The United Kingdom’s Labour Party has committed itself to abolishing private schools if it wins the next election. A measure approved at the party’s latest annual conference says “the ongoing existence of private schools is incompatible with Labour’s pledge to promote social justice.” The measure promised to confiscate private schools’ property, land and other assets and redistribute them “democratically and fairly across the country’s educational institutions.”
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ALhQ2J
via IFTTT
‘Croatian Elon Musk’ Unleashes 256 MPH Electric Hypercar With Nearly 2,000 Horsepower, Insane 0-60
31-year-old Croatian entrepreneur Mate Rimac – who has created batteries for companies such as Aston Martin, Renault and Koenigsegg – has built his own all-electric hypercar: the Rimac C_Two.
The beast of a car produces 1,914 hp from four permanent-magnet motors, which propel it to a top speed of 412 km/h (256 mph). 0-60 comes in a blistering 1.85 seconds (Tesla’s next-gen Roadster does 0-60 in 1.9 seconds). Perhaps even more amazing is that Rimac is a magician when it comes to battery technology – which gives the C_Two a range of 340 miles on a single charge.
Whereas Elon Musk’s Tesla batteries are known for high energy density (i.e. long range), Rimac’s forte is power—that is, battery and inverter systems that discharge and recharge at Zeus-like rates (hybrid cars recuperate power under braking).
On display in the factory’s modest reception area is the battery pack from the Koenigsegg Regera gas-electric hybrid supercar. This brick of circuitry is, Rimac claims, the highest power-density battery of its kind, capable of discharging at 500 kilowatts—about the output of a Dodge Hellcat at full honk—from a box weighing 143 pounds, about the size and shape of a sofa cushion. –WSJ
Last month, Porsche – VW Group’s luxury-performance brand – took another 5.5% share of Rimac, after buying a 10% tranche in 2018.
“I think [Mr. Rimac] is a genius,” said Heiko Mayer, powertrain project leader for Porsche’s all-electric Taycan – telling the Journal‘s Dan Neil “I think he is going to be a legend.”
DRIVEN Mate Rimac has been dubbed Europe’s Elon Musk. But his all-electric C_Two is built for speed as well as range (340 miles). PHOTO: RIMAC
Why are all these major brands coming to Rimac for his expertise? Niel asked. Rimac, in “impeccable, softly accented English” was quick to credit his staff. “It’s a lot of optimization, trying out things, experimenting, being fast, doing loops—idea, concept, simulation, detailed prototyping, again and again.”
OFF IN A DASH Along with being very fast, the C_Two will have all the bells and whistles, including facial recognition and Level 4 autonomy. PHOTO: RIMAC
Except, Niel noted, Porsche R&D does the same thing – to which Rimac “chose his words carefully” – saying that original equipment manufacturers (OEM)s have to be more “conservative on the technology side.”
An example is the new Porsche Taycan, which arrived with less range than the comparable Tesla Model S. “Tesla and [Rimac] both use cylindrical cells. But it’s much more difficult to build than with prismatic cells [like the Taycan’s], there’s many more parts, much more that could go wrong.”
Conservative is one thing Rimac isn’t. For example, none of the company’s technology is currently patented. “We believe that if somebody is that good that they can copy us, go ahead, man, you deserve it. We are so fast that we are already two generations in front before [we] can protect it.” –WSJ
None of Rimac’s designs are patented. To that end, he said “We believe that if somebody is that good that they can copy us, go ahead, man, you deserve it. We are so fast that we are already two generations in front before [we] can protect it.”
The man, the myth
When Rimac began his automotive endeavors, there were no automakers, or even component manufacturing, in Croatia. “When I started [in 2011], there was no outside investment,” he said. “nobody I could learn from, nobody growing a business. Even stupid things like finding a lawyer who could communicate to investors.”
“And absolutely no market, no companies I could hire from with any experience,” Rimac continued. “Nobody knew how to develop a chassis, develop a suspension, how to build up a crash test car, how to develop headlamps…”
In 2016, Rimac produced his Concept_One – which had 1,224 hp and waspromptly crashed by British presenter Richard Hammond on a Swiss hillside.
Now, Rimac has around 600 employees and has “thoroughly outgrown its facilities.”
