ReportWire

Tag: Foreign policy

  • PolitiFact – Fact-checking a TikTok claim that the government caused inflation to wage war on civilians

    PolitiFact – Fact-checking a TikTok claim that the government caused inflation to wage war on civilians

    [ad_1]

    A TikTok user sought to causally connect two hot-button concerns: inflation in the U.S. and overseas wars.

    The Nov. 18 post features a narrator who says, after stripping out frequent obscenities, “The … feds were raising inflation so they could fund this … war. The entire time that these companies and the Federal Reserve were raising prices on us and raising … interest rates on us, they were doing that so they could fund a … war. It had nothing to do with stimulating our economy or getting our economy back in line. They did this … on purpose so they could fund a … war against a bunch of civilians.”

    PolitiFact was tagged in the video, so we wanted to examine the claim. We found several problems with the TikTokker’s reasoning.

    Government policy may have exacerbated inflation, which recently peaked in summer 2022. But supply chain disruptions because of the coronavirus pandemic and price shocks from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine were inflation’s primary drivers.

    Also, Federal Reserve rate hikes have been targeted specifically at lowering inflation. Inflation is down from its 9% year-over-year increase in July 2022 to 3.2% in October 2023.

    Finally, the purported synchronous timing of inflation and war does not add up. Israel’s military response, which has killed more than 11,000 people in Gaza, was sparked by large-scale terrorist attacks by Hamas, an armed Palestinian militant group, on Oct. 7. 

    Claim: The federal government was “raising inflation.”

    Government spending can have an effect on inflation. But it’s not the only factor.

    The 2021 American Rescue Plan Act, a key piece of President Joe Biden’s economic agenda, added about $1.9 trillion to the economy, and economists across the political spectrum say this spurred inflation. They differ on how much; estimates range from 2 to 4 points out of the peak inflation rate of about 9%.

    However, none of the experts PolitiFact interviewed for a previous fact-check, liberal or conservative, said Biden’s actions were solely responsible for all of the inflation. Past government spending, COVID-19-related labor market disruptions, shifting energy prices and supply chains also played significant roles. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 drove some prices even higher.

    One can argue that Biden should have better understood his policies’ possible inflationary side effects, but there is no evidence that an intentional desire to provoke inflation, or warmongering, drove his policies. Biden’s stated goal for the American Rescue Plan was to help the nation recover from a difficult pandemic’s economic consequences.

    Claim: Actions by the federal government and the Federal Reserve “had nothing to do with … getting our economy back in line.”

    Economists have told PolitiFact that the major policy reason that inflation has declined is a series of rate hikes by the Federal Reserve, which acts independently of the executive branch. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell has reiterated repeatedly that the goal was to leverage rate hikes to reduce inflation. 

    When the Fed raises interest rates, economic growth slows and demand cools, lowering prices. On March 16, 2022, the Fed’s main interest rate was 0.8%. Today, it’s 5.33%, the highest in a decade and a half. 

    The Fed’s rate increases have rippled throughout the economy and in some ways raised consumers’ costs by raising mortgage rates for homebuyers. But in almost every other way, the rate hikes make it less likely that consumers spend aggressively. By raising the cost of credit, the hikes cool consumer demand, which better aligns that demand with the available supply of goods and services, resulting in lower prices.

    The Fed’s rate hikes, and the subsequent rise in mortgage rates, has “cratered the housing market,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the center-right American Action Forum think tank. And when the housing sector gets hit, he said, demand for a host of other things, such as appliances and home furnishings, falls, too. As a result, he said, “goods price inflation is almost gone.”

    “Few Americans give the Fed, Congress, or two presidents much credit for pursuing policies that limited the economic damage from a sharp and severe recession,” said Brookings Institution economist Gary Burtless. But many Americans, he added, “blame the Fed, Congress, and at least one of the two presidents for the inflation that was generated by the mostly successful counter-recessionary policies of the federal government.”

    Claim: Government is using inflation to fund a “war against a bunch of civilians”

    The U.S. gives more money to Israel than any other country. And Israel’s military response to the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks has resulted in the killing of more than 11,000 people in Gaza, many of whom are civilians. 

    But this does not mean U.S. inflation and the Israel-Hamas war are connected logically.

    The Oct. 7 attacks were carried out on Hamas’ timetable, and when they happened, inflation was down to 3% — close to the Fed’s customary target level. 

    Also, U.S. aid earmarked to help Israel hasn’t passed Congress yet, because of differences between the Republican-led House and the Democratic-led Senate over whether to combine aid to Israel with aid to Ukraine.

