| Labour Hits Past and Present Foes in Reversing Thatcher Reforms Posted: 03 Dec 2019 04:01 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- Britain's upcoming election has revived a political and economic debate that many considered to have been won decades ago -- whether nationalization works.The opposition Labour Party has pledged to bring rail, water, energy distribution, the postal service and -- in an announcement last month that shocked investors -- BT Group Plc's broadband network under public control. The aim is to reverse much of privatization wave unleashed by Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government in the 1980s.While opinion polls suggest Labour is unlikely to win the Dec. 12 vote, which is largely focused on Brexit, they also show the public tend to agree with party leader Jeremy Corbyn. They see poor rail service despite rapidly rising fares, slow internet speeds and limited access in remote areas, and the shambolic performance of the Royal Mail after it was sold to the private sector.Moreover, it isn't obvious that the U.K. has better service in these areas than other European countries with higher public ownership."It's important to take a step back and recognize how unusual the U.K. is," said Laurie Macfarlane at the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose. Industries like water and mail in public hands is "absolutely standard in a northern European social democracy."Corbyn's plans have, however, been seized on by Prime Minister Boris Johnson's ruling Conservatives as an example of Labour's unsuitability for government. They've also prompted howls of dismay from business groups and free-market advocates who may have thought the argument long settled.Price Tag"Nationalized industries are not just extremely expensive, but will provide an extremely bad quality service to its customers," said Matthew Lesh, head of research at the Adam Smith Institute. "They don't get the investment they need from government to keep them up to date."Much of the discourse during the election campaign has focused on the cost of Corbyn's plans, rather than their economic viability.The Confederation of British Industry estimates an "eye-watering" price tag of almost 200 billion pounds ($258 billion), which has been countered by a 50 billion-pound figure from the University of Greenwich.The second study, which put the difference down to basing its calculation on "compensating shareholders the exact money they invested, rather than paying 'market values'," also said the cost would be recouped within seven years thanks to the 7.8 billion pounds of savings it would bring.Some point out that low borrowing costs are a reason why now might be a good time to pursue the policy and that the state will receive valuable assets in return.To people on both sides of the debate, though, the relentless discussion of costs misses the point. What matters, they say, is whichever system best serves the economy."This should not be based on ideology," said John Weeks of the Department of Development Studies, SOAS, and author of The Debt Delusion. "It should be based on whether the private sector can carry the activity out more effectively than the public sector."That approach reflects the fundamental theory behind nationalization, that the government should own industries that are natural monopolies, such as rail or power lines where side-by-side competition doesn't make sense. The idea is to protect consumers by keeping prices down or ensuring that the profits from public goods accrue to taxpayers instead of shareholders.The Labour Party's constitution called for common ownership of industry for much of the 20th Century, until Tony Blair altered the famous Clause IV provision in 1995.Speaking to the CBI conference last month, Corbyn focused on the benefits to consumers, saying the U.K. had "been failed by rip-off energy bills and poor rail" services. On Monday, the party said it would cut fares by 33% under a publicly owned rail system.Nationalized SuccessesAdvocates of public control point to Scottish Water, a rare example of a still-nationalized operator in the industry and the most trusted utility company in the U.K., according to the We Own It lobby group. Meanwhile, European rail and Danish wind power are also cited as evidence of effective nationalized industries.Moves away from nationalization haven't been universally successful. A privatization of the prison probation service this decade was quickly reversed, while railways have been beset by increasing customer dissatisfaction, with one contract forced to be taken back into public hands.Tony Lodge, a rail expert, research fellow at the Center of Policy Studies and former Conservative adviser, holds government policy responsible. He advocates a purer implementation of privatization, opening up routes to multiple operators to allow for greater competition, and says that renationalization would be a "disaster."Opponents of nationalization also warn that public control could sap investment, and that such companies could become subsumed to political rather than customer-oriented goals. Bringing industries back into public hands would inevitably be complex, throwing up a myriad of negotiations over what compensation shareholders would receive.Efficiency DebateAcademic debate has also centered around the relative efficiency of both systems. A 2001 review of studies of privatization, published in the Journal of Economic Literature, found it tended to work because "firms become more efficient, more profitable, and financially healthier."However, a 2014 study by David Hall, who also carried out the University of Greenwich research, concluded there is "no empirical evidence that the private sector is intrinsically more efficient."Either way, public support for nationalization remains high. A 2017 YouGov survey showed 65% wanted the Royal Mail to be taken into public hands, with support around 60% for rail and water. That means the issue will probably live on regardless of how well Labour does in next week's election."A simple reinvention of old nationalized industries might be good politics but it is poor economics," Vince Cable, a Liberal Democrat who served as business secretary in the the Conservative-led coalition government between 2010 and 2015, wrote in the Independent last month. "It will cost a great deal and achieve very little."To contact the reporter on this story: David Goodman in London at dgoodman28@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Paul Gordon at pgordon6@bloomberg.net, ;Fergal O'Brien at fobrien@bloomberg.net, Brian Swint, Andrew AtkinsonFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Persistent Carbon Emissions Signal Global Climate Goal Is Out of Reach Posted: 03 Dec 2019 04:01 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- While global carbon emissions growth is slowing, the persistent rise is a warning that governments aren't doing enough to stave off the worst consequences of climate change, according to a new report.Carbon-dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels likely increased by 0.6% this year, down from 2.1% in 2018, according to a report from the Australia-based Global Carbon Project. Declines in the U.S. and Europe were offset by increases in the fast-growing economies of China and India, it said."Current climate and energy policies are not enough to reverse the trends in global emissions," the report's authors said in a press release. "Continued support for low-carbon technologies need to be combined with policies directed at phasing out the use of fossil fuels."The warning comes as envoys from nearly 200 countries gather this week for United Nations-organized climate talks, aimed at implementing the 2015 Paris Agreement to limit fossil fuel pollution, and as a global protest movement calling for tougher action on climate change gathers momentum.But increasingly dire estimates about the pace of climate change are leading to calls for more extreme solutions than the actions that nations have already committed to."Every single additional year of emissions growth makes it significantly harder to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement," Pep Canadell, GCP's executive director, said in a briefing before the release of the report.Rising natural gas use was the most-important driver of emissions growth in 2019, Canadell said, raising questions over the industry's claim that the fuel serves as a bridge between dirtier coal and cleaner renewables."It may be a bridge, but a bridge that is not going to lead us into the Paris Agreement targets," Canadell said.The slowdown in global emissions growth was significant, Canadell said. Given the margin of error in the projection, an actual decline could not be ruled out, he added.Coal use accounted for 42% of global emissions from fossil fuels, but its importance in power generation is on the wane. In the U.S., an abundant supply of cheap natural gas is helping accelerate the transition away from the dirtiest fuel.China's emissions growth is projected at 2.6% this year, similar to the pace in 2017 and 2018. India's increase is expected to ease to around 1.8% from 8% last year, due to an economic slowdown and a particularly wet monsoon season, which saw strong hydropower generation displace some coal-fired generation."The failure to mitigate global emissions, despite positive progress on so many aspects of climate policy, suggests that the full bag of policy options is not being effectively deployed," the report said.To contact the reporter on this story: James Thornhill in Sydney at jthornhill3@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Ramsey Al-Rikabi at ralrikabi@bloomberg.net, Rob VerdonckFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Intelligence Panel Adopts Democrats’ Report: Impeachment Update Posted: 03 Dec 2019 03:56 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- The House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday released its report on the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump, a day before the House Judiciary Committee holds its first hearing on constitutional issues. The report is here.Here are the latest developments:Intelligence Panel Adopts Democrats' Report (6:54 p.m.)The Intelligence Committee adopted the Democratic majority's report on a party-line 13-9 vote Tuesday evening. Committee Republicans will have two days to submit their version, and after that Chairman Adam Schiff will send the material to the Judiciary Committee. Records of Giuliani Calls Cited in Report (3:28 p.m.)The report puts Trump personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani at the center of a scheme to force out the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and pressure that country's government to investigate Joe Biden's family and a conspiracy theory that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.The House obtained AT&T call records showing Giuliani in contact with phone numbers associated with the White House, the Office of Management and Budget, top Intelligence Committee Republican Devin Nunes, and Giuliani associate Lev Parnas. The report doesn't say who in the White House or OMB participated in the calls.The calls and texts were made during the time period when Giuliani was publicly discussing his efforts to pursue investigations into the Bidens and a conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff said the call records show that "there was considerable coordination among the parties including the White House" in a smear campaign against then-U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.The committee also found Giuliani in contact on Aug. 8 with phone numbers associated with the White House amid negotiations with Ukrainian officials about announcing investigations. The records also showed European Union Ambassador Gordon Sondland in contact with White House and OMB phone numbers on Aug. 9.One of the Sondland calls came minutes before a text message he sent saying that he thought Trump strongly wanted the "deliverable." Sondland later said that referred to an announcement by Ukraine of investigations sought by Trump and Giuliani.McConnell Seeks Bipartisan Plan for Trial (3:03 p.m.)Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters he will seek to reach an agreement with top Democrat Chuck Schumer on procedures for any impeachment trial of Trump.If that option fails, McConnell said, he'll work toward an agreement among Senate Republicans, who could use their majority to set the ground rules.Schumer said he hasn't discussed the matter with McConnell but he hopes for a bipartisan solution. -- Teaganne FinnTrump Aides Helped With Scheme, Report Says (2:40 p.m.)The report implicates Trump's executive branch subordinates in helping to further his Ukraine "scheme."It said his "closest subordinates and advisers," including acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, then-Energy Secretary Rick Perry and other officials, "had knowledge of, in some cases facilitated and furthered the president's scheme, and withheld information about the scheme from the Congress and the American public," the report states. -- Billy HouseWhite House Says No Evidence of Misconduct (2:29 p.m.)White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham said in a statement, "The Democrats utterly failed to produce any evidence of wrongdoing by President Trump.""This report reflects nothing more than their frustrations," Grisham said. "Chairman Schiff's report reads like the ramblings of a basement blogger straining to prove something when there is evidence of nothing."Chairmen Say Decision Is Up to Congress (2:14 p.m.)Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney and Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel said in a joint statement that "it will be up to the Congress to determine whether these acts rise to the level of an impeachable offense."The impeachment report said that Trump "became the author of his own impeachment inquiry" by "doubling down on his misconduct" and declaring that his July 25 call with Ukraine's president was "perfect." -- Billy HouseReport Cites 'Clear and Present Danger' (2:06 p.m.)Among its "key findings of fact," the report said that "faced with the revelation of his actions, President Trump publicly and repeatedly persisted in urging foreign governments, including Ukraine and China, to investigate his political opponent.""This continued solicitation of foreign interference in a U.S. election presents a clear and present danger that the president will continue to use the power of his office for his personal political gain," it said. -- Billy HouseTrump Harmed National Security, Report Says (1:59 p.m.)Trump compromised national security and intimidated and tampered with actual and prospective witnesses, the impeachment report said.The inquiry "uncovered a months-long effort by President Trump to use the powers of his office to solicit foreign interference on his behalf in the 2020 election," the report said."Using the power of the office of the president, and exercising his authority over the executive branch, President Trump ordered and implemented a campaign to conceal his conduct from the public and frustrate and obstruct the House of Representatives' impeachment inquiry," it said. -- Billy HouseIntelligence Panel Releases Trump Report (1:52 p.m.)The House Intelligence Committee released its report on the investigation of Trump's dealings with Ukraine. The report is here.Trump Says He Wants Top Officials to Testify (11:05 a.m.)Trump said he wants top administration officials including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to testify in the impeachment inquiry, but only during a Senate trial."I want them to testify but I want them to testify in the Senate," Trump told reporters during a meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on the sidelines of a NATO summit in London on Tuesday.Trump has refused to allow administration officials to testify to House committees conducting the inquiry.Trudeau sat quietly for several minutes as Trump angrily defended himself, again insisting that his July 25 call with Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Zelenskiy was "perfect." The call touched off a whistle-blower complaint that Trump had abused his power by asking Zelenskiy to investigate his political rivals.The president lashed out again at House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff, who is leading the current phase of the probe, calling him a "maniac" and a "deranged human being." -- Jordan FabianDemocrats Take Aim at Trump Defense (11:05 a.m.)Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee took aim at key elements of Trump's potential impeachment defense, including the claim by some Republicans that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 U.S. election.During a hearing on U.S. policy toward Russia, top committee Democrat Bob Menendez asked State Department official David Hale, "Are you aware of any evidence Ukraine interfered in the 2016 U.S. election?""I am not," Hale said, adding later that it would be to Russian President Vladimir Putin's advantage to push the narrative that Ukraine, not Russia, meddled in the U.S. vote.Hale also told Senator Ben Cardin, a Maryland Democrat, that Russia is continuing to try to interfere in U.S. elections.Senator Chris Murphy, who traveled to Ukraine earlier this year, asked Hale whether it was U.S. policy to investigate cybersecurity company CrowdStrike or the connections of former Vice President Joe Biden's family to Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings, as Trump pressed Ukraine's president to do.Murphy of Connecticut also asked Hale whether Trump's personal attorney Rudy Giuliani was currently involved in any diplomatic discussions with Ukraine. Hale said Giuliani was not."Part of the defense of the president's actions will be that those requests were in fact appropriate," Murphy said. "It's relevant that since the uncovering of those demands have been made, they are no longer part of official U.S. policy." -- Daniel FlatleyWhite House Counsel to Join Senate GOP Lunch (10:13 a.m.)White House Counsel Pat Cipollone plans to join Senate Republicans during their lunch meeting on Wednesday, the same day the House Judiciary Committee will hold its first hearing on the impeachment inquiry."As part of an ongoing effort to keep Senate Republicans informed about White House thinking, White House Counsel Pat Cipollone will attend this Wednesday's steering lunch," said Conn Carroll, a spokesman for Senator Mike Lee of Utah.Cipollone has been playing a leading role in reaching out to senators in recent weeks, including a meeting late last month at the White House with Senate GOP allies of Trump to discuss how long an impeachment trial might last. Those attending included Senators John Kennedy of Louisiana, Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Ted Cruz of Texas.Cipollone previously informed House Democrats that Trump's team wouldn't take part in the initial hearing. -- Laura LitvanCatch Up on Impeachment CoverageKey EventsThe House Judiciary Committee will hear on Wednesday from Harvard law professor Noah Feldman, Stanford law professor Pamela Karlan, University of North Carolina law professor Michael Gerhardt and George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley. Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist.A report by GOP lawmakers said the Democratic-led House investigation of Trump failed to establish any impeachable offenses and instead paints a picture of "unelected bureaucrats" disagreeing with the president's style, world view and foreign policy decisions.Gordon Sondland's transcript is here and here; Kurt Volker's transcript is here and here. Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch's transcript is here and here; the transcript of Michael McKinley, former senior adviser to the secretary of State, is here. The transcript of Holmes, a Foreign Service officer in Kyiv, is here.The transcript of William Taylor, the top U.S. envoy to Ukraine, is here and here. State Department official George Kent's testimony is here and here. Testimony by Alexander Vindman can be found here, and the Hill transcript is here. Laura Cooper's transcript is here; Christopher Anderson's is here and Catherine Croft's is here. Jennifer Williams' transcript is here and Timothy Morrison's is here. Philip Reeker transcript is here. Mark Sandy's is here.\--With assistance from Laura Litvan, Daniel Flatley, Jordan Fabian, Steven T. Dennis and Teaganne Finn.To contact the reporters on this story: Steven T. Dennis in Washington at sdennis17@bloomberg.net;Billy House in Washington at bhouse5@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Joe Sobczyk at jsobczyk@bloomberg.net, Laurie AsséoFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Israel to UN: Uprooted Jews should be seen as refugees Posted: 03 Dec 2019 03:16 PM PST  Israel wants the United Nations to recognize as refugees hundreds of thousands of Jews who fled Arab and Muslim countries in the last century, its U.N. envoy said Tuesday. "We don't hear the international community speak of them when they discuss the refugees of the conflict, perhaps because it doesn't serve the Palestinian narrative," Danon said, accusing the international community of taking a one-sided approach to refugees and other aspects of the conflict.