A new campus will be built on 54 acres of Croatian countryside “complete with 15th-century castle, located a few minutes away.”
The new complex will have green roofs and farm animals—he himself is a vegetarian and hopes the animals’ presence will disincline meateaters—as well as outdoor meeting rooms, barbershops, restaurants, a kindergarten, and a hotel in the woods for guests. Along with R&D and component production, the facility will produce a small number of Rimac’s own hypercars, no more than three or four per month. “At $2 million per car, it’s not small business,” he said. –WSJ
That said, there are sacrifices.
“Is this all good for me? Certainly not!” said Rimac, smiling. “Doing something like this is sacrificing everything else. This is something I accepted. I don’t have time, for my friends, for myself.”
As far as Rimac and Musk? “I’ve never talked to him,” he said, adding “I would really like to kick things around.”
The United Kingdom’s Labour Party has committed itself to abolishing private schools if it wins the next election. A measure approved at the party’s latest annual conference says “the ongoing existence of private schools is incompatible with Labour’s pledge to promote social justice.” The measure promised to confiscate private schools’ property, land and other assets and redistribute them “democratically and fairly across the country’s educational institutions.”
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/2ALhQ2J
via IFTTT
The German carmakers finally broke their silence on Brexit last month. In a rare joint statement with car industry lobby groups from across Europe, they warned that a No Deal Brexit would have “seismic” and “devastating” consequences for the sector.
A German study released earlier this year predicted that No Deal could put as many as 100,000 jobs at risk in Germany – and that Wolfsburg would be among the worst hit cities. Already reeling from the Dieselgate scandal, No Deal is the last thing VW needs.
“We absolutely need a deal with Britain,” Hartwig, Erb, Wolfsburg’s most powerful trade union leader, told the Telegraph.
“There are no winners from a No Deal Brexit. The European economy will be weakened, but “There are no winners from a No Deal Brexit. The European economy will be weakened, but the effects on the British economy will be even worse. Donald Trump is not going to save you.” Donald Trump is not going to save you.”
No Winners
I agree there will be no winners, at least short-term.
Long-term, the UK will be a huge winner.
Brexit Propaganda
But note that myth again: “effects on the British economy will be even worse.”
The second half of that statement, “Donald Trump is not going to save you” is certainly true.
But the myths linger. Those myths are in reality nothing but propaganda.
Trade War Battles
For starters, exporters always get hurt more in trade battles, always. If you understand that key point you come to the correct conclusion without looking further.
The same applies to US vs China trade wars. China is hurting more, but China has far more pain tolerance than the US. And of course, loosing less is not winning, no matter what Trump says.
The EU in general, and Germany in particular depend more on exports than the UK. That’s about all you need to understand, but pain and remedies go well beyond that.
UK vs EU Remedies
The UK can lower corporate and personal taxes, which I believe it would do. Because of budget rules, the EU will mostly be stuck.
WTO tariffs will be uniform, but a lower pound will mitigate the UK export damage.
In short, the “UK will get hurt worse” is nothing but purposeful scare tactic propaganda.
UK reliance on EU food imports is a major risk if the country crashes out of the union. Walk into any British supermarket and you will be surrounded by European products, from Italian cheeses to French wines. Around 30% of all food consumed in the UK is imported from the EU, but for some foods, such as spinach and olives, the EU is practically the UK’s sole supplier.
With Boris Johnson claiming he will take Britain out of the EU by 31 October “do or die”, the UK’s reliance on EU food is a major risk. In the event of a no-deal Brexit, the UK would be obliged under World Trade Organization rules to impose average food import tariffs of 22% and conduct product inspections, leading to delays and shortening the shelf-life of products.
OK, 30% of UK food comes from the EU. There are other suppliers for most of that, but not some things like olives.
UK Obligations
The UK is not obliged under WTO rules to impose 22% tariffs on the EU. That is a purposeful Guardian lie. The UK can impose whatever tariff it wants, including zero, as long as it’s uniform.
And it can be one level for lamb or things that the UK produces, and another level for olives which it doesn’t.
One thing the UK cannot do is apply higher tariffs on the EU than it does other countries, but it is well withing the UK’s right to set tariffs at whatever level it wants, not 22%.