    This assistance would represent “a drop in the bucket relative to the economy,” said Dean Baker, an economist with the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research.

    “There are political issues that can be raised about the merits of the spending, but we’re talking about less than 0.1% of gross domestic product,” Baker said.

    Our ruling

    The TikTok video said the federal government and the Federal Reserve were “raising inflation,” something that “had nothing to do with … getting our economy back in line” but rather to fund a “war against a bunch of civilians.”

    Although government policy may have exacerbated the recent inflation that peaked in summer 2022, economists say coronavirus pandemic-related supply chain disruptions and price shocks from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine drove inflation primarily.

    The Federal Reserve’s rate hikes have specifically targeted inflation and have succeeded, cutting the year-over-year rate by two-thirds.

    Finally, the war in Gaza was precipitated by Hamas’ surprise terrorist attacks Oct. 7. These occurred when inflation in the U.S. had cooled almost to the Fed’s target rate.

    We rate the statement False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Yemen no declaró la guerra a Israel, grupo rebelde de hutíes lanzó misiles

    PolitiFact – Yemen no declaró la guerra a Israel, grupo rebelde de hutíes lanzó misiles

    [ad_1]

    Una publicación en Facebook dice que Yemen le declaró la guerra a Israel, pero eso es falso. 

    “El representante oficial de las fuerzas armadas de Yemen ha declarado oficialmente la guerra a Israel”, dice el video del 2 de noviembre que muestra a un soldado dando un discurso televisado. 

    La publicación fue marcada como parte del esfuerzo de Meta para combatir las noticias falsas y la desinformación en su plataforma. (Lea más sobre nuestra colaboración con Meta, propietaria de Facebook e Instagram).

    Ni el gobierno oficial de Yemen, ni su representante oficial de las fuerzas armadas declararon la guerra a Israel. Un grupo de rebeldes llamados hutíes lanzaron drones y misiles balísticos a Israel el 31 de octubre. El general de brigada del grupo rebelde, Yahya Saree, dijo en un comunicado televisado que ellos fueron los responsables de estos ataques. Él también dijo que no iban a parar hasta que “las agresiones israelíes” contra la Franja de Gaza cesarán, según Reuters. 

    Los hutíes no son el gobierno oficial de Yemen, dijo a PolitiFact el Dr. Charles Schmitz, un profesor de geografía en la Universidad de Towson y especialista en el Medio Oriente y Yemen. 

    Schmitz dijo que los hutíes controlan la capital del país, Saná, y alrededor de tres cuartos de la población yemeníe. 

    A pesar de los intentos militares de Arabia Saudita y los Emiratos Árabes de expulsarlos de la región en los últimos ocho años de la guerra civil, los hutíes son referidos como el gobierno “de facto” de Yemen. El gobierno reconocido internacionalmente como la República de Yemen, dirigido por el Consejo de Liderazgo Presidencial, sigue controlando el sur y el este del país, incluyendo Adén, la capital temporal. 

     “Es posible que sus esfuerzos no tengan mucho más que un efecto simbólico, aunque los israelíes, saudíes y estadounidenses están dedicando recursos a proteger a Arabia Saudita e Israel de los drones y misiles hutíes”, Schmitz dijo.

    Niku Jafarnia, una experta en Yemen del Human Rights Watch, le confirmó a PolitiFact que Yemen no declaró la guerra a Israel. 

    “Los hutíes son apoyados por Irán y son virulentamente anti-Israel, lo cual es parte de su motivo por el cual están atacando a Israel”, dijo Jafarnia.

    Adonis Fakhri, el concejal ejecutivo de la embajada de la República de Yemen en los Estados Unidos, le dijo a PolitiFact que “los hutíes son un grupo rebelde que es designado como una organización terrorista por el gobierno legítimo e internacionalmente reconocido de Yemen”.

    El grupo rebelde hutí lanzó ataques a Israel, pero ellos no son considerados representantes oficiales de la República de Yemen. Calificamos la declaración de que Yemen le declaró la guerra a Israel como Falsa. 

    Lea más reportes de PolitiFact en Español aquí.

    _______________________________________________

    Debido a limitaciones técnicas, partes de nuestra página web aparecen en inglés. Estamos trabajando en mejorar la presentación.

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – US military aid isn’t the majority of foreign assistance, contrary to what Marianne Williamson said

    PolitiFact – US military aid isn’t the majority of foreign assistance, contrary to what Marianne Williamson said

    [ad_1]

    Does most of U.S. aid to foreign countries consist of military assistance? That’s what Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson said during a Nov. 7 town hall at a store in Manchester, New Hampshire.

