| Trump Called Out For His Hypocrisy Championing A Free Press — In Iran Posted: 12 Jan 2020 05:41 PM PST  "We know that he wants reporters to roam free in Iran," GOP presidential challenger Bill Weld said. But in America, "he says a free press is the enemy of the people."
|
| Anger and grief as Canada remembers Iran plane crash victims Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:47 PM PST  Thousands of people attended vigils Sunday in Canada for the 57 Canadian victims of the Ukrainian airliner crash in Iran, most of them from the Iranian community. "We want to assure all families and all Canadians that we will not rest until there are answers," he said. Six university students were killed when the Ukraine International Airlines flight crashed on January 8, shortly after takeoff from Tehran's airport.
|
| No Soul Searching for Xi Jinping After Taiwan Rebuffs China in Election Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:44 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- In a democracy, two resounding election defeats in a matter of months might prompt some soul searching in the losing camp.In China, however, a snub at the polls in territories it claims is more a minor setback rather than a sign of a flawed strategy. President Xi Jinping's government showed that yet again in the wake of Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen's landside win on Saturday, which came shortly after Hong Kong's pro-democracy forces gave Beijing a black eye in a November election."This temporary counter-current is just a bubble under the tide of the times," the official state-run Xinhua News Agency said in a commentary after Tsai's win. Blaming "anti-China political forces in the West" and calling the election a "fluke," it warned that "reunification cannot be stopped by any force or anyone."China's response signals it would maintain a hard line during Tsai's second term, using its clout as the world's second-biggest economy to lure Taipei's 15 remaining formal diplomatic partners and offer further incentives to Taiwanese businesses. It could also flex its increasing military strength by stepping up air force and naval patrols around the island.But just as China's uncompromising approach in Hong Kong has strengthened the city's pro-democracy forces, so far its tough approach to Taiwan has only reduced support for its stated goal of unification. Tsai saw her poll numbers surge after her vocal backing of Hong Kong's protests, which have widespread support in Taiwan."I doubt that Beijing will reflect on the meaning of President Tsai's victory, but will double down on the coercive policies it deployed during her first term," said Richard Bush, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former head of the American Institute in Taiwan. "Beijing sees the Trump administration, and not President Tsai, as the more dangerous variable here. It will push back harder against U.S. initiatives to help Taiwan."Saturday's election victory by Tsai's pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party amounted to its fourth win over Taiwan's China-friendly opposition in six elections since 2000. She secured 57% of the vote, compared with 39% for Han Kuo-yu, whose Kuomintang party oversaw a historic expansion of cross-strait economic ties in the 1990s. Her party also held onto its majority in the legislature, albeit with a reduced margin.In her first public appearances after the win, Tsai signaled she was bracing for Beijing's wrath by meeting local envoys from China's biggest rivals, the U.S. and Japan. While it's extremely unlikely Tsai would assert the island's formal independence, a move that could trigger war, she has angered Beijing by refusing to accept the belief that both sides are part of "one China.""In the past three years, Taiwan has refused to bow to pressure, but also refrained from provocation or rash behavior when it comes to cross-strait relations," Tsai told the Japanese delegation Sunday in Taipei. "In the future, we will continue to take this same approach."U.S. SupportAny resolution of Taiwan's status risks bringing China into a direct military conflict with the U.S., the island's main ally and arms supplier. Support for Taipei has surged in Washington since President Donald Trump held an unprecedented phone call with Tsai, dubbed China a "strategic competitor" and launched a bruising trade war against Xi's government.While a formal trade deal with the U.S. remains elusive, Taiwan has emerged as one of the surprise beneficiaries of the trade war, with its companies securing orders worth billions of dollars from American customers forced to seek alternative suppliers outside China. The Trump administration, among other things, also approved an $8 billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan last year, the first such deal in almost 30 years."The American people and the people of Taiwan are not just partners -- we are members of the same community of democracies, bonded by our shared political, economic, and international values," U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo said in a statement after the election. Similar remarks from prominent Democrats suggest such support for Taiwan will endure regardless of the outcome of U.S.'s own election in November.Military OptionThe U.S.'s involvement makes it particularly difficult for Xi to take a softer approach, since the Communist Party has promised to restore what it believes was its rightful territory before a "century of humiliation" at the hands of colonial powers. Earlier this month, China appointed an official that analysts described as a "strong man" to replace its top representative in Hong Kong, after a historic defeat for Beijing loyalists in local elections.In a speech last year, Xi reaffirmed Beijing's desire to govern Taiwan under the same "one country, two systems" framework as Hong Kong. Taiwan's election outcome would only embolden those in Beijing who favor asserting control over the island by force, according to one Chinese official who asked not to be named speculating about internal policy discussions."The status of Taiwan is not up to the 23 million people in Taiwan to decide by themselves," said Gao Zhikai, a former Chinese diplomat and interpreter for late paramount leader Deng Xiaoping. "One way or another this issue will need to come to a head. Everyone hopes it will be peaceful, but eventually if this fails there may be other solutions."Hearts and MindsWhile the Communist Party-led government in Beijing claims Taiwan as part of its territory, it has never controlled the island. China's former Nationalist government under Chiang Kai-shek assumed power over Taiwan from the Japanese after World War II. It later became a refuge for Chiang and his troops as they fled the Communists at the end of China's civil war in 1949.Xi's hard line against Taiwan and Hong Kong may appeal to the almost 1.4 billion people already living under direct Communist Party rule in the mainland. Aided by decades of nationalist education and the world's most sophisticated censorship regime, Beijing has so far enjoyed broad domestic support for its policies in both territories.But that approach has backfired among the people that China wants to control. Beijing's belligerent tone has failed to win the hearts and minds of the public and left "China with no serious allies in Taiwan, not even those who want to promote peaceful unification," according to Chang Ya-chung, a professor of political science at National Taiwan University who is among the minority in Taiwan that support unification."The Chinese Communist Party leadership seems to be falling for its own propaganda and underestimating the challenges it faces in seeking to occupy Taiwan," said Alex Joske, an analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute who focuses on Chinese Communist Party influence operations. "Its attempts to interfere in Taiwan appear to have sowed division in society, but haven't successfully changed the outcome of this election."\--With assistance from Miaojung Lin.To contact the reporters on this story: Samson Ellis in Taipei at sellis29@bloomberg.net;Peter Martin in Beijing at pmartin138@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: John Liu at jliu42@bloomberg.net, ;Daniel Ten Kate at dtenkate@bloomberg.net, Brendan ScottFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Canada PM Trudeau: Iran plane families will get answers Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:43 PM PST  Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Sunday it's been gut-wrenching to listen to stories from relatives of 57 Canadians who perished in the downing of a Ukrainian jetliner in Iran last week as he attended one of several memorials across the country. Speaking at a memorial with a capacity crowd of 2,300 in Edmonton, Alberta, Trudeau said he has learned many of the victims came to Canada in search of new opportunities for their families, but those families are now consumed by grief and outrage. All 176 on board were killed, including 138 who were headed for Canada.
|
| 7 bombs struck an Iraqi joint military base housing US soldiers, wounding 4 Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:18 PM PST  The attack comes just days after two military bases in Iraq that house US forces were targeted by Iran as tensions between the countries escalated.
|
| Ireland’s Prime Minister Heads for Election With Brexit Win in Hand Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:01 PM PST |
| Who’s Oman’s New Sultan Haitham bin Tariq? Q&A Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:00 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- Oman's new sultan takes charge of a nation that has known only one ruler for the past half-century. And while the country Haitham bin Tariq now leads is nothing like the impoverished backwater his cousin Qaboos took over back in 1970, he, too, is grabbing the reins in complicated times.Qaboos, who died Friday at 79, oversaw the transformation of Oman from a collection of sleepy villages to a developed nation powered by oil revenue. A foreign policy maverick, he also cemented his country's reputation as an oasis of calm in a turbulent region.But Oman, strategically located near key oil shipping lines at the eastern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, has been struggling for years to pull itself out of an economic slump, and the quiet quashing of dissent has become commonplace. Under Haitham, Qaboos's handpicked successor, the small nation famous for its independent ways may also need to rethink alliances.What Do We Know About Haitham Bin Tariq?Not much. The new leader has held governmental positions over the last three decades, including minister of culture and heritage, general secretary of foreign affairs and head of the Anglo-Omani society. He also led the Oman Vision 2040 committee, the country's economic and social development strategy.Unlike some of his brothers and his predecessor, who died Friday at 79, he doesn't have a military background, and was assigned economic, sports, cultural and foreign policy portfolios before ascending the throne. He is also thought to have strong ties to traditional ally Britain and neighboring Gulf Arab states.A 2009 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Muscat, leaked by WikiLeaks, said he's invested his own money in media, advertising, telecommunications, tourism, energy services and construction. But he's earned a special reputation for his real estate holdings. His elevation to the sultanate defied the prediction of one U.S. diplomat, who speculated that one failed project may have "tarnished" Haitham's prospects of taking the throne.What Are Some of the Challenges Sultan Haitham Faces?Lifting Oman out of economic stagnation may be his biggest challenge."The new leader faces three economic challenges: controlling the increase in public debt, preserving the currency peg and diversifying the economy away from oil," said Bloomberg's chief Middle East economist, Ziad Daoud. "The first two issues require urgent action; and as head of the Oman Vision 2040 committee, he would understand the difficulties of achieving diversification."The finances of the largest Arab crude producer outside the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries have been battered by a slump in oil prices. Oman plans to borrow 2 billion rials ($5.2 billion) to bridge the bulk of its 2020 budget deficit, which is expected to reach 2.5 billion rials this year. The country's debt is rated as junk by all three major rating companies, and two of them have a negative outlook.Gross domestic product is expected to expand by 1.5% in 2019 and 2.8% in 2020, according to a Bloomberg survey of economists.The economic situation was at the root of protests in 2011 "and it has only worsened since the fall of oil prices in 2014," said Mar Valeri, an Oman expert at the University of Exeter. "The process of diversifying sources of revenue of the state has been extremely slow."This situation may determine Haitham's relations with its richer neighbors, Valeri said.Will Oman's Foreign Policy Change?By anointing Haitham as his successor, Qaboos may have seen him as continuing his own path. But Oman's needs have been changing, as have its old alliances. The sultanate has historically enjoyed a close relationship with the U.K., but London's own Brexit-fueled economic needs have seen it shift priorities to Oman's wealthier neighbors.Qaboos's fiercely unorthodox foreign policy kept some of Oman's richer Gulf neighbors at arm's length, and relations with the United Arab Emirates have been particularly tense. But if Haitham embarks on an effort to jump-start the economy, he may consider strengthening some of those ties. More affluent Gulf states have stepped in to support struggling Arab states economically in the past, but Oman has been unwilling to pay the political cost of lost independence.To maintain its independence, Oman has to balance the U.A.E. and Saudi Arabia, said Kristin Smith Diwan, a senior resident scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington. "Courting their economic engagement while deflecting any infringements on Oman's sovereignty," she said. "It's a tough act."\--With assistance from Sylvia Westall.To contact the reporter on this story: Layan Odeh in Dubai at lodeh3@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Shaji Mathew at shajimathew@bloomberg.net, Amy Teibel, Claudia MaedlerFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Pompeo Plans Dinner With Tech Leaders Including Oracle’s Ellison Posted: 12 Jan 2020 02:59 PM PST  (Bloomberg) -- Secretary of State Michael Pompeo is planning to attend a private dinner on Monday with tech leaders including Oracle Corp.'s Larry Ellison, according to people familiar with the matter. The dinner, which will be held in San Francisco, comes as tensions between the U.S. and Iran run high, and days after Pompeo announced new sanctions on the country.The hope is to drum up support for the Trump administration in Silicon Valley amid the ongoing conflict with Iran, according to one of the people, all of whom asked not to be identified discussing private information.The dinner guest list includes about 15 people, many of them tech industry leaders, including Sarah Friar, the chief executive officer of Nextdoor.com Inc., Marc Andreessen, the prominent venture capitalist, and Gregory Becker, the CEO of Silicon Valley Bank, the person said.Representatives for Oracle, Nextdoor, Andreessen Horowitz and Silicon Valley Bank didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.The dinner is set to follow appearances earlier Monday for Pompeo in Silicon Valley, including public events at the Commonwealth Club and Stanford University's Hoover Institution.\--With assistance from Nick Wadhams and Nico Grant.To contact the reporter on this story: Sarah Frier in San Francisco at sfrier1@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Jillian Ward at jward56@bloomberg.net, Anne VanderMey, Virginia Van NattaFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| US to send home some Saudi military students after shooting Posted: 12 Jan 2020 02:09 PM PST |
| Richard Ratcliffe says arrest of British ambassador 'a bad sign' for his wife Nazanin as she remains incarcerated Posted: 12 Jan 2020 12:50 PM PST  The husband of British-Iranian mother Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe has said the arrest of the UK's ambassador to Iran is a "really bad sign for us". Richard Ratcliffe said the detention of Rob Macaire during anti-government protests in Tehran did not bode well for his wife, who has been held "essentially as a hostage" for almost four years. He also said US President Donald Trump's actions have made the situation "much more volatile" but noted "his administration has got Americans home, whereas the UK hasn't succeeded". Mr Ratcliffe told Sky News' Sophie Ridge show: "The arrest of the ambassador and the attempt to try and turn that into 'this is a foreign plot, it's the British organising the protest' which is what Iranian Press TV has put out, it's a really bad sign for us. "Of course we are in the middle of all that because Nazanin is regularly brought out as someone involved in overthrowing the regime and all those fake stories. Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe, a charity worker from London, has suffered declining physical and mental health during her detention and suffered panic attacks amid the rising political tensions in recent days. Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe is in Evin prison Credit: Family Handout/PA Wire Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe is serving a five-year sentence over allegations, which she vehemently denies, of plotting to overthrow the Tehran government, having been arrested in 2016 during a holiday visit to show her baby daughter Gabriella, now aged five, to her parents. Mr Ratcliffe believes once her sentence concludes the regime will "just add a second sentence at the end, so yes the longer we don't get out the more likely we are to have many more years to do". The long-time campaigner for her freedom said he understands he will have a meeting with Prime Minister Boris Johnson "not next week but the week after". Rights groups say her trial was a sham and describe her as a prisoner of conscience, while the Foreign Office says her treatment fails to meet obligations under international law. Mr Ratcliffe says she is being held by the Islamic republic as a diplomatic bargaining chip.