It is on this basis that that some UK farmers are afraid of Brexit, but the advantage to the consumer of zero tariffs is obvious.
Lose-Lose
Regardless of which “who is hurt more” story you believe, No Deal Brexit will be a lose-lose proposition in the short run, with some countries clobbered.
The two countries clobbered the hardest are undoubtedly Ireland and Germany, the former estimated at 4% of GDP.
That’s one hell of a hit. It would be up to Ireland to put in border controls because Northern Ireland wouldn’t.
It is on this basis I expect a deal, but one never knows in a game of “Chicken”.
Battle For The Arctic: Russia To Install New Missile Warning Systems To Monitor New Frontier
In a continuing story from last month, Russia continues to establish military dominance in the Arctic region, where $35 trillion worth of natural resources could be hiding underneath the ocean floor.
Two new early warning radar systems will be operational in northern Russia by 2022, the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation said, also reported by Sputnik News.
The defense Ministry said the Voronezh radar system would be installed in the Komi Republic and the Murmansk region in northern Russia. The radar systems are expected to become operational by 2022, will monitor Arctic airspace for ballistic missile attacks, and monitor aircraft in the region.
“Work continues on the construction of new radar stations for the missile early warning network in the Komi Republic and the Murmansk region. These works are planned to be completed in 2022,” the ministry said.
The radar systems have a range of 3,700 miles, enough distance to monitor planes in parts of Alaska.
Russia already has seven Voronezh radar systems in operation. By 2022, there could be as many as 9 to 11 across the country.
The first Voronezh system was constructed in Lekhtusi near St Petersburg in 2005 and was declared “combat ready” in 2012.
Here’s a list of the current operational Voronezh systems, along with ones that are in development.
Last month, we reported that the Russian Northern Fleet deployed a new S-400 Triumph system on the Novaya Zemlya archipelago in the Arctic.
Russia has been aggressively expanding its military presence in the Arctic in the last several years. It has also been increasing exploration activities in the region, such as oil and gas and mineral extraction.
Washington has widely criticized Moscow for its increased presence in the Arctic.
Responding to criticism, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Moscow isn’t intimidating anyone, noting that increased defense capabilities in the Arctic are to protect its assets.
Russia and China are establishing the “Polar Silk Road” in the Arctic as warming temperatures give way to new shipping lanes and economic opportunities.
The Arctic is home to at least 20-25% of the world’s untapped fossil-fuel resources, along with minerals, including gold, silver, diamond, copper, titanium, graphite, uranium, and other rare earth minerals.
Russia is aggressively militarizing the Arctic ahead of the next global military conflict that could involve countries fighting over Arctic resources. The first country to secure dominance in the Arctic could be the next global superpower.
In Sweden, discussing who is behind the current crime epidemic in the country has long been taboo. Such a statistic has only been published twice by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (BRÅ), in 1996 and in 2005. In 2005, when BRÅ published its last report on the subject, “Crime among people born in Sweden and abroad,” it contained the following note:
“Critics have argued that new results can be inflated, taken out of context and misinterpreted and lead to reinforcing ‘us and them’ thinking. There is every reason to take such risks seriously. However, BRÅ’s assessment is… that a knowledge-based picture of immigrant crime is better than one based on guesses and personal perceptions. The absence of current facts about the crime among the foreign-born and their children facilitates the creation and consolidation of myths. If crime is a problem in certain groups of the foreign-born, then the problems do not disappear unless you highlight them and speak openly about them. A correct picture of the extent and development of the problems should instead be the best basis for analyzing conditions and improving the ability of all residents to function well in Sweden, regardless of ethnic origin.”
Back then, apparently, the authorities still appreciated facts.
Twelve years later, in January 2017, however, Minister of Justice Morgan Johansson flatly refused to publish statistics about the ethnic origins of criminals in Sweden.According to Johansson:
“[Studies] have been done both in Sweden in the past, and there are countless international studies that all show much the same thing: That minority groups are often overrepresented in crime statistics, but when you remove socio-economic factors, it [the overrepresentation] almost completely disappears. So the political conclusions that I need to make, I can already make with existing international and Swedish studies.”
Johansson, who in addition to being Minister of Justice also serves as Minister for Migration and Asylum Policy, was not alone in his views. When Swedish Television asked the political parties in the Swedish parliament, the majority said that they did not think such a statistic was needed.