    “So, when you look at most American aid over the last few decades, what do we mean by American aid to other countries?” Williamson said, in remarks captured by PolitiFact’s partner, WMUR-TV in New Hampshire. “The vast majority of it is military aid. And we sell arms to 60% of the world’s autocrats. We are the world’s largest arms exporters.”

    In reality, official federal data shows that U.S. military aid accounts for a minority of overall U.S. foreign aid. (We are checking the portion about arms exports separately.)

    Military vs. economic assistance

    U.S. military aid is defined as equipment, training and other defense-related services to national-level security forces of U.S. allies and partners. 

    The ForeignAid.gov website, a project of the State Department and the Agency for International Development, tracks U.S. foreign aid to every country, including the breakdown between economic and military aid. This source is the official one for such breakdowns, said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

    It shows that for the most recent full year, 2022, the U.S. provided about $60 billion in economic aid and about $8.9 billion in military aid. That means about 13% of total aid was military aid.

    That was a smaller percentage for military aid than in other recent years; for instance in 2011, military aid accounted for about 38% of all foreign aid.

    Still, at no point in this century has military aid accounted for a majority of all U.S. foreign aid. 

    Our ruling

    Williamson said that looking at “American aid to other countries … the vast majority of it is military aid.”

    In 2022, military aid accounted for about 13% of overall U.S. foreign aid, and in this century, even at its peak, military aid has accounted for less than 40% of overall foreign aid.

    We rate the statement False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Marianne Williamson correct that U.S. is world’s biggest arms exporter

    PolitiFact – Marianne Williamson correct that U.S. is world’s biggest arms exporter

    [ad_1]

    In a recent appearance in New Hampshire, Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson said the U.S. is the world’s biggest arms exporter and sells widely to autocratic countries.

    “So, when you look at most American aid over the last few decades, what do we mean by American aid to other countries?” Williamson said at a Nov. 7 event at a store in Manchester, New Hampshire. “The vast majority of it is military aid. And we sell arms to 60% of the world’s autocrats. We are the world’s largest arms exporters.” The comments were captured by PolitiFact’s partner, WMUR-TV in New Hampshire.

    She’s correct about the U.S. being the world’s largest arms exporter, and that the U.S. sells heavily to autocratic governments. (We are checking her statement about military aid as a share of U.S. foreign aid separately.)

    Arms exports

    In the breadth of its arms exports, the U.S. leads every other country.

    Data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute found that from 2018 to 2022, the U.S. accounted for 40% of arms transfers globally. The next closest country was Russia, at 16%.

    The U.S. share has been climbing. From 2013 to 2017, the U.S. accounted for 33% of global arms transfers. The three biggest importers of U.S. arms are Saudi Arabia, Japan and Australia.

    Williamson said 60% of the military aid goes to the world’s autocrats, which appears to come from reporting in The Intercept, a left-leaning online publication. In May, it published a story that used federal data to calculate that, in 2022, the U.S. sold weapons to at least 57% of the world’s autocratic countries.

    For its definitions, it relied on the Varieties of Democracy project at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, which classifies regimes in four categories: closed autocracy, electoral autocracy, electoral democracy, and liberal democracy. The Intercept found that of the 84 nations categorized as autocracies in 2022, the United States sold weapons to 57%. Among the biggest autocratic importers of U.S. arms in recent years have been Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar.

    Using another classification system, the Freedom in the World report published by the human rights group Freedom House, produced a nearly identical result of 58%.

    Our ruling

    Williamson said, “We sell arms to 60% of the world’s autocrats. We are the world’s largest arms exporters.”

    The U.S. is the world’s largest arms exporter, with 40% of the global share, easily ahead of Russia at 16%.

    We rate the statement True.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Former UK Prime Minister David Cameron made foreign minister in surprise political comeback

    Former UK Prime Minister David Cameron made foreign minister in surprise political comeback

    [ad_1]

    LONDON, ENGLAND – JUNE 19: Former British Prime Minister David Cameron leaves after giving evidence at the Covid-19 inquiry on June 19, 2023 in London, England. The UK Covid-19 Inquiry is examining the UK’s response to and impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and learning lessons for the future. (Photo by Carl Court/Getty Images)

    Carl Court | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    LONDON – Former U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron was appointed foreign secretary Monday in a sweeping reshuffle of current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s cabinet.

    Cameron was seen walking into No. 10 — the official residence and office of the British prime minister — to meet with Sunak, following the abrupt sacking of Suella Braverman as interior minister.

    Cameron served as prime minister from 2010 to 2016 and presided over Britain’s controversial Brexit vote, which ultimately led to his resignation.