|
| Over half of Americans disapprove of how Trump is handling the situation with Iran as tensions near a breaking point Posted: 12 Jan 2020 12:05 PM PST  Fifty-six percent of American voters say they disapprove of how Trump has handled the situation with Iran, according to a poll conducted by Ipsos.
|
| The Importance of Being China Posted: 12 Jan 2020 11:35 AM PST  Beijing has flexed is military and political muscles in its neighborhood of distrust again and again and again. But now, one of those neighbors has leverage over Xi Jinping's kingdom thanks to a precedent set by the Philippines.
|
| Iran's only female Olympic medalist defected to Europe, citing the country's oppressive treatment of women in a goodbye Instagram post Posted: 12 Jan 2020 11:29 AM PST  Kimia Alizadeh won a bronze medal in taekwondo in the 2016 summer Olympics, and now says she is one of millions of oppressed women in Iran.
|
| Trump claims to be 'dealmaker not warmonger' after killing top Iranian general and increasing tensions across Middle East Posted: 12 Jan 2020 10:43 AM PST  Donald Trump has claimed he is a "not a warmonger" but a "dealmaker" - days after ordering the killing of Iran's top general Qassem Soleimani and escalating tensions between the Middle Eastern country and his own.Sharing quotes from a sympathetic article by New York Post columnist and Fox News pundit Michael Goodwin, who described Mr Trump as someone who takes the military action only as a "last resort", the American leader wrote: "Could not have said it better myself".
|
| Ticket change in Tehran saves Ukrainian's life Posted: 12 Jan 2020 10:42 AM PST  A Ukrainian political analyst who was in Iran's capital for an international conference planned to head home when it was done, but then chose to stay one more day and do some sightseeing. Andrey Buzarov told The Associated Press on Sunday that his original plan would have put him on the flight that Iran shot down by mistake last week, killing all 176 people on board.
|
| The resolution to limit Trump's war powers is nothing but an empty political gesture Posted: 12 Jan 2020 10:37 AM PST  A war powers resolution won't stop Trump from doing anything he would do anyway in Iran. It's just a signal that Congress doesn't trust Trump.
|
| Trump Trade Deal Raises Issue of Trusting China to Deliver Posted: 12 Jan 2020 10:02 AM PST  (Bloomberg) -- After three years of tweets and tariffs, President Donald Trump has arrived at his China moment.With the signing Wednesday of a "phase one" deal that includes Chinese commitments to respect American intellectual property, not manipulate its currency, and a U.S. expectation for $200 billion in new purchases that should help reduce a yawning trade deficit and repair some of the damage suffered by farmers, Trump will deliver at least a partial agreement many skeptics doubted was ever possible.But even that political victory leaves Trump confronting the same China conundrum that has plagued his predecessors. The broad and bipartisan agreement in Washington is that American presidents have for decades been hoodwinked by a China that has often failed to deliver on its promises.Trump and his lieutenants, of course, insist that this time is different, that experts who see phase one as a rebranding of old guarantees are wrong. Unlike agreements negotiated by prior administrations, this one is enforceable, they say, and there will be real and immediate economic repercussions for China if it comes up short."We think it was a good negotiation, we think it will make a real difference," U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer told reporters on Dec. 13. "A skeptic would say 'we'll see' and that's probably a wise position to take. But our expectation is that they keep their obligations and in any event, they're enforceable."Also, it's not the end of the story, the White House says. Coming soon, though even Trump acknowledges probably not before the November U.S. presidential election, is a second deal that will address long-standing American complaints not covered in the initial 86-page document. Among those: the state subsidies -- from discounted loans to cheap electricity -- that have nurtured a growing club of Chinese multinationals.Some inside and close to the White House have their own doubts that second installment will ever materialize. Yet the more immediate question is whether China will even live up to the promises in the first phase. And if not, the question becomes whether Trump will have the political courage to take action ahead of the election, even it if risks roiling the markets on which he is hanging his economic credentials."There is a real enforcement provision," U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Sunday on Fox News. "And if they don't comply with the agreement, the president retains the authority to put on tariffs, both existing tariffs and additional tariffs." In a talking points memo distributed to supporters last month, the administration said it called for each country to establish a special office to monitor the deal's implementation and address any disputes. If conflicts aren't resolved within 90 days, the U.S. could take unspecified "proportionate" action against China and vice versa. Either party could also abandon the deal, of course.But some analysts say such a framework risks being inherently political.Wendy Cutler, a veteran trade negotiator now at the Asia Society Policy Institute, says that by not deferring to independent panels or arbitrators, the dispute mechanism leaves the question of violations -- and how to respond -- in the eye of the beholder. That means politics and competing economic pressures and interests are likely to intrude, as they have before. It also means that the only arbiter of whether the Chinese are keeping their end of the bargain will be the Trump administration, which may be loath toadmit they are not."What does it say for one of his key negotiating accomplishments if the president has to admit the agreement isn't working as intended?" Cutler says.The Hawkish CampSteve Bannon, Trump's former White House chief strategist, says there won't be enough time before November for the president to take action if China doesn't abide by the deal's terms. "I don't think we'll be able to ascertain whether they lived up to the commitments until after the 2020 election," he said.Bannon, who since leaving the administration in 2017 has made hawkishness on China a central part of his brand, says hardliners like him who see communist China as an existential threat to America remain disappointed by a phase one deal they see as easing the pressure on Beijing. A second phase will only be possible if China is put under "extreme duress" by an economic assault on multiple fronts, including restrictions on access to U.S. capital markets, he told Bloomberg News.More moderate observers have their doubts as well. Jude Blanchette, a China expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, says there are signs already that China and particularly its own economic nationalists have been emboldened by the phase one deal and are shrugging off the commitments it includes."There's a darn good chance we just see a repeat of this show which has been going on certainly since WTO accession in 2001 of China doing what it can to get its tiptoes right up to the letter of the law but in fundamental ways ignoring the spirit of it," Blanchette says.That is in part because everything from Trump's impeachment to the looming election and even the president's handling of Iran is adding to China's perception of weakness rather than strength in Washington."They smell blood for Trump," Blanchette says. "There has always been, especially since impeachment, a narrative in China that we've got him where we want him, we've got a lot more leverage over him than we had."Rod Hunter, who agonized over China policy while on President George W. Bush's National Security Council and is now a partner at law firm Baker McKenzie, argues that no single agreement can bridge the huge "asymmetry of interests" between the U.S. and China over key issues like the heavy role of the state in the Chinese economy."We see that as a problem. But the Chinese government sees that as a feature, a virtue of their system," Hunter says.'Steady Strides'For its part, Beijing is pointing to progress.A foreign investment law that took effect Jan. 1 bans administrative agencies from forcing technology transfers. The government also brought forward plans to allow full foreign ownership of life insurers, futures, securities and mutual fund companies by 2020, after cracking the door open in 2018. And while the U.S. labeled China as a "currency manipulator" in August at the height of trade war, the People's Bank of China has long relinquished direct intervention."China has made steady strides in reform and opening-up over the past year," Cui Tiankai, China's ambassador to the U.S., said last week at a gala in New York for Chinese companies that invest in the U.S.Bridging the differences requires a careful balance of diplomacy and leverage. One solution being pushed by Mnuchin is to revive a forum for bilateral discussion that the Trump administration disbanded in 2017, but it's unclear yet whether the president will go for that idea.Hunter and others acknowledge that even if China does not comply with the terms of the phase one deal, Trump has still managed to reset the relationship in ways other than the notable redirection of global supply chains and a reduction in Chinese imports, which is why there is so much talk in policy circles of a decoupling or a new Cold War.Technology BattlesThe administration has enforced a new, broader conception of national security and given defense and intelligence officials a bigger say in economic policy, particularly on China. In practical terms that has meant stricter curbs on Chinese investment in the U.S. and on the ability of American technology companies to do business with China, as seen most vividly in the blacklisting last year of Chinese tech giant Huawei Technologies Co.Those efforts aren't ending with the new truce. In fact, they are expanding. In the pipeline is a new Commerce Department rule to restrict U.S. imports of telecommunications equipment -- such as that made by Huawei -- that might threaten U.S. national security.Tariffs, meanwhile, will remain a blunt stick. According to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, average U.S. levies on Chinese imports will be 19.3% even after the deal takes effect -- more than six times higher than before the trade war began in 2018."A President Warren, a President Biden, they are not going to be able to unwind that," Hunter says. "They are not just going to be able to say on Jan. 21st 'never mind, we're taking away the tariffs without getting something in return.'"(Updates with Mnuchin comment in eighth paragraph.)\--With assistance from Joshua Green and Miao Han.To contact the reporters on this story: Shawn Donnan in Washington at sdonnan@bloomberg.net;Jenny Leonard in Washington at jleonard67@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Brendan Murray at brmurray@bloomberg.net, Ros KrasnyFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Defense secretary believes U.S. embassies were likely targets, but 'didn't see' specific threats from Iran Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:57 AM PST  Defense Secretary Mark Esper has remained somewhat under-the-radar during the United States' flirtation with conflict with Iran, ceding center stage to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, but he opened up about his stance on the situation Sunday during an appearance on CBS' Face the Nation.Esper stood by President Trump's decision to kill Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani in an airstrike earlier this month in Iraq, arguing that the U.S. is safer now because of it. He didn't, however, appear to convince host Margaret Brennan with his response to her question about the intelligence the U.S. received on potential direct threats prior to Soleimani's death.Trump previously said Washington received word of an attack against multiple U.S. embassies in the region, though that's been disputed, and it remains unclear if there was knowledge of any tangible threat, or if the decision was based on a wider assessment. Esper noted that he shared the president's view that embassies could have been the targets, but he didn't have much of an argument when Brennan pointed out that sounded more like an assessment than anything. Esper acknowledged he "didn't see" anything specific in terms of threats against the embassies, but that didn't change his expectation that they were the most likely targets.> NEWS: @EsperDod tells @margbrennan he "didn't see" specific evidence showing Iran planned to strike 4 U.S. embassies, despite @realDonaldTrump saying an attack at multiple embassies was "imminent." Watch more of Esper's interview on @FacetheNation today. pic.twitter.com/1Nud8waok1> > — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) January 12, 2020White House National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien, meanwhile, defended the "exquisite intelligence" gathered by the U.S. in the lead up to Soleimani's death.More stories from theweek.com The death of rock's master craftsman NFL's future, present on display Sunday thanks to a pair thrilling QB matchups Pelosi says delaying articles of impeachment achieved 'very positive' results
|
| 4 Iraqi servicemen wounded by rocket attack on air base Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:56 AM PST  Four members of Iraq's military were wounded Sunday in a rocket attack targeting an air base just north of Baghdad where American trainers were present until recently, Iraqi security officials said. The attack by at least six rockets came just days after Iran fired ballistic missiles at two bases in Iraq that house U.S. forces, causing no casualties. There are no Americans currently at Balad air base and there were none during the the attack, according to a coalition spokesperson.