This summer, however, in the continued absence of any forthcoming public statistics on such an extremely important public issue, a private foundation, Det Goda Samhället (“The Good Society”) took it upon itself to produce these statistics in a new report, Invandring och brottslighet – ett trettioårsperspektiv (“Immigration and crime – a thirty-year perspective”). All the raw data in it were ordered from and supplied by BRÅ. The raw data from BRÅ can be accessed here.
According to the new report by Det Goda Samhället:
“For the first time now, more crimes — in absolute terms — are committed by persons of foreign background than by persons of Swedish origin… The most crime-prone population subgroup are people born [in Sweden] to two foreign-born parents.”
The report concludes:
“In the more than thirty years that the surveys cover, one tendency is clearer than all others, namely that the proportion of the total amount of crimes committed by persons with a foreign background is steadily increasing… During the first of the investigated periods, 1985-1989, persons with a foreign background accounted for 31 percent of all crimes. During the period 2013-2017, the figure had risen to 58 percent. Thus, people of Swedish origin now account for less than half, 42 per cent, of the total crime in Sweden, despite constituting 67 per cent of the population surveyed.”
In 1996, in its first report on the issue, BRÅ disclosed (p. 40) that, “The general picture from foreign studies of immigrants’ children’s crime is that they have a higher crime rate than first-generation immigrants. That is not the case in Sweden”. According to the new report, it is the case now, and that is perhaps the greatest indictment against Swedish integration policies of the past 30 years: the policies clearly do not work.
Another notable conclusion of the report is the increase in crimes committed by foreign-born non-registered persons in Sweden — these include illegal immigrants, EU citizens and tourists. The crimes this group has committed have increased from 3% in the period 1985-89 to 13% in 2013-17.
The report has largely been ignored by the Swedish press and political echelons, apart from a few exceptions, such as the local newspapers Göteborgs-Posten and Norrköpings Tidningar.
In Norway, recently, a report about the overrepresentation of immigrants and their descendants in crime statistics was ordered from Statistics Norway, by Fremskrittspartiet (FrP), which forms part of the Norwegian government. “We had known that immigrants are overrepresented in these statistics, but not [by] so much”said FrP immigration policy spokesman Jon Helgheim.
“For example, if we use the unadjusted figures… Afghans and Somalis are charged five times more for violence and abuse than Norwegians. Adjusted for age and gender, the overrepresentation is almost triple… Most immigrants are not criminals, but when the immigrant population is overrepresented in almost every crime category, then there is a problem that we must dare to talk about”.
According to Dagbladet, FrP has, for years, been calling for detailed statistics on crimes perpetrated by immigrants and children of immigrants. In 2015, the party commissioned data from Statistics Norway, but the agency refused to compile crime statistics based on immigrants’ country of origin.
Two years later, Statistics Norway published research showing that immigrants were strongly overrepresented in the crime statistics, but the report was not detailed enough, according to FrP, which ordered a new report, now available. According to Dagbladet, the new statistics “show that immigrants from non-Western countries are overrepresented in 65 out of 80 crime categories. In 2017, 7.1 per cent of Norway’s population were immigrants from a non-western country.”
According to Dagbladet, the new statistics also show that, “The largest overrepresentation [is] in violence and abuse in close relationships.”
“Non-Western immigrants and their descendants are charged with family violence eight times as often as the rest of the population. In total, 443 persons were charged per year on average during the period 2015-2017, [and] 35 per cent (155) of those charged were from a non-western country or had a non-Western background. Only half of those charged with abuse in close relationships were what SSB [the statistical bureau] calls the rest of the population… Africa, Asia, Latin America, Oceania except Australia and Europe outside the EU and the EEA are considered non-Western countries.”
According to Dagbladet, men from the Palestinian Authority and Somalia are charged with violence and abuse three times more often than Norwegian men.
FrP has been accused by its political opponents of ordering these statistics specifically for municipal elections that took place in Norway on September 9, 2019. Dagbladet asked Helgheim whether using these statistics was “cynical.” Helgheim responded:
“No, it’s not cynical at all. This is very relevant for the citizens to know something about. It would be a failure of FrP not to do everything we can to inform voters of what are realities and facts. Our opponents constantly criticize us for pulling the immigration card… I can find no explanations other than that those who do not want this to be known also do not want to know about the consequences of immigration to Norway.”