|
| Tariff Man Back, ECB Negative Risk, Lowflation Spreads: Eco Day Posted: 03 Dec 2019 02:35 PM PST ![Tariff Man Back, ECB Negative Risk, Lowflation Spreads: Eco Day]( "Tariff Man Back, ECB Negative Risk, Lowflation Spreads: Eco Day") (Bloomberg) -- Welcome to Wednesday Asia. Here's the latest news and analysis from Bloomberg Economics to help get your day started:President Donald Trump reminded financial markets that he's comfortable heading into an election year using tariffs as his main source of international economic leverage, with a flurry of trade threats across three continents in the span of 24 hoursECB officials face increasing push back against their negative interest-rate policy in private engagements with the region's finance ministers, particularly from northern EuropeFor years low inflation looked like a classic rich-world problem. Now, developing economies are tackling this tooCanada's immigration-driven population boom gets credit for driving employment gains, bolstering housing markets and keeping the nation's expansion running. But it's also masking a deeper economic problem: sluggish productivity gainsBank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz, one of the few central bankers to resist the global push toward easier monetary policy, will probably maintain his wait-and-see approach this week and hold the benchmark interest rateLabour leader Jeremy Corbyn stood by his election campaign claim that the U.K.'s National Health Service would be under threat from a post-Brexit trade deal with the U.S., even as Trump said it wouldn't be part of negotiationsNew Zealand recorded the fastest gains in house prices in 12 months, with prices rising by 3.3%y/y in NovemberThe euro area can't spend its way to sustainably higher inflation, raising a question mark over whether urging countries to deploy fiscal stimulus is actually effectiveIf you are a believer in the consensus that Trump's trade wars have peaked then Monday was a very bad day and Tuesday isn't much better, writes Shawn Donnan in the latest Terms of TradeThe death of the U.K. high street hit female workers hardest and digital disruptions mean employees need to retrain. Retail is the largest private sector employer in the U.K. with 2.9 million peopleTrump and French President Emmanuel Macron sparred in front of reporters over Turkey's future in NATO and other differences, hours after the U.S. president assailed his French counterpart for "very nasty" comments about the military alliance that's celebrating its 70th anniversary in LondonTo contact the reporter on this story: Alexandra Veroude in Sydney at averoude4@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Nasreen Seria at nseria@bloomberg.net, Michael HeathFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Merck Cyberattack’s $1.3 Billion Question: Was It an Act of War? Posted: 03 Dec 2019 02:03 PM PST  (Bloomberg Markets) -- By the time Deb Dellapena arrived for work at Merck & Co.'s 90-acre campus north of Philadelphia, there was a handwritten sign on the door: The computers are down.It was worse than it seemed. Some employees who were already at their desks at Merck offices across the U.S. were greeted by an even more unsettling message when they turned on their PCs. A pink font glowed with a warning: "Ooops, your important files are encrypted. … We guarantee that you can recover all your files safely and easily. All you need to do is submit the payment …" The cost was $300 in Bitcoin per computer.The ransom demand was a ruse. It was designed to make the software locking up many of Merck's computers—eventually dubbed NotPetya—look like the handiwork of ordinary criminals. In fact, according to Western intelligence agencies, NotPetya was the creation of the GRU, Russia's military intelligence agency—the same one that had hacked the Democratic National Committee the previous year."For two weeks, there was nothing being done. Merck is huge. It seemed crazy that something like this could happen"NotPetya's impact on Merck that day—June 27, 2017—and for weeks afterward was devastating. Dellapena, a temporary employee, couldn't dig into her fact-checking work. Interns and temps bided their time at their desks before some of them were sent home a week later. Some employees gossiped, their screens dark. Others watched videos on their phones.In all, the attack crippled more than 30,000 laptop and desktop computers at the global drugmaker, as well as 7,500 servers, according to a person familiar with the matter. Sales, manufacturing, and research units were all hit. One researcher told a colleague she'd lost 15 years of work. Near Dellapena's suburban office, a manufacturing facility that supplies vaccines for the U.S. market had ground to a halt. "For two weeks, there was nothing being done," Dellapena recalls. "Merck is huge. It seemed crazy that something like this could happen."As it turned out, NotPetya's real targets were half a world away, in Ukraine, which has been in heightened conflict with Russia since 2014. In the former Soviet republic, the malware rocketed through government agencies, banks, power stations—even the Chernobyl radiation monitoring system. Merck was apparently collateral damage. NotPetya contaminated Merck via a server in its Ukraine office that was running an infected tax software application called M.E.Doc.NotPetya spread. It hopped from computer to computer, from country to country. It hit FedEx, the shipping giant Maersk, the global confectioner Mondelēz International, the advertising firm WPP, and hundreds of other companies. All in all, the White House said in a statement afterward, it was the "most destructive and costly cyberattack in history." By the end of 2017, Merck estimated initially in regulatory filings that the malware did $870 million in damages. Among other things, NotPetya so crippled Merck's production facilities that it couldn't meet demand that year for Gardasil 9, the leading vaccine against the human papillomavirus, or HPV, which can cause cervical cancer. Merck had to borrow 1.8 million doses—the entire U.S. emergency supply—from the Pediatric National Stockpile. It took Merck 18 months to replenish the cache, valued at $240 million. (The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say the stockpile's ability to deliver medicine wasn't affected.)Merck did what any of us would do when facing a disaster: It turned to its insurers. After all, through its property policies, the company was covered—after a $150 million deductible—to the tune of $1.75 billion for catastrophic risks including the destruction of computer data, coding, and software. So it was stunned when most of its 30 insurers and reinsurers denied coverage under those policies. Why? Because Merck's property policies specifically excluded another class of risk: an act of war.Merck went to court, suing its insurers, including such industry titans as Allianz SE and American International Group Inc., for breach of contract, ultimately claiming $1.3 billion in losses.In a world where a hacker can cause more damage than a gunship, the dispute playing out in a New Jersey courtroom will have far-reaching consequences for victims of cyberattacks and the insurance companies that will or will not protect them. Until recently, the big worry associated with cyberattacks was data loss. The NotPetya strike shows how a few hundred lines of malicious code can bring a company to its knees.As the nascent cyber insurance market has grown, so has skepticism about pricing digital risk at all. Few people understand risk as well as Warren Buffett, who's built conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc.—and one of the world's biggest personal fortunes—on the back of insurance companies such as Geico and National Indemnity Co. "Frankly, I don't think we or anybody else really knows what they're doing when writing cyber," he told investors in 2018. Anyone who says they have a firm grasp on this kind of risk, he said, "is kidding themselves."Those who could be on the receiving end of cyberattacks don't underestimate the peril. Asked in September what kept him up at night, BP Plc Chief Executive Officer Bob Dudley said that aside from the transition away from fossil fuels, the threat of a catastrophic cyberattack worried him most. "It's the one that you can have the least control of," Dudley said on a call with investors. "That one keeps me awake at night."The depths of these concerns show why the fight between Merck and its insurers is not only about what happened on a summer's day in 2017. It's about what companies and their insurers fear lurks over the horizon.Union County's imposing 17-story neoclassical courthouse in Elizabeth, N.J., is a 15-minute drive from Merck's global headquarters in Kenilworth. It's also relatively conveniently located for the phalanxes of East Coast lawyers, from firms such as Covington & Burling and Steptoe & Johnson, who come here to do battle over the Merck case.Their numbers are growing. One Monday in November, a dozen dark-suited lawyers filed into Judge Robert Mega's 14th-floor courtroom. They were there to discuss pro hac vice ("for this time only") applications to allow five additional colleagues to practice temporarily in New Jersey.Merck has already collected on some property insurance policies that specify coverage for cyberdamage while also settling with two defendants in the lawsuit for undisclosed amounts. One that settled, syndicate No. 382 at the insurance marketplace Lloyd's of London Ltd., was in a group that covered losses only if they ranged from $1.15 billion to $1.75 billion. A spokesman for CNA Financial Corp., which is tied to the syndicate, declined to comment.The lawsuit in Union County addresses only property insurance claims. The $1.3 billion in losses that Merck claims includes expenses such as repairing its computer networks and the costs of business that was interrupted by the attack. Units of Chubb Ltd., Allianz, and other insurers have denied coverage on grounds that NotPetya was a "hostile or warlike" act or an act of terrorism, which are explicitly excluded by their policies.As far as Merck is concerned, it was struck not by any of those excluded acts, but by a cyber event. "The 'war' and 'terrorism' exclusions do not, on their face, apply to losses caused by network interruption events such as NotPetya," the company's lawyers wrote in an Aug. 1 filing. "They do not mention cyber events, networks, computers, data, coding, or software; nor do they contain any other language suggesting an intention to exclude coverage for cyber events." Lawyers for the insurance companies declined to comment for this story, as did Merck's attorneys. Merck declined to comment on the hack or the lawsuit beyond what's in their public filings. Addressing the broader issue, Merck Chief Financial Officer Robert Davis says, "We continue to make sure we fully invest to protect ourselves against the cyberthreats we see." He didn't disclose how much Merck spends on cybersecurity.The courts in the U.S. struggled with these matters long before cyber came along. Even under clearer circumstances—as when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941—lawsuits between insurers and victims over similar exclusions tied U.S. courts in knots. In cases involving life insurance payouts after Pearl Harbor, courts in different parts of the country split, with some judges ruling that the exclusions didn't apply and other judges saying they did.The NotPetya attack will catapult the U.S. legal system into even murkier terrain. Nation-states for years have been developing digital tools to create chaos in time of war: computer code that can shut down ports, tangle land transportation networks, and bring down the electrical grid. But increasingly those tools are being used in forms of conflict that defy categorization, including the 2014 attack that exposed emails and destroyed computers at Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc. The U.S. government blamed that attack on North Korea. Sony settled claims by ex-employees.In the Merck lawsuit, the insurers may well see an opportunity to test their legal theories and find out if they can meet their burden of proving that war exclusions should apply. Fighting in eastern Ukraine between Russian-backed separatist forces and Ukraine's military has killed thousands. Speaking about NotPetya, Olga Oliker, a senior adviser to the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, said in testimony before the U.S. Senate in March 2017, "If this was, indeed, an orchestrated attack by Russia, it is an example of precisely the type of cyber operation that could be seen as warfare, in that it approximates effects similar to those that might be attained through the use of armed force."Informed analysis doesn't equal the evidence insurance companies really want, however. If there is "smoking gun" proof that would be useful to the insurers' legal arguments, it probably resides out of reach: in classified U.S. or U.K. intelligence assessments that may have been based on intercepted communications and evidence obtained by hacking the attackers' computers. Even so, Philip Silverberg, a lead lawyer for the insurers, wrote to Judge Mega on Sept. 11, "The insurers are confident that there is evidence to demonstrate attribution of NotPetya to the Russian military."To get it, the insurers will lean on the work of computer forensic experts who've analyzed NotPetya and may be able to testify that it bears the hallmarks of a Russian military operation. That analysis is complicated, because attackers often mask their identities and can mislead investigators. The insurers may get a little help from the Trump administration. In its February 2018 statement, the White House said NotPetya "was part of the Kremlin's ongoing effort to destabilize Ukraine and demonstrates ever more clearly Russia's involvement in the ongoing conflict.""When the president of the United States comes out and says, 'It's Russia,' it's going to be hard to fight," says Jake Williams, a former National Security Agency hacker who now helps companies hunt for vulnerabilities in their computer networks. "I'll be surprised if the insurance companies don't get a win. This is as solid a case as they're going to get."In addition, the insurers are likely to probe whether Merck did as much as it could to defend itself against a NotPetya-like attack: Was the company, for example, vigilant in updating its computer software?The arguments and counterarguments unfolding in Elizabeth are sometimes arcane and convoluted. But what triggered them is plain to see. The attack that ricocheted around the world on June 27, 2017, was "the closest thing we've seen" to a cyber catastrophe, says Marcello Antonucci, global cyber and technology claims team leader at insurer Beazley Plc. "NotPetya was a wake-up call for everybody."A Decade at WarA new era of cyberattacks to destroy systems or hijack data began with assaults by nation-states that were eventually copied by criminal groups2009 into 2010StuxnetCybersecurity experts blamed this malware for a devastating attack on Iran's nuclear processing facilities. Stuxnet is widely believed to have been designed by hackers working for the U.S. and Israeli governments.August 2012Saudi Arabian Oil Co. A computer virus that hit Aramco affected at least 30,000 personal computers. The oil giant vowed to fortify its network, with leaders saying at the time that it wasn't the first attack and likely wouldn't be the last.February 2014Las Vegas Sands Corp.Hackers attacked Sheldon Adelson's casino company, gaining control of a website and posting content criticizing the billionaire. James Clapper, who was U.S. director of national intelligence, confirmed in 2015 that Iran was behind the hack.November 2014Sony Pictures Entertainment Inc.Hackers besieged Sony, stealing new movies and debilitating thousands of computers. U.S. government officials attributed the attack to North Korea. In 2018 the U.S. charged a North Korean hacker for crimes stemming from this and the WannaCry hacks.December 2015Ukraine Power GridIn the first known cyberattack on an electricity grid, hackers knocked out power to about 225,000 customers of three Ukrainian companies for several hours. Cybersecurity experts blamed Russia.December 2016Kyiv Power GridCyberattackers shut down power to part of Kyiv for about an hour. Cybersecurity experts blamed the same hackers who struck a year earlier and said the Kyiv incident appeared to be a test run for later strikes.May 2017WannaCryThis ransomware attack crippled parts of Britain's National Health Service and encrypted hundreds of thousands of computers worldwide. U.S. authorities blamed North Korea.June 2017NotPetyaA computer worm spread from Ukraine to companies around the world, causing billions of dollars in damage. The U.S., the U.K., and other countries later blamed the Russian military.March 2018AtlantaRansomware compromised the city's computers, causing millions of dollars in losses. The two Iranian hackers who were indicted were separately charged with extorting more than 200 victims, including hospitals, the University of Calgary in Alberta, and the cities of Atlanta and Newark, N.J., over almost three years.March 2019Norsk Hydro ASAA ransomware hack forced Norsk Hydro, a Norwegian aluminum maker, to shut down several of its automated product lines and switch smelters to manual mode.Source: Bloomberg reportingScott Stransky was in elementary school in 1992 when Hurricane Andrew blew through the Bahamas, Florida, and Louisiana, killing more than two dozen people and wrecking tens of thousands of homes. At the time, his family was vacationing in Hawaii, flying out just before the islands were battered by Hurricane Iniki, the worst in the state's history.Such cataclysmic events do more than take lives, destroy homes, and wreck infrastructure. They cut a path of destruction through the insurance business as well: About a dozen underprepared insurers went out of business in Andrew's aftermath. Later in life, Stransky, who studied mathematics and atmospheric science at MIT, went to work helping insurers model their exposure to the next Andrew or Iniki.Data obsession crosses into Stransky's private life. Sitting in his office in downtown Boston, the hiking and travel fanatic rattles off the number of U.S. national park sites he's visited (399 of 419), interstate borders he's crossed (96 of 107), and times he's stood at spots where three U.S. states meet (12 of 38).About six years ago, Stransky decided to turn his skills to cybersecurity. Hacks were getting bigger. The 2013 attack on Target Corp., which exposed the financial or personal data of at least 70 million people, led him to talk to his boss about developing a new form of cybermodeling.Billions of calculations later, Stransky, who turns 36 in December, is vice president and director for emerging risk modeling at AIR Worldwide, a unit of Verisk Analytics Inc. He leads a team—data geeks, Ph.D.s, even a certified ethical hacker who worked at the U.S. Department of Defense—that creates and stress-tests models designed to assess future cybercosts.The tools deployed by the group are especially useful to insurance companies tapping into the lucrative cyber insurance market. The armaments include thousands of insurance claims as well as data from internet sensors that track traffic between corporations and business partners, sniffing out malware or determining if network ports are vulnerable to incursions by outsiders.For companies and their insurers, the numbers are daunting. The cost to businesses and insurers of a single global ransomware attack could hit $193 billion, with 86% of that uninsured, according to a 2019 report from a group that includes Lloyd's of London. The figure for Andrew's insured losses alone was an estimated $15 billion. Some estimates of total annual business losses from data breaches rise to more than $5 trillion by 2024. "We're always looking to simulate what the Hurricane Andrew of cyber would be," Stransky says. "NotPetya is not even close to the worst-case scenario. It can get much, much worse."As the Merck case is highlighting, the insurance industry's exposure to cyberdamage is almost incalculably hard to grasp. The problem isn't the relatively modest pool of cyberpolicies that insurers are writing; they amounted in the U.S. to $3.6 billion in premiums in 2018, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. The bigger worry is that cyberattacks could spill over into the vastly deeper pool of property casualty policies that insurers wrote in the U.S. in 2018—$621 billion worth in all.Buffett's notion—that experts like Stransky are "kidding themselves"—nags at Stransky. Cyber events are in important ways not like weather events. There's far less data because companies often hide what happens to them or downplay the damage. Furthermore, hacks and the defenses against them are not governed by ecology or physics. Hackers have so-called zero-days—computer vulnerabilities known only to them and for which there is no defense. And it's almost impossible to predict what a Russia or an Iran might do based on its past actions.Stransky concedes all of that, but he remains optimistic that his data work will help clarify the clouded picture faced by insurers and their clients. "I'm not going to say this is the panacea," he says. "It's just one part of the process." In a darkened room across the river from the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, two dozen analysts watch row upon row of monitors as streams of data on the computer health of 150 companies scroll past. Protected by steel doors with facial-recognition locks, this is the so-called watch floor in Deloitte & Touche LLP's Cybersphere—the place where the accounting firm tracks the minutiae of the world's cyberthreats for its customers, scouring for malware and other signs of intruders.The cybersecurity business is booming at Deloitte, as it is at companies such as FireEye, CrowdStrike Holdings, and Check Point Software Technologies. Deloitte's U.S. cyber unit employs 4,500 people, and the watch floor sits at its heart. Andrew Morrison leads strategy, defense, and response for the cyber practice.Deloitte sends out teams to help companies recover data and network capabilities in the midst of cyberattacks. After NotPetya struck, a Deloitte team launched a recovery operation for A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, the world's largest container shipping company. The attack left Maersk's container ships stranded at sea, closed ports, and ruptured communications. Within 10 days, Maersk reinstalled its entire computer infrastructure, including 4,000 servers and 45,000 PCs, according to Chairman Jim Hagemann Snabe.A few years before NotPetya, China's military and intelligence agencies were stealing the secrets of global corporations at an alarming rate, giving a boost to the cybersecurity business. Most experts agree that threat has abated in the wake of a 2015 U.S.-China cybersecurity agreement and a reorganization of the Chinese military.New and increasing threats are coming from ransomware and other malicious code designed to hijack, destroy, or alter data. Victims come in all sizes. Petty criminals, to cite one example, regularly use ransomware to lock up patient data in dentists' offices in capers that bring in a few thousand dollars. But for the most sophisticated cybercriminals, the choice targets are companies that make up a nation's infrastructure: manufacturers, power companies, gas pipeline operators, banks.And yet Morrison's team is busier than ever. Manufacturers, including aluminum companies with smelters valued at almost $1 billion that could be ruined in a cyberattack, are particularly vulnerable, Morrison says. "Taking down the manufacturing facility, taking down the supply chain, all have dramatic impacts," he says. "Clients generally aren't as well-prepared in that space, because it's legacy equipment run by a shop steward on a machine floor and it's very difficult to secure."That risk has increased as more industrial companies use interconnected devices that are embedded in their systems. Earlier this year, a ransomware attack hit aluminum producer Norsk Hydro ASA, halting production at some plants that fashion the metal into finished products. As manufacturers upgrade industrial systems, cyberattacks threaten to cripple production and ripple through supply chains.Given how scary the future looks, the Merck case is, in some ways, an effort by insurers to turn back the clock. They want clarity. The industry is working to write its policy exclusions in such a way as to avoid any confusion over whether a digital attack is covered or not.Standalone cyberpolicies give insurers the clarity they want. But property policies historically haven't taken into account the potential damage in a cyberattack. This raises the dread prospect of what's known as "silent cyber"—the unknown exposure in an insurer's portfolio created by a cyber peril that hasn't been explicitly excluded or included.Insurers such as AIG or the underwriters governed by Lloyd's are now tightening the language around what events they'll cover. Lloyd's said in July that certain policies must state more clearly whether cyberattacks are covered. AIG said that starting in January, almost all of its policies for businesses should make that clear, culminating a six-year effort.In Elizabeth, the action has been going on behind closed doors. Witnesses will testify on such subjects as what insurers intended in drafting exclusions for acts of war or terrorism and what Merck believed its coverage meant. Some insurers drafted new war or cyber exclusions for policies after NotPetya, but Judge Mega ruled that insurers don't have to disclose documents showing why they changed their policies after the attack.In early 2020, experts will testify behind closed doors as to what constitutes an act of war in the cyber age. The case could be settled at some point—or it could drag on for years before going to trial.The challenge for insurers is to show that NotPetya was an act of war even though there's no clear definition in U.S. law on what that means in the cyber age. Mega will also have to analyze international law, says Catherine Lotrionte, a former CIA lawyer who's taught at Georgetown University. "It's not going to be an easy case for a judge in the U.S. to declare that this was an act of war," she says. "It's not just whether another country did it, but does it meet the legal criteria under international law for an armed attack?"Whichever way the courts rule, one stark reality is clear: The era of cyberweapons is forcing companies to defend themselves against a scale of threat that, in the conventional world, would have merited government help. With the insurance companies working to protect themselves against cyber risk, and because there's only so much that governments can do, companies such as Merck have no choice but to build their own defenses to manage risk. —With Kelly GilblomVoreacos covers financial investigations, Chiglinsky covers insurance, and Griffin covers the drug industry. They are based in New York. (Clarifies Andrew Morrison's role in the 40th paragraph.)To contact the authors of this story: David Voreacos in New York at dvoreacos@bloomberg.netKatherine Chiglinsky in New York at kchiglinsky@bloomberg.netRiley Griffin in New York at rgriffin42@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Stryker McGuire at smcguire12@bloomberg.net, Jeffrey GrocottFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Nato summit: Leaders arrive at Buckingham Palace for event hosted by the Queen Posted: 03 Dec 2019 01:40 PM PST  Buckingham Palace event hosted by the Queen Prince Andrew 'a very tough story', President says Trump on Corbyn | 'I know nothing about him, honestly' US wants 'nothing to do' with NHS The Queen hosted Nato leaders for a reception at Buckingham Palace on Tuesday evening. It comes following an earlier diplomatic flare-up between Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron. The US president denounced a claim by Mr Macron that the alliance was suffering from "brain death" as "very insulting" to other member states. But when the two men met later, at the US ambassador's residence in London, Mr Trump acknowledged the need for greater "flexibility" in the way in which Nato responded to global threats. Mr Macron insisted he stood by his original remarks, while acknowledging US concerns that other allies had not borne their fair share of the financial burden for collective defence. Mr Trump said they had had a "very good discussion", and welcomed Mr Macron's comments about financial burden-sharing. Mr Johnson hosted talks with Mr Macron, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and German Chancellor Angela Merkel ahead of the main gathering in an attempt to iron out some of the differences between them. The main Nato talks will take place on Wednesday at The Grove, a country house hotel near Watford. The meeting is expected to consider new threats, including in the areas of cyber and space, after the alliance last month declared space one of its operational domains alongside air, land, sea and cyber. 