|
| Billionaire Tom Steyer defends place in Iowa Democratic debate Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:45 AM PST  * Billionaire hedge funder is sixth qualifier for seventh debate * How to dump Trump: Rick Wilson on Running Against the DevilTom Steyer, the billionaire hedge funder, has claimed picking a nominee to face Donald Trump in November is "more about judgment than experience".Steyer this week became the sixth qualifier for the seventh Democratic presidential debate, in Des Moines on Tuesday, after he met polling and donor-based marks set by the Democratic National Committee.He is way down the field in Iowa, the first state to vote, but polls in South Carolina and Nevada, where he has spent heavily on ads that depict him as an "outsider" ready to take on Trump, put him over the top.Steyer will line up against former senator and vice-president Joe Biden; senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar; and Pete Buttigieg, formerly mayor of South Bend, Indiana.None of the other candidates, among them New Jersey senator Cory Booker, tech entrepreneur Andrew Yang and another billionaire, former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, will be present.Steyer's success has prompted pointed remarks from analysts and other candidates. Warren said recently she did not "believe that elections ought to be for sale". Others have pointed to an all-white debate lineup in the absence of Booker, the only African American left in the race, and what that says for a party committed to recognising diversity.Asked what qualified him to seek the White House, Steyer told CNN's State of the Union: "I did business for over 30 years working and traveling around the world, meeting with governments, talking to the heads of huge corporations, and understanding actually what drives America's business around the world and our relationships with other countries, and what makes that trade and relationship succeed."He also said the person who "did the best job in figuring out American foreign policy and military policy" over the last two decades was "a state senator from Illinois with absolutely no military or international experience named Barack Obama, who said, against the advice of everybody who was an insider in Washington DC, that the Iraq war was a mistake".Amid fierce controversy over Trump's aggression towards Iran, Steyer added: "When you tell me that what we really need is more conventional DC thinking about our international policy, our foreign policy, and our military policy, I would actually suggest to you that maybe this is more about judgment than experience."Steyer has a financial advantage over most other candidates. Many have criticised him, and Bloomberg, for seeking to "buy" the nomination, in order to face another billionaire at the polls.Stayer made his fortune running Farallon Capital, out of San Francisco, but has spent the last 10 years or so giving money philanthropically and pursuing policy priorities including accessible banking and climate activism."I think that the thing that has put me on this stage," he told CNN, "is message. I have a very simple message, which is, the government is broken. It's been bought by corporations. I spent 10 years as an outsider putting together coalitions of American citizens to fight and beat those corporations."I'm the only person in this race who will say that his or her No 1 priority is climate. And I will attack it from the … very first day from the standpoint of environmental justice, and I can take on Mr Trump on the economy in a way that nobody else can, because I built a business from scratch, and I understand job creation and prosperity and growth, as well as economic justice."The Nevada caucuses are on 22 February and South Carolina holds its primary seven days later. Steyer's concentration on the two states has had national benefits: on Saturday a Washington Poll post poll showed him second, if distantly, to Biden among black voters, a key bloc in South Carolina.Other candidates, with less to spend, have been busy in Iowa and New Hampshire, which vote on 3 and 11 February respectively. Challenged over figures that show 91% of political advertising so far in South Carolina and 97% in Nevada has been from his campaign, Steyer insisted he had "82 organisers on the ground in South Carolina" and was "actually a grassroots person"."I have been there," he said. "There's someone who didn't endorse me who's a politician in South Carolina who said, 'Steyer came down here. He rolled up his sleeves. He went out. He listened to people. He sat across the table. He worked.'"I have been a grassroots organiser, as you know, for 10 years. And that's exactly what I'm doing in these early primary states. I'm going. I'm listening to people. I spend all my time in the kinds of meetings that I love, which is taking questions and asking questions and listening and learning."
|
| Chris Wallace to National Security Adviser: Why Can Trump Tell Fox About Embassy Attacks but Not Congress? Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:38 AM PST  Fox News anchor Chris Wallace pressed White House national security adviser Robert O'Brien on Sunday over President Donald Trump's claims on Fox News last week that a senior Iranian official killed by U.S. airstrikes was planning imminent attacks on four U.S.embassies, asking why Congress wasn't told of these threats.During a Fox News interview with Laura Ingraham last Friday, the president asserted that it was necessary to kill former Quds Force commander Qassem Soliemani as he believed there would have been four embassies that would have been attacked. This expanded on his previous claims that Soleimani was "actively planning" an attack on the embassy in Baghdad, something he later revised to "multiple embassies."Interviewing O'Brien on Fox News Sunday, Wallace noted that members of Congress pointed out that there wasn't a single mention of imminent threats to U.S. embassies during recent intelligence briefings with the Trump administration on Iran."So why is [the president] saying it on television but the top officials didn't tell members of Congress?" Wallace wondered aloud.O'Brien, meanwhile, asserted that while he's "seen the intelligence on this" and that it was "very strong," he can't release it to the American public but that they should still "trust the administration on this." He further noted that the administration has always said that there were "severe threats to American diplomats" in the region."So I think what the president said is consistent with what we've been saying since day one," O'Brien added."It does seem to be a contradiction," Wallace countered. "He is telling Laura Ingraham, our esteemed colleague, but in a 75-minute classified briefing your top national security people never mention this to members of Congress. Why not?""I wasn't at the briefing and I don't know how the Q&A went back and forth, depends on the questions were asked or how they were phrased, I don't know, I wasn't there," the national security adviser replied. "All I can tell you is we've been clear from the start that there were very significant threats to American facilities in the region and American military officials, officers and men and women and also to U.S. diplomats and I think that is consistent with what the president is saying."Wallace pushed back some more, asking O'Brien if he would agree with Trump that there were specific imminent threats to four American embassies, prompting more equivocation from the senior White House official."It is always difficult to know exactly what the targets are but it certainly is consistent with the intelligence to assume they would have hit embassies in at least four countries," O'Brien responded.O'Brien's remarks largely overlap with those of Defense Secretary Mark Esper, who on Sunday said that while he shares the president's "belief" that four embassies faced imminent threats from Soleimani, he "didn't see" any specific evidence to support those claims.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.
|
| Esper contradicts Trump claim Iran planned attacks on four US embassies Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:35 AM PST  Defense secretary first attempted to water down president's assessment, then later appeared to row back assertionsSeeking to explain Donald Trump's claim that Iran was planning attacks on four American embassies before the US killed Iranian Gen Qassem Suleimani in a drone strike, defense secretary Mike Esper found himself in the dangerous position of contradicting the president.Asked on CBS's Face the Nation if there had been a specific or tangible threat, Esper said: "I didn't see one with regard to four embassies."Trump's claim on Fox News on Friday prompted fierce criticism from members of Congress who were not briefed before the strike and who say such a threat was not mentioned in a classified briefing on Wednesday.On Sunday, Esper added: "What I'm saying is I share the president's view that, probably, my expectation was that they were going to go after our embassies."We had information that there was going to be an attack within a matter of days that would be broad in scale, in other words more than one country, and that it would be bigger than previous attacks, likely going to take us into open hostilities with Iran."We had every expectation to believe this would happen. That threat has been disrupted."Suleimani was killed by a drone strike at Baghdad airport on 2 January. Iran responded with missile strikes on US bases in Iraq. It has also admitted accidentally shooting down a Ukrainian airliner over Tehran, killing 176 people.Esper later appeared to row back, telling CNN's State of the Union "what the president said with regard to the four embassies is what I believe as well"."There was intelligence that there was an intent to target the US embassy in Baghdad," he said.However, Esper's insistence that such "exquisite intelligence" was shared with the bipartisan Gang of Eight congressional leaders in a briefing was immediately dismissed by Adam Schiff, Democratic chair of the House intelligence committee."He's just plain wrong," Schiff told CBS. "There was no discussion that, 'These are the four embassies that are being targeted and we have exquisite intelligence that shows these or those are specific targets.'"[And] I don't recall there being a specific discussion about bombing the US embassy in Baghdad. The briefing was more along the lines of what Secretary [of State Mike] Pompeo admitted the other day, that, 'We don't know precisely where and we don't know precisely when.'"That's not an intelligence conclusion. That's Pompeo's personal opinion."Schiff also had harsh words for Trump."When you hear the president out there on Fox," he said, "he's fudging the intelligence."Trump has also mentioned the threat to the Baghdad embassy as a motivation for the strike on Suleimani, but congressional criticism of his attempts to justify precipitating a crisis with Iran remains.After the classified briefing on Wednesday, Senator Mike Lee of Utah voiced rare Republican criticism of the president."I didn't hear anything about [the four embassies claim]," Lee told CNN on Sunday, appearing to back up Schiff's assertion. "And several of my colleagues have said the same so that was news to me. It certainly wasn't something I recall being mentioned at the classified briefing."Pompeo has claimed Congress was briefed fully on the rationale for the strike on Suleimani, "the most perilous chapter so far in Trump's three years in office", according to a detailed chronology of the crisis published by the New York Times on Saturday."I'm sure there was a mention of at least one embassy in that briefing," Lee said, "because there had been an attack on one of our embassies [in Baghdad, by pro-Iranian militia] leading up to the strike on Suleimani."Asked if he agreed with the former Republican now independent congressman Justin Amash, that Trump was guilty of an abuse of his power in ordering the strike without informing Congress, Lee said he did not "doubt there was an imminent attack but it's frustrating not to get the details of the intelligence behind it".The Kentucky senator Rand Paul was more blunt than his fellow Republican on NBC's Meet the Press, claiming Pompeo had given "contradictory information"."We've heard from the secretary of state that they don't know where or when, but it was imminent," Paul said. "He thinks he can square the circle but to me it seems pretty inconsistent."Robert O'Brien, Trump's national security adviser, parroted the "exquisite intelligence" talking point."We had exquisite intelligence to show they were looking at US facilities throughout the region and they wanted to inflict casualties on American soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, as well as diplomats," he told NBC."The threat was imminent, I saw the evidence," O'Brien added, declining to elaborate because he said the information was classified. Pressed on his definition of imminent, he said: "Soon, quickly."On ABC's This Week, Democratic House speaker Nancy Pelosi accepted Iran had malignant intentions towards the US but questioned the president's handling of the crisis."A lot of bad actors are doing bad things and threatening bad things to us, we know that," she said, "Iran being one of them and its proxies doing bad things to our interests and the world."But how do we deal with that in a way that calms rather than escalates?"Trump, meanwhile, continued to seek to capitalise on protests in Iran which broke out after the regime admitted shooting down the airliner."To the leaders of Iran," the president tweeted, "DO NOT KILL YOUR PROTESTERS. Thousands have already been killed or imprisoned by you, and the World is watching. More importantly, the USA is watching. Turn your internet back on and let reporters roam free! Stop the killing of your great Iranian people!"
|
| Trump Aide ‘Concerned’ Russia May Be Trying to Undermine Biden Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:31 AM PST |
| Amid Iran Crisis, Russia’s Mideast Presence Just Keeps Growing Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:28 AM PST  MOSCOW—The balance of power in the Middle East is shifting. German Chancellor Angela Merkel arrived in Moscow on Saturday to discuss the crises there with President Vladimir Putin and try to save what's left of the Iran nuclear deal.Russia to Iran: Don't Admit Guilt—Blame the U.S. InsteadIn spite of U.S. President Donald Trump's calls to put "maximum pressure" on Iran's "bad deal," Merkel said everything should be done to keep the agreement. And Russian politicians gloated: "This is remarkable, at the peak of the pre-war crises around Iran, Merkel is coming to Putin and not to Trump. Negotiations with Trump would make no sense, he would just repeat his statements," Senator Aleksey Pushkov told Russian news agencies. Whoever has American bases on their territory (including Germany) should pay attention to Washington threatening Iraq with severe sanctions, Chair of the Federation Council Committee of Foreign Policy Konstantin Kosachev said: "Alliances with the USA might look romantic, devoted to values, peace and democracy but only on the surface." Nobody can imagine a Putin-Trump alliance in the conflict with Iran. In most of the Middle East's conflicts, Moscow and Washington back forces on different sides of the front lines. Moscow blamed Washington for not making an alliance in Syria to back up the dictator Bashar Assad while Moscow builds up its Tartus, Khmeimim and Tiyas military bases there. "I can see Russia deploying military experts now both to Iran and to Iraq," pro-Kremlin political analyst Sergei Markov told The Daily Beast."Russia's general strategy is to continue strengthening its uniquely strong alliances in the region with Iran, Israel, Turkey, Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Qatar," said Markov. "We should be careful taking responsibilities though, especially with Iran, who we are told can be slippery when it comes to sticking to agreements." In sum, said Markov, "We should benefit from U.S.-Iran tensions."In the last six years Moscow has been taking part in military conflicts in Ukraine and Syria, with the excuse of defending Russians on the ground. "We don't know if there are Russian officers and engineers on the ground in Iran; if there are this is situation might grow uglier," Moscow based military analyst, Alexander Golts told The Daily Beast."America has Started a War," the popular television channel NTV informed Russians in the headline on the Orthodox Christmas eve. The major state newspaper, Rossiyskaya Gazeta, reported that the Russian minister of defense, Sergei Shoigu, spoke with Iranian military commandership and intelligence several times on Monday to prevent "the escalation of tensions" mainly in pro-Iranian Syria, where Russia has thousands of soldiers on the ground. No more details were revealed. The Kremlin is using the opportunity to say repeatedly in one way or another, "See, didn't we tell you America cannot be trusted?" and emphasize Russia's "unique" role in the Middle East. In fact, during the years of war in Syria, Russia has become Iran's major military ally, but so far the Kremlin has not given any indications of Russia's plans to to fight on Tehran's side in case of a direct military conflict with the U.S.. "Nobody knows if Shoigu told Teheran not to count on Moscow or if he promised Iran Russia's support," said military analyst Golts told The Daily Beast. When the U.S. aviation attacked Syria, Russia demonstrated two types of reactions: ignored the attacks and threatened "retaliatory measures both on missiles and carriers that will use them." If a war begins in Iran, the U.S. might strike Russia's four S-300 missile systems, Golts says. "And then the key question would be whether Russia is going to use its S-400 and other missile systems deployed to its Khmeimim air base base in Syria." Iran's Days of Rage, a 'Chernobyl' Moment for TehranOn Tuesday Russian leader Vladimir Putin flew to Russian military bases in Syria to discuss "the fight against terrorism" with Assad. Putin speaks with authoritarian leaders in the Middle East and Western Asia from a position of money and power, just as Trump does, but unlike Trump, Putin manages to build alliances in the region. Earlier last week Putin visited Istanbul, where he opened a $7,8 billion pipeline, TurkStream. When German Chancellor Angela Merkel went to Moscow to discuss the crisis over the Soleimani assassination her government's spokesperson says Russia is "indispensable" when it comes to solving political conflicts. Few people are saying that about Trump.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.