In Denmark, unlike Sweden and Norway, the publication of such statistics in itself is fairly uncontroversial. The Danish statistical bureau, Statistics Denmark, publishes them as a matter of fact every year and they are publicly available to everyone.
“The figures show that crime in 2017 was 60% higher among male immigrants and 234% higher in male non-Western descendants than the entire male population. If one takes into account, for example, that many of the descendants are young, and Statistics Denmark does so in the report, the figures are 44% for immigrants and 145% for descendants, respectively. If further corrected, for both age and income, of immigrants and descendants from non-western countries, the figures are 21% and 108%”.
As for the nationality of the criminal migrants, Berlingske Tidende reported:
“At the top of the list are male Lebanese who, as far as [their] descendants are concerned, are almost four times as criminal as average men, when [the figures are] adjusted for age. [That is] sharply followed by male descendants from Somalia, Morocco and Syria. The violence index is 351 for descendants from non-western countries. They are 3.5 times more violent than the population as a whole. Descendants from Lebanon have an index of violent crimes of 668 when corrected for age.”
Unless Scandinavian political leaders begin actively to engage with the facts that these statistics describe, the problems are only going to become more intractable — to the point where they might not be solvable at all.
I’m delighted to report that Prof. Andrew Leipold (Illinois) will be guest-blogging this week about his new American Criminal Law Review article, Is Mass Incarceration Inevitable?
The claim that American justice system engages in “mass incarceration” is now a cliché, albeit one that seems entirely justified by both the number and rate of people who are behind bars. As a result, a large number of states and the federal government have engaged in wide-ranging reform efforts to shorten sentences, divert people from prison, and in general reduce incarceration numbers to more manageable levels. Although these efforts have made modest gains, there has been little discussion of whether their ultimate goal is feasible-reducing incarceration levels to a point where “mass” incarceration is no longer an apt description.
This article explores the likelihood of a meaningful, sustained reduction in incarceration rates. It begins by asking what we really mean by mass incarceration and finds that while the definition is surprisingly complex, the label ultimately seems justified. Then, using existing and original compilations of data, the article examines some of the less-obvious obstacles to reducing prison populations. In particular, it highlights the difficulty of reducing incarceration rates without addressing the problems created by those convicted of violent crimes, something few reforms have been willing or able to do. It also argues that those who believe prison reform will lead to economic savings-a primary motivation in virtually every state-are misguided, and that illusion of economic savings might ultimately derail the reform efforts.
The article then takes a further step and suggests that efforts to decrease incarceration levels will inevitably be frustrated unless the most influential person in the creation of mass incarceration, the prosecutor, is induced to play a more central role. To date, reform efforts have routinely targeted everyone in the process except prosecutors, and this article offers both suggestions on why this is so and an argument for why prosecutors are an indispensable part of any change. The article concludes with the sobering prediction that, as useful as recent reforms have been, as currently constructed they will ultimately be inadequate to erase the mass incarceration label for years to come.
This is obviously an important and interesting topic, and I much look forward to Prof. Leipold’s posts.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/35e13mX
via IFTTT
I’m delighted to report that Prof. Andrew Leipold (Illinois) will be guest-blogging this week about his new American Criminal Law Review article, Is Mass Incarceration Inevitable?
The claim that American justice system engages in “mass incarceration” is now a cliché, albeit one that seems entirely justified by both the number and rate of people who are behind bars. As a result, a large number of states and the federal government have engaged in wide-ranging reform efforts to shorten sentences, divert people from prison, and in general reduce incarceration numbers to more manageable levels. Although these efforts have made modest gains, there has been little discussion of whether their ultimate goal is feasible-reducing incarceration levels to a point where “mass” incarceration is no longer an apt description.
This article explores the likelihood of a meaningful, sustained reduction in incarceration rates. It begins by asking what we really mean by mass incarceration and finds that while the definition is surprisingly complex, the label ultimately seems justified. Then, using existing and original compilations of data, the article examines some of the less-obvious obstacles to reducing prison populations. In particular, it highlights the difficulty of reducing incarceration rates without addressing the problems created by those convicted of violent crimes, something few reforms have been willing or able to do. It also argues that those who believe prison reform will lead to economic savings-a primary motivation in virtually every state-are misguided, and that illusion of economic savings might ultimately derail the reform efforts.
