except Prime Minister Abe,” Thae said, adding that while such a meeting would surely materialize, it would come at a cost. Pyongyang, he said, “strongly believes” that the Japanese government has “outstanding” issues that it has reneged on with the Kim regime. He pointed to the landmark 2002 Pyongyang Declaration, which was signed following the first-ever Japan-North Korea summit meeting between Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, the current leader’s father. In the declaration, signed in the North Korean capital, Japan pledged to give economic assistance to North Korea once bilateral diplomatic relations are normalized with the resolution of the abduction issue to atone for its past colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula. For its part, North Korea agreed to extend its moratorium on missile testing. Abe was the chief negotiator for the Japanese government on behalf of the families of abductees and, as a part of Tokyo’s effort to resolve the issue, accompanied Koizumi in 2002. “That’s why if Prime Minister Abe wants to meet Kim Jong Un, (the regime) thinks that the Japanese government should do something in advance to show the sincerity of implementing that … declaration,” Thae said. “If the Japanese government indicates any kind of economic or humanitarian aid in advance, then I think Kim Jong Un will take that offer,” he added. “But if there is not any immediate or upcoming benefit for Kim Jong Un to meet Prime Minister Abe, I don’t think Kim … will meet the prime minister in the near future. Japan, however, said in 2006 that North Korea violated that agreement when it fired a ballistic missile. Nevertheless, Thae said the question remains: What and when can Abe deliver to make any summit happen? Thae, who was making his first visit to Japan to promote the Japanese-language publication last week of his book, “Password From the Third-Floor,” also revealed that among North Korean diplomats, Japan is ranked as the second most difficult country to enter, after South Korea, where he and his family currently reside, and before Israel at No. 3. The United States, he said, ranked fourth. The book’s title is a reference to a secretive office on the third floor of the headquarters of the North’s ruling Workers’ Party of Korea, he has said, which is believed to be a “control tower like the South Korean Presidential Secretariat” and reports only to the leader. Thae’s remarks came as Chinese leader Xi Jinping kicked off his first visit to Pyongyang as president, in what has been widely seen as an attempt to push for a bigger role in stalled nuclear talks between the U.S. and North Korea. Those negotiations have been deadlocked since the second summit between Kim and U.S. President Donald Trump collapsed without a deal due to major differences over the scope of North Korea’s denuclearization and potential sanctions relief by the United States. China, the North’s top ally and economic lifeline, has urged the two sides to return to the negotiating table, and Xi’s visit — the first trip by a Chinese leader to North Korea in 14 years — will surely see the two sides discuss ways to kick-start talks with the U.S.

shinzo abe
north korea
kim jong un
abductions
north korea-japan relations
defectors


After trade feuds in Tsukuba, Japan faces uphill task at G20

Abstract: At the end of November last year, a high-ranking official at the Foreign Ministry looked deeply worried. Earlier that month, Beijing and Washington were bashing each other over trade, which left the member states of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum unable to issue a joint statement after their summit for the first time since the group was established in 1993. The diplomat was worried the same battle could occur during the Group of 20 meetings chaired by Japan this year, including the two-day leaders summit in the city of Osaka starting June 28. “China became supersensitive about the use of words,” said the government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in November. “The U.S.-China trade war has intensified. There will be big trouble if they are so defensive at the G20 meetings.” The official found his concerns had turned into reality earlier this month. On June 8 in Tsukuba, Ibaraki Prefecture, the G20 trade ministers got together for a two-day session to lay the groundwork for the Osaka summit. According to Japanese officials, China, the United States and the European Union continued their fierce war of words during marathon negotiations before and during the meeting while hammering out the draft of the joint statement to be issued afterward. Beijing and Washington vehemently opposed to the use of the phrases “unfair trade practices” and “fighting protectionism,” respectively. Neither appeared in the joint communique. In the past, those phrases were “almost automatically used” in joint statements to reaffirm the merits of free-trade systems, but those words have become untouchable now, another senior Foreign Ministry official in charge of economic affairs said. “We’ve entered a really difficult age. That has been proven at Tsukuba,” the official said on condition of anonymity. The joint statement issued for last year’s G20 summit in Buenos Aires also avoided the key phrase “fighting protectionism.” But “the trade friction between the U.S. and China is now fiercer than last year,” handing Japan a tougher task as chair of this year’s meeting, the official said. Thus Japanese diplomats are expecting a tough, long battle of words to ensue over the joint communique until the very last minute. The first official said the reality of the trade talks at Tsukuba was so harsh that the inclusion of any key phase in the joint statement might not make much difference anyway. “It’s true the phase ‘fighting protectionism’ was not included in the statement. But even if it was included, would it have any meaning now? It wouldn’t change (the behavior) of America anyway,” the official said. The senior diplomat also pointed out that the Group of Seven countries are likewise deeply divided on trade, in particular the U.S. and EU. “The G7 doesn’t include China so members can agree on issues related to China. But otherwise, they can’t agree because their own interests are involved,” the first official said. At the G20 trade session in Tsukuba, the EU strongly demanded that tougher wording against U.S. trade policies be included in the statement, the official added. In fact, the G7’s deep discord became apparent on May 23 in Paris at a meeting of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The OECD ministers issued a joint statement pledging to promote the use of artificial intelligence and digital technologies for growth but skipped any mention of trade. This is because the U.S. and EU were at loggerheads. The U.S. was threatening to restrict auto imports from the EU and the EU was refusing to start any negotiations on opening more of its agriculture market to U.S. produce. “Protectionism slows down the economic growth of the world and could pose grave problems,” warned Shujiro Urata, a professor at Waseda University Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies who is an expert on international economics. Major countries such as the U.S., China and Japan occupy a large part of the world economy and their responsibilities are “accordingly heavy,” Urata said, but “the U.S. doesn’t remind itself of its responsibility at all.” In the meantime, the ministry officials emphasized that the results of the Tsukuba meeting trade were “better than expected” for many other participating countries. According to the Tsukuba statement, “Many members affirmed the need to strengthen international rules on industrial subsidies,” a phrase that apparently refers to China’s much-criticized policy of subsidizing state-backed enterprises. The joint statement, based on the consensus of all G20 members, also said the group will work to “undertake necessary (World Trade Organization) reform with a sense of urgency,” although many members are split over how to do that and some were opposed to the inclusion of the sentence, the ministry officials said. Still, the wording used is rather abstract and the statement lacks specific measures or any road map to prevent protectionism, said Urata of Waseda University. As chair of the G20, Japan should have proposed concrete plans and used stronger wording in the chairman’s statement, which does not require the group’s consensus, he said. However, G20 summit sessions may be too big in the first place for any meaningful discussion to be held by top world leaders. In addition to the 20 heads of the member states, the heads of eight additional guest states and nine international organizations are invited to the G20 summit meeting. This means as many as 37 top leaders sit in one conference room for two days, with each of the 20 member states holding the right to veto any part of a joint statement draft, making consensus-building extremely difficult for the chair state, Japanese officials said. According to Japanese diplomats, there are effectively no “interactive exchanges” among the top leaders, as each basically gets the chance to express a view only once per agenda item during the summit . The individual presentations are useful to learn about the official stance of each country, but they are hardly present the opportunity to build a consensus. Instead, the marathon talks held by the working-level officials to draft the joint statement are a more substantial part of the G20 , the diplomats said. Urata of Waseda University concurred that the G20 is not a good place for consensus-building because it includes dozens of countries with conflicting interests. Still, the group is important because it includes fast-growing economies such as China and is perhaps the only forum where those kinds of countries and developed nations can form shared views of the economic problems confronting the world, he said.