9:40PM Trump attends Downing Street event Mr Trump arrived in Downing Street at around 7.45pm with Mr Macron, after apparently giving the French President a lift in his security vehicle, nicknamed "the Beast". The Italian Prime Minister also arrived with the Trumps in the Beast. The Trumps paused for a picture before entering Number 10 Downing Street Credit: Simon Dawson /Bloomberg A choir ran through Christmas songs as guests began arriving, including Hark the Herald Angel, Walking in a Winter Wonderland and We Wish You a Merry Christmas. Mr Trump left Number 10 shortly before 9pm with the First Lady, offering a wave and a thank you as they left. Mr Trump waves as he leaves Downing Street Credit: Leon Neal /Getty 9:27PM Harry Dunn's mother joins crowds outside Buckingham Palace The mother of Harry Dunn, the teenager killed after an accident by a US diplomat's wife, joined crowds outside Buckingham Palace as the Queen hosted a reception attended by Mr Trump and Mr Johnson. Mrs Charles said she would like to meet the Prime Minister and the US president together while Mr Trump is in town. Standing in front of a large banner featuring a photo of her son, said she had come to London "to continue to raise awareness" of her son's case with political leaders. Charlotte Charles, outside Buckingham Palace, while Mr Trump was attending a reception Credit: Tom Pilgrim/PA Harry's family are demanding that American Anne Sacoolas, 42, who allegedly collided with Harry's motorbike then fled to the US after claiming diplomatic immunity, return to face justice. Mrs Charles said she had sent an email to Mr Johnson's team "to see if there was any possibility at all of just grabbing a couple of minutes with him and President Trump together". "We had an email back to say that our email was having some attention and consideration, it's probably just a standard email, but us as a family would not be able to give up the opportunity of being in London just in case they ever did ring and say we've got a few minutes." Mrs Charles said it was "upsetting" that the UK and the Queen were hosting Mr Trump while he was "harbouring" the suspect in Harry's case. 8:10PM Queen spends time with female leaders The Queen, who was wearing a matching jacket and dress in steel blue and teal with teal diamante embellishments and the Queen Mother's Palm Leaf brooch, spent time at the reception speaking to female leaders and first ladies including Mrs Trump and German Chancellor Angela Merkel before mingling with the rest of the leaders and their wives. The Queen speaks with Mrs Merkel, Mrs Trump and others during the Nato reception Credit: Geoff Pugh for The Telegraph Mr Trump could be seen speaking to Mr Macron, the French President, while Prime Minister Boris Johnson was also in attendance. 7:16PM Nato leaders gather at Buckingham Palace Leaders of Nato member states and its secretary general join the Queen and the Prince of Wales for a group picture Credit: Yui Mok /PA The leaders arrived at the Grand Entrance to the palace before being escorted inside, where they were met by the Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall in the Music Room. Prince Charles and the Queen then joined the politicians for a group photograph in the Throne Room before they were served drinks in the Green Drawing Room. Deeply honoured to mark NATO's 70th anniversary at Buckingham Palace with Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and all 29 Allies. Our Alliance is strong and looking to the future. pic.twitter.com/Z2Ji1jPnfx— Jens Stoltenberg (@jensstoltenberg) December 3, 2019 The leaders of Nato alliance countries formed an orderly line to greet the Royal family, who were out in force for the event, including the Duchess of Cambridge, the Princess Royal, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Princess Alexandra. The Duke of Cambridge is away in the Middle East and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on a six-week break from royal engagements. Prince Charles appeared to have a particularly warm greeting for French president Emmanuel Macron: Lots of bonhomie tonight at BuckinghamPalaceNATOpic.twitter.com/u4AfJkUVVA— Rebecca English (@RE_DailyMail) December 3, 2019 6:52PM Trump meets the Queen Mr Trump and the first lady Melania Trump were greeted by supporters as they were driven through the gates of Buckingham Palace. The Queen and Jens Stoltenberg, Nato's Secretary General, greeted him upon his arrival. A supporter of Donald Trump waves the US flag outside Buckingham Palace Credit: Alberto Pezzali /AP 6:21PM Trump late for tea with Prince Charles Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall met Mr Trump and his wife Melania at Clarence House Credit: Victoria Jones Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall met Mr Trump and his wife Melania for tea at Clarence House earlier today but their meeting was cut short after the US President arrived late. Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall welcomed Mr Trump and First Lady Melania at their official residence shortly before 6pm on Tuesday. Protesters on the Mall could be heard and helicopters hovered above as the president's motorcade arrived. Rush-hour traffic meant the Trumps arrived around 40 minutes after they were expected for their half-an-hour sit down with Charles and Camilla, who greeted them at the entrance before welcoming them inside. The two couples posed for pictures in the morning room before moving to private quarters for tea. Their meeting was cut short as the couples were expected at a reception at Buckingham Palace hosted by the Queen a short time later. The Prince of Wales earlier met other Nato leaders, including Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Norway Erna Solberg and Prime Minister of Italy Giuseppe Conte. Meanwhile, Princess Anne was later spotted chatting with Mr Trudeau and Mr Johnson at the Nato leaders reception in Buckingham Palace. Princess Anne chats with Justin Trudeau and Boris Johnson at Buckingham Palace Credit: Geoff Pugh for the Telegraph 5:57PM The leaders have started arriving at Buckingham Palace Here is the Prime Minister of Denmark Mette Frederiksen And Boris Johnson with the Prime Minister of Luxembourg Xavier Bette 3:58PM Watch the moment Trump and Macron exchange blows over Islamic State The political heavyweights have been throwing barbs around all week. Here's the moment it came to a head. French President Emmanuel Macron has said he stands by his statement that Nato appears to be suffering a "brain death". His remarks were earlier condemned by Donald Trump, attending a meeting of Nato leaders in London, as "very insulting" to other alliance members. But at a meeting at the US ambassador's residence, Mr Macron said there was a need within the alliance for a "strategic clarification" on how to deliver long-term peace in Europe. Both leaders struck a conciliatory note with Mr Trump acknowledging that Nato needed to look beyond the threat from Russia to issues such as Islamic terrorism. "The president and I feel that we need more flexibility so we can use it for other things, not just one specific country," Mr Trump said. "A lot of people say it was originally meant to look at the Soviet Union, now Russia, but we also have other things to look at, whether it is radical Islamic terrorism, whether it is the tremendous growth of China." Mr Macron acknowledged that there had been US "over-investment" in the alliance for decades - a key complaint of Mr Trump. 3:51PM Trump praises bystanders for intervening during London Bridge terror attack Donald Trump has praised members of the public who intervened in the London Bridge terror attack on Friday. The US president said: "I don't have a comment on the London Bridge attack other than to say that I was very proud of those people that grabbed him and did such a good job between the fire extinguishers and whatever else. "It was an amazing job they did and he was very violent - you could see that, I mean this was captured very much on tape. "I think they were British citizens - the way they stepped up was incredible, that was really great. "A terrible thing, a terrible attack, a lot of people very badly hurt, I believe three or four killed... so it's a terrible thing. I know it's an act of terrorism, it's been declared an act of terrorism - radical Islamic terrorism by the way, and it's very bad. "But I think the way they stepped up, to me, that was something very special." 3:37PM Donald Trump tweets support for Iranian protesters The moment we've been waiting for - Donald Trump's first Nato-related tweet. The United States of America supports the brave people of Iran who are protesting for their FREEDOM. We have under the Trump Administration, and always will!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 3, 2019 At the press conference earlier he laid into Iran for "killing thousands" for protesting. 3:36PM Football for the Prince of Wales Prime Minister of Norway Erna Solberg gave the Prince of Wales a football decorated with sustainability goals when the pair met at Clarence House. Ms Solberg told Charles it is used to get young people to talk about sustainability. "I don't know if you play football," she joked as she gave the prince the gift. He replied: "A very, very long time ago." Charles threw the ball to a royal aide as he took Ms Solberg out of the morning room. 3:04PM Good to see you, Mr Macron After slinging words back and forth, Donald Trump and Emmanuel Macron met on Tuesday afternoon at the Nato summit. This photograph sums up the mood quite neatly. Trump and Macron shake hands Credit: AFP There are cold handshakes, and then there are this. 3:01PM Behind-the-scenes take from inside the room of Trump's press conference The Telegraph's Defence and Security Correspondent Dominic Nicholls was among those grilling the President on Tuesday morning. Here is a behind-the-scenes take from inside the room. Being part of the press pool to interview Donald Trump is an experience as exhilarating as it is bewildering. He answers all the questions posed to him, just not in the correct order, so you have always to be on full alert to catch a comment about Jeremy Corbyn in an answer ostensibly about German GDP. As soon as he started, Mr Trump was machine-gunning sound bites and controversy around the room. He said there was a "tremendous spirit" around Nato, "except for one country". The assembled journalists held our breath, but no further clues came. "We'll be talking to that country and see how it works out," he said, further teasing us. "Actually that one country has a couple of points but they're very devastating to Nato." Which country?, blurted one of the journalists? "I'd rather have you guess," said the President. Before we could dig further, he was off on a more familiar tack; gripes about money. "The United States pays a disproportionate amount," he said. "The United States is paying 4.3 per cent of a much larger GDP. Germany is paying 1.3 per cent of a much smaller GDP; that's not fair". For no apparent reason, this passage ended on domestic British politics. Asked if he would be making any comments about the general election he said no: "I have no thoughts on it. I don't want to complicate it" So far so uncontroversial. But Mr Trump then treated us to a roller coaster ride through US political campaigns, the EU referendum and the failings of former Presidents. "I've won a lot of elections for a lot of people," he suddenly threw out to no one in particular, "North Carolina…Kentucky…Louisiana…go od guy, popular Governor…Kansas…I've won virtually every race," he continued, listing a bewildering array of places and people that few of the Europeans in the room could follow. He finally wheeled back to Britain and something I recognised. "But this is a different country," he said, and my hopes soared that we were going to get an actual comment about the General Election. But no: "…and, I say often, in Germany they like Obama, because he gave the ship away." What, wait, what ship? "…'l'll stay out of the election. I was a fan of Brexit, I called it the day before. I think Boris is very capable and will do a great job." Like a drowning man clinging to a lifebelt I had to get the conversation back onto something I could recognise before I was sucked down the whirlpool never to be seen again I asked the President if he could work with a possible Prime Minister Corbyn. "I can work with anybody," he boomed. "I'm a very easy person to work with." "Look at this gentleman," he said, indicating the somewhat stunned Jens Stoltenberg, Nato's Secretary General, sat next to him. "When I came in I was angry at Nato and now I've raised $130billion…and yet you still have many delinquents who have not paid up in full." The waters were swirling around me again. Different tack called for. Should the NHS be on the table in trade talks? "No, no, no, I've had nothing to do with it, never even thought about it. We're doing great healthcare work…in this country they have to work that out for themselves. I don't even know where that rumour started. We have absolutely nothing to do with it." Confusion reigned, especially after comments on his state visit to the UK when he seemed to suggest the NHS would be included in any future negotiations. Luckily the President then cleared up any doubt: "If you handed it to us on a silver platter, we want nothing to do with it," he said. The five-minute photo call had now been going on for over half an hour. There was a surreal quality to the event, as if time stood still. Donald Trump during the impromptu press conference Credit: REX Suddenly voices were raised at the back of the room. "Has a fist fight broken out?" called the President. For a moment I wondered if Mr Corbyn had snuck in, posing as a hack. No, it was Mike Pompeo, US Secretary of State, squeezing into the room Desperate for an actual answer to a security question, I asked why North Korea had continued its nuclear programme despite three meetings between Mr Trump and President Kim Jung Un. The President brightened. "I have a lot of confidence in him, we'll see what happens" he answered, before continuing in a manner that did little to spread confidence. "He definitely likes sending rockets up doesn't he?" he said smiling disconcertingly at me. "That's why I call him rocket man. It may work out, it may not. If I weren't President you'd be at war right now in Asia and who knows where that leads." Attention was drawn back to the Nato member without the 'tremendous spirit' Mr Trump had mentioned at the start. Could he have been hinting at France? "President Macron said Nato was brain dead," Mr Trump started, "I think that's very insulting. I was very surprised…It's a tough statement, but when you make a statement like that, hat was a very very nasty statement to make to 28 countries. You just can't go around making statements like that about Nato, it's very disrespectful." "Nobody needs Nato more than France," the President said, fully in his stride now, and seemingly oblivious to statements he has made in the past that seemed to question Nato's viability. "You just look back over the last, a long period of time. Frankly the one that benefits really the least is the United States. "We're helping Europe to go against a common foe. That may or may not be a foe. But there are other foes out there also. So that's why when France makes a statement about Nato, it's a very dangerous statement to make. "I see France breaking off and I'm a little surprised at that. "I've always had a great relationship with Emmanuel. Sometimes he'll say things he shouldn't say, but he's gotta do what he's gotta do. Sometimes I think he does things that are counterproductive to his own country." And with that we were ushered out of the room, blinking in the light, wondering if it had all been a dream, and concluding that sometimes Mr Trump has just gotta do what he's gotta do, and we all have to make any sense of it we can. 1:46PM Nato is 'politically in some trouble, militarily alright,' says ex-secretary general Former secretary general of Nato from 2004 to 2009 Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said the organisation was "politically in some trouble, militarily more or less alright". Asked how healthy Nato was, he told BBC Radio 4's World at One programme: "From a military point of view, apart from the perennial budget discussions, Nato is relatively healthy. From a political point of view, it would need some antibiotics, I think." He added: "There is not sufficient serious political debate around the Nato table ... Nato should take its political role and its political consultation seriously." 1:37PM Prince Andrew will not attend the Nato events The Duke of York, who stepped down from public duties after his disastrous Newsnight interview about his association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, is not attending. With all the Queen's other children at the prestigious palace event, it is likely Andrew would have attended if circumstances had been different. The duke stood down after he was criticised for showing little sympathy with Epstein's victims and no remorse for his friendship with the disgraced financier. The reception falls a day after the broadcast of Panorama's interview with Virginia Giuffre, who alleges she slept with Andrew when she was a teenager. Ms Giuffre told the BBC she was left "horrified and ashamed" after an alleged sexual encounter with Andrew when she was 17. The duke strenuously denies having any form of sexual contact or relationship with her. Panorama also claimed it had uncovered an email allegedly sent by Andrew to socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, who is accused of procuring victims for Epstein, asking for her help in dealing with claims by Ms Giuffre. 12:14PM Pictures from this morning's Nato briefings US President Donald Trump speaks during his meeting with Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at Winfield House, London Credit: Nicholas Kamm/AFP North Macedonia's Prime Minister Zoran Zaev speaks during an event 'NATO Engages' at Central Hall Westminster Credit: Francisco Seco/AP A British police officer cycles along The Mall past the flags of Nato Credit: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg 11:02AM Defence Secretary says 'hybrid warfare is our new reality' Defence Secretary Ben Wallace has said Nato is facing new threats and must "continue to adapt" by investing, innovating and remaining collective. Speaking at the Nato Engages conference, Mr Wallace said: "To those that doubt the potency of Nato, you should ask yourself why - if an organisation is without purpose - do our adversaries put so much into destabilising our alliance?" He added: "But today we face new challenges, and keeping with our traditions, we must continue to adapt. "Hybrid warfare is our new reality - it is constant and challenging to all our aims." Mr Wallace said the response to these new threats should be threefold - it should start with investment, involve innovation and revolve around solidarity. He said: "It starts with investment, investment in both our conventional forces and in new capabilities that are needed to address the challenges that lie ahead." 10:32AM Queen to host Donald Trump and world leaders The Queen is preparing to host US President Donald Trump at a Buckingham Palace reception for Nato leaders. Mr Trump landed at Stansted Airport in Air Force One with his wife Melania at 10pm on Monday for his third visit as US President. He will gather with Western politicians and their partners in the royal residence's grand State Rooms. The Queen, the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall will formally greet the Nato leaders at the reception, which marks 70 years of the alliance. Charles and the monarch will then join the politicians for a group photograph. The royals will be out in force for the event, including the Duchess of Cambridge, the Earl of Wessex, the Princess Royal, the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester and Princess Alexandra. Donald Trump and the Queen make a toast at Buckingham Palace in June Credit: Getty The Duke of Cambridge is away in the Middle East and the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are on a six-week break from royal engagements. The Duke of York, who stepped down from public duties after his disastrous Newsnight interview about his association with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, is not attending. Mr Trump has repeatedly criticised Nato, describing it as "obsolete and disproportionately too expensive (and unfair) for the US". Nato - the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation - was established in Washington on April 4 1949. It began as a 12-member alliance to counterbalance the growing military might of the Soviet Union and to keep the peace in post-war Europe. The political and military alliance now has 29 member countries. 10:29AM The Queen is in the sky Our reporter Tony Diver has been monitoring the skies, and it looks like the Queen is airborne. Out from Sandringham, heading to London ���� The Queen's Helicopter Flight Sikorsky S-76 G-XXEB TQF1 pic.twitter.com/0y5cVCImzi— CivMilAir ✈ (@CivMilAir) December 3, 2019 She is hosting the world leaders this evening at Buckingham Palace. 10:26AM Nato's coming home Well, that five-minute briefing turned quite quickly into an almost hour-long press conference. So here's something a bit more lighthearted from Downing Street. This week @NATO is coming home. The first NATO HQ was established at 13 Belgrave Square in London in 1950. Lord Ismay made his maiden speech as the first Secretary General in the building in 1952. NATOLondonpic.twitter.com/eCWcMzXzcX— UK Prime Minister (@10DowningStreet) December 3, 2019 10:18AM Prince Andrew 'story is tough', Trump says Donald Trump's final question from the gathered press was about the Duke of York. The exchange: Reporter: "Do you have an opinion on Prince Andrew stepping down from public duties?" Mr Trump: "On who?" Reporter: "Prince Andrew." Mr Trump: "No, I don't know Prince Andrew. "But it's a tough story. It's a very tough story - I don't know." 10:13AM Trump 'knows nothing about' Jeremy Corbyn Donald Trump was asked if Jeremy Corbyn should be doing more to address the issues of anti-semitism within the Labour Party. The reply: "I know nothing about the gentleman, honestly. I know nothing about him." 10:10AM Trump 'trying to work something out' on Harry Dunn situation Harry Dunn was killed in a motorbike crash in Northamptonshire on August 27. Anne Sacoolas is believed to have been driving on the wrong side of the road when she hit 19-year-old Mr Dunn's motorbike outside RAF Croughton. The suspect, 42-year-old Mrs Sacoolas, who is married to a US intelligence official, was able to leave the country on a private flight under the benefit of diplomatic immunity following the crash. Asked if he's going to extradite the suspect, Mr Trump said: "You're talking about the woman who had the accident that killed the young man on the motorcycle. "I had his parents up and they're lovely people. "And I've talked to the woman who has diplomatic immunity. "We're trying to work things out." 10:04AM Trump 'has confidence' in North Korea denuclearisation The President has faith in Kim Jong-un's vow to denuclearise the peninsula, he said in response to a question put to him by The Telegraph's Defence and Security Correspondent Dominic Nicholls. Having become the first US President to meet with the North Korean leader, he said: "I have confidence in him, he likes me. I like him. "We have a good relationship, so we'll see." "He likes sending rockets up doesn't he, that's why I call him Rocketman. "We'd be in a war right now if it wasn't for me. Donald Trump meeting Kim Jong-un in June 2019 Credit: Susan Walsh/AP "We'd be in a war right now in Asia. "But we have peace. I have a very good personal relationship with him, possibly the only relationship he has in the world like that. "They call it the hermit kingdom. "I know a lot about his hermit kingdom. "We'd be in World War Three right now if we'd have listened to Obama." 9:58AM US 'wouldn't do anything with NHS even if it was handed on silver platter' So - there you have it. "If you handed it to us on a silver platter, we want nothing to do with it." US President @realDonaldTrump says he has "nothing to do with it" and "wouldn't want to" when asked if the NHS should be included in post-Brexit trade talks Read more: https://t.co/k1FWZTcx60pic.twitter.com/zBSZiudk3H— Sky News (@SkyNews) December 3, 2019 The US President says the NHS is not and will not form any part of a UK-US trade deal. Asked if the NHS should be on the table in trade talks, Mr Trump said: "No, not at all, I have nothing to do with it. Never even thought about it, honestly." Mr Trump added: "I don't even know where that rumour started. We have absolutely nothing to do with it and we wouldn't want to if you handed it to us on a silver platter, we want nothing to do with it." 9:54AM Trump lashes out at 'delinquent' countries Donald Trump branded nations who did not meet the spending target on defence as "delinquents". Donald Trump brands NATO countries that don't meet 2% spending target on defence as "delinquents" and says figure shd be raised to 4%— norman smith (@BBCNormanS) December 3, 2019 He is talking in a press conference in London. 9:49AM Trump will 'work with anybody' if Labour wins election Mr Trump said he could "work with anybody" when asked whether he could work with Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. He replied: "I can work with anybody, I'm a very easy person to work with, you wouldn't believe it." 9:43AM Tax on French wine to increase, Trump says Donald Trump has hit back at French President Emmanuel Macron over his claim that Nato was "brain dead". The US president, in London for a meeting of alliance leaders, said Mr Macron's comments were "very insulting". Speaking at the US ambassador's residence, Mr Trump said he was "very surprised" at his remarks. "Turkey responded by saying that he was brain dead which was interesting," he told reporters. He added: "I heard that President Macron said that Nato was brain dead. I think that is very insulting to a lot of different forces. It has a great purpose." After criticizing French President Macron for calling NATO "brain dead," Trump says the US benefits the least from the international alliance: https://t.co/8TwTVsCrHApic.twitter.com/t88cXDyVZ7— CNN International (@cnni) December 3, 2019 Mr Trump said that taxes would start to rise on French products, including wine. "Nobody needs Nato more than France," he said. "And frankly the one that benefits the least is the United States. When France makes a statement like they did against Nato, it's a very dangerous statement to make." 9:42AM Donald Trump 'will meet Boris Johnson' US President Donald Trump has said he will be meeting with Boris Johnson during the course of his visit to the UK for a two-day meeting of Nato leaders. Speaking during a breakfast meeting with Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the US ambassador's residence in London, Mr Trump said he had "no thoughts" on the UK General Election. Asked if he would be meeting Mr Johnson, the president said: "I will be meeting with him, yes." He added: "I have many meetings. I have meetings set up with lots of different countries." Asked why he is staying out of the General Election, Mr Trump said: "Because I don't want to complicate it." He added: "I'll stay out of the election. You know that I was a fan of Brexit. I called it the day before," he said. Mr Trump added: "I think Boris is very capable and I think he'll do a good job." 9:15AM Protesters set to march from Trafalgar Square to Palace Protesters are planning to march from London's Trafalgar Square down The Mall to the palace to demonstrate as the event takes place on Tuesday. Among the protesters will be NHS nurses, doctors and workers campaigning over potential risks to the NHS from a future US-UK trade deal. Nick Dearden, from Global Justice Now, said: "Tuesday's demonstration will be led by nurses and doctors - to symbolise the millions of people who will stand up for our health service against a US president who simply represents the biggest, greediest corporate interests in the world." Stand Up To Trump, Stop the War Coalition and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) will be among the groups taking part. Lindsey German, from Stop the War Coalition, said: "We need an alternative to war, militarism and racism - an anti-war government and a mass demonstration against Trump and Nato." CND general secretary Kate Hudson described Nato as "a hugely dangerous and destructive nuclear-armed alliance with the capacity to destroy all forms of life many times over". She added: "This is no time to celebrate and welcome it to London." 9:09AM Nato Summit timeline - what's happening when? TUESDAY 9.30am Meeting with the President of the Unites States 11.30am NATO Secretary General addresses the NATO Engages: Innovating the Alliance conference 4pm Deputy Secretary General addresses the NATO Engages conference 6pm Reception hosted by Her Majesty the Queen at Buckingham Palace WEDNESDAY 7.30am Statement by the NATO Secretary General 7.45am World leaders arrive 9.05am Official handshake ceremony with the NATO Secretary General and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson 9.35am Family photo of NATO Heads of State and Government 10am Meeting of the North Atlantic Council at the level of Heads of State and Government 1.30pm Press conference by the NATO Secretary General
|
| IAEA warns against intimidation after Iran incident Posted: 03 Dec 2019 01:33 PM PST  The new head of the UN nuclear watchdog warned Tuesday against intimidating its inspectors after one of them had their accreditation revoked by Iran over an incident at a nuclear facility. "We don't want to make something out of proportion but this is a serious matter," Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said. Last month, Iran confirmed it had revoked an IAEA inspector's accreditation in October after she allegedly triggered a security check -- used to detect explosives -- at the entrance gate to the Natanz enrichment plant.