The article then takes a further step and suggests that efforts to decrease incarceration levels will inevitably be frustrated unless the most influential person in the creation of mass incarceration, the prosecutor, is induced to play a more central role. To date, reform efforts have routinely targeted everyone in the process except prosecutors, and this article offers both suggestions on why this is so and an argument for why prosecutors are an indispensable part of any change. The article concludes with the sobering prediction that, as useful as recent reforms have been, as currently constructed they will ultimately be inadequate to erase the mass incarceration label for years to come.
This is obviously an important and interesting topic, and I much look forward to Prof. Leipold’s posts.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/35e13mX
via IFTTT
The last four days have shown that the ongoing US-Iran war is acutely affecting the whole region. This is now evident in Iraq where more than 105 people have been killed and thousands wounded in the course of demonstrations that engulfed the capital Baghdad and southern Shia cities including Amara, Nasririyeh, Basrah, Najaf and Karbalaa. Similar demonstrations could erupt in Beirut and other Lebanese cities due to the similarity of economic conditions in the two countries. The critical economic situation in the Middle East offers fertile ground for uprisings that lead to general chaos.
Iraq has special status due to its position, since the 2003 US occupation of the country, as both an Iranian and as a US ally. Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi up to now has armed himself with article 8 of the constitution, seeking to keep Iraq as a balancing point between all allies and neighboring countries, and to prevent Mesopotamia from becoming a battlefield for conflicts between the US and Iran or Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Notwithstanding the efforts of Baghdad officials, the deterioration of the domestic economic situation in Iraq has pushed the country into a situation comparable to that of those Middle Eastern countries who were hit by the so-called “Arab Spring”.
Fueled by real grievances including lack of job opportunities and severe corruption, domestic uprisings were manipulated by hostile foreign manipulation for purposes of regime change; these efforts have been ongoing in Syria since 2011. Baghdad believes that foreign and regional countries took advantage of the justified demands of the population to implement their own agenda, with disastrous consequences for the countries in question.
Sources within the office of the Iraqi Prime Minister said “the recent demonstrations were already planned a couple of months ago. Baghdad was working to try and ease the situation in the country, particularly since the demands of the population are legitimate. The Prime Minister has inherited the corrupt system that has developed since 2003; hundreds of billions of dollars have been diverted into the pockets of corrupt politicians. Moreover, the war on terror used not only all the country’s resources but forced Iraq to borrow billions of dollars for the reconstruction of the security forces and other basic needs.”
A word on one of the dynamics behind the Iraq protests, namely: youth unemployment. In Iraq, 40% of the country is under 14, and 60% is under 25. Youth unemployment is around 40%. Changing demographics should keep policymakers up at night across the region. pic.twitter.com/NayNpIeR2I
“The latest demonstrations were supposed to be peaceful and legitimate because people have the right to express their discontent, concerns and frustration. However, the course of events showed a different objective: 16 members of the security forces were killed along with tens of civilians and many government and party buildings were set on fire and completely destroyed. This sort of behavior has misdirected the real grievances of the population onto a disastrous course: creating chaos in the country. Who benefits from the disarray in Iraq?”
The unrest in Iraqi cities coincides with an assassination attempt against Iran’s Soleimani. Sources believe that the “assassination attempt against the commander of the Iranian IRGC-Quds Brigade Qassem Soleimani is not a pure coincidence but related to events in Iraq”.
“Soleimani was in Iraq during the selection of the key leaders of the country. He has a lot of influence, like the Americans who have their own people. If Soleimani is removed, those who may have been behind the recent unrest may think it will create enough confusion in Iraq and Iran, allowing room for a possible coup d’état carried out by military or encouraged by foreign forces, Saudi Arabia and the US in this case. Killing Soleimani, in the minds of foreign actors, could lead to chaos, leading to a reduction of Iranian influence in Iraq”, said the sources.