    He is the figurehead of an age of Conservative leadership that Sunak has previously heavily lambasted. In a conference speech in October, Sunak positioned himself as the U.K.’s “change” candidate, decrying the prior 30 years of British politics — through which the Tories governed for around two-thirds — as a failure.

    David Cameron, UK foreign secretary, departs 10 Downing Street after being appointed in London, UK, on Monday, Nov. 13, 2023.

    Bloomberg | Getty Images

    A royal decree eased Cameron’s return to the political fold. Under British law, only current MPs or members of the House of Lords can become government ministers. Cameron quit as a Member of Parliament in 2016, but King Charles III confirmed him as a life peer on Monday, raising him as a lord and enabling him to assume the role of foreign secretary.

    Cameron was viewed as fervently pro-China during his leadership and spent time afterwards trying to set up a $1 billion U.K.-China investment fund — a plan which was later shelved. It is currently unclear how his foreign policy agenda will adapt against a backdrop of increased Sino skepticism among Western nations and ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the Middle East.

    “We are facing a daunting set of international challenges, including the war in Ukraine and the crisis in the Middle East,” Cameron said in a statement.

    “At this time of profound global change, it has rarely been more important for this country to stand by our allies, strengthen our partnerships and make sure our voice is heard.”

    The reshuffle comes as Sunak attempts to reassert his authority, with his ruling Conservative Party trailing opposition Labour by more than 20 points in opinion polls ahead of a general election due before January 2025.

    Speculation over Braverman’s dismissal arose last week after an op-ed she penned was published in The Times newspaper, ignoring guidance from Downing Street and accusing London police of political bias in policing protests.

    The former interior minister has long been a controversial figure, attracting criticism over her plans to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda and her comments describing homelessness as a “lifestyle choice.

    James Cleverly, who formerly served as foreign secretary, was appointed Braverman’s successor. Finance Minister Jeremy Hunt remains in post ahead of his Autumn Statement to be delivered next week, though further reappointments at the top of government are expected Monday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Fact-checking Chris Christie on U.S. security obligations toward Ukraine

    PolitiFact – Fact-checking Chris Christie on U.S. security obligations toward Ukraine

    [ad_1]

    During the third Republican presidential debate, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie explained that his support for Ukraine against the continuing Russian invasion traces back to promises made during the 1990s.

    “In 1992, this country made a promise to Ukraine,” Christie said during the Nov. 8 debate in Miami. “We said, ‘If you return nuclear missiles that were part of the old Soviet Union to Russia, and they invade you, we will protect you.’”

    This makes the U.S. obligation to defend Ukraine sound cut and dried. However, as we’ve previously written, it was anything but.

    Christie’s campaign did not respond to an inquiry for this article.

    The crack-up of the USSR and the 1994 Budapest agreement

    When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, the rest of the world expressed concern over the fate of the Soviet nuclear arsenal, which was spread across not just Russia but also three newly independent states, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. 

    Belarus and Kazakhstan agreed to dismantle or return to Russia what they had. But Ukraine looked at the roughly 1,900 warheads on its soil and began seeking something in exchange before it ceded them.

    “Essentially, it was something that they traded off in order to encourage international recognition,” Brian Finlay, a specialist in nonproliferation at the Stimson Center, a military-focused Washington, D.C., think tank told PolitiFact in 2015.

    According to a 2011 report by Steven Pifer, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine from 1998 to 2000, Ukraine wanted Russia to promise to respect its sovereignty and its borders, a promise that Russia made but has since broken. Ukraine also wanted money, and it knew that going non-nuclear would open the door to better ties with the West.

    In early 1994, the United States agreed to provide money to dismantle Ukraine’s nuclear infrastructure, while Russia agreed to forgive Ukraine’s debts. In December 1994, the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom and Ukraine signed the Budapest Memorandum of Security Assurances

    The agreement reaffirmed certain commitments among the parties:

    Pifer described in his report the lengths to which Washington lingered over the precise phrasing of the U.S. security obligations to Ukraine.

    State Department lawyers “took careful interest in the actual language … to keep the commitments of a political nature,” Pifer wrote. “U.S. officials also continually used the term ‘assurances’ instead of ‘guarantees,’ as the latter implied a deeper, even legally binding commitment of the kind that the United States extended to its NATO allies.”

    Pifer wrote that American diplomats made sure that the Russians and Ukrainians understood specifically that the English meaning of “assurance” was not the same as a “guarantee.”

    Has anything changed?

    We asked several experts whether anything had changed since we last covered this topic eight years ago (which also came during a presidential election cycle, in comments by Republican candidates Ben Carson and Ted Cruz).