|
| Macron and Trump Spar But Share A Ride: NATO Update Posted: 03 Dec 2019 01:04 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- The U.K. is hosting NATO leaders to mark the military alliance's 70th anniversary. The timing is delicate as frictions abound among the allies. U.S. President Donald Trump and France's Emmanuel Macron got into a tense exchange over Turkey's role in NATO and its purchase of Russian missiles.Key Developments:NATO leaders arrived at Buckingham Palace from around 5 p.m.Erdogan met today with the leaders of France, the U.K. and GermanyThe formal alliance meeting is Wednesday in Watford, just outside LondonGetting a ride with Trump (8:55 p.m.)Trump and Macron may have had a public spat but that may have been in part for show. The two have shared a personal affinity over the years while having their disagreements.Trump gave Macron and Italian prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, a ride to Johnson's residence. The feeling from French officials is that the mood in the room, behind the cameras, was excellent. Turkey's version of meeting with European leaders (6:15 p.m.)Turkey asked for political, logistical, military and financial support for the creation of a "safe zone" in Syria where refugees can be resettled, a senior Turkish official said.The meeting, which was "very good" and lasted less than an hour, showed Europeans had in principle support for those plans but the discussions were preliminary, the official said, asking not to be identified in line with customary restrictions on Turkish civil servants.Europeans said any effort on refugee settlement should be under the UN umbrella, something Turkey is already working on with the organization. The four leaders also discussed the Berlin meeting on the future of Libya —- a process Turkey fully supports.Merkel says she's "relatively optimistic" about NATO talks (5:10 p.m.)Chancellor Angela Merkel, who's maintained a lower profile in London than Trump and Macron, said the meeting with Erdogan was "good and sensible" –- but can only be the beginning. The German leader appeared relaxed after being the target of the U.S. president's ire at the 2018 NATO summit in Brussels."Notwithstanding all the differences that we have, and that we certainly need to talk through –- we need to talk about NATO's future and our common strategic interests -- I'm going into the meeting relatively optimistically," Merkel said.Speaking moments before heading to a reception at Buckingham Palace, Merkel wryly suggested royal protocol was to blame for any lack of further progress. "The time for that was too short, and obviously the Queen cannot be kept waiting," she said.After meeting Erdogan, Macron says Turkey is "great country" (4:40 p.m.)The French president told reporters in London that talks between Turkey, Germany and the U.K. covered issues ranging from Syria to Libya and that there was agreement to continue to cooperate on refugees. While the meeting was "very useful," he said "all the ambiguities" haven't been lifted.On Turkey, Macron stuck to his previous stance but softened his tone. He says that disagreements over the status of the Kurdish YPG militia have existed for a long time, and that he believes the political groups the coalition works with shouldn't be labeled terrorist entities."It's a people I respect very profoundly – we need to work with Turkey, we were able to talk, there are disagreements that exist, there are choices that sometimes aren't the same, but there is the necessity to go forward," Macron said. "I'm very clear on the interests of France and Europe I express them clearly, I defend them but in a respectful way."Dutch premier says Macron NATO analysis broadly right (3:17 p.m.)The analysis Emmanuel Macron makes in that Economist interview is right on many points: Europe needs to do more, we have to look at the European-American relationship -- that is crucial when it comes to Russia, China, space, new technologies, Prime Minister Mark Rutte says when asked about the French president's 'brain dead' comments in an interview with Bloomberg Television."I wouldn't agree with his final comments (about NATO being strategically brain dead)" but I don't think that was the main point, the main point was to outline the issues that NATO is facing and to say we have to deal with them.Separately, with regards to Russia, Rutte says there "should be pressure first, dialogue second" and commenting on Turkey buying the S-400 from Russia, he says it's "not a wise decision."French leader says Turkey isn't "compliant" (2:54 p.m.)Turkey is threatening to block all declarations unless member states agree at the meeting to Ankara's definition of a terrorist group, Macron says. Turkey wants the alliance to declare the Kurdish YPG militia a terrorist entity; France does not consider it one.Macron asks how it's possible for Turkey to be a NATO member and at the same time buy S-400 from Russia. Technically it is not possible, he says. "They decided not to be compliant with NATO."Macron tells Trump to get serious (2:45 p.m.)Trump asks Macron if he wants to take some Islamic State fighters and Macron replies, "let's get serious." The French leader says that taking foreign fighters will be decided on a case by case basis and that the priority is to finish the war against Islamic State. The U.S. president then says: "this is why he is the greatest politician, because that was one of the best non-answers of all time."The discussion also highlighted differences over Turkey and Iran.Macron says he stands by his criticism of NATO (2:40 p.m.)"We don't have the same definition of terrorism around the table," Macron says. This is a strategic issue, he says. "I do believe we need strategy clarifications on who is enemy today and peace in Europe," Macron says.He refers specifically to Turkey, which is asking NATO to label the Kurdish YPG militia a terrorist organization. "They now are fighting against those who fight with us, who fought with us, shoulder-to-shoulder against ISIS, and sometimes they work with ISIS proxies. This is an issue, and this is a strategic issue. If we just have discussion about what we pay and we don't have clearly discussions about such a situation, we are not serious," Macron says.Trump says disputes with Macron always work out (2:27 p.m.)We'll be talking about a lot of things, NATO and trade, Trump says. He adds that he and the French leader made "a lot of progress" during the first 25 minutes of speaking together and that he hopes to make more progress in next hour or so.Trump says the U.S. and France have a "minor dispute" over trade, but he's confident they can work it out. "We've done a lot of good things together as partners" and "it's always worked out."Stoltenberg: Trump showing strong support for NATO (1 p.m.)NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg says in an interview with Bloomberg Television in London that Trump has "conveyed a very strong support to NATO" and disputes Macron's depiction of the military alliance as being in a permanent, vegetative state."I don't agree with that way of characterizing NATO, especially because what we have seen over the last years is that NATO is actually doing more than it had done for decades," he says. This includes "addressing new challenges like the rise of China, which was not on the NATO agenda before but which is on the NATO agenda now."Stoltenberg said the fact that the rise of China was on the agenda, a topic that wasn't previously, points to the health of NATO.Trump says Iranian crackdown "a terrible thing" (11:30 a.m.)"Thousands of people are being killed that are protesting," Trump says. When asked if there was anything he wanted to do about that, he replies: "Well, I'd rather not say right now. But it's a terrible thing and I think the world has to be watching."Erdogan aide says NATO fails to grasp YPG threat (11:00 a.m.)"Turkey is facing dire national security threats from terrorists in Syria," says Gulnur Aybet who advises the Turkish president on foreign affairs.The failure of NATO allies to understand "existential threats" posed by YPG militants will "undermine" the alliance, she says in London. "Turkey does not question NATO's fundamentals," Aybet adds. "It questions NATO's understanding of threats to Turkey."On Turkey's plans to fully deploy the Russian S-400 system next year, despite the threat of U.S. sanctions, Aybet says: "It's a bilateral issue with the U.S. It's not a NATO issue" and it's a "requirement" for a Turkey but "not the end of the road." Turkey is looking for options, including a domestically developed system.U.K.'s Wallace plays down differences (10:30 a.m.)U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace used a speech on the fringes of the NATO summit to urge the alliance to "stand together -- no side deals, no separate voices.""Our comparative advantage over our competitors has always hinged on our togetherness, our unity," Wallace told the NATO Engages conference in London. "While differences of opinion are normal in any democratic organization like ours, we ultimately succeed because each of us trust the other will have their back."Trump lashes out at France over taxes (10:00 a.m.)"I don't want France taxing American companies," Trump says, just four hours before a scheduled meeting with Macron. If anyone is going to take advantage of American companies, it's going to be us not France, he added.A French official at Macron's office says in reply: "We will not live comment everything that Trump says." Minutes later, French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire in Paris says: "we are counting on European solidarity on this. The French tax is not discriminatory."The U.S. President's comments in London are a second hit at his ally after Tuesday's announcement the U.S. could hit about $2.4 billion of French products with tariffs over a dispute concerning how large tech companies aretaxed. France imposes since this year a digital services tax -- a levy that hits the revenues of large American tech companies including Google, Apple Inc., Facebook Inc. and Amazon.com Inc.Trump says he's become 'a bigger fan of NATO' (10:02 a.m.)"I've become a bigger fan of NATO" because they have been so "flexible."Trump's says U.S. has good relations with Turkey (9:50 a.m.)"I like Turkey" and get along with Erdogan, Trump said. "He is a good NATO member, or will be."He added that Turkey was very helpful during the operation by U.S. forces in northern Syria that led to the death of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi last month. He could not "have been nicer and more supportive.'Trump says he could work with Corbyn (9:53 a.m.)The U.S. president responded to a question about whether he could work with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn were he to be elected prime minister by saying he could work with anybody.Trump takes a jab at Macron's brain-dead comment (9:40 a.m.)The U.S. president also responded to Macron's recent comments raising concerns about the NATO alliance being "brain dead," calling the remarks "very disrespectful.""NATO serves a great purpose," the president said, adding that Macron's remarks were a "very nasty statement essentially to 28 countries."The praise for the seven-decade old defense alliance was a notable break for Trump, who at recent meetings of the organization has threatened to pull out of the treaty over frustration that other countries weren't spending enough on defense. But Trump struck a more positive tone on Tuesday, saying he was encouraged that other members of the alliance had boosted their security funding by $130 billion during his presidency.Trump says EU must shape up or things will get very tough (9:35 a.m.)Trump then took aim at the European Union and returned to a frequent complaint: that Germany and others are not paying putting enough money into the pot. He criticized Germany's spending levels - around 1.2 percent of GDP - were unfairly below agreed-upon targets."It's not right to be taken advantage of on NATO," Trump says. "I love Germany. I love this country. But I am representing the U.S. They may not like me because I am representing the U.S. strong."He adds: "EU has to shape up or else things will get very tough."Trump will see Johnson, declines to comment on election (9:29 a.m.)There was a lot of speculation on whether Trump would see Johnson one-to-one. In his first bilateral in London, the U.S. president said he would meet with the U.K. leader without giving any more details on when and how. He also steered clear of weighing in on the U.K. election on Dec. 12: "I dont' want to complicate it." Trump is a divisive figure among the U.K. electorate. Every time he's visited he's been met with protests. Therefore, his opinion on a preferred outcome come have an effect on voters.Trump insisted that he will "stay out of the election" and repeated that he liked Johnson and thinks he will do a good job.Erdogan opposes NATO steps unless YPG group called terrorist (9:10 a.m.)"If our friends in NATO do not accept those terrorists that we are fighting as terrorists, then sorry, but we will oppose any step that is to be taken," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Tuesday before setting off for the summit.Ankara has been holding up an alliance plan to defend Baltic states against Russian aggression as it demands NATO recognize the Kurdish YPG militia as a terrorist organization. Turkey views it as a menace to its territorial integrity and in October launched a operation against them across the border in Syria that's been widely deplored within the alliance.Raab says Trump-Johnson meeting plans 'fluid' (8:30 a.m.)Touring TV studios to talk up the NATO celebrations, U.K. Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has been repeatedly asked if Trump will meet with Johnson on the sidelines of the summit. Raab says the decision is "fluid."The ruling Conservatives are seeking to distance themselves from the U.S. President, who's unpopular in the U.K., fearing Trump could damage Johnson's electoral chances if the pair are photographed looking too close.The Tories Secretly Fear Trump Could Wreck Johnson's ElectionKey stories:Trump May Meet Again With Erdogan Despite Backlash Risk at HomeTrump Turns Against Macron and His 'Very Nasty' Attack on NATOTrump's Deference to Erdogan Adds to NATO's Vexation Over TurkeyIt's No Longer Just Donald Trump Questioning What NATO DoesErdogan Opposes NATO Steps Unless Kurdish Group Called Terrorist\--With assistance from Onur Ant and Patrick Donahue.To contact the reporters on this story: Jordan Fabian in Washington at jfabian6@bloomberg.net;Kitty Donaldson in London at kdonaldson1@bloomberg.net;Helene Fouquet in Paris at hfouquet1@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Flavia Krause-Jackson at fjackson@bloomberg.net, ;Ben Sills at bsills@bloomberg.net, Caroline AlexanderFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| China and the U.S. Are Racing to Create a Super Pig Posted: 03 Dec 2019 01:00 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- Inside a fortress-like megafarm on the outskirts of Beijing, dozens of pink-and-black pigs forage and snooze, unfazed by the chilly spring air. These experimentally bred hogs are fortified with a gene for regulating heat, buffering them against northern China's hypothermia-inducing winters.The gene that researcher Jianguo Zhao inserted into the pigs' DNA is among dozens of examples of genetic engineering underway in China—and in rival laboratories across the world—to create super pigs. For years, the quest was for better-tasting, stronger, and faster-growing swine. Now, in the wake of a devastating global outbreak of African swine fever, the more crucial need is to safeguard food security, and keep hogs alive. "The most burning question for scientists is how to make the pig more healthy," says Zhao, 45, who heads a 20-strong group of researchers and technicians at the state-run Chinese Academy of Sciences' Institute of Zoology in Beijing, where he's become a superstar in the world of swine genomics.China's ambitions, though, extend well beyond farm animals. In dozens of labs across the country, scientists are racing researchers in the U.S. and Europe to develop superior lines of food and fiber crops, while others are pushing the boundaries of medical science—sometimes facing criticism—by editing the human genome to correct disease-causing mutations or susceptibility to infections like HIV."The most burning question for scientists is how to make the pig more healthy"It's a biotechnology arms race happening against the backdrop of a disruptive trade war with the U.S., a rapidly aging population, and diminishing resources to feed China's 1.4 billion people. Soaring pork prices prompted the State Council, China's cabinet, in September to call for the greater use of science and technology, among other measures, to boost production of the country's staple meat.Read about how Chinese parents use DNA tests to map out their babies' lives.China's investment in research and development has already catapulted the world's most populous nation from relative obscurity in biomedical science to behemoth in less than two decades.China outspends every other country barring the U.S. on research and development—$445 billion in 2017. Chinese firms have also stepped up acquisitions of foreign biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, with $25.4 billion in deals since the start of 2014, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.But teams in the U.S. and Europe currently have a critical edge, including something China desperately needs: protection from major pig-killing diseases.China has sought to redress that by sending abroad promising scientists, like Zhao, to learn from the world's best, then bringing them home and furnishing them with industrial-scale resources. The campus that houses Zhao's gene-edited pigs is ring-fenced by three layers of security checkpoints and can accommodate 4,000 hogs."The powerhouse these days is China," said Simon Lillico, 47, a scientist at the University of Edinburgh's historic Roslin Institute, where Dolly the sheep became the first mammal cloned from an adult cell in 1996. "They are spending so much money and throwing so much resource at science that we can't even come close to competing with the amount of money that they are investing in this sort of science, so we need to be smart about what we do."China's market for biologic drugs and agricultural biotechnology remains a fraction of the U.S.'s estimated $228 billion industry, but the upsurge in Chinese investment is already causing anxiety in Washington. In July, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission pledged to investigate the potential risks of America's growing reliance on Chinese biotechnology and medicines.Of concern "is the potential for the U.S. to become dependent on China for important pharmaceuticals or other health-care technologies," said Mark Kazmierczak, a molecular biologist with consulting firm Gryphon Scientific who wrote a report on the industry for the U.S. security review panel. "China's access to personal information of U.S. citizens, including DNA sequence data, also poses privacy concerns."Our reporter took DNA tests in the U.S., and China. Read about why the results concerned her.Zhao, who grew up in rural Shandong province, embodies the zeal with which China is pursuing genomics, the science of analyzing an organism's complete DNA sequence. After receiving his doctorate in animal genetics and breeding from an agricultural university in Harbin in 2003, he worked for a few years as an assistant researcher at a medical genetics institute in Shanghai.Techniques for modifying genomes were slow at the time, he recalls. To expedite his research, he headed to the University of New Orleans a few months after Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005 to train under reproductive physiologist Barry Bavister. Decades earlier, work by Bavister had led to the first successful in vitro fertilization of a rhesus monkey, paving the way for the world's first test-tube baby in 1978.After that, Zhao spent three years at the University of Missouri in a lab run by Randall Prather, another swine geneticist. Prather, 60, helped Zhao refine his gene-editing skills, which the Chinese scientist then used after he returned home in 2010 as a principal investigator with the Institute of Zoology's State Key Laboratory of Stem Cell and Reproductive Biology in Beijing."He's been a friend, and colleague—and competition," said Prather, a 30-year animal-science veteran and head of the National Swine Resource and Research Center in Columbia, Missouri. "He's competing to be the first to make genetic modifications in pigs and beat us. And I'm trying to beat him." Prather and Zhao say the rivalry is friendly.Zhao says he started using Crispr after needed materials were donated to labs in China and other nations by a team led by Feng Zhang, a Chinese-American biochemist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who pioneered development of the genome-editing tool.The technique put Zhao's research into hyperdrive. In 2016, he led the Chinese team that demonstrated for the first time it was possible to use Crispr to knock out three pig genes in one step, speeding the development of animals that can serve as models for studying human diseases.The following year, Zhao and colleagues showed they could make pigs less susceptible to cold weather by using Crispr to endow the animals with the so-called UCP1 gene, which is found in most mammals and helps them form heat-producing brown fat. The gene-altered porkers also have almost 5 percent less white fat, making their meat leaner, the scientists found. Chinese researchers have used the gene-editing tool to develop mildew-resistant wheat, musclier police dogs and woollier goats. More controversially, a Chinese scientist used the tool to genetically alter twin babies in an effort to make them resistant to HIV, igniting a global outcry. China has embraced the technique like no other nation, publishing twice as many Crispr-related agricultural papers as the second-place country, the U.S., according to the journal Science."The most burning question for scientists is how to make the pig more healthy"It's also spawned the world's largest commercial genetic sequencer, Shenzhen-based BGI Group, and China's scientists are behind a string of world-first gene-tinkering experiments.In pigs alone, Chinese researchers have successfully made 40 different genetic modifications with Crispr, Science reported in July. Zhao has been among those leading the way."He's doing great stuff," Prather told the journal. "I've trained all my competition over there, and I've trained them well."Livestock modified by Crispr may take longer to develop and face significant regulatory hurdles. Still, "whoever can capitalize on this technology will have a distinct economic advantage as the technology will likely enable large gains in productivity," said Kazmierczak, the Gryphon molecular biologist.Five thousand miles away from Beijing, at Scotland's Roslin Institute, scientists have been working on genetically edited animals for more than two decades. Lillico and colleagues, based at Midlothian, on the outskirts of Edinburgh, reported in 2016 pigs that could potentially resist African swine fever. The work was done by manipulating a gene called RELA in farm-bred pigs to resemble one in warthogs that's associated with their ability to survive infection. There's no treatment or vaccine for the virus, which has spread from Africa to Europe and now Asia, where it's led to the deaths and destruction of about a quarter of the planet's hogs. Creating pigs that can naturally thwart the disease would represent the holy grail of porcine genetic engineering.Results from a test that would show whether the gene-edited pigs resist infection from the hemorrhagic virus could be published next year, Lillico said. He referred further questions to Genus Plc, one of the world's largest livestock genetics companies, which co-funded the study with a British government agency. Genus did not respond to requests for comment.Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome, also known as PRRS or blue ear disease, killed 400,000 pigs in China in 2006, and infected millions. The virus, which leads to stillborn piglets and lung infections, infects swine by targeting a protein on the surface of white blood cells called CD163. Prather and colleague showed in 2015 that by editing the gene that makes the CD163 protein, they were able to produce pigs resistant to the virus. Further research demonstrated that the resistance can be inherited by offspring of gene-altered sows.It was a game changer for the pork industry, which China dominates with a market worth about $118 billion a year that represents about half of global demand. While genetically modified food-animals are yet to be approved for sale there, Genus is betting that barrier will eventually be lifted.The gene-edited hogs developed by Prather were licensed to Genus's pig improvement unit. It announced a pact in May with a breeder that's part-owned by the Beijing municipal government to research, develop and secure regulatory approval for virus-resistant pigs in China. Genus said it expects to earn as much as $160 million and additional royalties if that happens.Chinese researchers are racing to close the gap. At Jilin University, located in the northeastern province bordering North Korea, scientists last year developed gene-edited pigs that are protected from classical swine fever virus. The Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Beijing is starting trials of an African swine fever vaccine.Zhao said he and other Chinese scientists are lobbying the government to reconsider its policies on gene-edited animals, starting by distinguishing between animals with and without genes from non-pig organisms. Still, he doubts that his leaner pigs will be consumed as bacon anytime soon."Right now in China, it's so rigid," Zhao said. "It will maybe take several years."But China doesn't have years to make up a disease-induced, 10 million-ton shortfall in pork supply that's sent prices to a record.It's possible there are hogs in the wild, or even on commercial farms, that are naturally resistant to certain viruses, said Christine Tait-Burkard, a cellular biologist at Roslin.But finding that "one-in-a-million pig" is difficult because nobody tests for them, she said. "You either find a mutant, or make one yourself." \--With assistance from Dong Lyu, Lydia Mulvany, Qian Ye, Ben Scent and Chloe Whiteaker.To contact the author of this story: Kristine Servando in Hong Kong at kservando@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Rachel Chang at wchang98@bloomberg.net, Jason GaleEmma O'BrienJohn LauermanFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Trump Pulls U-Turn on NATO, Claiming Credit for ‘Stronger’ Pact Posted: 03 Dec 2019 01:00 PM PST ![Trump Pulls U-Turn on NATO, Claiming Credit for 'Stronger' Pact]( "Trump Pulls U-Turn on NATO, Claiming Credit for 'Stronger' Pact") (Bloomberg) -- From the start of his presidency Donald Trump has been a vocal critic of NATO, especially the unfair burden he says the U.S. has borne for Europe's defense. On Tuesday he became its surprise champion.The U.S. president picked a public fight with Emmanuel Macron over what he called the French president's "dangerous" and "nasty" demands for NATO reform. The two had a tense exchange in London in front of reporters, disagreeing over Turkey's role in the alliance and whether Islamic State has really been defeated.The sparring ahead of a summit for NATO's 70th anniversary reflected new domestic and political calculations for Trump, laboring under the threat of impeachment at home and seeking to protect the proliferation of his brand of conservative nationalism abroad.Trump once questioned whether the U.S. should remain in NATO, and his interactions with allies have been marked by badgering them for their relatively low military spending. But on Tuesday he celebrated the alliance while crediting himself for strengthening it, setting up a plausible claim that NATO's rising defense budgets validate Trump's unorthodox approach to foreign policy ahead of his 2020 re-election bid."What I'm liking about NATO is that a lot of countries have stepped up, I think, really, at my behest," Trump said Tuesday in a meeting with Macron. The alliance is "becoming different than it was, much bigger than it was and much stronger than it was."Trump may yet backtrack when the formal summit opens on Wednesday in the English countryside. He expressed such severe skepticism of the alliance at the 2018 summit that NATO leaders called an emergency session out of concern the U.S. might bolt.Although defense spending by America's NATO allies began to rise before Trump entered the White House in response to Russia's 2014 aggression in Ukraine, other leaders have been happy to credit Trump's relentless focus on burden-sharing.According to NATO data, alliance members other than the U.S. have increased their defense spending by about $130 billion from 2016 to 2020. The U.S. under Trump has also accelerated new commitments of U.S. troops and hardware to Europe, after years of withdrawals, despite the president's often hostile rhetoric.Pointing to Success"He can point at a success," Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said Tuesday of Trump's push for higher defense spending. Speaking at NATO Engages, a conference on the margins of the leaders' meeting on Tuesday, Rutte added: "He's right there, we cannot have the U.S. share all the burden."Making that case is particularly crucial as the House impeachment inquiry grinds on at home. The White House is eager to portray the president as hard at work, in contrast with Capitol Hill Democrats that Trump says are distracted by what will ultimately be a futile effort to remove him from office.On Tuesday the House Intelligence Committee released a report concluding Trump abused his office by pressuring Ukraine's government to deliver a political favor, then undertook an effort to obscure his conduct and obstruct a congressional investigation.In more than two hours of remarks to reporters in London on Tuesday, Trump also emphasized his work on trade, describing China as more eager than him for a deal and adding a meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that appeared intended to put pressure on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, to hold a vote on Trump's signature re-write of Nafta.The president's decision to avoid upsetting NATO's apple cart for a third consecutive summit also could be an effort -- though it's probably not the biggest driver -- to assist its host, U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, a Trump friend who faces an election just days after the summit concludes.Trump also now regards NATO as potentially useful in his broader bid to counter China's economic and strategic influence.China for the first time will be on the formal agenda at the summit, with the U.S. warning against countries becoming dependent on Chinese infrastructure and credit. The construction of 5G networks in NATO countries by Chinese companies such as Huawei Technologies Co., opposed by the U.S., will be up for discussion.The French at the very least are wary of taking a strong stance on China within the parameters of NATO. While China might be included in language in NATO statements, it's not an operational issue for a military alliance, one official said.Lifting SpiritsTrump's relatively amiable tone appeared to lift spirits going into a summit that many Europeans had feared could descend into a bitter show of disunion."We need to talk about NATO's future and our common strategic interests – but I'm going into the meeting relatively optimistically," German Chancellor Angela Merkel said after a side meeting with Macron, Johnson and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to discuss Syria.And while Macron is set to press on with his demands on Wednesday for a rethink of NATO's remit (he recently called it "brain dead") it seems his public spat with Trump has not dented their private admiration. Trump gave Macron -- and the Italian prime minister -- a ride to an evening reception. They are two Europeans, along with Johnson, with whom he has struck the biggest personal connection on the world stage.Still, some old tendencies bled through for Trump. When asked by reporters on Tuesday if the U.S. would come to the defense of NATO members who he had described as "delinquent" on defense spending, the president hinted he'd consider tariffs on imports from countries like Germany that lag the alliance's goal of spending 2% of gross domestic product on their militaries."I'm going to be discussing that today," Trump said. "It's a very interesting question, isn't it?"(Updates with impeachment latest, further on Macron.)\--With assistance from Jordan Fabian, Caroline Alexander and Helene Fouquet.To contact the reporters on this story: Justin Sink in London at jsink1@bloomberg.net;Marc Champion in London at mchampion7@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Rosalind Mathieson at rmathieson3@bloomberg.net, Alex WayneFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Trump team scours intel sent by Iranians as it weighs new sanctions Posted: 03 Dec 2019 12:49 PM PST  The team sees the Iran protests as a sign that its sanctions-heavy "maximum pressure" campaign is working.