|
| Iran plane crash: British ambassador summoned by Tehran claiming he attended 'illegal rally' Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:26 AM PST  Iran summoned the British ambassador on Sunday after it accused him of "illegal and inappropriate" presence at anti-government demonstrations, deepening a diplomatic rift between the countries. Ambassador Rob Macaire denounced his detention on Saturday, which he said was "of course illegal", saying he had attended a vigil for victims of the Ukrainian Airlines crash, but left as protests broke out. It came as Iran faced a second day of protests over the downing of the flight by the Iranian military, killing all 176 passengers, and initial denials by the regime. Iranian officials defended the detention of Mr Macaire, which foreign secretary Dominic Raab said risked the country gaining "pariah status". Hamid Baeidinejad, Iran's ambassador to the UK, suggested Mr Macaire should have heeded his own embassy's warnings to "not be present in the proximity of political demonstrations in Tehran." Iran's deputy foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, said Mr Macaire had been arrested as an "unknown foreigner in an illegal gathering" and "15 min later he was free." Demonstrators light candles while gathering during a vigil for the victims of the Ukraine International Airlines flight Credit: Ali Mohammadi/Bloomberg The arrest was condemned by both Prime Minister Boris Johnson and German Chancellor Angela Merkel as a "violation of international law. Meanwhile scores of protestors gathered in Tehran to protest against the regime, despite the widespread presence of riot police just months after hundreds of protesters were killed in a crackdown on demonstrations. Videos showed protesters shouting anti-government slogans, including: "They are lying that our enemy is America, our enemy is right here." Iranian demonstrators prepare to burn a Union flag and Israeli flag in front of the British embassy in Iran's capital Tehran on January 12 One video circulated on social media appeared to show crowds of students at a Tehran university deliberately walking around American and Israeli flags painted on the floor in order to avoid stepping on them. The protests began on Saturday after Iran's admission that it had accidentally shot down the Ukrainian jet caused widespread public anger. Most of the passengers were Iranian citizens. Tehran had previously denied responsibility for the tragedy, which it said came as the military was on high alert for US strikes in the wake of the assasination of General Qassim Soleimani. Rob Macaire A report from London-based Iran International TV suggested Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps had deliberately allowed civilian air traffic around the airport as a deterrence against any US attack. Crowds had gathered outside a university in central Tehran on Saturday to denounce the IRGC, the elite military force under the direct authority of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Kahmenei. The students shouted, "Death to the dictator," and "End your rule over the country." Riot police fired tear gas in an attempt to disperse the protests. Donald Trump voiced his support for pro-democracy demonstrators in Iran by tweeting in Farsi over the weekend. In one tweet, which swiftly earned more than 300,000 likes he said: "To the brave and suffering Iranian people: I have stood with you since the beginning of my presidency and my government will continue to stand with you. We are following your protests closely. Your courage is inspiring." On Sunday, he warned Iranian leaders not to kill protesters, saying "the world is watching". Iran crisis | Read more But back in the US, an ABC News/Ipsos poll showed that 56 per cent of voters disapproved of the president's handling of Iran, with 52 per cent saying that the airstrike which killed Soleimani had made the US less safe. Last night, a volley of rockets hit an Iraqi airbase north of Baghdad where US forces have been based, wounding four local troops. Military bases hosting US troops have been subject to volleys of rocket and mortar attacks in recent months that have mostly wounded Iraqi forces, but also killed one American contractor last month, setting off the dramatic developments of recent weeks. Iran on Sunday signalled it was interested in "de-escalation" following talks with Qatar, as the US defence secretary said Mr Trump was ready to "sit down and discuss without precondition a new way forward".
|
| Hezbollah says payback for US strike has just begun Posted: 12 Jan 2020 09:02 AM PST  The leader of the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah said Sunday that Iran's missile attacks on two bases in Iraq housing U.S. forces was only the start of the retaliation for America's killing a top Iranian general in a drone strike. Hassan Nasrallah described Iran's ballistic missile response as a "slap" to Washington, one that sent a message. The leader of Hezbollah, which is closely aligned with Iran, said the strikes were the "first step down a long path" that will ensure U.S. troops withdraw from the region.
|
| Esper says he's seen no hard evidence embassies under threat Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:48 AM PST  Defense Secretary Mark Esper explicitly said Sunday that he had seen no hard evidence that four American embassies had been under possible threat when President Donald Trump authorized the targeting of Iran's top commander, raising questions about the scale of the threat described by Trump last week. As the administration struggled with its justification for the drone strike that killed Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Esper and other officials tried to refocus attention on voices of dissent in Iran. Esper said street protests in Tehran show the Iranian people are hungry for a more accountable government after leaders denied, then admitted shooting down a Ukrainian passenger plane.
|
| Who Signs Up to Fight? Makeup of U.S. Recruits Shows Glaring Disparity Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:40 AM PST  COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- The sergeant in charge of one of the busiest Army recruiting centers in Colorado, Sgt. 1st Class Dustin Comes, joined the Army, in part, because his father served. Now two of his four children say they want to serve, too. And he will not be surprised if the other two make the same decision once they are a little older."Hey, if that's what your calling is, I encourage it, absolutely," said Comes, who wore a dagger-shaped patch on his camouflage uniform, signifying that he had been in combat.Enlisting, he said, enabled him to build a good life where, despite yearlong deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, he felt proud of his work, got generous benefits, never worried about being laid off and earned enough that his wife could stay home to raise their children."Show me a better deal for the common person," he said.Soldiers like him are increasingly making the U.S. military a family business. The men and women who sign up overwhelmingly come from counties in the South and a scattering of communities at the gates of military bases like Colorado Springs, which sits next to Fort Carson and several Air Force installations, and where the tradition of military service is deeply ingrained.More and more, new recruits are the children of old recruits. In 2019, 79% of Army recruits reported having a family member who served. For nearly 30%, it was a parent -- a striking point in a nation where less than 1% of the population serves in the military.For years, military leaders have been sounding the alarm over the growing gulf between communities that serve and those that do not, warning that relying on a small number of counties that reliably produce soldiers is unsustainable, particularly now amid escalating tensions with Iran."A widening military-civilian divide increasingly impacts our ability to effectively recruit and sustain the force," Anthony Kurta, acting undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, told the National Commission on Military, National and Public Service last year. "This disconnect is characterized by misperceptions, a lack of knowledge and an inability to identify with those who serve. It threatens our ability to recruit the number of quality youth with the needed skill sets to maintain our advantage."To be sure, the idea of joining the military has lost much of its luster in nearly two decades of grinding war. The patriotic rush to enlist after the terrorist attacks of 2001 has faded. For a generation, enlisting has produced reliable hardship for troops and families but nothing that resembles victory. But the military families who have borne nearly all of the burden, and are the most cleareyed about the risks of war, are still the Americans who are most likely to encourage their sons and daughters to join.With the goal of recruiting about 68,000 soldiers in 2020, the Army is trying to broaden its appeal beyond traditional recruitment pools. New marketing plays up future careers in medicine and tech, as well as generous tuition benefits for a generation crushed by student debt. The messaging often notes that most Army jobs are not in combat fields.But for now, rates of military service remain far from equal in the United States, and the gap may continue to widen because a driving decision to enlist is whether a young person knows anyone who served in the military. In communities where veterans are plentiful, teachers, coaches, mothers, uncles and other mentors often steer youths toward military service. In communities where veterans are scarce, influential adults are more wary.That has created a broad gap, easily seen on a map. The South, where the culture of military service runs deep and military installations are plentiful, produces 20% more recruits than would be expected, based on its youth population. The states in the Northeast, which have very few military bases and a lower percentage of veterans, produce 20% fewer.The main predictors are not based on class or race. Army data show service spread mostly evenly through middle-class and "downscale" groups. Youth unemployment turns out not to be the prime factor. And the racial makeup of the force is more or less in line with that of young Americans as a whole, although African Americans are slightly more likely to serve. Instead, the best predictor is a person's familiarity with the military."Those who understand military life are more likely to consider it as a career option than those who do not," said Kelli Bland, a spokeswoman for the Army's Recruiting Command.That distinction has created glaring disparities across the country. In 2019, Fayetteville, North Carolina, which is home to Fort Bragg, provided more than twice as many military enlistment contracts as Manhattan, even though Manhattan has eight times as many people. Many of the new contracts in Fayetteville were soldiers signing up for second and third enlistments.This was not always the case. Military service was once spread fairly evenly -- at least geographically -- throughout the nation because of the draft. But after the draft ended in 1973, enlistments shifted steadily south of the Mason-Dixon Line. The military's decision to close many bases in Northern states where long winters limited training only hastened the trend.Today, students growing up in military communities are constantly exposed to the people who serve. Moms pick up their sons from day care in flight suits. Dads attend the fourth-grade holiday party in camouflage. High schools often have Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps programs in which students wear uniforms to class once a week and can earn credit for learning about science, leadership and fitness through a military framework.Many schools encourage students to take the military's aptitude exam, the ASVAB, in the way students nationwide are pushed to take the SAT.That exposure during school is one of the strongest predictors of enlistment rates, according to a 2018 report by the Institute for Defense Analyses.In Colorado Springs, the high schools with the highest number of military families are also the biggest producers of recruits, Comes said, adding that parents aware of the military's camaraderie, stability and generous health, education and retirement benefits often march their children into his office and encourage them to join."We just tell them our story: 'This is where I was, one of six kids living in a trailer. This is where I am today.' Good paycheck. Great benefits," he said, adding that even in good economic times, it is an easy sell. His recruiting station made its goals handily this month.His biggest challenge is finding recruits before they are scooped up by recruiters from the Air Force, Navy and Marines, who work the same fertile neighborhoods.The situation is markedly different in regions where few people traditionally join.In Los Angeles, a region defined by liberal politics where many families are suspicious of the military, the Army has struggled to even gain access to high schools. By law, schools have to allow recruiters on campus once a semester, but administrators tightly control when and how recruiters can interact with students. Access is "very minimal," said Lt. Col. Tameka Wilson, the commander of the Los Angeles Recruiting Battalion.Predictably, enlistment rates are low.In 2019 the Army made a push to increase recruiting efforts in 22 liberal-leaning cities like Los Angeles. As part of that, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy visited officials from the Los Angeles Unified School District in December to push for greater access."He was doing a sort of listening tour," said Patricia Heideman, who is in charge of high school instruction for the school district and said there was a perception the military preys on disadvantaged students. "I told him from the educator perspective, we sometimes feel they are targeting our black and brown students and students of poverty," she said. And therefore they are less likely to push enlistment.Recognizing it cannot sustain recruitment numbers by relying only on the South and military communities, the Army has tried to broaden its appeal. Slick ads on social media offer less of the guns-and-grunts messaging of decades past. Instead they play up college benefits and career training in medical and tech fields.Even within one state there are striking differences in how communities view military service. Colorado Springs produced 29 times as many enlistments in 2019 as Boulder, a liberal university town."I grew up in Boulder, and the military appealed to me but it was just not in the culture, or my family," said Brett Dollar, who now lives in Fort Collins, Colorado. "The conversation was not 'What do you want to do after high school?' but 'Which college are you going to go to?'"She attended Middlebury College in Vermont before becoming a police officer in Fort Collins and, eventually, a law enforcement dog handler.This fall, at age 32, she decided to enlist in the Army, drawn by the chance to work with dogs in security, bomb-sniffing and rescue missions around the world. She ships to basic training in about a week."I'd always had an itch to serve in the military and be useful," she said. "I think it took me being on my own for a while to realize it was a possibility."She said she was going into the work knowing she could soon end up deployed to a combat zone."The Army is ultimately a war-fighting organization -- you go in knowing that," she said. "I guess I really didn't see that as a downside. It's a core value of mine to try to be of service."This article originally appeared in The New York Times.(C) 2020 The New York Times Company
|