The recent decisions of Abdel Mahdi made him extremely unpopular with the US. He has declared Israel responsible for the destruction of the five warehouses of the Iraqi security forces, Hashd al-Shaabi, and the killing of one commander on the Iraqi-Syrian borders. He opened the crossing at al-Qaem between Iraq and Syria to the displeasure of the US embassy in Baghdad, whose officers expressed their discomfort to Iraqi officials. He expressed his willingness to buy the S-400 and other military hardware from Russia.
Abdel Mahdi agreed with China to reconstruct essential infrastructure in exchange for oil, and gave a $284 million electricity deal to a German rather than an American company. The Iraqi Prime Minister refused to abide by US sanctions and is still buying electricity from Iran and allowing the exchange of commerce that is bringing large amounts of foreign currency and boosting the Iranian economy. And lastly, Abdel Mahdi rejected the “Deal of the Century” proposed by the US: he is trying to mediate between Iran and Saudi Arabia and therefore is showing his intention to keep away from the US objectives and policies in the Middle East.
US officials expressed their complete dissatisfaction with Abdel Mahdi’s policy to many Iraqi officials. The Americans consider that their failure to capture Iraq as an avant-garde country against Iran is a victory for Tehran. However, this is not what the Iraqi Prime Minister is aiming at. He is genuinely trying to keep away from the US-Iran war, but is confronted with increasing difficulties.
Video confirms that security forces are shooting live bullets and ammunitions at the protesters in #Baghdad and not toward the air, the security forces have killed at least 93 protestors so far since the beginning of #IraqProtests on Tuesday. #العراق_ينتقضpic.twitter.com/ya7m4LBXWA
Abdel Mahdi took over governance in Iraq when the economy was at a catastrophic level. He is struggling in his first year of governance even though Iraq is considered to have the fourth largest of the world’s oil reserves. A quarter of Iraq’s over 40 million people live at poverty level.
The Marjaiya in Najaf intervened to calm down the situation, showing its capacity to control the mob. Its representative in Karbalaa Sayyed Ahmad al-Safi emphasises the importance of fighting corruption and creating an independent committee to put the country back on track. Al-Safi said it was necessary to start serious reforms and asked the Parliament, in particular “the biggest coalition”, to assume its responsibility.
The biggest group belongs to Sayyed Moqtada al-Sadr, with 53 MPs. Moqtada declared – contrary to what the Marjaiya hoped – the suspension of his group from the parliament rather than assuming his responsibilities. Moqtada is calling for early elections, an election where he is not expected to gather more than 12-15 MPs. Al-Sadr, who visits Saudi Arabia and Iran for no strategic objective, is trying to ride the horse of grievance so he can take advantage of the just requests of the demonstrators. Moqtada and the other Shia groups who rule the country today, in alliance with Kurds and Sunni minorities, are the ones to respond to the people’s requests, and not hide behind those in the street asking for the end of corruption, for more job opportunities, and improvement of their conditions of life.
Prime Minister Abdel Mahdi doesn’t have a magic wand; the people can’t wait for very long. Notwithstanding their justified demands, the people were “not alone in the streets. The majority of social media hashtags were Saudi: indicating that Abdel Mahdi’s visits to Saudi Arabia and his mediation between Riyadh and Tehran have not rendered him immune to regime change efforts supported by Saudi,” said the source. Indeed, Iraq’s neighbours gave strong indications to the Prime Minister that Iraq’s relation Iran is the healthiest and the most stable of relations with neighbouring countries. Tehran didn’t conspire against him even if it was the only country whose flag was burned by some demonstrators and reviled in the streets of Baghdad during the last days of unrest.
Iraq Predictions:
Protests in Iraq will only get worse.
The authorities will have no answer.
They will continue to overreact.
Leadership in the opposition will emerge.
The opposition will become more political, violent, and international.
The critical economic situation is making the Middle East vulnerable to unrest. Most countries are suffering due to the US sanctions on Iran and the monstrous financial expenditure on US weapons. US President Donald Trump is trying hard to empty Arab leaders’ pockets and keep Iran as the main scarecrow to drain Gulf finances. The Saudi war on Yemen is also another destabilizing factor in the Middle East, allowing plenty of room for tension and confrontation.