|
| Fears deepen for families of people held in Iran amid unrest Posted: 03 Dec 2019 12:12 PM PST  Families of several U.S. and British people held in Iran expressed fear for their loved ones Tuesday amid the deadliest unrest in decades in the Islamic republic. The relatives spoke at a news conference in Washington to demand the release of spouses and parents held in Iran — in at least one case for more than a decade. Among those who spoke was a daughter of Robert Levinson, the former FBI agent who disappeared in Iran in 2007.
|
| Escalating the trade war is risky for Trump. Signing a deal with China may be even riskier. Posted: 03 Dec 2019 11:31 AM PST ![Escalating the trade war is risky for Trump. Signing a deal with China may be even riskier.]( "Escalating the trade war is risky for Trump. Signing a deal with China may be even riskier.") President Trump in October announced a "phase one" trade deal with China, but the specifics still needed hammering out. And the hammering continues. Actually, it may continue for some time.Trump now says he's prepared to wait until after next year's U.S. elections before finalizing a deal with Beijing, if ever. As the president told reporters on Tuesday in London, where he is attending the NATO summit, "The China trade deal is dependent on one thing: Do I want to make it?"Maybe Trump doesn't. Or maybe he's just not sure. Now there's no doubt that Wall Street would love a pause in the U.S.-China trade war. Most bullish forecasts for next year assume just such a scenario. For example: Goldman Sachs expects economic growth to "accelerate modestly ... for several reasons. First, the drag from the trade war should fade absent further escalation." The president surely wants a buoyant stock market in 2020 along with a steady, even strengthening, economy.But signing a deal isn't without political risk for Trump. Media reports on its outline suggest China would agree to buy more U.S. farm goods, do more to protect U.S. intellectual property, refrain from currency manipulation, and further open its financial sector to American firms. Overall, it sounds like the sort of deal Washington might sign with a rising economic power and competitor that's transitioning to a more market-based economy.But fewer and fewer people in Washington still see China in those benign terms, especially in Trump's own party. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) warns of China's "long-term plan to supplant the United States of America as the world's dominant political, military, and economic power." Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) says Chinese President Xi Jinping is establishing a "new evil empire" and Washington should stop American companies from helping him. The conservative "Committee on the Present Danger: China" explains that "as with the Soviet Union in the past, Communist China represents an existential and ideological threat to the United States and to the idea of freedom." Indeed, America is "in the race of our lives" against China, according to Fox News host Tucker Carlson.But if China really is so dangerous, why would Trump want to make American farmers more dependent on it? Why would Trump want China to make itself more hospitable to American business and investment? Why would Trump treat Chinese tech companies as bargaining chips to increase purchases of America-grown sorghum rather than as the nefarious national champions of a hostile power?These are exactly the kind of questions Trump will get asked if he signs a deal that fails to treat China as a serious geopolitical threat and not just an economic rival -- which almost certainly describes any realistic U.S.-China agreement. China isn't going to abandon its top-down, state capitalist model, something Beijing views as both economically successful and a key part of maintaining the Communist Party's hold on power. Moreover, there's little evidence Trump strategically sees the two nations as a fighting a long, multifront war for 21st century global supremacy. If he did, he would be bracing the American public for years of conflict. After all, the Soviet Union wasn't defeated by a clever deal but rather by decades of Western military, economic, and ideological pressure at great financial and human cost. While his fellow Republicans call Xi a dictator running an evil empire, Trump calls him "a king" with whom he gets along "great."So it's not inconceivable that some high-profile Republicans bash a Trump trade deal. At least in foreign policy, GOPers have shown a degree of independence from the president, such as when they criticized his abandonment of the Kurds and backed legislation supporting Hong Kong's pro-democracy protesters. A deal would also give the Democratic 2020 candidates an opportunity to out-hawk Trump on perhaps his signature issue by finally advocating a comprehensive action plan to contain China.So Trump's conundrum: If he signs a deal, he could look out-of-step, even dovish on China, hurting his re-election chances. And if he doesn't sign a deal, markets and the economy could weaken, also hurting his re-election chances.Hey, no one ever said trade wars were good and easy to win. Other than Trump, of course.Want more essential commentary and analysis like this delivered straight to your inbox? Sign up for The Week's "Today's best articles" newsletter here.More stories from theweek.com The case for Bernie Sanders What the Charles Schwab-TD Ameritrade acquisition means ICE employees reportedly thought McKinsey consultant's cost-cutting recommendations went too far
|
| North Korea says choice of 'Christmas gift' is up to US amid missile tensions Posted: 03 Dec 2019 11:13 AM PST  * Pyongyang had given US till end of year to change position * 'Dialogue touted by US … is a foolish trick' linked to 2020 vote * Help us cover the critical issues of 2020. This Giving Tuesday, consider making a contributionNorth Korea yesterday issued a thinly veiled warning it could resume long-distance missile tests in the next few weeks if the US does not change its negotiating position on the regime's nuclear disarmament, saying "it is entirely up to the US what Christmas gift it will select to get".Ri Thae Song, the deputy foreign minister, said in a statement translated on the state news agency that the "year-end time limit" set for the US was "drawing nearer" and accused the Trump administration of playing for time in discussions with Pyongyang, in the hope of avoiding a standoff before US presidential elections in November."The dialogue touted by the US is, in essence, nothing but a foolish trick hatched to keep the DPRK [North Korea] bound to dialogue and use it in favour of the political situation and election in the US," Ri said.Joshua Pollack, the editor of the Nonproliferation Review, pointed out that Pyongyang has used the threat of a "gift" before, to refer to its first test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in 2017.He said that Pyongyang also warned the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, that he could face "a real ballistic missile in the not distant future and under his nose"."They might not necessarily wait until the end of the year to show their displeasure on how the diplomacy with the United States has gone," Pollack, a senior research associate at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, said. "I wouldn't be surprised to see an ICBM go over Japan on Christmas Day itself."Donald Trump is touting his summit diplomacy with Kim Jong-un as one of his signature foreign policy achievements. He points in particular to North Korea's moratorium on testing nuclear warheads and ICBMs. An ICBM test over the holiday season would represent a significant blow as his re-election campaign moves into higher gear.Speaking in London, where he is attending a Nato meeting, Trump played down the security concerns over the North Korean nuclear and missile programmes. When a journalist put it to him that Kim continued to developed both programmes, the president replied "You don't know that", even though it reflects the US intelligence consensus.However, Trump did acknowledge that Kim had staged a series of short- and medium-range missile tests."He definitely likes sending rockets up, doesn't he? That's why I call him Rocket Man," Trump said. He added: "Now we have the most powerful military we've ever had and we're by far the most powerful country in the world. And, hopefully, we don't have to use it, but if we do, we'll use it."Trump said that at their first summit meeting in Singapore in June 2017, Kim had promised to "denuclearize"."I hope he lives up to the agreement, but we're going to find out," the president said.In fact the Singapore agreement said "the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula". To North Korea, the denuclearization of the peninsula, signifies a gradual process of mutual disarmament that also involves the withdrawal of US strategic weapons from the region.The difference in interpretations was papered over until the second summit in Hanoi in February 2018. The talks fell apart when Trump presented a plan requiring the wholesale dismantling of the North Korean nuclear and missile programmes in return for comprehensive sanctions relief. Kim wanted a step-by-step process.Since the collapse of the Hanoi talks, Kim and his regime have issued repeated threats that North Korea could resume nuclear or ICBM testing if the US did not make more concessions or demand less of Pyongyang.In his remarks in London, Trump hinted at possible concessions over its military deployment in South Korea, saying "it can be debated" whether the troop presence there was in US national security interests."I can go either way," he said.
|
| Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan to meet in US over Nile dam dispute Posted: 03 Dec 2019 10:37 AM PST ![Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan to meet in US over Nile dam dispute]( "Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan to meet in US over Nile dam dispute") Egypt says officials from the three Nile basin countries will meet in the U.S. to "assess the results" of their recent negotiations about Ethiopia's soon-to-be-finished mega-dam project, which Cairo says threatens its water supply. Tuesday's statement by Egypt's irrigation ministry says the meeting in Washington next week will assess the conclusions of two rounds of technical talks in Cairo this week and in Addis Ababa last month. This week talks were the second round on the dam since a breakdown prompted Egypt to appeal for international mediation.
|
| Corbyn Says NHS Still at Risk Even as Trump Changes Tune Posted: 03 Dec 2019 09:49 AM PST  (Bloomberg) -- Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn stood by his election campaign claim that the U.K.'s beloved National Health Service would be under threat from a post-Brexit trade deal with the U.S., even as President Donald Trump said it wouldn't be part of negotiations.Trump's comment in June, that "everything is on the table" when discussing trade, opened the door to Corbyn's main attack line against Prime Minister Boris Johnson's Conservatives in the run-up to the Dec. 12 vote.But speaking on Tuesday at a press conference in London ahead of the NATO summit, Trump struck a very different tone on the NHS: "I don't even know where that rumor started," he said. "We have absolutely nothing to do with it and we wouldn't want to if you handed it to us on a silver platter."Britain's state-run NHS is always a key issue during election campaigns, yet the stakes are even higher this year as the U.K. prepares to leave the European Union. Johnson has made a free-trade deal with the U.S. a key goal for his government, and Corbyn has stoked voters' fears that would mean increased privatization and greater access for U.S. drug companies in a way that would damage the free-to-use service.Corbyn even wrote to Trump on Monday, saying any increase in the cost of drugs would be an "unacceptable" outcome of trade talks. The Labour leader has also published a previously redacted dossier containing the minutes of early U.S.-U.K. trade negotiations to bolster his case.A YouGov poll released Tuesday evening showed the Conservatives maintaining their nine-point lead, but suggested Corbyn was making progress in attracting former Labour voters who were skeptical of his party at the start of the campaign.In early November, only 57% of 2017 Labour voters said they'd back Corbyn in the upcoming election. That figure has now jumped to 71%, with there being no corresponding change among 2017 Tory voters.'Bermuda Triangle'Johnson has repeatedly denied his government is negotiating with the U.S. over the NHS, and called Labour's accusations "Bermuda Triangle stuff." He repeated the same line during a campaign visit on Tuesday.Even so, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raabadmitted a trade deal could mean the U.S. would be able to raise the costs of drugs bought by the NHS. Asked in a Sky News interview if Washington could "jack up the prices" of key drugs, Raab replied: "The Americans will take their decisions... I think it's hugely unlikely. Why would they do that?"The NHS row illustrates how risky Trump's visit is to Johnson's campaign, even after the U.S. president promised to "stay out of the election." Trump has previously endorsed Johnson and further evidence of close ties between them has the potential to alienate some voters.The Tories Secretly Fear Trump Could Wreck Johnson's ElectionCorbyn is showing no signs of backing down. In an interview with ITV on Tuesday morning, the Labour leader was pressed on reports his dossier may have been disseminated by a Russian-linked disinformation campaign. He responded that nobody in the government had questioned the documents' accuracy or validity before the "new conspiracy theory."Staying On?He also appeared to indicate he plans to stay on regardless of the election result next week. Asked if he would still be Labour leader at the end of the next parliamentary term even if he loses on Dec. 12, he replied: "I hope so, yes. I think I'm young enough, I still feel fit."That comment is likely to disappoint those within Labour who believe the party cannot win an election while he is leader. Corbyn has fended off many challenges from his own MPs, including a leadership challenge by Owen Smith in 2016. He decided to continue as leader following the 2017 election after his party unexpectedly gained seats -- but not enough to form a government.Corbyn also personally apologized for the allegations of antisemitism that have dogged Labour under his leadership, something he had refused to do in the campaign so far. "Obviously I'm very sorry for anything that's happened," he said. "But I want to make this clear: I'm dealing with it, I dealt with it."(Updates with latest polling in sixth graf.)To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Ritchie in London at gritchie10@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Tim Ross at tross54@bloomberg.net, Stuart Biggs, Thomas PennyFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Trump's position on supporting Iran protests: No, yes and no comment Posted: 03 Dec 2019 09:33 AM PST  In the course of a single day, President Trump on Tuesday gave a "no comment," a "no" and a "yes" in response to questions about whether the U.S. supported antigovernment protesters in Iran.
|
| Robert Mugabe died with $10m in cash and several houses, but left no will Posted: 03 Dec 2019 09:30 AM PST  The wealth of Zimbabwe's former longtime president Robert Mugabe was long a mystery. Now the first official list of assets to be made public says he left behind $10 million and several houses when he died in September. Some in Zimbabwe view that estate as far too modest for Mugabe, who ruled for 37 years and was accused by critics of accumulating vast riches and presiding over grand corruption. The report by the state-run Herald newspaper on Tuesday does not mention any overseas assets, though it is thought that Mugabe had properties in neighboring South Africa and in Asia. The report says there appears to be no will, though lawyers are still looking for one. The report cites the lawyers as saying the law stipulates that Mugabe's wife, Grace, and children will inherit the property in that case. Mugabe also left behind a farm, 10 cars and 11 hectares (27 acres) of land that included an orchard at his rural home where he was buried. His daughter, Bona, registered the estate on behalf of the family, the report said. Mugabe's wife Grace will inherit his assets if no will is found Credit: REUTERS/Howard Burditt More than a dozen farms are publicly known to have been seized from both black and white farmers by the late strongman's family. Mugabe died of cancer in a Singapore hospital at age 95 nearly two years after he was forced by Zimbabwe's military and ruling party to resign. Many in the southern African nation say the country he left behind has fallen deeper into economic and political crisis, with a growing hunger problem that a United Nations expert last month called "shocking" for a state not at war. Half of Zimbabwe's population, or more than 7 million people, is experiencing severe hunger, the UN World Food Program said Tuesday. Critics blame the administration of Emmerson Mnangagwa, the president, who has struggled to fulfil promises of prosperity since taking power in 2017.
|
| UPDATE 2-New SPD leaders pull back from sinking German coalition Posted: 03 Dec 2019 09:15 AM PST ![UPDATE 2-New SPD leaders pull back from sinking German coalition]( "UPDATE 2-New SPD leaders pull back from sinking German coalition") Leaders of Germany's Social Democrats are leaning away from proposing the party quit Chancellor Angela Merkel's government as they work on a motion to put to delegates at a party congress, party sources said. Norbert Walter-Borjans and Saskia Esken, leftist critics of the coalition with Merkel's conservatives, won a vote for leadership of the SPD on Saturday, putting Europe's largest economy at a political crossroads.
|
| AP Interview: New IAEA head seeking answers from Iran Posted: 03 Dec 2019 09:13 AM PST  The United Nations' atomic watchdog agency is still waiting for information from Iran on the discovery of uranium particles at a site near Tehran, the agency's new director general told The Associated Press on Tuesday in an interview. Responding to criticism that the IAEA dragged its feet in the investigation, Grossi acknowledged that the matter is urgent because samples can degrade.
|
| Top US career diplomat rejects Ukraine meddling theory Posted: 03 Dec 2019 08:38 AM PST  The top US career diplomat on Tuesday unambiguously rejected a theory promoted by President Donald Trump that Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election. "No," he replied when Menendez asked him if Russian meddling in the election was a "hoax," a word often used by Trump. "Yes, the intelligence community assessed that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at our presidential election," Hale told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
|
| New SPD leaders to avoid outright call to quit German government - sources Posted: 03 Dec 2019 08:33 AM PST ![New SPD leaders to avoid outright call to quit German government - sources]( "New SPD leaders to avoid outright call to quit German government - sources") Leaders of Germany's Social Democrats are leaning away from proposing the party quit Chancellor Angela Merkel's government as they work on a motion to put to delegates at a party congress, party sources said. Norbert Walter-Borjans and Saskia Esken, leftist critics of the coalition with Merkel's conservatives, won a vote for leadership of the SPD on Saturday, putting Europe's largest economy at a political crossroads.