| Professor Fired After Joking That Iran Should Pick U.S. Sites to Bomb Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:37 AM PST  In a case that has stirred debate about free speech on college campuses, an adjunct professor at a Massachusetts college was fired on Thursday after posting on Facebook what he described as a joke suggesting that Iran pick sites in the United States to bomb.The professor, Asheen Phansey, wrote on his personal Facebook page on Jan. 5 that Iran's supreme leader should "tweet a list of 52 sites of beloved American cultural heritage that he would bomb," suggesting the Mall of America in Minnesota and a Kardashian residence as targets, Judy Rakowsky, a spokeswoman for Phansey, said Saturday.The post was a response to President Donald Trump's comments that he would target Iranian cultural sites if Iran retaliated against the United States for killing one of its top generals. The Pentagon later ruled out striking Iranian cultural sites because of "the laws of armed conflict."Phansey deleted his post, but not before it was captured in a screengrab and circulated on social media with the school's phone number."Why does @Babson 'College' have an America-hating terrorist supporter on their payroll. Ask them!" said one widely shared tweet.Phansey received a master's degree in business administration in 2008 from Babson College, a private business school in Wellesley, Massachusetts, near Boston, that has a student population of about 3,000. He became an adjunct professor at the school that year, according to his LinkedIn profile.Babson soon learned of Phansey's remarks and suspended him. Babson said in statement Wednesday that it condemned "any type of threatening words" and "actions condoning violence.""This particular post from a staff member on his personal Facebook page clearly does not represent the values and culture of Babson College," it said.After his suspension, Phansey said in a statement that he regretted his "bad attempt at humor.""As an American, born and raised, I was trying to juxtapose our 'cultural sites' with ancient Iranian churches and mosques," he said, adding that he was opposed to violence. "I am sorry that my sloppy humor was read as a threat."The next day, the school announced it had fired Phansey. "Based on the results of the investigation, the staff member is no longer a Babson College employee," the school said.In a subsequent statement, Phansey said he was "disappointed" and "saddened" by the decision to fire him "just because people willfully misinterpreted a joke I made to friends on Facebook.""I would have hoped that Babson, an institution of higher education that I love and to which I have given a great deal, would have defended and supported my right to free speech," he said. "Beyond my own situation, I am really concerned about what this portends for our ability as Americans to engage in political discourse without presuming the worst about each other."Babson declined to comment Saturday.Phansey's lawyer, Jeffrey Pyle, said on Saturday that the college's actions sent a "chilling" message to academics and staff members at schools everywhere."It's a terribly tragic situation for a comment, that was obviously a joke, to have resulted in everything that's occurred," he said.Pyle said the pretext for Phansey's firing "is that he violated a social media policy that prohibits threats of violence" and that it could not have been "reasonably read" as a threat."I say that it was a pretext because they fired him in order to stop the criticism on social media," Pyle said.Some of the uproar about Phansey's post was also "racially intolerant," Pyle said."I saw a number of messages saying Asheen should be deported as well as prosecuted and fired. Asheen was born in the United States, he is of South Asian origin," he said, adding that some assumed his client was Iranian or from the Middle East. "I think that makes it doubly unfortunate that Babson couldn't defend him when some of the vitriol thrown his way was of that nature."The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which defends the rights of students and faculty members at colleges and universities, said in a statement Saturday that Phansey's post was "obvious rhetorical hyperbole.""Babson's process-free termination in an attempt to quell criticism on social media is censorship, plain and simple, and reveals Babson's stated commitment to freedom of expression to be worthless," it said.In recent years, colleges and universities have grappled with where to draw the line on free speech. The University of Wisconsin adopted a three-strikes policy in which any student found to have disrupted the free expressions of others would be expelled after a third infraction. Indiana University Bloomington faced a different problem last fall after a professor's viewpoints were described as racist, sexist and homophobic, but the administration said it could not fire him because of the First Amendment.This article originally appeared in The New York Times.(C) 2020 The New York Times Company
|
| Seven Days in January: How the U.S. and Iran Approached the Brink of War Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:36 AM PST  WASHINGTON -- The plane was late and the kill team was worried. International listings showed that Cham Wings Airlines Flight 6Q501, scheduled to take off from Damascus, Syria, at 7:30 p.m. for Baghdad, had departed; but in fact, an informant at the airport reported, it was still on the ground, and the targeted passenger had not yet shown up.The hours ticked by, and some involved in the operation wondered if it should be called off. Then, just before the plane door closed, a convoy of cars pulled up on the tarmac carrying Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iran's security mastermind, who climbed on board along with two escorts. Flight 6Q501 lifted off, three hours late, bound for the Iraqi capital.The plane landed at Baghdad International Airport just after midnight, at 12:36 a.m., and the first to disembark were Soleimani and his entourage. Waiting at the bottom of the gangway was Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, an Iraqi official in charge of militias and close to Iran. Two cars carrying the group headed into the night -- shadowed by American MQ-9 Reaper drones. At 12:47, the first of several missiles smashed into the vehicles, engulfing them in flames and leaving 10 charred bodies inside.The operation that took out Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, propelled the United States to the precipice of war with Iran and plunged the world into seven days of roiling uncertainty. The story of those seven days, and the secret planning in the months preceding them, ranks as the most perilous chapter so far in President Donald Trump's three years in office: his decision to launch an audacious strike on Iran, and his attempt through allies and a back channel to keep the ensuing crisis from mushrooming out of control.The president's decision to ratchet up decades of simmering conflict with Iran set off an extraordinary worldwide drama, much of which played out behind the scenes. In capitals from Europe to the Middle East, leaders and diplomats sought to head off a full-fledged new war, while at the White House and Pentagon, the president and his advisers ordered more troops to the region.Saudi Arabia's de facto ruler was so alarmed, he dispatched his brother to Washington for a clandestine meeting with Trump. European leaders, incensed at being kept in the dark, scrambled to keep Iran from escalating. If it did, Americans developed plans to strike a command-and-control ship and conduct a cyberattack to partly disable Iran's oil and gas sector.But the United States also sent secret messages through Swiss intermediaries urging Iran not to respond so forcefully that Trump would feel compelled to go even further. After Iran did respond -- firing 16 missiles at bases housing U.S. troops without hurting anyone, as a relatively harmless show of force -- a message came back through the Swiss saying that would be the end of its reprisal for now. The message, forwarded to Washington within five minutes after it was received, persuaded the president to stand down.When the week ended without the war many feared, Trump boasted that he had taken out a U.S. enemy. But the struggle between two nations is not really over. Iran may find other ways to take revenge. Iraqi leaders may expel U.S. forces, accomplishing in death what Soleimani tried and failed to do in life. And in the confusion, a Ukrainian civilian passenger jet was destroyed by an Iranian missile, killing 176 people.The episode briefly gave Trump's allies something to cheer, distracting from the coming Senate impeachment trial, but now Trump faces questions even among Republicans about the shifting justifications for the strike that he and his national security team have offered. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo initially cited the need to forestall an "imminent" attack, and the president has amplified that to say four U.S. embassies were targeted.But administration officials said they did not actually know when or where such an attack might occur, and one State Department official said it was "a mistake" to use the word "imminent." And somewere stunned that Trump picked what they considered a radical option with unforeseen consequences.This account -- based on interviews with dozens of Trump administration officials, military officers, diplomats, intelligence analysts and others in the United States, Europe and the Middle East -- offers new details about what may be the most consequential seven days of the Trump presidency.If Protesters Enter the Compound, Kill ThemThe confrontation may have actually begun by accident. For years, Iran has sponsored proxy forces in Iraq, competing for influence with U.S. troops who first arrived in the invasion of 2003. Starting last fall, Iranian-backed militias launched rockets at Iraqi bases that house U.S. troops, shattering nerves more than doing much damage.So when rockets smashed into the K1 military base near Kirkuk on Dec. 27, killing an American civilian contractor, Nawres Waleed Hamid, and injuring several others, the only surprise was the casualties. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia group held responsible, had fired at least five other rocket attacks on bases with Americans in the previous month without deadly results.U.S. intelligence officials monitoring communications between Hezbollah and Soleimani's Guard learned that the Iranians wanted to keep the pressure on the Americans but had not intended to escalate the low-level conflict. The rockets landed in a place and at a time when U.S. and Iraqi personnel normally were not there, and it was only by unlucky chance that Hamid was killed, U.S. officials said.But that did not matter to Trump and his team. An American was dead, and the president who had called off a retaliatory strike with 10 minutes to go in June and otherwise refrained from military action in response to Iranian provocations now faced a choice.Advisers told him Iran had probably misinterpreted his previous reluctance to use force as a sign of weakness. To reestablish deterrence, he should authorize a tough response. On holiday at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida resort, the president agreed to strikes on five sites in Iraq and Syria two days later, killing at least 25 members of Kataib Hezbollah and injuring at least 50 more.Two days later, on Dec. 31, pro-Iranian protesters backed by many members of the same militia responded by breaking into the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad and setting fires. Worried about repeats of the 1979 embassy takeover in Iran or the 2012 attack on a diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, Trump and his team ordered more than 100 Marines to rush to Baghdad from Kuwait.The Marines received little information about their mission or what was happening on the ground as they loaded their magazines with ammunition. All they knew was, they were being sent to secure the embassy with one clear order: If protesters entered the compound, kill them.Some of the Marines made dry jokes about the movie "Rules of Engagement," starring Samuel L. Jackson as a commander whose unit fires on a crowd of embassy protesters, stirring an international episode and a court-martial. But when the Marines reached Baghdad, none had to open fire. They used nonlethal weapons like tear gas to disperse protesters, and the siege ended without bloodshed.Still, watching television in Florida, Trump grew agitated by the chaos and ready to authorize a more robust response. And Dec. 31, even as protests were beginning, a top secret memo began circulating, signed by Robert O'Brien, his national security adviser, listing potential targets, including an Iranian energy facility and a command-and-control ship used by the Guard to direct small boats that harass oil tankers in the waters around Iran. The ship had been an irritant to Americans for months, especially after a series of covert attacks on oil tankers.The memo also listed a more provocative option: targeting specific Iranian officials for death by military strike. Among the targets mentioned, according to officials who saw it, was Abdul Reza Shahlai, an Iranian commander in Yemen who helped finance armed groups across the region.Another name on the list: Soleimani.Exerting Power, Praying for a Martyr's DeathSoleimani was hardly a household name in the United States, but as far as U.S. officials were concerned, he was responsible for more instability and death in the Middle East than almost anyone.As head of the elite Quds Force, Soleimani was effectively the second most powerful man in Iran and had a hand in managing proxy wars in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, including a campaign of roadside bombs and other attacks that killed an estimated 600 U.S. troops during the height of the Iraq War.At 62, with a narrow face, gray hair and a close-cropped beard, Soleimani was known for traveling without body armor or personal protection, collaborating with some of the most ruthless figures in the region while sharing meals with the fighters and telling them to take care of their mothers, according to a Hezbollah field commander who met him in Syria.After decades of working in the shadows, Soleimani had emerged in recent years following the Arab Spring and war with the Islamic State as the public figure most associated with Iran's goal of achieving regional dominance. Photographs surfaced showing him visiting the front lines in Iraq or Syria, and meeting with Iran's supreme leader in Tehran and sitting down with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Lebanon. When President Bashar Assad of Syria visited Tehran last year, it was Soleimani who welcomed him.By the end of 2019, Soleimani could boast of a number of Iranian accomplishments: Assad, a longtime Iranian ally, was safely in power in Damascus, Syria's capital, prevailing in a bloody, multifront, yearslong civil war; and the Quds Force had a permanent presence on Israel's frontier. A number of militias Soleimani had helped foster were receiving salaries from the Iraqi government and exerting power in Iraq's political system. And the Islamic State had been defeated in Syria and Iraq -- thanks, in part, to ground forces he had overseen, one area where he and the United States shared interests.For the past 18 months, officials said, there had been discussions about whether to target Soleimani. Figuring that it would be too difficult to hit him in Iran, officials contemplated going after him during one of his frequent visits to Syria or Iraq and focused on developing agents in seven different entities to report on his movements -- the Syrian Army, the Quds Force in Damascus, Hezbollah in Damascus, the Damascus and Baghdad airports, and the Hezbollah and Popular Mobilization forces in Iraq.By