Iraq seems headed for instability as one aspect of the multidimensional US war on Iran; the US is demanding support and solidarity from Gulf and Arab countries to stand behind its plans. Iraq is not conforming to all US demands. The Iraqi parliament and political parties represent the majority of the population; regime change is therefore unlikely, but neighboring countries and the US will continue to exploit domestic grievances. It is not clear whether Abdel Mahdi will manage to keep Iraq stable. What is clear is that US-Iran tensions are not sparing any country in the Middle East.
Airport Customs Agent Badgers Journalist; Won’t Let Pass Until He Admits To ‘Writing Propaganda’
A journalist for Defense One was badgered by a Customs and Border Protection individual while passing through Dulles International Airport on a return trip from Denmark – forcing the newsman, Ben Watson, to admit to writing ‘propaganda’before he was allowed to pass.
Of note, Defense One is rated as being “Least Biased” by Media Bias/Fact Check, and publishes “well written, well sourced, and highly factual” articles.
Read below for an account of the incident by Defense One‘s Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston.
***
A U.S. passport screening official held a Defense One journalist’s passport until he received an affirmative answer to this repeated question: “You write propaganda, right?”
The incident took place about 4 p.m. on Thursday at Dulles International Airport. News Editor Ben Watson was returning from an assignment in Denmark when he entered permanent resident reentry aisle No. 17 at Dulles. After the Customs and Border Protection official asked the usual question about undeclared fruit or meat, the interaction took an unusual and unsettling turn.
Watson recalls the conversation:
CBP officer, holding Watson’s passport: “What do you do?”
Watson: “Journalism.”
CBP officer:“So you write propaganda, right?”
Watson: “No.”
CBP officer:“You’re a journalist?”
Watson: “Yes.”
CBP officer:“You write propaganda, right?”
Watson: “No. I am in journalism. Covering national security. And homeland security. And with many of the same skills I used in the U.S. Army as a public affairs officer. Some would argue that’s propaganda.”
CBP officer: “You’re a journalist?”
Watson: “Yes.”
CBP officer:“You write propaganda, right?”
Watson waited five seconds. Then: “For the purposes of expediting this conversation, yes.”
CBP officer, a fourth time: “You write propaganda, right?”
Watson, again: “For the purposes of expediting this conversation, yes.”
CBP officer: “Here you go.”
At that point, the CBP officer handed back the passport.
The CBP official’s behavior appeared to violate the spirit, and possibly the letter, of DHS’s internal Directive 0480.1, “Ethics/Standards of Conduct”; DHS Code of Conduct § 102-74.445; and possibly U.S. Customs and Border Protection Directive 51735-013A, “Standards of Conduct.”
Update: In an email, a CBP spokesperson said that the agency is aware of and is investigating the “allegation about an officer’s alleged inappropriate conduct at Washington Dulles International airport,” adding that the agency holds its employees accountable and does not tolerate inappropriate comments or behavior. The spokesperson declined to be identified.
In a separate email, a DHS spokesperson said that the agency’s Civil Rights and Civil Liberties office has “received the information and is reviewing it.” The spokesperson declined to be identified.
Over the past year, several journalists have reported being harassed and even detained by U.S. customs agents. In February, CBP officials apologized to a BuzzFeed reporter who was aggressively questioned upon entering New York’s JFK Airport. In June, freelance reporter Seth Harp described his hours-long detention by CBP officers in the Austin, Texas, airport. In August, British journalist James Dyer said he was harassed as “fake news” by a CBP agent at Los Angeles International Airport. “He wanted to know if I’d ever worked for CNN or MSNBC or other outlets that are ‘spreading lies to the American people,’ ” he tweeted, per a Washington Poststory that links to other instances of CBP harassment of journalists.
The Post also noted that in April, the United States’ ranking in the annual World Freedom Press Index dropped for a third year in a row. It classified the treatment of journalists in the United States as “problematic,” a first in the 17 years the report has been issued. The report’s authors attributed the decline “to President Trump’s anti-press rhetoric and continuing threats to journalists,” the Postreported at the time. Watson, who writes the D Brief newsletter and produces the Defense One Radio podcast, said that he’d never before encountered a CBP officer who’d tried to extract a statement in this way. And he noted that the incident was particularly striking in the wake of his reporting trip, during which Danish officials had voiced concerns about a global decline in respect for and adherence to a rules-based order, beginning in the United States.