|
| Brexit Bulletin: Look, Don’t Touch Posted: 03 Dec 2019 08:30 AM PST  Days to General Election: 9(Bloomberg) -- Sign up here to get the Brexit Bulletin in your inbox every weekday.What's Happening? The U.S. president is in town, but seems more interested in squabbling with France than upending Britain's election.In winter, it's best to keep your eye on the road. With little more than a week to go before election day, Boris Johnson's Conservative party is doing just that. The big peril today was one they knew was coming: U.S. President Donald Trump. From the moment Air Force One landed at Stansted last night ahead of a two-day NATO summit, Tory strategists crossed their fingers and hoped that the outspoken U.S. president was not about to get involved in local politics. An off-script Trump can upend the most carefully planned election grid. When the president appeared this morning he did as his host required. Trump insisted that he will "stay out of the election," repeating only that he likes Johnson and thinks he would do a good job if re-elected. In response to a question, he also said he could work with anyone, including Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. (He later spent much of the day sparring with French President Emmanuel Macron.)And he delivered a crucial line on the National Health Service, the post-Brexit future of which has become central to Labour's anti-Johnson message. "We have absolutely nothing to do with it and we wouldn't want to if you handed it to us on a silver platter," Trump said, when asked whether the NHS could be part of a future U.S.-U.K. free-trade deal.Corbyn, for his part, isn't backing down. He says the NHS is at risk, and last week unveiled a previously redacted document containing minutes of early U.S.-U.K. trade negotiations that he says bolsters his case. Corbyn wrote to Trump on Monday, saying any increase in the cost of drugs would be an "unacceptable" outcome of trade talks.Even so, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab admitted a trade deal could mean the U.S. would be able to raise the costs of drugs bought by the NHS. Asked in a Sky News interview if Washington could "jack up the prices" of key drugs, Raab replied: "The Americans will take their decisions... I think it's hugely unlikely. Why would they do that?"Today's Must-ReadsRussian-style disinformation tactics are at play ahead of the U.K. election, writes Bloomberg's Alyza Sebenius, who reports on a digital operation to amplify leaked documents in the run-up to the Dec. 12 vote. Johnson's seriousness about winning is unmatched by a gravitas about governing, Robert Shrimsley writes in the Financial Times. The BBC is politically neutral, yet biased towards the government of the day, Peter Oborne writes in the Guardian — and that means it is favoring the Conservatives this time around.Brexit in BriefFeeling Moody | Ratings firm Moody's cut its outlook for British lenders to negative from stable, saying that while it expects the EU and U.K. to reach a free-trade agreement, "it is increasingly unlikely that any such deal will substantially mitigate the negative economic impact of Brexit."Brexit Nightmares | Bank of America is now set up to deal with the U.K.'s exit from the European Union, Vice Chairman Anne Finucane said in a speech in Dublin. Brexit has "consumed days and nights and a few nightmares," she said.100 Voices | The Times held a large-scale pre-election focus group, asking 100 people from across England and Wales for their views. The newspaper found a weariness with Brexit that could augur well for Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" mantra. Throughout the day, Ben Macintyre writes, "I heard not a single voice argue that a second referendum was needed, or even possible."Words Matter | The major party manifestos show huge variations in the prominence they give Brexit. Quartz counted every reference across all the party platforms, and found the anti-Brexit Scottish National Party the clear winner, mentioning Brexit 68 times. The Conservatives came second, with 60 mentions. Labour's manifesto mentions Brexit just 15 times.Sofa So Good | Johnson may still be avoiding a prime-time sit-down interview with BBC political interviewer Andrew Neil, but he has at least agreed to one with ITV This Morning hosts Philip Schofield and Holly Willoughby, BuzzFeed News reports. The pair today interviewed Corbyn, getting him to say "sorry" over allegations of antisemitism in the Labour party.No Joke | Comedian Nish Kumar was forced to leave the stage at a lunch organized by cricket charity the Lord's Taverners after his routine hit the wrong notes. Kumar, who co-presents the BBC Two satire The Mash Report, was booed and had a bread roll thrown at him mid-way through a routine reportedly laced with anti-Brexit jokes.Want to keep up with Brexit?You can follow us @Brexit on Twitter, and listen to Bloomberg Westminster every weekday. It's live at midday on Bloomberg Radio and is available as a podcast too. Share the Brexit Bulletin: Colleagues, friends and family can sign up here. For full EU coverage, try the Brussels Edition.For even more: Subscribe to Bloomberg All Access for our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, The Bloomberg Open and The Bloomberg Close. To contact the author of this story: Adam Blenford in London at ablenford@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Chris Kay at ckay5@bloomberg.netFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Trump Grandstands at NATO Summit Nobody Wanted Posted: 03 Dec 2019 08:14 AM PST  LONDON—In political communications, they call it a "grip and grin" or a "spray": Two leaders shake hands and answer a couple of shouted questions while photographers capture the occasion for posterity. Two or three minutes are typically allocated in the diplomatic schedules that have been painstakingly constructed over months of meetings. On Tuesday morning, Donald Trump tossed the entire plan into the trash and embarked on a 52-minute free-association ramble through global affairs.It's exactly why everyone was dreading this NATO leaders meeting.The hosts for this 70th anniversary bash—the British government and the royal family—are both tip-toeing their way through extremely delicate domestic matters. Boris Johnson is trying to convince the nation to vote him back into No. 10 in an election he didn't need to call, while the Queen and senior royals are trying to contain the damage caused by lurid allegations of sex-trafficking leveled at Prince Andrew.NATO itself is still smarting from the U.S. president's previous threats to blow up the alliance over defense-spending contributions from across Europe as well as French President Emmanuel Macron's warning that the alliance was experiencing "brain death."To try and make sure there were no more shockwaves, the whole event was pared back to a one-day session with a single afternoon of press conferences Wednesday. The last thing anyone needed was a renegade president shooting his mouth off. And yet here we are.Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO secretary-general, was the leader who happened to be sitting alongside Trump when he set off on his first unscheduled Q&A in London. The Norwegian's normally inscrutable façade was tested to breaking point as Trump tried to get him to nod along with increasingly wild assertions about how much money he was going to wring out of his "delinquent" NATO partners.Trump had been beseeched by the British hosts to stay out of their election as the unpopular U.S. president's support for the Conservatives is seen as electorally damaging. Behind the scenes, London has been pleading with the White House for cooperation; Johnson even asked him publicly to keep out of it last week: "We don't traditionally get involved in each other's election campaigns," he warned.When asked about the vote by a reporter, Trump tried to stick to the plan. "I'll stay out of it," he said. Before accidentally endorsing the man he has called "Britain's Trump" in the very same sentence."I'll stay out of it, but Boris is very capable and I think he will do a good job," he said.Of course, whatever the advisers in London or Washington tell him, Trump believes he's electoral dynamite. "I've won a lot of elections for a lot of people," he boasted.The Labour party, which has closed the gap on the Tories but still lags behind, is hoping Trump might still win the Dec. 12 election for them. Jeremy Corbyn has tried to make Johnson's relationship with Trump a key factor in the campaign, claiming that Britain would sell out the National Health Service to Trump and the U.S. pharmaceutical companies as the price for a post-Brexit free trade deal.Was Russia Behind Mystery British Government Document Leaked on Reddit Ahead of the Election?"If you handed it to us on a silver platter, we'd want nothing to do with [the NHS]," said Trump, following the script."I don't even know where that rumor started," he continued, not following the script, and thus reminding everyone that it was he who said the NHS would be on the table during trade talks when he visited London in June.Trump's visits to Britain appear to have been among his favorite foreign outings—despite crowds of protesters booing his every move—because of his evident joy at being surrounded by the pomp and circumstance of the royal family.He was invited back to Buckingham Palace on Tuesday for a world leaders' reception hosted by the Queen. The British authorities went out of their way to make him feel welcome, installing unprecedented road blocks to prevent thousands of protesters from coming within half a mile of the palace to greet Trump's arrival. One of the demonstrators told The Daily Beast she hadn't seen such a powerful police presence in London since an infamous Vietnam War protest at the U.S. embassy in 1968 ended with 86 people injured.The Queen is currently battling one of the worst scandals of her reign after her son was accused of sexual abuse by Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who was just 17 when she was flown to London by Jeffrey Epstein. Giuffre alleges that she was made to have sex with the Duke of York on three separate occasions.Prince Andrew deepened the crisis by giving an appalling interview to the BBC in which he said he still did not regret his friendship with Epstein, and claimed he had no recollection of meeting Giuffre despite a photograph that appears to show him with his arm around her waist.Trump also tried—and failed—not to trample onto that territory. "It's a tough story, it's a very tough story," he said.He also made the surprising claim: "I don't know Prince Andrew." At least half a dozen photographs of the men in conversation at different events over the years would suggest otherwise.As the Trump fire hydrant continued to blast the world's media, Stoltenberg periodically interjected by trying in vain to bring proceedings back to NATO priorities.Macron put up a much better fight when Trump got going at a second out-of-control "pool spray" a few hours later. Trump had earlier described his French counterpart's NATO remarks as "nasty" and "very insulting."The president of France refused to be steamrolled—saying he stood by his "brain death" quote. The two men made little effort to conceal their differences. Macron contradicted Trump, telling the U.S. president that his claim to have ended the ISIS problem was false. "It is not yet done, I'm sorry to say that," Macron said, pointing at Trump as the U.S. president looked down at the ground.Trump asked if he was ready to take back the French ISIS fighters, and Macron rejected the idea that Europe was responsible for the ongoing issues in Syria. Trump smirked at the cameras and concluded, "That was one of the greatest non-answers I've ever heard."Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.
|
| Trump immediately walks back comment that he doesn't support Iranian protesters Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:56 AM PST ![Trump immediately walks back comment that he doesn't support Iranian protesters]( "Trump immediately walks back comment that he doesn't support Iranian protesters") Let's do that again.During a joint news conference with French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday, President Trump was asked if the U.S. supports anti-government protesters in Iran. "I don't want to comment on that, but the answer's no," he said. "But I don't want to comment on that."The president pretty much immediately changed course, later tweeting that the U.S. and the Trump administration have always supported the demonstrators.> And there's the walkback https://t.co/J4m8FAMtcB> > -- Aaron Blake (@AaronBlake) December 3, 2019Unsurprisingly, Trump said he had a reason for the mix-up. He apparently thought the question was asking whether the U.S was providing financial support for the protesters, as opposed to moral and ideological solidarity. > Trump clarifies his answer on Iran -- and says he thought the question was about financial support when he said no. "We do support them totally and have supported them from the beginning," he says in meeting with Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau.> > -- Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) December 3, 2019It's possible the misunderstanding was genuine -- Trump, after all, usually doesn't hesitate to criticize Tehran -- but regardless it appears Washington's official stance has been cleared up.More stories from theweek.com The case for Bernie Sanders What the Charles Schwab-TD Ameritrade acquisition means ICE employees reportedly thought McKinsey consultant's cost-cutting recommendations went too far
|
| Ethereum developer Virgil Griffith accused of helping North Korea evade sanctions Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:47 AM PST  On Friday, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced that Ethereum Foundation staff member Virgil Griffith was arrested. In particular, he allegedly provided services to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK, also known as North Korea) without obtaining approval from the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Asset Control. According to the complaint, Griffith reached out to the U.S. State Department but his permission was denied due to economic sanctions against North Korea.
|
| Israeli court OKs evaluation of Australia sex crimes suspect Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:46 AM PST ![Israeli court OKs evaluation of Australia sex crimes suspect]( "Israeli court OKs evaluation of Australia sex crimes suspect") Israel's Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by a former educator accused of sexually abusing students in Australia, paving the way for a new psychiatric evaluation to determine her fitness to stand trial for extradition. Australia wants Malka Leifer extradited to face 74 charges of abusing students while she was principal at a Jewish religious school in Melbourne. Prosecutors say she is feigning mental illness to dodge extradition.
|
| Crypto expert thought it would be ‘cool’ if North Korea mined ether -source Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:41 AM PST ![Crypto expert thought it would be 'cool' if North Korea mined ether -source]( "Crypto expert thought it would be 'cool' if North Korea mined ether -source") A U.S. digital currency expert who was arrested last week for allegedly aiding North Korea in violation of sanctions told acquaintances last year that he thought it would be "really cool" if the reclusive state mined cryptocurrency ether, according to one person with direct knowledge of the matter. Virgil Griffith, 36, a U.S. citizen who works for the Ethereum Foundation, told fellow digital currency experts in April 2018 about his intention to arrange the delivery into North Korea of equipment to create ether, two sources told Reuters at the time. Cryptocurrencies, like bitcoin and ether, are created through a computer process called mining, which requires powerful hardware.
|
| Why tyrants really block the internet Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:28 AM PST ![Why tyrants really block the internet]( "Why tyrants really block the internet") As global norms against state violence rise, countries like Iran try harder to prevent videos of their police killing protesters. They are, in effect, ashamed of violating international standards.
|
| Iran rejects as 'lies' unrest death tolls given abroad Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:10 AM PST  Iran on Tuesday rejected as "utter lies" unofficial casualty figures given for street violence that erupted last month during demonstrations against a shock decision to hike fuel prices. US President Donald Trump, speaking in London, told reporters that "the word is that thousands of people are being killed in Iran that are protesting," without providing details. Iran's economy has been battered since last year when Trump unilaterally withdrew the United States from a 2015 nuclear agreement and reimposed crippling sanctions.
|
| World has not done enough over Khashoggi killing- UN investigator Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:00 AM PST ![World has not done enough over Khashoggi killing- UN investigator]( "World has not done enough over Khashoggi killing- UN investigator") The world has not done enough to ensure justice is done over the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a special U.N. investigator said on Tuesday. "I think it is important to recognise that the international community so far has failed in its duty to ensure that there cannot be immunity or impunity for the killing of Jamal Khashoggi," Callamard told reporters in Brussels. Hatice Cengiz, who had been due to marry Khashoggi, accompanied Callamard on a trip to Brussels which she said was intended to remind people they were still seeking justice.
|
| UN must rethink its approach to environmental problems, says Grawemeyer world order winner Posted: 03 Dec 2019 07:00 AM PST  The United Nations can tackle global environmental challenges far more effectively by incorporating two overlooked parts of its mandate—human rights and peace—into its efforts.
|
| Putin signs bill targeting journalists and bloggers as foreign agents Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:42 AM PST  Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, has signed into law an amendment that could require bloggers and independent journalists to register as foreign agents, a move that rights activists say poses a threat to independent journalism. The legislation is the latest addition to a flurry of bills passed in recent years in Russia aimed to tighten government control over media and the internet. The amendment, which was endorsed by the upper house of Russian parliament last week, expands the status of foreign agents to private individuals such as bloggers and freelance journalists. Individuals who collaborate with an entity designated as a foreign agent will now have to put the foreign agent label on what they publish in print and online and register a legal entity with the Russian Ministry of Justice or face fines up to 500,000 rubles (£6,000) or imprisonment of up to two years. The new law would in theory cover anyone who "distributes information" and receives any funding from abroad, which could affect independent journalists and bloggers receiving grants and scholarships. Kremlin-aligned lawmakers who pushed for the amendment insisted that it would not pose a direct danger to freedom of expression but would affect only "selected individuals" who work for NGOs that have been designed as foreign agents. Rights activists see the law as the Kremlin's latest step towards tightening the screws on freedom of expression online as well as in traditional media. The international rights group Human Rights Watch condemned the new amendment as "a further step to restrict free and independent media in the country." Tanya Lokshina, associate director for Europe and Central Asia at Human Rights Watch, told the Telegraph that the amendment could affect a wide number of people. "Political bloggers, freelancers working for foreign media and people working for independent groups disliked by the government are particularly at risk," Ms Lokshina said. "But the law is so broad that anyone active on social media can be targeted."
|
| Pompeo falsely claimed Obama made Iran his 'primary security partner in the Middle East' Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:36 AM PST  Iran has been an adversary of the US for decades, including under former President Barack Obama. But Pompeo just suggested otherwise.
|
| Europe Set to Overhaul Its Entire Economy in Green Deal Push Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:30 AM PST  (Bloomberg) -- The European Union is gearing up for the world's most ambitious push against climate change with a radical overhaul of its economy.At a summit in Brussels next week, EU leaders will commit to cutting net greenhouse-gas emissions to zero by 2050, according to a draft of their joint statement for the Dec. 12-13 meeting. To meet this target, the EU will promise more green investment and adjust all of its policy making accordingly."If our common goal is to be a climate-neutral continent in 2050, we have to act now," Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, told a United Nations climate conference on Monday. "It's a generational transition we have to go through."The commission, the EU's regulatory arm, will have the job of drafting the rules that would transform the European economy once national leaders have signed off on the climate goals for 2050. The wording of the first draft summit communique, which may still change, reflects an initial set of ideas to be floated by the commission on the eve of the leaders' gathering.The EU plan, set to be approved as the high-profile United Nations summit in Madrid winds up, would put the bloc ahead of other major emitters. Countries including China, India and Japan have yet to translate voluntary pledges under the 2015 Paris climate accord into binding national measures. U.S. President Donald Trump has said he'll pull the U.S. out of the Paris agreement.In a pitch of her Green Deal to member states and the European Parliament on Dec. 11, von der Leyen is set to promise a set of measures to reach the net-zero emissions target, affecting sectors from agriculture to energy production. It will include a thorough analysis on how to toughen the current 40% goal to reduce emissions by 2030 to 50% or even 55%, according to an EU document obtained by Bloomberg News.Make It IrreversibleIn the next step, the commission will propose an EU law in March that would "make the transition to climate neutrality irreversible," von der Leyen told the UN meeting. She said the measure will include "a farm-to-fork strategy and a biodiversity strategy" and will extend the scope of emissions trading.The EU Emissions Trading System is the world's largest cap-and-trade market for greenhouse gases. It imposes pollution caps on around 12,000 facilities in sectors from refining to cement production, including Royal Dutch Shell Plc and BASF SE. Von der Leyen eyes the inclusion of road transport into the market and cutting the number of free emission permits for airlines.Some of the transportation industry's biggest polluters have already stepped up efforts to reduce their environmental impact. In June, France's Airbus SE, its U.S. rival Boeing Co. and other aviation companies pledged to reduce net CO2 emissions by half in 2050 compared with 2005 levels. EasyJet Plc, the U.K.-based discount airline, has promised to offset all of its carbon emissions by planting trees and supporting solar-energy projects, while Air France will take similar steps on its domestic routes.Germany's Volkswagen AG, the world's largest automaker, aims to become CO2 neutral by 2050, while Daimler AG plans to reach that target for its Mercedes-Benz luxury car lineup by 2039.To ensure that coal-reliant Poland doesn't veto the climate goals next week, EU leaders will pledge an "enabling framework" that will include financial support, according to the document, dated Dec. 2. The commission has estimated that additional investment on energy and infrastructure of as much as 290 billion euros a year may be required after 2030 to meet the targets.The EU leaders will also debate the bloc's next long-term budget next week. The current proposal would commit at least $300 billion in public funds for climate initiatives, or at least a quarter of the bloc's entire budget for the period between 2021 and 2027.(Updates with details on draft sumit communique from fourth paragraph.)\--With assistance from Ania Nussbaum, Siddharth Philip and Christoph Rauwald.To contact the reporters on this story: Ewa Krukowska in Brussels at ekrukowska@bloomberg.net;Nikos Chrysoloras in Brussels at nchrysoloras@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Chad Thomas at cthomas16@bloomberg.net, Chris ReiterFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Unrest in Ebola-Hit Congo Region Fuels Anger Against UN Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:20 AM PST ![Unrest in Ebola-Hit Congo Region Fuels Anger Against UN]( "Unrest in Ebola-Hit Congo Region Fuels Anger Against UN") (Bloomberg) -- Protests against United Nations peacekeepers and national security forces in the Democratic Republic of Congo's northeast for their failure to halt ongoing violence left several people dead in a region struggling to contain the second-worst Ebola outbreak in history.Demonstrators in the town of Beni have burned government buildings and attacked UN peacekeepers since last week, following a series of massacres by armed groups that left dozens dead. A Congolese policeman and three protesters died Monday during further clashes, according to UN sources. Police arrested about 30 protesters, including several members of local armed groups.After a weekend visiting the region, the UN top official for peacekeeping operations urged Congolese to not mistake the UN for their enemy."Those who are the enemy are the groups that attack and kill the population," Jean-Pierre Lacroix, UN Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, said Monday in Kinshasa, Congo's capital. "I say this without ignoring the frustration, sadness and anguish of the population in the region, because it is real."The unrest is hindering efforts to eradicate the Ebola epidemic, Lacroix said. Four Congolese nationals working on the Ebola response were killed and five others injured in two attacks by armed groups last week, according to the World Health Organization. Some staff have been evacuated from the region.Small GangsMore than 1,000 people have been killed around Beni in the past five years, with the government blaming most of the killings on the Allied Democratic Forces, an Islamist rebel group founded in neighboring Uganda in the 1990s. Violence in the region has increased since late October, when the Congolese army launched a military offensive against the ADF.UN experts and researchers say other militias and senior Congolese army officers have also been involved in planning and carrying out assaults. More than 100 armed groups are active in eastern Congo and more than a dozen operate around Beni. Sometimes small gangs with machetes hack villagers to death and steal their belongings.The uptick in violence has led to calls for UN peacekeepers to leave Congo after 20 years. The force, once the UN's largest, will be reduced to about 13,000 troops in January. The UN has sent reinforcements to Beni, where there are less than 1,000 peacekeepers and military police, Mathias Gillmann, acting spokesman for the UN mission in Congo, said by phone on Tuesday."We're facing a system that's founded on asymmetric warfare, with people who are flexible and who hide in the thick jungle," Lacroix said. "There's not a simple, military response that consists of saying, 'let's go, do a few robust offensives and all will be solved.'"To contact the reporter on this story: Michael J. Kavanagh in Kinshasa at mkavanagh9@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Paul Richardson at pmrichardson@bloomberg.net, Pauline Bax, Karl MaierFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Brexit Explained: What US Shippers Need To Know Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:19 AM PST ![Brexit Explained: What US Shippers Need To Know]( "Brexit Explained: What US Shippers Need To Know") Brits head to the polls next week (Dec. 12) in a general election which should bring more clarity to the endless Brexit saga ahead of the U.K.'s scheduled departure from the European Union (EU) at the end of January. In an exclusive interview with FreightWaves, U.K.-based Andy Cliff, managing director of international logistics facilitation specialists Straightforward Consultancy, tells Mike King what shippers need to know about the multiple potential Brexit outcomes. FW: Brexit was delayed again at the end of October until Jan. 31.
|
| Was Russia Behind Mystery British Government Document Leaked on Reddit Ahead of the Election? Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:13 AM PST  Last week, the leader of the British Labour party, lagging behind Boris Johnson's Conservatives in all polls ahead of the imminent election, played what he believed to be his trump card. He presented leaked documents indicating that the United States would demand more access to the country's beloved National Health Service in any trade talks after Brexit.The theory, as often repeated by Jeremy Corbyn but strongly denied by both President Donald Trump and Johnson, goes that the prime minister is plotting to sell access to vast swaths of the sacred health service to U.S. pharmaceutical firms to help him see through a trade deal with Washington. The leaked documents finally seemed to add at least some evidence that the suspicions should be taken seriously ahead of the Dec. 12 vote.But there's a problem. The documents brandished by Corbyn were, within hours of his announcement, shown to have been posted weeks earlier by an anonymous user on Reddit. Now experts say the leak and distribution of the classified British-U.S. trade documents are eerily similar to a disinformation campaign uncovered this year that originated in Russia.The experts—researchers at Britain's Oxford and Cardiff universities, the Atlantic Council think tank, and analytics firm Graphika—aren't saying the documents are fake or accusing Labour of working with the Kremlin. However, they have said that the way the documents were first shared with the public on Reddit replicated a known tactic dubbed Secondary Infektion.Secondary Infektion was first uncovered by the Atlantic Council in June. The campaign used fabricated or altered documents and spread the false information across online platforms. It all stemmed from a network of social-media accounts which Facebook confirmed "originated in Russia."The researchers now say the sites that were used to put the U.S.-U.K. trade documents online; the way they were subsequently shared on Twitter; and the clunky language errors in the posts accompanying the papers all made it resemble the Secondary Infektion disinformation campaign.Ben Nimmo, the head of investigations at Graphika, said in the report: "What we are saying is that the initial efforts to amplify the NHS leak closely resemble techniques used by Secondary Infektion in the past, a known Russian operation. But we do not have all the data that allows us to make a final determination in this case."The NHS documents were first posted on Reddit by a user called Gregoriator, who, according to the researchers, made the same kind of grammatical errors that were made by those behind Secondary Infektion. For example, the post said the documents showed that "Great Britain is practically standing on her knees" in seeking a U.S. trade deal.A Twitter account using the @Gregoriator username then tried to share the leak by tweeting a link to the original Reddit post to a wide range of British politicians, journalists, and celebrities such as Stephen Fry. Weeks later, the document fell into the hands of staffers at the Labour party and were presented publicly at a Corbyn press conference.Labour has now come under pressure from senior Conservative party figures to "come clean" on how it obtained the tainted documents. Asked to explain during a Tuesday morning TV interview, Corbyn said: "I held the dossier up because it had been released and I'd seen it and at no stage up until today has anyone challenged the veracity of that document."Graphika's report concluded that the critical question to answer now is how the unredacted documents ended up in the hands of the anonymous person or people who posted them on Reddit. It raises the potentially explosive possibility that someone inside the British establishment may have leaked the potentially election-changing documents to foreign actors.The Kremlin ridiculed suggestions that Russian hackers leaked British-U.S. trade documents. "It's very convenient for demonization, to cover up one's own headache, and to use this fetish to frighten people with Russian hackers. We have repeatedly come up against this and we view it with a dose of irony," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday.However, the researchers are adamant. "Whoever did this... was absolutely trying to keep it a secret," said Graham Brookie, director at the Atlantic Council's digital research lab. "It carries the specter of foreign influence."Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.