the time tensions with Iran spiked in May with attacks on four oil tankers, John Bolton, then the president's national security adviser, asked the military and intelligence agencies to produce new options to deter Iranian aggression. Among those presented to Bolton was killing Soleimani and other leaders of the Guard. At that point, work to track Soleimani's travels grew more intense.By September, the U.S. Central Command and Joint Special Operations Command were brought into the process to plan a possible operation. Various alternatives were discussed -- some in Syria, some in Iraq. Syria seemed more complicated, both because the U.S. military had less freedom of movement there and because Soleimani spent most of his time with Hezbollah officers and officials did not want to bring them into the mix and risk a new war with Israel.Agents recruited in Syria and Iraq reported from time to time on Soleimani's movements, according to an official involved. Surveillance revealed that he flew on a number of airlines and sometimes tickets for a trip were bought on more than one to throw off pursuers. He would be delivered to his plane at the last possible moment, then sit in the front row of business class so he could get off first and depart quickly.Soleimani set off on his last trip on New Year's Day, flying to Damascus and then heading by car to Lebanon to meet with Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, before returning to Damascus that evening. During their meeting, Nasrallah said in a later speech, he warned Soleimani that the U.S. news media was focusing on him and publishing his photograph."This was media and political preparation for his assassination," Nasrallah said.But as he recalled, Soleimani laughed and said that, in fact, he hoped to die a martyr and asked Nasrallah to pray that he would.At Spy Headquarters, Seeing a 'Mosaic Effect'That same day, at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, Gina Haspel was working to fulfill that prayer.Haspel, the director, was shown intelligence indicating that Soleimani was preparing to move from Syria to Iraq. Officials told her there was additional intelligence that he was working on a large-scale attack intended to drive U.S. forces out of the Middle East.There was no single definitive piece of intelligence. Instead, officials said, CIA officers spoke of the "mosaic effect," multiple scraps of information that came together indicating that Soleimani was organizing proxy forces around the region, including in Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq, to attack U.S. embassies and bases. Several officials said they did not have enough concrete information to describe such a threat as "imminent," despite Pompeo's assertion, but they did see a worrying pattern.While Pompeo also claimed later that such an attack could kill "hundreds," other officials said they had no specific intelligence suggesting that. Most U.S. facilities in the region have been heavily fortified for years, and such an immense death toll would be unlikely; at no point in the last two decades, even during the worst of the Iraq War, have any hostile forces been able to pull off such a deadly assault on Americans at once.Nonetheless, Haspel was convinced there was evidence of a coming attack and argued the consequences of not striking Soleimani were more dangerous than waiting, officials said. While others worried about reprisals, she reassured colleagues that Iran's response would be measured. Indeed, she predicted the most likely response would be an ineffectual missile strike from Iran on Iraqi bases where U.S. troops were stationed."If past is prologue, we have learned that when we enforce a red line with Iran, when Iran gets rapped on the knuckles, they tactically retreat," said Dan Hoffman, a former CIA officer who served in Iraq. "The retreat might be ephemeral before Iran probes its enemies with more gradually escalating attacks, but we've seen it repeatedly."There was little dissent about killing Soleimani among Trump's senior advisers, but some Pentagon officials were shocked that the president picked what they considered the most extreme option, and some intelligence officials worried that the possible long-term ramifications were not adequately considered, particularly if action on Iraqi soil prompted Iraq to expel U.S. forces."The whole thing seems haphazard to me," said Marc Polymeropoulos, a former senior CIA official who retired last year.In the Middle East, 'a State of Mobilization'The Trump administration has said that Soleimani was going to Baghdad as part of the attack plot, but there are different theories about the purpose of his visit.Soleimani had long played a role as power broker in Iraqi politics, and two Iraqi politicians with links to Iran said he was coming to Baghdad to help break an impasse over replacing the prime minister after the collapse of the government in November in the face of anti-Iran protests.But Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi, still serving as a caretaker until a new government is formed, told Parliament after the drone strike that Soleimani had another goal: to bring an Iranian response to a Saudi offer to reduce tensions. The shadow conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia had been heating up. After Iranian forces were blamed for an attack on two Saudi oil facilities in September and Trump opted against a military response, Saudi officials worried that they were vulnerable and opened a back channel.In his speech to Parliament, Abdul Mahdi said he had planned to meet with Soleimani a few hours after his arrival in Baghdad. "It was expected that he was carrying a message for me from the Iranian side responding to the Saudi message that we had sent to the Iranian side to reach agreements and breakthroughs," Abdul Mahdi said.A Saudi official said he was unaware of any message carried by Soleimani, and some analysts doubted Abdul Mahdi's account. "That is laughable," said Mohammed Alyahya, editor-in-chief of Al Arabiya English, a Saudi news site. "Suddenly, this man is a diplomat extraordinaire one day before he died?"Another theory, advanced by an intelligence official involved in the operation, held that Soleimani was visiting Iraq to quash anti-Iranian protests by having his Shiite militia break them up by force. He hoped to install a new anti-U.S. government that might even throw out U.S. forces.Whatever goals Soleimani may have had, they died with him in the mangled wreckage at Baghdad's airport. Altogether, 10 people were killed -- Soleimani, al-Muhandis and their aides. Al-Muhandis had helped found Hezbollah, the militia held responsible for the Dec. 27 rocket attack that killed the American contractor.But another Iranian commander escaped. The same night Soleimani died, U.S. forces tried to kill Shahlai, the Quds Force commander in Yemen mentioned in O'Brien's memo. Still, the attack failed because of an undisclosed problem with the intelligence.Iran braced for more. "There was a state of mobilization to get ready in case that was the first stage in a wider plan," said Mohammed Obeid, a Lebanese political activist with ties to Iran's "resistance axis" in the region. "There could have been other steps that the Americans or the Israelis would take, broadening the circle of confrontation."'We Know That Our Region Is Stormy'Trump planned to play golf the next morning, Jan. 4, but advisers concluded it would send the wrong message as Soleimani's death stirred unrest around the Middle East and raised the prospect of a wider conflict with Iran.The president was initially upbeat, expecting the operation to be greeted with applause much like the raid in October that killed Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State. Indeed, Trump opened his first statement to reporters on the mission that Friday by describing Soleimani as the "No. 1 terrorist anywhere in the world," much as he had opened his statement a couple of months ago calling al-Baghdadi the "world's No. 1 terrorist leader."But as the president watched television over the weekend, he grew angry that critics were accusing him of reckless escalation. He sought validation from guests at his Florida clubs, recounting details of the Baghdad Embassy protests and drinking in their praise for his decisiveness. He told some associates that he wanted to preserve the support of Republican hawks in the Senate in the coming impeachment trial, naming Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., as an example, even though they had not spoken about Iran since before Christmas.While Trump tipped off another hawk -- Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who was visiting in Florida -- his administration gave no advance warning to its European allies or Persian Gulf partners in advance of the strike. The only foreign leader who appeared in the know was Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, who had spoken with Pompeo before the attack and later offered a cryptic public hint hours before it took place."We know that our region is stormy; very, very dramatic things are happening in it," Netanyahu told reporters, unprompted, on the tarmac in Tel Aviv before departing for a visit to Athens, Greece. He went on to offer support for the United States "and to its full right to defend itself and its citizens."Israeli leaders were later pleased by the death of Soleimani, one of their deadliest enemies, but remained silent lest they provoke retaliation, even as shelter supplies were checked and a ski resort near the Syrian frontier was briefly closed.Yet some figured that if Hezbollah were to attack Israel on Iran's behalf, it might be better to have that battle now. "This camp believes that there will be such a clash anyway, and the best timing is before the U.S. elections -- and that Israel may lose this president in the White House," said Ofer Zalzberg, an analyst at the International Crisis Group.In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, the crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, was unsettled. Despite his hawkish approach to Iran, he has been recently accepting offers from Pakistanis, Omanis, Iraqis and others to mediate. Now he immediately dispatched his younger brother, Prince Khalid bin Salman, the deputy defense minister, on an emergency mission to the White House.The Saudi view was, "Hitting Soleimani is great, but what is the plan?" said Sir John Jenkins, a former British ambassador to Riyadh. "If there is a plan, we are down with it. If not, we all have to de-escalate."Khalid was pleased by whatever Trump told him, telling diplomats afterward that the royal family was glad the president had dealt Iran a serious blow -- and relieved that he did not seem inclined to escalate further.'A New Stage in the Trans-Atlantic Divorce'But many were not sure. Trump issued bellicose threats to destroy Iran if it retaliated, including cultural treasures -- in violation of international law -- touching off international outrage and forcing his own defense secretary to publicly disavow the threat, saying it would be a war crime.Trump was largely alone on the world stage. No major European power, not even Britain, voiced support for the drone strike, even as leaders agreed that Soleimani had blood on his hands. As Le Monde, the French newspaper, put it, the rift signaled "a new stage in the trans-Atlantic divorce over the Middle East."Trump's withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear accord with Iran has been a major point of contention. European leaders deeply resented the unilateral pullout, seeing that as a grave error that started a cycle of sanctions and recriminations that led to the seven-day showdown and now the restart of the Iranian nuclear program.When Pompeo phoned his European counterparts after the strike, they expressed concern.In a 15-minute call, Foreign Minister Heiko Maas of Germany said the killing had not made it any easier to stabilize the region. Pompeo responded that the situation was now more stable.The French and Japanese both offered to serve as mediators, but that only annoyed Trump, who dislikes middlemen. So the Europeans focused on keeping Iran from overreacting.A senior German diplomat sent a text message to his Iranian counterpart urging calm. He got back a terse, though polite, message. In a series of phone calls, European officials tried to give the Iranians a sense that it was not them against the rest of the world but that in fact there was a global public beyond the United States, according to one European diplomat.President Emmanuel Macron of France played an active role, reaching out to both sides. "Macron's specificity is that he does not approve, but he also does not condemn," said Michel Duclos, a former French ambassador to Syria.Macron reached Trump on Sunday and emphasized the need for de-escalation. Trump suggested he was still open to diplomacy. All the Iranians had to do was come to him, and they could make a deal, Trump said, according to a senior French official.Two days later, Macron spoke with President Hassan Rouhani of Iran and reminded him that he had "missed a chance in September" to talk directly with Trump in a phone call Macron tried to arrange on the sidelines of the annual United Nations session.Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany spoke with Trump, too, and expressed concern for Iraq's stability if allied troops withdrew. If the United States stayed, she said, Germany would also. Trump joked that Germany was welcome to lead the international force and replace the Americans. Merkel laughed.'The Ball Is in Our Court,' the Defense Secretary SaysThe most important European country in these seven days, it turned out, was Switzerland, which has served as the intermediary between the United States and Iran since they broke off diplomatic relations in 1980.Hours after the strike, Markus Leitner, the Swiss ambassador in Tehran, headed to the Iranian Foreign Ministry for the first of two visits that day, according to a Swiss analyst. The Americans had sent a letter to the Iranians through the Swiss warning against any retaliation for the drone strike that would incite further military action by Trump.The Americans "said that if you want to get revenge, get revenge in proportion to what we did," Rear Adm. Ali Fadavi, deputy commander of the Guard, told Iranian state television.U.S. officials disputed that characterization, and analysts doubted it was that explicit, although that could be how Iran interpreted it. In any case, Leitner went back to the Foreign Ministry at day's end for the Iranian response.Unbeknown to the Iranians, Trump had agreed to targeting the other sites originally considered -- the oil and gas facility and the command-in-control ship -- as part of any further retaliation that might be necessary if Iran responded to the drone strike. Despite Trump's threat, none of the targets on the list were actually cultural, an official said; that was just presidential bluster, aggravated by an instinct to double down in the face of criticism.On Tuesday, the Defense Special Missile and Astronautics Center, part of the National Security Agency, pulled together multiple strands of information, including overhead imagery and communication intercepts, to conclude that an Iranian missile strike on Iraqi bases was coming, officials said. The center sent the warning to the White House.Vice President Mike Pence and O'Brien immediately headed to the Situation Room in the basement, joined later by the president and Pompeo. At the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff, led by its chairman, Gen. Mark Milley, convened in a third-floor conference room and discussed how to move troops and families in the region to safer locations.Just after 5:30 p.m., an almost robotic voice came over a speakerphone in the Situation Room. "Sir, we have indications of