|
| From the 9/11 Inquiry to Impeachment, Why Justice Fails Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:13 AM PST  This is the third article in a three-part series about the way top officials in the fight against terrorism during the 1990s worked closely together to try to keep Americans safe—but turned against each other in the Age of Trump, and why.In July 2001, several Yemeni men detained by the FBI were discovered to have been taking photographs of the tops of buildings around downtown Manhattan. That was two months before the whole world focused on smoke and flames coming from the top of New York's tallest buildings, the twin towers of the World Trade Center. The security concern of that moment concerned another locale in lower Manhattan. New York had become known as the terrorism-trial capital of the world, having seen in its courts the culprits of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the thwarted TERRSTOP case involving the plot to blow up New York City landmarks, and the East African bombings of 1998. All had led to successful convictions. As a result enhanced security was put in place for 26 Federal Plaza, which housed the FBI and the Immigration and Naturalization Service among other agencies, and the nearby federal courts. But now that extra layer of protection had been removed.Once-Heroic Agents Have Helped Trump's Effort to Divide and Conquer the FBIJohn O'Neill, the Special Agent in Charge (SAC) for the New York Field Office's National Security Division at the time, had an instinct about the danger to New York City. Seeing this Yemeni activity, he asked an FBI agent to write a white paper to send to FBI headquarters requesting resources for continued security. The paper outlined what the FBI believed was a continuing threat to the federal building and the federal courts area. The paper requesting the continuation of security enhancements was endorsed by other occupants of 26 Federal Plaza as well.A copy of the paper was left for me by the author while I was serving on the Joint 9/11 Congressional Inquiry in 2002. The agent who had written the paper asked if the 9/11 Inquiry could find out if anyone at FBI headquarters had even seen it. All she knew was that the enhanced security never happened. The white paper fell into the black hole of "routine" FBI communications from the field and had extremely limited circulation. The reaction had been similar in the case of the so-called "Phoenix Memo," written before 9/11 by an FBI agent in Arizona trying to raise a red flag about the large number of Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools. The agent in Phoenix had worked terrorism cases before, but now that he was in Arizona he was told to stay in his investigative lane, which in Phoenix did not include al-Qaeda. He testified before the inquiry behind a screen to protect his image from being seen, although his name was known. The Joint Congressional Inquiry predated the independent 9/11 Commission and, as had been predicted by members of Congress who wanted to go straight to an independent commission, it fell prey to politicization.Days before FBI counterterrorism officials were due to appear before the inquiry, I briefed Rep. Tim Roemer (D-IN), himself a former FBI agent, on the white paper so he could question the new FBI Counterterrorism Division chief, Dale Watson. As the hearing approached, however, FBI Deputy General Counsel Tom Kelley (who had somehow managed to get himself onto the staff of the inquiry to do FBI damage control), talked Roemer and the inquiry leadership out of questioning Watson about it. I had cleared any classification concerns with the FBI, but Kelley managed to put enough doubt in Roemer's mind to bury the issue.The 9/11 Inquiry was staffed by personnel from most of the major intelligence agencies. And it soon became apparent that all brought with them, to a greater or lesser extent, the perspective of their agencies, in particular with regard to 9/11. Before the country could move on from the horrific tragedy, it needed someone to blame. I don't recall exactly whose idea it was, but I suspect it came from the inquiry's staff director, L. Britt Snider, a former CIA Chief Counsel who himself had written many articles and books on intelligence, but we were all handed a copy of Thomas C Shelling's preface to Roberta Wohlstetter book Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision. It is one of the most brilliant passages ever written about bureaucratic failure:"Surprise, when it happens to a government, is likely to be a complicated, diffuse, bureaucratic thing. It includes neglect of responsibility but also responsibility so poorly defined or so ambiguously delegated that action gets lost. It includes gaps in intelligence, but also intelligence that, like a string of pearls too precious to wear, is too sensitive to give to those who need it. It includes the alarm that fails to work, but also the alarm that has gone off so often it has been disconnected. It includes the unalert watchman, but also the one who knows he'll be chewed out by his superior if he gets higher authority out of bed. It includes the contingencies that occur to no one, but also those that everyone assumes somebody else is taking care of. It includes straightforward procrastination, but also decisions protracted by internal disagreement. It includes, in addition, the inability of individual human beings to rise to the occasion until they are sure it is the occasion–which is usually too late."It took only three weeks for the Senate's leading snake-oil salesman, Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL), to politicize the inquiry. His target was the aforementioned inquiry staff director, Britt Snider. Before the inquiry had even begun its work, we were informed that Britt had been forced to step down by Shelby and other Republicans. In an act of appeasement so that the inquiry would not be further delayed, the Democrats acquiesced. There were all sorts of reasons given for Snider's departure—mostly that Shelby felt Snider was too close to CIA Director George Tenet. Another reason was that Snider reportedly had failed to inform inquiry members that one of his staff hires was still under the cloud of an "unresolved" polygraph examination. (A fairly common occurrence in the intelligence world and in no way dispositive of any guilt.) When Shelby met with inquiry staff, he provided no reason. "If this inquiry is going to be politicized, it will have no credibility," I told Shelby before the entire staff. He denied any politicization.Ironically, Snider had been unanimously confirmed to the position of CIA General Counsel by the Senate Intelligence Committee—chaired by none other than Richard Shelby—just four years earlier. They did so citing Snider's excellent reputation and integrity. Mueller, Barr, Giuliani, Comey and Kallstrom Once Fought Terror Together—Now Trump Has Them Fight Each OtherBut now, with the inquiry into 9/11 about to start, the Republicans saw their job as doing damage control for the George W. Bush Administration. Republicans on the inquiry didn't want anyone in charge who was too close to CIA Director George Tenet—a Clinton appointee who might be needed to take the fall for 9/11. Even worse, both Tenet and Snider had been Clinton appointees. Shelby would have none of it. Tenet had agreed to stay on as Bush's CIA director, but he was not totally trusted by Republicans. (It may have been Tenet's desire to stay in good stead with the Republican administration, and keep his job at the CIA, that led him to his "slam dunk" remark a year later about the certainty Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, even though it did not.)Snider's replacement was the less politically controversial Eleanor Hill—a former Clinton-appointed inspector general for the Department of Defense. The Democrats were satisfied. * * *'THE 28 PAGES'* * *While Snider was open and accessible, Hill's management style was to spend entire days behind a closed door huddled with just a few chosen staff. (I don't recall her ever having one meeting, or just a chat, with the entire staff.) One reason for the secrecy centered around what would become known as "the 28 pages"—the classified final section, Part Four, of the inquiry's report which dealt with the alleged connection of certain Saudi government officials to 9/11 hijackers. This section (actually 29 pages) would not be declassified until 2016, that is, 15 years after the event.There was little doubt in anyone's mind at the time, even without fully knowing the specific contents of the 28 pages, that the decision by the Bush Administration to classify this section of the 9/11 Inquiry's report was not only to protect the Saudi royal family, but one man specifically—Bush family friend Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Moreover, President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were setting their sights on a war to overthrow the Saudis' neighbor in Iraq, Saddam Hussein, and bad publicity about Saudi relations with al-Qaeda would be, at best, a distraction. Public opinion already was hostile to Riyadh since 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11, 2001, were in fact from Saudi Arabia. The 28 pages ultimately did not expose the cloak and dagger drama their secrecy led people to anticipate, but they did show, for example, some shadowy telephone linkages between al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaidah and a security guard at the Saudi Embassy in Washington as well as with the unlisted number of a company managing the residence of Bandar in Aspen, Colorado. Two of the 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, revealed to an FBI informant that they had received aid from an al-Qaeda supporter living in San Diego prior to 9/11, but it could not be firmly established that their benefactor had received funds directly from the Saudi government. A man living across the street from the hijackers claimed he gave them support, and the long-classified Part Four of the 9/11 inquiry noted cautiously (page 417) that he "reportedly received funding and possibly a fake passport from Saudi Government officials," before stating flatly, "He and his wife have received support from the Saudi Ambassador to the United States [Bandar] and his wife." None of this was probative, but all of it would have cast serious suspicion on a diplomat so close to the president's family he often was called "Bandar Bush." (Bandar remains an influential figure in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh's current ambassador to the United States is his daughter.) It was also argued at the time that the FBI was still investigating this thread of evidence, and thus the need for secrecy. But with the Saudi relationship deemed so fragile and essential, even President Barack Obama's press secretary would say at the time of the 28 pages declassification, "This information does not change the assessment of the U.S. government that there is no evidence that the Saudi government or senior Saudi officials funded al Qaeda." * * *THE PUTRID AIR AT DHS* * *The major reforms the intelligence community hoped to achieve after 9/11 focused on the removal of "stovepipes" to create horizontal intelligence structures within intelligence agencies and across the intelligence agencies. It could be argued that by creating at least three new enormous bureaucracies, the stovepipes didn't go away, but just got bigger—namely the new Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), and of course, the biggest one of all, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).And while the FBI still couldn't bring its computer systems up to date (spending millions of dollars and years on promises only to have vendors admit they had failed), a state-of-the-art National Counterterrorism Center was built in McLean, Virginia. In 2003, I watched on the closed circuit TV in my office as President George W. Bush talked about the effort to unite the country's foreign and domestic counterterrorism efforts under one roof. Essentially, the FBI's Counterterrorism Division was being moved to the NCTC. Standing behind Bush 43 was George Tenet, the CIA director. "Look at that," I said, believing the positioning of the CIA director behind the president at FBI Headquarters was significant. "The Bureau just lost its Counterterrorism Division to the CIA." In those post-9/11 days, agencies in Washington were watching carefully to see who the winners and losers would be. FBI agents would now be sitting in Fusion Centers at NCTC in Virginia next to CIA, DHS, DOD, and other agencies, and there was no doubt, CIA was packing the NCTC and the ODNI with its people. But CIA lost something as well. Under the new reforms that created the ODNI, the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) would no longer be the principal intelligence advisor to the president. That job was now going to the new Director of National Intelligence (DNI). The biggest post-9/11 reorganization would be the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which brought together 22 separate agencies under one director. But from the beginning, DHS received no love from Congress or the Executive Branch. DHS headquarters was set up in a run-down World War ll-era former Naval facility on Nebraska Avenue in Washington, D.C. I worked there for nearly three years. Brown water came out of the faucets and putrid air circulated in each of the barracks-like buildings. This space was referred to as the "temporary" home of DHS year after year until finally they moved in 2019 to their new location in Southeast, the St. Elizabeth's psychiatric hospital complex renovated at a cost of $5 billion. Also worthy of note: there have been four directors of DHS in the three years Trump has been president.In its early years, DHS was staffed mainly by former military personnel who, in turn, got their military buddies government or contracting jobs there. I personally left the FBI for a six-figure contracting job at DHS, being hired after only a brief telephone interview. The gravy-train of post-9/11 contracting money was flowing freely.But instead of making the nation's counterterrorism effort more "lean and mean," there was now only more confusion. Who was responsible for domestic terrorist threat reporting and pushing that information out to state and local law enforcement? DHS headquarters initially was envisioned as the "clearing house" for homeland terrorist threat reporting. But the information was at FBI, CIA, ODNI, and NCTC. Meanwhile, at the FBI, each field office was mandated to produce a certain number of IIRs (Intelligence Information Reports) every month. Many field offices struggled to come up with something to report back to headquarters and meet their quota. When FBI agents feel they have to go on fishing expeditions to come up with something—anything—to report back to headquarters, it invites potential abuse. I didn't hang around long enough to know what became of that program.Tom Ridge, the former governor of Pennsylvania, was appointed by Bush 43 as DHS's first director. He was succeeded after only two years by Michael Chertoff, a Harvard Law graduate and former Assistant U.S. Attorney General. Chertoff had gotten his big break in 1983 when he was hired by—wait for it —Rudy Giuliani, to be a special prosecutor in the Southern District of New York (SDNY). At SDNY Chertoff joined Giuliani and Louis Freeh working on major mafia and political corruption cases. (In later years, he had also worked as a special counsel on the Senate Whitewater Committee, but Chertoff publicly endorsed Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump in 2016, breaking with his former SDNY colleagues.)As a new federal agency, DHS failed its first major test during Hurricane Katrina. As part of this new gigantic bureaucracy, FEMA was stymied by an unclear chain of command on the ground, and the image out of New Orleans of President Bush congratulating FEMA director Michael Brown for doing "a heck of a job" after hundreds of deaths (the final toll would be 1,833) was politically very damaging.The major story out of Katrina was that for all the investigations, reforms and supposed "lessons learned" after 9/11, the country was still woefully unprepared to deal with an unexpected, catastrophic disaster. The problem may have been that each and every reform that occurred at each and every agency was now geared toward one major threat—al-Qaeda. "What happens when al-Qaeda no longer exists? What do we do with all of this? What about other threats?" I asked these questions at one CIA conference. The audience looked at me as if I had just landed from Mars.Louis Freeh retired as FBI director in June 2001 and Robert Mueller took over. One of Mueller's first moves was the sudden removal of the FBI's highest ranking female, Sheila Horan—a 28-year veteran of the agency—from her position as acting chief of the National Security Division. It was apparently during a testy encounter with Mueller over a Chinese espionage case that he exiled her to an administrative position. * * *MUELLER'S INHERITED DISASTERS* * *If the FBI was behind the curve on the al-Qaeda threat, it was light years behind on the Chinese espionage threat. Its attempts to prosecute Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee for allegedly pulling an Edward Snowden-type download of classified information on nuclear technology that supposedly found its way to China proved how difficult espionage cases were becoming. This was not the old Russian tradecraft—leaving documents at a dead-drop and getting an envelope full of cash in return. American scientists were wined and dined at scientific and technological conferences in China and throughout Asia. They enjoyed bragging about their work and the free flow of ideas with other foreign scientists. Much of what is published in highly technical journals is, by intelligence community standards, surprisingly sensitive. The culture scientists operate in, and want to keep operating in, is open and cooperative. This makes it very difficult to ascertain malicious intent. The Feds bearing down on the scientists' colleagues at Los Alamos, attempting to gain access to their computers, shook them to the core. When I took Senate Intelligence Committee staffers to the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the resentment by the scientists for coming under such scrutiny, being interrogated, and the notion that they were expected to monitor their colleagues for possible security violations, was palpable. At the time, they were truly in their own little world with little understanding of Chinese espionage tradecraft. But the FBI was also in the dark, and they knew it. There had been little doubt that the Chinese had developed a nuclear warhead similar to what's known as a W-88. Lee came under suspicion for attending conferences in his native Taiwan and being warmly greeted by Chinese counterparts. It was also discovered from some old Bureau wiretaps that Lee had phone conversations with a convicted Chinese spy back in the '80s. Lee was arrested and held in solitary confinement for 10 months.Numerous congressional hearings were held before the Intelligence Committees, the Energy Committees, and the Armed Services Committees. Members pounded their fists on the table, asking how the FBI could let this happen. Ultimately, over the ensuing months, the case faltered and media opinion—as well as congressional opinion—started to turn in Lee's favor. His image went from that of diabolical traitor to a victimized and misunderstood Taiwanese immigrant who had been harassed and badly mistreated by the U.S. government. No definitive case could be made against Lee, the technology behind the W-88 had been in the public domain, and the public relations aspect was a disaster for the Bureau. Attorney General Janet Reno had given the order to Louis Freeh for the FBI to pull the plug on the case. Several media outlets paid Lee $1.6 million for leaking his name and damaging his career—as had been done for Richard Jewell, wrongly accused in the Atlanta Olympics bombing. But to this day agents who worked on the case believe Lee was probably "good for it." Tensions in the Counterintelligence Division were high, and Mueller's removal of Horan over a case concerning a possible recruitment attempt by the Chinese of an American citizen frayed agents' nerves. Mueller was a hard-nosed, no nonsense legal eagle. While the Counterterrorism Division was waiting for the next shoe to drop—and they were certain al-Qaeda had more plans for the U.S.—it turned out the Counterintelligence Division— yes, the Counterintelligence Division—had had Robert Hanssen in its midst for 10 years undetected. The FBI knew Soviet spycraft well, not so much when it came to the new Russia. And when it came to Chinese espionage, with the Chinese willing to play the long game and thousands of Chinese students, scientists, academics pouring into the U.S. to work and attend school, it was an enormous undertaking to detect espionage activity. The Chinese intelligence operatives were known for reaching out to Chinese nationals in the U.S. and appealing to their nationalism. The Chinese were subtle, not as heavy handed as the Russians, and thus left few clues to follow. And this wasn't only in the area of human intelligence, which the Russians excelled in for decades, but in economic espionage and cyber intrusions, which were Chinese specialties.The Chief of the East Asia Counterintelligence Unit invited me to leave the Congressional Affairs Office and come work for him. "The Chinese have totally penetrated our military," he told me in a pique of stress and exasperation. Chinese espionage, both in terms of economic and technological espionage, remains one of our country's most intractable problems. Our failure to thwart Russian cyber-manipulators in our own presidential election has not been lost on the Chinese who see what naive, easy prey we are. Also not lost on the Chinese is the Senate Republicans' refusal to even pass legislation to address the issue, and worse still, recite in unison the Russian narrative that it was Ukraine and not Russia who infiltrated our democratic process. The Chinese surely look on in amazement as they see the United States not only is not addressing the issue of cyber penetration by foreign actors, but actually seems to be wittingly enabling it.As part of Mueller's reorganization of the Bureau's intelligence apparatus, he hired Maureen Baginski, the former signals intelligence director at the National Security Agency. Baginski would become Executive Assistant Director of Intelligence, somewhat modeled after the ODNI where all intelligence and intelligence product would flow through her. Hiring Baginski was essentially a way for Mueller to demonstrate he was reorganizing the Bureau's intelligence function. Especially after 9/11, the key to every agency's survival was "reorganization." She made her dutiful rounds around town and on the Hill was heralded as "the woman who would save the FBI." She hired me as her special assistant. The senior agents resented her. As Mueller's golden girl they would tolerate Baginski, at least at first, but agents were very resistant to being supervised in any way by a non-agent. "There are two kinds of people at the FBI," I was told on my first day at the Bureau. "Agents and furniture."Baginski's management style had not won her many fans at the NSA—and I had been warned. She lived on cigarettes and Diet Coke, was always high-strung, and thought FBI agents were out to get her. They were. In the end, Baginski lasted only two years in her position. Mueller, helping her make a gracious exit, announced she would become a "senior adviser" to the FBI. She had started her intelligence career as a Russian linguist and was an analyst at heart, not a bureaucrat, and she was supportive of the Bureau's non-agent intelligence analysts and "case support" workers (Intelligence Operations Specialists), a cadre at the time in serious need of professionalization.After 9/11, the discovery that many of the Bureau's intelligence operation specialists were untrained former administrative staff without college degrees who couldn't find Afghanistan on a map showed the public what the rest of the Intelligence Community had already known about the FBI. The Bureau set as its goal the professionalization of its cadre of analysts and provided them with the same level of training as other analysts in the intelligence community received. Every intelligence analyst would now be required to take a six-week course at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia.* * *THE SAUDIS, AGAIN* * *Eighteen years after 9/11, U.S. policy in the Middle East is still closely tied to Saudi Arabia. The Trump Administration has deepened these ties with platitudes, weapons sales, troops, and our assistance to the Saudis' war in Yemen. But it's also Trump's personal financial interests that draws him to Saudi Arabia. As he told a rally in 2015, "They [the Saudis] buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. I make a lot of money from them." His first trip abroad was to Riyadh. You may remember the sword dance and the hands on the glowing globe.Historically, American presidents have felt the need to keep Saudi Arabia as one of its closest allies in the region—to keep oil flowing, and, after 1979, to be a bulwark against the Iranian Revolutionary regime. In times of heightened conflict, like the run-up to the war in Iraq in 2003, the Saudis could turn on the oil taps enough to keep prices stable. But the Trump Administration has taken the relationship to such sycophantic levels that the Saudis now believe they can act with near total impunity. The most glaring example is the Trump Administration's failure to respond forcefully after the Saudis' role in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi became clear. The president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has established a very close relationship with MBS, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the power in front of his father's throne. Trump built many of his positions on the Middle East around MBS advice and assurances.In the eyes of the rest of the world, these relationships will make the U.S. complicit in anything the Saudis should decide to do or stumble into. Historically, our relationship with the Saudis has not only fueled Sunni extremist resentment toward the United States, but Iranian-backed Shi'a resentment as well.When imprisoned fighters from the so-called Islamic State were reported escaping from the Kurdish region of northern Syria after the recent capricious U.S. withdrawal, President Trump remarked, "Well they are going to be escaping to Europe, that's where they want to go. They want to go back to their homes." But, while some of those captives might have made that argument from prison, it's probably not true for the most dangerous among them. What the intelligence community knows is that those mujahideen fighters who went to Afghanistan from Europe and the Middle East in the '80s did not return home in the '90s. They went to North Africa, Yemen, Pakistan, or remained in Afghanistan, continuing to direct and spread their notion of jihad.So once again there is a false narrative being fed to Americans by the current president that the terrorist threat is "over there," and that our relationship with the Saudis will make the Middle East and the U.S. safer.You would think, after all these years, we had learned otherwise. But none of it is surprising knowing how little Trump listens to his intelligence agencies, and knowing how little he thinks of the FBI. At some point, his unwillingness to listen to something other than his own voice will have implications for the security and safety of Americans.* * *FROM CRUSADERS TO LOBBYISTS* * *After leaving the FBI, Louis Freeh, his Chief of Staff Bob Bucknam, and his congressional liaison guru John Collingwood, all ended up working together at MBNA, the credit card company in Delaware, Maryland. (MBNA was later purchased by the Bank of New York.) Freeh had signed on to Giuliani's unsuccessful 2008 presidential campaign. But more recently Freeh, who now operates The Freeh Group, registered as a foreign lobbyist working not only with Giuliani, but law professor Alan Dershowitz, who has become another Trump mouthpiece. Dershowitz was ensnared in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and hired Freeh's security company to conduct an "investigation." Perhaps it's not a surprise that the investigation cleared Dershowitz of any foul deeds. While Giuliani was involved in his now well-known escapades involving Ukraine on behalf of Donald Trump, he was also working with Freeh representing a Romanian-American real estate investor named Gabriel Popoviciu who was trying to beat his conviction for corruption in Romania. An appeal ultimately failed, and Popoviciu was sentenced to seven years in jail. Another U.S. attorney who traveled to Romania in 2016 to assist in attempts to clear Popoviciu, working toward the same goal as Giuliani and Freeh, was—wait for it—Hunter Biden, the son of then-Vice President Joe Biden. With the unexpected ascendency of Donald Trump to the presidency, the paths of Rudy Giuliani, Louis Freeh, and James Kallstrom diverged sharply from those of James Comey and Robert Mueller. Giuliani, Kallstrom, and Freeh remained connected by their anti-Hillary beliefs and spoke out against her at every opportunity. Comey and Mueller would find themselves, reluctantly, dragged into Trump's reality show while trying to do the right thing in an environment that made that nearly impossible. They would always be in a no-win situation.* * *BARR 'FACTS'* * *Like Freeh and Kallstrom in particular, William Barr had been another life-long fanboy of George H.W. Bush, having first worked with him when they were both at the CIA. Barr worked on the elder Bush's presidential campaign in 1988 and was later appointed to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. When Bush 41 became president, Barr was appointed attorney general. From that first job at DOJ in the Office of Legal Counsel, Barr was the champion of robust executive authority. He spoke about it, wrote legal and academic opinions about it, and misused the Constitution to defend the president in everything from Iran-Contra to increased surveillance techniques and incarceration of asylum seekers. He's defended Trump's Muslim ban and child separation policies at the southern border. When the courts differ with him, he denounces the courts. When his own DOJ Inspector General disagrees with him on the Russia Inquiry, he trashed his own department's Office of Inspector General. Although Trump did not know him, it was Barr's career-long record of fighting for an all-powerful, unaccountable executive that convinced Trump that Barr was the right guy to be his attorney general. Not since Trump bemoaned, "Where's my Roy Cohn?" has Trump been so convinced he finally found the right guy.Comey tried to stay one step ahead of an organization that contained forces he could not control while answering to a president pressuring him to obstruct justice. Robert Mueller has been criticized for not dealing the death knell to the Trump presidency that The Resistance had hoped for, even though his work as Special Counsel has led to the convictions of at least half a dozen Trump associates. But it was always obvious, from the moment Trump fired his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, for recusing himself from the Russia investigation, that Trump had wanted Mueller stopped. Barr and Rod Rosenstein, the deputy AG, knew Mueller and understood that the American public respected his reputation. Firing Mueller would set off a political firestorm. Mueller had been the longest serving FBI director since J. Edgar Hoover. He knew how to survive and was a cautious, methodical man. He did not seek the spotlight, and he was not prone to hyperbole. These may be the reasons he would be allowed to continue his work, and Mueller, in return, would respect the boundaries he was expected to observe. There would be no sworn testimony by Trump before the Special Counsel, as Trump was such a pathological, often delusional liar, he would surely incriminate himself. The same would be true for Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr. There would be no indictment of a sitting president. In the end, Mueller's report laid out the different ways Russia interfered in the 2016 election and the Trump campaign's receptivity to Russia's overtures—without calling it "collusion." More damning were the attempts to obstruct justice, as outlined in Part 2 of the report. But Barr, taking a page from the classic "influence operation" playbook often employed by authoritarian regimes, knew the first thing people hear is what sticks in the mind. He got out in front of the cameras before the report was even released to Congress, and claimed it exonerated Trump—repeating the mantra, "no collusion." It would be up to the Democrats now to scramble, to go on the offensive, to look like they were indeed on a "witch hunt." The plan worked, and a public already weary of the Russia story, and very unlikely to read the report's 448 pages, mostly accepted that the case was closed.* * *'HOWEVER LONG IT TAKES'* * *None so blind as those who will not see. Mueller had held a press conference when the report was released stating, "I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments—that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interference in our election. That allegation deserves the attention of every American." When he finally testified before Congress, he said about Russian interference in our elections, "They are doing it while we sit here. And they expect to do it during the next campaign." And yet, today, Republicans in Congress and members of the Trump Administration are deliberately, consciously and employing an influence operation directed by the White House to accuse Ukraine, not Russia, of the interference. The question yet to be answered: Who is directing the White House?It is possible the ramifications of the Mueller Report for Donald Trump may not have been fully realized yet as the multiple attempts to obstruct justice it outlines could become an article of impeachment.But what to make of Giuliani, Kallstrom, and Freeh's continued hostility toward the Clintons for their supposed criminality while so publicly defending a man whose personal lawyer and "fixer," Michael Cohen, called him a "racist, con man, and cheat" before Congress, providing them copies of checks Trump used to pay off a porn star. Donald Trump seems to get a pass when it comes to the standards of morality each of these three—Giuliani, Kallstrom, and Freeh—claims to practice as part of their Catholic faith. Each of them understands the law, and when in their prime, enforced it. They especially understood criminal organizations and how they operated. But by keeping the focus on Hillary Clinton and all that "lock her up" chanting, Trump supporters don't have to face the reality that far more Trump associates have gone to jail than Clinton associates. When Trump's world comes crashing down from the weight of his illegalities—as inevitably it will—those Fox News appearances by Giuliani and Kallstrom, especially, will be played in a loop, tarnishing their legacies. There was an expression the FBI used when pursuing the most difficult cases—an expression each of these men is familiar with—"However long it takes."Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.
|
| North Korea warns it's 'up to the U.S. what Christmas gift' it will get ahead of nuclear talks deadline Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:03 AM PST ![North Korea warns it's 'up to the U.S. what Christmas gift' it will get ahead of nuclear talks deadline]( "North Korea warns it's 'up to the U.S. what Christmas gift' it will get ahead of nuclear talks deadline") North Korea is warning the United States it will have to choose "what Christmas gift" it will get ahead of a year-end nuclear talks deadline.North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has set a deadline for the end of the year for a breakthrough in nuclear talks, and after the U.S. postponed joint military exercises with South Korea as an "act of goodwill," North Korean Foreign Minister Kim Kye Gwan in November dismissed what he called U.S. attempts to "earn time, pretending it has made progress," adding "we are no longer interested in such talks that bring nothing to us" and "we will no longer gift the U.S. president with something he can boast of."The country is now escalating that rhetoric as the deadline looms, with North Korea's Ri Thae Song calling U.S. messaging "nothing but a foolish trick hatched to keep the DPRK bound to dialogue and use it in favor of the political situation and election in the U.S.," The Associated Press reports. Ri also warned, "What is left to be done now is the U.S. option and it is entirely up to the U.S. what Christmas gift it will select to get."The Washington Post notes North Korea "has a history of timing launches with an eye on international developments and even U.S. holidays."Talks between President Trump and Kim previously broke down at a summit in February, with Trump saying that "they wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety, but we couldn't do that." Working-level talks also broke down in October, AP notes, with North Korea blaming the U.S.' "old stance and attitude."Meanwhile, Trump in London on Tuesday expressed confidence that Kim will denuclearize, the Post reports, while adding he "likes sending rockets up, doesn't he?"More stories from theweek.com The case for Bernie Sanders What the Charles Schwab-TD Ameritrade acquisition means ICE employees reportedly thought McKinsey consultant's cost-cutting recommendations went too far
|
| US Citizen Charged With Assisting North Korea On Blockchain Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:01 AM PST ![US Citizen Charged With Assisting North Korea On Blockchain]( "US Citizen Charged With Assisting North Korea On Blockchain") The Justice Department said a 36-year-old U.S. citizen was charged in a Manhattan federal court Dec. 2 with illegally providing technical information to North Korea on how to use cryptocurrency and blockchain technology to evade sanctions. Authorities took Virgil Griffith into custody at Los Angeles International Airport on Nov. 28, according to the Justice Department. "Despite receiving warnings not to go, Griffith allegedly traveled to one of the United States' foremost adversaries, North Korea, where he taught his audience how to use blockchain technology to evade sanctions," said Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers in a statement.
|
| Trump’s Foreign Policy Won’t Distract Americans From Impeachment Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:00 AM PST ![Trump's Foreign Policy Won't Distract Americans From Impeachment]( "Trump's Foreign Policy Won't Distract Americans From Impeachment") (Bloomberg Opinion) -- If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, then foreign policy is the last refuge of a president facing impeachment. But Donald Trump will find it harder than Bill Clinton or Richard Nixon to use foreign policy to distract Americans from his own domestic political travails, whatever their ultimate outcome.He didn't help his cause with his plaintive tweet just before leaving for the NATO summit in London, reminding his 67.2 million followers that he would be at the summit "while the Democrats are holding the most ridiculous Impeachment hearings in history." So much for changing the subject.Say what you will about Nixon, but few modern-day presidents (George H.W. Bush may be an exception) had more experience with foreign policy or more inclination to conduct it. Even in the paranoid, self-pitying funk induced by Watergate, he mostly stayed on top of his foreign policy brief. When foreign affairs came up in meetings with Nixon, "it was just like giving him a needle," recalled Admiral Thomas Moorer, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "He would spark right up and get right in the middle of the conversation." Nixon was hardly above using foreign policy to distract the public from impeachment and try to burnish his leadership: As Walter Isaacson writes in his biography of Henry Kissinger, Nixon was "obsessed" with ending the Arab oil embargo, "a coup he thought might bring some relief from Watergate." Even when the president gave vent to his worst impulses, he was restrained or deflected not just by his seasoned secretary of state, but also by a formidable Cold War-era policy-making machinery and bureaucracy. Although Watergate distracted Nixon from his presidential duties, historian Ken Hughes of the Miller Center told me via e-mail, "It never came close to crippling the functioning of the federal government."The same could be said about Clinton, who mostly succeeded in "compartmentalizing" the impeachment hearings and the Monica Lewinsky scandal from the running of government. As Nancy Soderberg, a foreign policy veteran of both his terms, later recalled: "My experience was that Clinton was more engaged in foreign policy than ever before…. Usually he'd read every memo you gave him, but not necessarily all the attachments. People were joking: now they'd come back with all the attachments with notes on them.""Compartmentalize" is not a word associated with Trump. Over the last week, impeachment has dominated his Twitter feed, the surest barometer of the presidential id. Nor can one imagine Trump — whose infrequent, keep-it-to-one-page intelligence briefings have sparked derision and concern — bearing down on decision memos as a form of escapism.But the problem runs deeper than that: Even if he wanted to, Trump would be unable to immerse himself in the details of the national security process because there is no national security process. He's on his fourth national security adviser in three years. His Secretary of State is increasingly focused on "workforce development" in Kansas (read: an open Senate seat) rather than running his department. Even before Trump's defenestration and defamation of Marie Yovanovitch, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Foggy Bottom was struggling with both internal scandal and White House scorn. (It's also been saddled with a higher proportion of less qualified political appointments than under previous administrations.) As Colombia's ambassador to the U.S. lamented last month: "The U.S. State Department, which used to be important, is destroyed. It doesn't exist."Since the onset of his administration, Trump has made clear that he is "the only one that matters" on foreign policy. If anything, the impeachment hearings and his campaign for re-election (a pressure that neither Clinton nor Nixon faced) will only increase his tendency to improvise, either to blunt unfavorable testimony or to stoke his base. His announcement in Afghanistan last week that talks with the Taliban would resume, for instance, was as preemptory as his decision in September to cancel secret negotiations with them. Likewise his demand that South Korea increase its financial support for U.S. forces based there by 400 percent, more than the actual cost of their deployment and an amount that Pentagon officials struggled to justify to their Korean counterparts.All this may be good campaign rally fodder, but it's corrosive for the network of alliances that has underpinned U.S. security since the end of World War II. Look for similar political opportunism on a trade deal with China, negotiations with Trump's "friend" Kim Jong Un, even Iran. With his political survival at stake, Trump is likely to try anything.That prospective turmoil is no reason not to pursue impeachment. Congress has a constitutional duty to check executive overreach, and this president's destructive impetuousness presents a unique threat to America's global power and influence. Even if Congress ultimately fails to remove Trump from office, holding him to account will stand as a reminder to the world that the U.S. remains a nation of laws and democratic institutions.To contact the author of this story: James Gibney at jgibney5@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Newman at mnewman43@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.James Gibney writes editorials on international affairs for Bloomberg Opinion. Previously an editor at the Atlantic, the New York Times, Smithsonian, Foreign Policy and the New Republic, he was also in the U.S. Foreign Service from 1989 to 1997 in India, Japan and Washington.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Trump’s Foreign Policy Won’t Distract Americans From Impeachment Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:00 AM PST ![Trump's Foreign Policy Won't Distract Americans From Impeachment]( "Trump's Foreign Policy Won't Distract Americans From Impeachment") (Bloomberg Opinion) -- If patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, then foreign policy is the last refuge of a president facing impeachment. But Donald Trump will find it harder than Bill Clinton or Richard Nixon to use foreign policy to distract Americans from his own domestic political travails, whatever their ultimate outcome.He didn't help his cause with his plaintive tweet just before leaving for the NATO summit in London, reminding his 67.2 million followers that he would be at the summit "while the Democrats are holding the most ridiculous Impeachment hearings in history." So much for changing the subject.Say what you will about Nixon, but few modern-day presidents (George H.W. Bush may be an exception) had more experience with foreign policy or more inclination to conduct it. Even in the paranoid, self-pitying funk induced by Watergate, he mostly stayed on top of his foreign policy brief. When foreign affairs came up in meetings with Nixon, "it was just like giving him a needle," recalled Admiral Thomas Moorer, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "He would spark right up and get right in the middle of the conversation." Nixon was hardly above using foreign policy to distract the public from impeachment and try to burnish his leadership: As Walter Isaacson writes in his biography of Henry Kissinger, Nixon was "obsessed" with ending the Arab oil embargo, "a coup he thought might bring some relief from Watergate." Even when the president gave vent to his worst impulses, he was restrained or deflected not just by his seasoned secretary of state, but also by a formidable Cold War-era policy-making machinery and bureaucracy. Although Watergate distracted Nixon from his presidential duties, historian Ken Hughes of the Miller Center told me via e-mail, "It never came close to crippling the functioning of the federal government."The same could be said about Clinton, who mostly succeeded in "compartmentalizing" the impeachment hearings and the Monica Lewinsky scandal from the running of government. As Nancy Soderberg, a foreign policy veteran of both his terms, later recalled: "My experience was that Clinton was more engaged in foreign policy than ever before…. Usually he'd read every memo you gave him, but not necessarily all the attachments. People were joking: now they'd come back with all the attachments with notes on them.""Compartmentalize" is not a word associated with Trump. Over the last week, impeachment has dominated his Twitter feed, the surest barometer of the presidential id. Nor can one imagine Trump — whose infrequent, keep-it-to-one-page intelligence briefings have sparked derision and concern — bearing down on decision memos as a form of escapism.But the problem runs deeper than that: Even if he wanted to, Trump would be unable to immerse himself in the details of the national security process because there is no national security process. He's on his fourth national security adviser in three years. His Secretary of State is increasingly focused on "workforce development" in Kansas (read: an open Senate seat) rather than running his department. Even before Trump's defenestration and defamation of Marie Yovanovitch, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Foggy Bottom was struggling with both internal scandal and White House scorn. (It's also been saddled with a higher proportion of less qualified political appointments than under previous administrations.) As Colombia's ambassador to the U.S. lamented last month: "The U.S. State Department, which used to be important, is destroyed. It doesn't exist."Since the onset of his administration, Trump has made clear that he is "the only one that matters" on foreign policy. If anything, the impeachment hearings and his campaign for re-election (a pressure that neither Clinton nor Nixon faced) will only increase his tendency to improvise, either to blunt unfavorable testimony or to stoke his base. His announcement in Afghanistan last week that talks with the Taliban would resume, for instance, was as preemptory as his decision in September to cancel secret negotiations with them. Likewise his demand that South Korea increase its financial support for U.S. forces based there by 400 percent, more than the actual cost of their deployment and an amount that Pentagon officials struggled to justify to their Korean counterparts.All this may be good campaign rally fodder, but it's corrosive for the network of alliances that has underpinned U.S. security since the end of World War II. Look for similar political opportunism on a trade deal with China, negotiations with Trump's "friend" Kim Jong Un, even Iran. With his political survival at stake, Trump is likely to try anything.That prospective turmoil is no reason not to pursue impeachment. Congress has a constitutional duty to check executive overreach, and this president's destructive impetuousness presents a unique threat to America's global power and influence. Even if Congress ultimately fails to remove Trump from office, holding him to account will stand as a reminder to the world that the U.S. remains a nation of laws and democratic institutions.To contact the author of this story: James Gibney at jgibney5@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Newman at mnewman43@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.James Gibney writes editorials on international affairs for Bloomberg Opinion. Previously an editor at the Atlantic, the New York Times, Smithsonian, Foreign Policy and the New Republic, he was also in the U.S. Foreign Service from 1989 to 1997 in India, Japan and Washington.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Theory Announces Giving Tuesday Partnership with Girl Up to Support Girl Leaders Worldwide Posted: 03 Dec 2019 06:00 AM PST ![Theory Announces Giving Tuesday Partnership with Girl Up to Support Girl Leaders Worldwide]( "Theory Announces Giving Tuesday Partnership with Girl Up to Support Girl Leaders Worldwide") Theory is partnering with Girl Up, an initiative founded by the United Nations Foundation, to support leadership development programs that activate the potential of every girl, everywhere. On December 3, as part of Giving Tuesday, Theory will donate 10% of proceeds from purchases at its U.S. full-price stores and Theory.com to Girl Up.
|
| Cannabis On The Tickets In The Coming UK Elections Posted: 03 Dec 2019 05:49 AM PST ![Cannabis On The Tickets In The Coming UK Elections]( "Cannabis On The Tickets In The Coming UK Elections") As voters in the United Kingdom prepare to head to the polls on December 12, political conversation revolves mainly around the Brexit question, though there are other issues on the ballot. While cannabis does not lead the agenda, it has gained sufficient social traction for inclusion in most party manifestos, marking an historic first in UK politics. References to cannabis cover medicinal and recreational use, if without mention of either CBD or hemp, mainly because CBD is already readily available (and perceived despite legal uncertainties as fully legal) while hemp remains off the general electorate's political radar.
|
| Fox News host Tucker Carlson: Putin does not hate America like liberals do Posted: 03 Dec 2019 05:25 AM PST  Public intellectual and TV anchor attacks 'mindless public intellectuals and hair hats in the television anchor's seat' * Help us cover the critical issues of 2020. This Giving Tuesday, consider making a contribution Russia may be "a cold and vodka-soaked and only marginally relevant place", according to Tucker Carlson, but the Fox News host seems determined to make controversial statements about it central to his primetime show.On Monday night, a week after making waves by saying he was "rooting" for Russia in its conflict with Ukraine – and then claiming to have been joking – the host blasted critics of the Trump administration employed by cable news."Putin," he said, "for all his faults, does not hate America as much as many of these people do."Bemoaning with Spiro Agnew-esque verve the "sneering accusations of our mindless public intellectuals and hair hats in the television anchor's seat", the public intellectual and TV anchor began by taking aim at NBC Meet the Press host Chuck Todd, for his questioning of Louisiana Republican senator John Kennedy on Sunday.Todd and Kennedy engaged in a fiery exchange over the senator's insistence that the theory Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election, rather than Russia, merits further investigation.Todd responded: "You realize the only other person selling this argument outside the United States is this man, Vladimir Putin!"> He's a living metaphor, he's the boogeyman! Step out of line and you're a traitor in league with Vladimir Putin!The US intelligence community agrees it was Moscow not Kyiv which interfered in 2016, in the aim of helping Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. Nonetheless, as Trump faces impeachment for his conduct regarding Ukraine, his supporters in Congress are pushing the Ukraine conspiracy theory.Carlson called Todd a "mouth-breather" who "went full Joe McCarthy" on Kennedy and claimed special counsel Robert Mueller, who investigated Russian interference in 2016, links between Trump and Moscow and possible obstruction of justice by the president, found nothing amiss."It's not really a story," he insisted, "it never happened, there was no collusion, Russia didn't hack our democracy. The whole thing was a ludicrous talking point invented by the Hillary Clinton campaign on or about 9 November 2016", the day after the election.Mueller did not prove criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Moscow. He also emphasised that "collusion" is not a term in US criminal law.But he did chart extensive contacts between the Trump campaign and Moscow and associates of the president including campaign chair Paul Manafort, national security adviser Michael Flynn, lawyer Michael Cohen and close aide Roger Stone have been convicted on charges arising from the inquiry. The special counsel also indicted 26 Russian nationals and three Russian companies and detailed extensive attempts by the president to obstruct the course of justice.Carlson continued, playing a montage of MSNBC pundits and hosts bemoaning attitudes to Russia within the Trump administration and the Republican party."If you excluded debunked conspiracy theories," Carlson said, "could any of these people actually tell you why Vladimir Putin is so bad? Why is he so bad? 'He's bad!' Chuck Todd says. OK, speak slowly so I can understand."Carlson continued: "For Chuck Todd and the rest of the dummies, Vladimir Putin isn't a real person with actual ideas and priorities and a country and beliefs. No, he stopped being that long ago. He's a metaphor, a living metaphor, he's the boogeyman! Step out of line and you're a traitor in league with Vladimir Putin!"The irony, of course, is that Putin, for all his faults, does not hate America as much as many of these people do. They really dislike our country. And they call other people traitors because they're 'mouthing the talking points of Putin'! These are people who don't know anything about Russia, who don't speak Russian!"In conclusion, Carlson said the US "ought to be in a relationship with Russia aligned against China, to the extent that we can".
|
| UN says half of Zimbabwe’s people face severe hunger Posted: 03 Dec 2019 05:06 AM PST  The World Food Program said it plans to more than double the number of people it helps to more than 4 million. A U.N. expert on the right to food last week said Zimbabwe is on the brink of man-made starvation and the number of people needing help is "shocking" for a country not in conflict.
|
| Hughes JUPITER System Selected by Speedcast to Power Community Wi-Fi Hotspots across the Philippines Posted: 03 Dec 2019 05:00 AM PST  Hughes Network Systems, LLC (HUGHES), the global leader in broadband satellite networks and services, today announced that Speedcast, a trusted provider of remote communications and IT solutions, has chosen the Hughes JUPITER™ System to power Community Wi-Fi Hotspots across the Philippines. The operator will employ a JUPITER gateway and 3,000 satellite terminals to establish Internet access in public places across the island nation. The award is part of the Pipol Konek Free Public Internet Access Program implemented by the Department of Information and Communications (DICT) with support of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP). Pipol Konek provides Wi-Fi in public places such as parks, plazas, libraries, government offices, schools, universities, hospitals, airports and health clinics.
|
| Sudan says at least 23 killed in factory fire Posted: 03 Dec 2019 04:52 AM PST ![Sudan says at least 23 killed in factory fire]( "Sudan says at least 23 killed in factory fire") At least 23 people have died in a huge explosion that tore through a tile factory in Sudan's capital of Khartoum on Tuesday, the government said. The blaze also injured over 130 people, several critically, the cabinet added, suggesting the death toll from the blaze could rise as burn victims were being treated at local hospitals. The government ordered an investigation into the exact cause and what it described as a lack of basic safety measures at a site full of combustible material.
|