a launch at 22:30 Zulu Time from western Iran in the direction of Iraq, Syria and Jordan." Reports began coming in faster. The missiles were staggered, but most were streaking toward Al Asad Air Base in Iraq, home to 2,000 U.S. troops.The barrage ended after an hour, but base commanders ordered troops to remain in shelter in case more missiles came. Around 7:30, about an hour after the strikes concluded, Esper and Milley headed to the White House to meet with Trump.The missiles damaged a helicopter, some tents and other structures but, thanks to the advance warning, inflicted no casualties. And through the Swiss came another message: That was it. That was Iran's retribution.The Americans were struck by the speed of the communication; it was shown to Trump and Pompeo within five minutes after the Swiss received it from Iran. They passed the it by encrypted fax to their embassy in Washington and then to Brian Hook, the special representative on Iran, two minutes after the Iranians gave it to them.Esper, a veteran of the Persian Gulf War of 1991, counseled caution. "Let's stay calm," he said. "The ball is in our court. There's no rush to do anything. Let's all sleep on it."By the time Trump retired to the residence for the night, advisers said, he was relieved there had been no casualties and eager for a reset, a path away from a deeper conflict. He posted a reassuring tweet: "All is well!"'What Were the Threats?' Lawmakers ShoutedThe next morning Trump addressed the nation from the White House, and while he excoriated Iran's "campaign of terror," he made clear he would not retaliate further."Iran appears to be standing down," he said, without revealing the secret message sent through the Swiss, adding that he was "ready to embrace peace with all who seek it."The immediate crisis over, Trump sent top officials to brief Congress, but the closed-door sessions in a secure facility where lawmakers had to surrender their telephones did little to quell concerns about the justification for the drone strike.In the House briefing, Pompeo offered a brief introduction, followed by presentations by Haspel, Esper, Milley and Joseph Maguire, acting director of national intelligence. All three offered vague but emphatic assertions of intelligence indicating an imminent threat by Soleimani. Milley said the evidence could not be clearer and was the "best intelligence" he had seen during his career.But they refused to describe it in detail. One lawmaker said the information was no more secret than what could be found on Wikipedia. At one point, Milley said the intelligence showed discussion by Soleimani of potential terrorist attacks on three specific dates in late December or early January."What were the threats?" several lawmakers in the audience shouted, but Milley declined to say.Another lawmaker noted that the three dates Milley cited were all before the strike on Soleimani, and no attacks actually occurred then."What really came across was a sense of disdain and contempt for the legislative branch," said Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va. "They didn't even pretend to be engaged in information sharing and consultation."Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, called the session for senators "probably the worst briefing" in his nine years in office. "We never got to the details," he said. "Every time we got close, they said, 'Well, we can't discuss that here because it's sensitive.'"If it was too sensitive for Congress, it was not too sensitive for Laura Ingraham, the Fox News host. In an interview broadcast Friday, Trump told her that the threat had been to four U.S. embassies, even as other officials said privately that they did not have concrete evidence of Soleimani's targets.After seven days of saber rattling and fresh deployments, the immediate march to war had ended. But inside the security establishment, few consider the crisis to be over. In the months to come, they expect Iran to regroup and find ways to strike back."Soleimani as a person inspired the masses. He was a national icon. He symbolized the struggle," said Ali Alfoneh, a senior fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington who studies Iran. "But he was also a very small part of a very large organization."Yes, it is decapitated," he added, "but the organization is not destroyed."This article originally appeared in The New York Times.(C) 2020 The New York Times Company
|
| Iran's only female Olympic medalist defects, saying she was oppressed Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:35 AM PST  Iran's only female Olympic medalist has said on social media she had left her homeland because she had had enough of being used by its authorities as a propaganda tool. Taekwondo champion Kimia Alizadeh, who won a bronze medal at the 2016 Rio Olympics, implied in an Instagram post that she had moved to Europe. She wrote the message on her Instagram page, but it was not immediately possible to verify her location. "No one has invited me to Europe and I haven't been given a tempting offer. But I accept the pain and hardship of homesickness because I didn't want to be part of hypocrisy, lies, injustice and flattery," she said. Mahin Farhadizadeh, a deputy Iranian sports minister, said: "I have not read Kimia's post, but as far as I know she always wanted to continue her studies in physiotherapy," the semi-official ISNA news agency reported. Alizadeh said the Islamic Republic's authorities had attributed her success to their management and the fact that she wore the Islamic veil, which is obligatory in Iran. "I am one of the millions of oppressed women in Iran whom they've been playing for years... I wore whatever they told me and repeated whatever they ordered. Every sentence they ordered I repeated," she wrote. "None of us matter for them, we are just tools." View this post on Instagram با سلام آغاز کنم، با خداحافظی یا تسلیت؟ سلام مردم مظلوم ایران، خداحافظ مردم نجیب ایران، تسلیت به شما مردم همیشه داغدار ایران. شما مرا چقدر میشناسید؟ فقط آنطور که در مسابقات، در تلویزیون، یا در حضور مقامات دیدهاید. اجازه دهید حالا آزادانه، هویت سانسور شدهام را معرفی کنم. میگویند کیمیا پس از این چیزی نخواهد شد. خودم از این هم فراتر میروم و میگویم قبل از این هم چیزی نبودهام: «من کیمیا علیزاده، نه تاریخسازم، نه قهرمانم، نه پرچمدار کاروان ایران» من یکی از میلیونها زن سرکوب شده در ایرانم که سالهاست هر طور خواستند بازیام دادند. هر کجا خواستند بردند. هر چه گفتند پوشیدم. هر جملهای دستور دادند تکرار کردم. هر زمان صلاح دیدند، مصادرهام کردند. مدالهایم را پای حجاب اجباری گذاشتند و به مدیریت و درایت خودشان نسبت دادند. من برایشان مهم نبودم. هیچکداممان برایشان مهم نیستیم، ما ابزاریم. فقط آن مدالهای فلزی اهمیت دارد تا به هر قیمتی که خودشان نرخ گذاشتند از ما بخرند و بهرهبرداری سیاسی کنند، اما همزمان برای تحقیرت، میگویند: فضیلت زن این نیست که پاهایش را دراز کند! من صبحها هم از خواب بیدار میشوم پاهایم ناخودآگاه مثل پنکه میچرخد و به در و دیوار میگیرد. آنوقت چگونه میتوانستم مترسکی باشم که میخواستند از من بسازند؟ در برنامه زنده تلویزیون، سوالهایی پرسیدند که دقیقاً بخاطر همان سوال دعوتم کرده بودند. حالا که نیستم میگویند تن به ذلت دادهام. آقای ساعی! من آمدم تا مثل شما نباشم و در مسیری که شما پیش رفتید قدم برندارم. من در صورت تقلید بخشی از رفتارهای شما، بیش از شما میتوانستم به ثروت و قدرت برسم. من به اینها پشت کردم. من یک انسانم و میخواهم بر مدار انسانیت باقی بمانم. در ذهنهای مردسالار و زنستیزتان، همیشه فکر میکردید کیمیا زن است و زبان ندارد! روح آزرده من در کانالهای آلوده اقتصادی و لابیهای تنگ سیاسی شما نمیگنجد. من جز تکواندو، امنیت و زندگی شاد و سالم درخواست دیگری از دنیا ندارم. مردم نازنین و داغدار ایران، من نمیخواستم از پلههای ترقی که بر پایه فساد و دروغ بنا شده بالا بروم. کسی به اروپا دعوتم نکرده و در باغ سبز به رویم باز نشده. اما رنج و سختی غربت را بجان میخرم چون نمیخواستم پای سفره ریاکاری، دروغ، بی عدالتی و چاپلوسی بنشینم. این تصمیم از کسب طلای المپیک هم سختتر است، اما هر کجا باشم فرزند ایران زمین باقی میمانم. پشت به دلگرمی شما میدهم و جز اعتماد شما در راه سختی که قدم گذاشتهام، خواسته دیگری ندارم. A post shared by ���������� ������������������ (@kimiya.alizade) on Jan 11, 2020 at 6:40am PST She said that while the government exploited her medals politically, officials would humiliate her with remarks such as "It is not virtuous for a woman to stretch her legs!" Alizadeh said at the time of her medal in the 57kg category that it had made her happy for Iranian girls. On Sunday she appeared torn by her decision. "Should I start with hello, goodbye or condolences? Hello oppressed people of Iran, goodbye noble people of Iran, my condolences to you people who are always mourning," she wrote. Iran's Kimia Alizadeh competing in the 2016 Rio Olympics Credit: ED JONES/AFP via Getty Images In the past week, 176 people, many Iranians with dual citizenship, were killed when the Iranian military mistakenly shot a Ukrainian airliner down, and at least 56 died in a stampede at the funeral for an Iranian military commander killed by a US air strike. Alizadeh's decision comes soon after two other top Iranian sportspeople declined to continue representing the country. In December, Iran's Chess Federation said top rated chess champion Alireza Firouzja had decided not to play for Iran over its informal ban on competing against Israeli players. Three months earlier, the International Judo Federation said Iranian judoka Saeid Mollaei had refused to return home over fears for his safety after he ignored orders from his national federation to pull out of fights to avoid a potential final meeting with an Israeli.
|
| Esper Says Bigger Iran Attacks Were ‘Days Away,' Offers No Proof Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:24 AM PST  (Bloomberg) -- The top U.S. defense official said Iran had planned to attack U.S. sites within days before a top Iranian general was killed on President Donald Trump's orders but that he hadn't seen specific evidence to back up Trump's claim that four embassies would be targeted."I didn't see one with regard to four embassies," U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said on CBS's "Face the Nation" when asked if he'd seen a specific piece of evidence. A top Democrat said here had been no discussion in a Congressional briefing of four embassies being targeted. "I believe there were threats to multiple embassies," Esper said on CNN's "State of the Union," while explicitly mentioning only the U.S. embassy in Baghdad. "I think that the attack was days away" and would result in "open hostilities," he said.Esper and National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien took to the Sunday news shows to bolster Trump's statement from Friday that Iran "probably" was targeting four U.S. embassies, as the rationale for the deadly Jan. 2 drone strike on Iranian General Qassem Soleimani continued to shift.Even so, the administration officials offered little specific evidence about the decision-making and intelligence that led to Soleimani being targeted.On CNN, Esper said the president said "he believed that they probably could have been targeting other embassies in the region" besides Baghdad. "I believe that as well," the defense chief said.O'Brien, appearing on "Fox News Sunday," defended Trump's assertion."It's certainly consistent with the intelligence to assume that they would have hit embassies in at least four countries," O'Brien said. There were strong indications that Iranian plots aimed "to kill and maim Americans," he said.Dissatisfaction in CongressEsper said he understood the frustration of some rank-and-file members of Congress who complained of incomplete information presented in briefings about Soleimani's killing and the authorization of military force in Iran.The content of those briefings was abbreviated compared with that provided to the so-called Gang of Eight lawmakers, he said, adding, "For every member that didn't like the brief, there were members that thought it was the greatest brief ever."Senator Mike Lee of Utah, a Republican who has criticized the administration's briefings as inadequate, said Sunday that he "didn't hear anything" as specific as four embassies having been targeted by Iran."That was news to me," Lee said on CNN. "It does matter that we give the details to members of Congress and it does matter to figure out where we go from here and to make sure that any further action is authorized by Congress."Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware said that while the briefing by administration officials lasted 75 minutes, senators received less information than Trump divulged Friday in a Fox News interview. In an interview with Fox News's Laura Ingraham, Trump said: "I can reveal that I believe it would've been four embassies."Representative Adam Schiff, who as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is one of the Gang of Eight, said the administration was "overstating" what the intelligence showed about potential attacks. Trump and Secretary of State Michael Pompeo are "fudging," Schiff said on CBS."There was no discussion in the Gang of Eight briefings that these are the four embassies that are being targeted," Schiff said. Iraq TroopsEsper said the U.S. is talking to its partners about how NATO troops may take on a bigger role in Iraq, potentially lowering U.S. troop levels there, said Defense Secretary Mark Esper.Any decisions will be made in "full respect of Iraqi sovereignty," Esper said in the CBS interview. Iraq's parliament a week ago approved a non-binding resolution that empowered the nation's government to ask the foreign troops leave the country.Trump's offer to meet with Iran's leaders without preconditions still stands, Esper. "The president has drawn no preconditions other than that we're willing to meet," Esper said.While Iran and the U.S. stepped back from the brink of open military conflict last week, underlying tensions remain elevated.Iran SanctionsThe Trump administration imposed new sanctions on Iran on Jan. 10, including penalties on the Islamic Republic's metals industry and some senior leaders, after Tehran attacked U.S. military bases to retaliate for the killing of Soleimani.The new measures seek to crack down on Iran's few remaining sources of export revenue and squeeze the nation's economy to force its leaders into negotiations for a new nuclear agreement."This is about cutting off money, oil sales, other revenue that would be funding their terrorist activities and their nuclear weapons development. We continue to allow for humanitarian transactions with Iran," Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Fox News's "Sunday Morning Futures.""We don't want to target the people of Iran."Iran has repeatedly rebuffed the Trump administration's overtures to talk, even as existing sprawling sanctions have crippled the Iranian economy. Yet President Hassan Rouhani has confronted street protests against price increases and corruption that has left his government politically vulnerable, potentially benefiting hard liners even more opposed to Washington.Protests swelled after Iran said Saturday that its military had accidentally shot down a Ukrainian passenger jet, killing all 176 people on board. Esper said Iran's government was attempting to "play the victim card" with the international community by blaming the U.S. for increasing hostilities.\--With assistance from Hailey Waller and Rich Miller.To contact the reporters on this story: Tony Czuczka in New York at aczuczka@bloomberg.net;Alan Levin in Washington at alevin24@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: James Ludden at jludden@bloomberg.net, Ros Krasny, Justin BlumFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Mark Esper: I 'Didn't See' Specific Evidence Of Iran Threat To 4 U.S. Embassies Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:20 AM PST  The defense secretary said Iran planned to target the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad but couldn't back up the president's claim about the other locations.
|
| Esper: Trump believed Iran was targeting U.S. embassies Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:08 AM PST |
| Mnuchin Says Boeing Woes Could Lop a Half-Point from U.S. GDP Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:07 AM PST  (Bloomberg) -- Troubles at aircraft maker Boeing Co. could trim about half a point from U.S. GDP in 2020 but economic growth should still come in at about 2.5%, said Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.Mnuchin discussed the growth outlook, plans to sign the first phase of a U.S.-China trade deal and new sanctions against Iran on Fox News Channel's "Sunday Morning Futures.""The president's economic program is really coming together," Mnuchin said.His assessment was more upbeat than many economists, who expect slowing growth. They say the economy had received a boost from the 2017 Republican tax cuts and from increased government spending, but that stimulus is starting to fade.Economists surveyed by Bloomberg News this month forecast growth this year of 1.8%, down from an estimated 2.3% in 2019. They put the chances of a recession happening over the next 12 months at 30%.Boeing's 737 Max jetliner remains subject to a global flight ban after deadly accidents in late 2018 and 2019. The aftermath has cut more than $50 billion off the plane-maker's market value, and it's unclear when the grounded airplanes will be back in operation.The U.S. and China are slated to sign a "phase one" trade deal this week that includes Chinese commitments to respect American intellectual property, not manipulate its currency and engage in a $200 billion spending spree on U.S. farm products and other goods.The U.S. in return suspended plans to slap tariffs on some $160 billion of Chinese products while reducing duties on some others.Mnuchin said an English-language version of the detailed agreement will be released this week and a suggestion that some items already agreed to had been watered down over the past few weeks.President Donald Trump told reporters on Jan. 9 that he wants to start negotiations on phase two "right away," but might not finish those until after the U.S. presidential election in November.Those negotiations would address long-standing American complaints not covered in the initial 86-page agreement, including Chinese government subsidies to its companies.The Treasury Department separately is advising the Trump administration to revive twice-yearly talks with China to discuss the economic relationship between the countries, according to people familiar with the matter.Such discussions, which would be separate from the phase two negotiations, would harken back to the strategic economic dialogue begun in 2006 when George W. Bush was president and which have been derided by China critics as mere talking shops.To contact the reporters on this story: Rich Miller in Washington at rmiller28@bloomberg.net;Hailey Waller in New York at hwaller@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Margaret Collins at mcollins45@bloomberg.net, Ros Krasny, Justin BlumFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
|
| Sole Iranian female Olympic medalist Kimia Alizadeh defects from country, she says Posted: 12 Jan 2020 08:04 AM PST  Sole Iranian female Olympic medalist Kimia Alizadeh defects from country, she says originally appeared on abcnews.go.comKimia Alizadeh, the sole woman to ever have won a medal at the Olympics for the country of Iran, has defected from the country and moved to Europe, she announced on social media.The 21-year-old, who won bronze at the 2016 summer Olympics in Rio in the women's Taekwondo 57-kg competition, wrote on Instagram Saturday that she is "one of the millions of oppressed woman in Iran. ...
|
| Impeachment: Trump fumes as Pelosi prepares to send articles to the Senate Posted: 12 Jan 2020 07:35 AM PST  * President claims speaker is 'absolute worst in US history' * How to dump Trump: Rick Wilson on Running Against the DevilWhether or not Nancy Pelosi is the "absolute worst Speaker of the House in US history", as Donald Trump insists, the Democrat said on Sunday her caucus will meet on Tuesday to decide when to transmit two articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial.Preparations continue for a piece of pure Washington theatre. Richard Nixon resigned before he could be impeached, which makes Trump only the third president to face trial in the Senate, a process Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton survived.The articles of impeachment were approved before Christmas but Pelosi delayed sending them to the Senate while Democrats sought to negotiate trial rules with Republicans who hold the upper chamber.Democrats want former national security adviser John Bolton and other key Trump aides to appear as witnesses and new evidence to be presented. Bolton has said he will appear if served with a subpoena.In an interview with Fox News broadcast on Friday night, Trump made clear that he would block such testimony, citing executive privilege.Majority leader Mitch McConnell remains in lockstep with the White House, saying he has not ruled out new witnesses but emphasising that impeachment is a political rather than a judicial process and promising the case against Trump will quickly be dismissed.Republicans have followed their leader, regardless of the oath they will take to be impartial jurors. Democratic hopes that moderates such as Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska might force the calling of witnesses seem to have been in vain."It's about a fair trial," Pelosi told ABC's This Week on Sunday. "They take an oath to have a fair trial and we think that would be with witnesses and documentation. Now the ball is in their court to either do that or pay a price for not doing that."Pelosi said McConnell's behaviour, including signing up to a resolution to dismiss the charges against Trump without a trial, was "vastly unusual"."Dismissing is a cover-up," she said.The case against Trump is that he abused his power, by seeking investigations in Ukraine regarding a conspiracy theory about election interference and alleged corruption involving former vice-president Joe Biden, and then obstructed Congress in its attempts to investigate the affair.In House hearings, witnesses detailed the withholding of nearly $400m in military aid as well as promises of a White House meeting for Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelinskiy. Bolton, who sought a judge's opinion on whether he should testify, thereby delaying a decision until the articles were approved, emerged as a key figure.For example, Fiona Hill, a British-born former White House expert on Russia policy, explained how Bolton called efforts towards the Kyiv government by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and others a "drug deal" in which he wanted no part.Even if Republicans do allow new witnesses and documentation, a two-thirds majority of 100 senators would be required to remove Trump – a vastly unlikely outcome.But leading Democrats, among them Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer and Adam Schiff, chairman of the House intelligence committee, have pointed to the emergence of new reporting on the Ukraine scandal as a benefit of Pelosi's delay.Pelosi told ABC: "We have confidence in our case that this is impeachable and the president is impeached for life, regardless of any gamesmanship on the part of Mitch McConnell. We're confident in the impeachment and we think that's enough testimony to remove [Trump] from office."On Saturday, Trump claimed "new polling shows that the totally partisan Impeachment Hoax is going nowhere". In fact, most polling shows the US public split.On Saturday a CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll of Iowa voters, released ahead of the caucuses which kick-off the Democratic primary on 3 February, said 45% of voters in the state, of either party, disapproved of the process while 43% approved. Nationally, polls site fivethirtyeight.com puts support for removing Trump at 50.2%, to 46.2% against.Trump spent the weekend presenting his aggressive moves against Iran as a contrast to alleged Democratic inaction domestically. Pelosi "is obsessed with impeachment", he told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. "She has done nothing. She is going to go down as one of the worst speakers in the history of our country. And she's become a crazed lunatic."On Sunday, Trump demanded ABC host George Stephanopoulos "ask Crazy Nancy why she allowed Adam 'Shifty' Schiff to totally make up my conversation with the Ukrainian President & read his false words to Congress and the world".That was a reference to a summary Schiff made at a congressional hearing of a 25 July phone call between Trump and Zelinskiy which sits at the heart of Trump's impeachment.The president and allies have sought to portray an attempt to misrepresent Trump's words. Opponents say the rough White House version of the call shows Trump engaged in impeachable behaviour.Asked about Trump's personal attacks, Pelosi told ABC: "It's Sunday morning. I'd like to talk about some more pleasant subjects than the erratic nature of this president ... but he has to know that every knock from him is a boost."She added: "I don't like to spend too much time on his crazy tweets, because everything he says is a projection. When he calls someone crazy, he knows that he is."Regarding Pelosi's abilities as speaker, political Twitter lit up with discussion of a man who held the position from 1999 to 2007, making him its longest-serving Republican.In 2015, Denny Hastert was sentenced to 15 months in prison for financial crimes related to attempts to cover up his abuse of teenage boys when he was a high-school wrestling coach. Hastert admitted the abuse. A federal judge called him "serial child molester".
|
| Trump, Pelosi square off ahead of impeachment trial Posted: 12 Jan 2020 07:31 AM PST  President Donald Trump and Speaker Nancy Pelosi squared off Sunday ahead of his impeachment trial, as she said senators will "pay a price" for blocking new witnesses and he quickly retorted that she and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff should both testify. The House plans to vote this week to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate for the historic trial on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress over Trump's actions toward Ukraine. It will be only the third presidential impeachment trial in American history and could start this week.
|
| Sanchez Vows to Heal Spain’s Wounds With Coalition Government Posted: 12 Jan 2020 06:48 AM PST |
| Majority of Americans feel less safe under Trump after Iran, poll finds Posted: 12 Jan 2020 06:46 AM PST  A majority of Americans said they think Donald Trump's airstrike in Iraq responsible for killing Iranian General Qassem Soleimani has made the United States less safe, according to a new poll.The ABC News/Ipsos poll published on Sunday also showed a majority of Americans disapproved of the president's handling of the current situation with Iran, with 56 per cent of those surveyed saying they disapproved of Mr Trump's actions, compared to 43 per cent who said they approved.
|
| 10 things you need to know today: January 12, 2020 Posted: 12 Jan 2020 06:26 AM PST |
| Trump's blundering attempts to strong arm Iran follow the same pattern as the China trade-war mess Posted: 12 Jan 2020 05:32 AM PST  With both Iran and China, the Trump administration's policies have left the US right where it started — but with a lot more hostility.
|
| Canadian officials accidentally push nuke alert to millions Posted: 12 Jan 2020 05:25 AM PST  People throughout the Canadian province of Ontario awoke Sunday to a cellphone alert warning them of an "incident" at a nuclear plant just east of Toronto — only to later be told the message was a mistake. It said an unspecified event had occurred at the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. There was no abnormal release of radioactivity, it added, and people did not need to take protective action.
|
| Iranian protesters call for Ayatollah to step down following plane strike admission Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:59 AM PST  Iran's admission of shooting down a Ukrainian passenger jet carrying 176 people this week has sparked unrest in the country.Protesters — including many students — gathered in Iran on Saturday and Sunday, criticizing the government and demanding the country's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei step down. Iran initially denied involvement in the incident, but later said the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, fearing retaliation from the U.S. for a strike Tuesday against an American military base in Iraq, mistook the plane for hostile aircraft and launched a missile that brought the plane down, killing everyone on board.A candlelit vigil in Tehran for the victims Saturday evening morphed into a protest before police broke up the gathering with tear gas. Iranian security forces deployed in large numbers in Tehran on Sunday, patrolling the city on motorbikes and stationing at various landmarks in anticipation of more protests.Iran has also faced criticism outside its borders. The United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab condemned Tehran for briefly detaining British Amabassador to Iran Rob Macaire after he attended the vigil (Macaire said he wasn't aware it would turn into a protest.) Raab said Iran was on its way toward "pariah status." Officials from Ukraine, Canada, and the United States also expressed dismay over how Iran handled the situation.More stories from theweek.com The death of rock's master craftsman NFL's future, present on display Sunday thanks to a pair thrilling QB matchups Pelosi says delaying articles of impeachment achieved 'very positive' results
|
| Thornberry, Lewis Fight to Get on U.K. Labour Leadership Ballot Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:54 AM PST |
| Trump loyalists back action in Iran, but still don't want 'endless wars' Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:05 AM PST  While waiting hours in line for her first Donald Trump rally, Jennifer Colburn, a staunch supporter of the president who has two sons serving in the military, said she hopes the president continues to de-escalate tension with Iran. "I'm not a big fan of war," she told ABC News, ahead of Trump's kickoff rally in Toledo, Ohio. Days earlier, Trump ordered an airstrike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, a seismic escalation in the prolonged conflict with Iran.
|
| Majority of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of Iran, feel less safe after strike: POLL Posted: 12 Jan 2020 04:00 AM PST  In a week dominated by increased tension with Iran and speculation over when impeachment articles would be delivered to the U.S. Senate, a majority of Americans said they disapprove of President Trump's handling of the situation with Iran and feel less safe, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll. The poll, conducted by Ipsos in partnership with ABC News, using Ipsos' Knowledge Panel, asked Americans about their attitudes on two unfolding challenges for the Trump presidency -- escalating tensions with Iran and the impending impeachment trial in the Senate.
|
| The Middle Eastern Problem Soleimani Figured Out Posted: 12 Jan 2020 03:49 AM PST |