    The experts agreed that although Russia has continued to break its promise to respect Ukraine’s borders, the U.S. obligations remain the same. The U.S. under President Joe Biden has supported Ukraine as it tries to fend off Russia’s invasion, including providing arms and money. But the U.S. has done this by choice, not because the Budapest agreement legally obligates it to do so. 

    Christie seems to be framing it as a pledge akin to NATO’s Article 5, which treats an attack on one member as an attack on all, obligating a response, said Erik Herron, a West Virginia University political scientist who specializes in Eastern Europe. But such an obligation “is not part of any written agreement,” Herron said.

    Pifer, the former ambassador to Ukraine, told PolitiFact that when negotiating the language, “Ukrainian officials asked us, the U.S. officials, what the United States would do if Russia violated its commitments. We responded that the United States would take an interest and support Ukraine, but we made clear that we were not committing to send U.S. troops.”

    And that is basically what has happened since Russia invaded in 2022, Pifer said. 

    “To my mind, U.S. support for Ukraine over the past two years has lived up to what we told Ukrainian officials in the early 1990s,” he said. 

    Our ruling

    Christie said, “In 1992, this country made a promise to Ukraine. We said, ‘If you return nuclear missiles that were part of the old Soviet Union to Russia, and they invade you, we will protect you.’”

    Setting aside that the agreement was signed in 1994, not 1992, Christie makes it sound as if the U.S. had an ironclad obligation to protect Ukraine if its borders were violated — that it had a “promise” to “protect” Ukraine.

    But the United States carefully avoided making a strong promise. The agreement deliberately steered away from the term “guarantee” in favor of “assurances,” which entails a lesser degree of obligation.

    The United States agreed to respect Ukraine’s borders and go to the United Nations if another power threatened Ukraine’s borders.

    We rate the statement Mostly False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nikki Haley Offers an Alternate Reality

    Nikki Haley Offers an Alternate Reality

    [ad_1]

    For some Republican voters, to attend a Nikki Haley campaign rally is to dive headfirst into the warm waters of an alternate reality—a reality in which Donald J. Trump is very old news.

    Last Thursday, this comfortable refuge could be found at the Poor Boy’s Diner in Londonderry, New Hampshire, where a few dozen white retirees wedged into booths adorned with vintage license plates and travel posters suggesting a visit to sunny Waikiki. The crowd, mostly Republican and “undeclared” voters wearing sundry combinations of flannel and cable-knit, clapped along as Haley—a youthful 51-year-old—outlined her presidential priorities: securing the border, supporting veterans, promoting small business, and “removing the kick me sign from America’s back.” Haley’s voice was steady; her words were studied; and the attendees beamed from their tables as though they couldn’t believe their luck: Finally, their relieved smiles seemed to say, here was a conservative candidate who didn’t sound completely unhinged.

    The voters I met had had it up to here with the former president, they told me: the insults, the drama, the interminable parade of indictments and gag orders. They’ve been yearning for a standard-issue Republican with governing experience and foreign-policy chops, and Haley, the former accountant turned South Carolina governor turned ambassador to the United Nations fits their bill and then some. When Haley finished speaking, voters scrambled to secure a campaign button reading NH ♥ NH. Some of them waited in line for half an hour to shake her hand.

    If you haven’t checked the scoreboard lately, Haley’s support has been ticking up steadily for weeks. New polling shows her at nearly 20 percent support in New Hampshire, up more than a dozen points since August, and knocking Florida Governor Ron DeSantis out of second place. She also leads DeSantis in her home state of South Carolina. In Iowa, Haley’s support has grown to double digits, putting her in third.

    Haley is not exactly gaining on Trump. In all three states, he’s leading the pack by roughly 30 points, which is a heck of a lot of ground for any candidate to make up. But in New Hampshire, voters were hopeful—even confident—that Haley could win this thing. Maybe, some told me, with a hint of desperation in their eyes, their Trump-free alternate reality could soon be the one we all live in. “She’s normal,” Bob Garvin, a lifelong Republican who had driven up with his wife from Dartmouth, Massachusetts, told me outside the diner. With a sigh, he said, “I just want somebody normal to run for president.”

    Some of Haley’s new support comes from her strong performance in the first two GOP primary debates, where she often stood, stoic and unimpressed, as the dudes shouted over one another. When Haley did speak, she generally sounded more measured—and frankly, more relatable—than the others. In the second debate, she turned, eyes rolling, toward the cocky newcomer Vivek Ramaswamy and channeled the exasperation many watching at home felt: “Honestly, every time I hear you, I feel a little bit dumber for what you say.”

    Haley has a clear lane. She’s seeking to build a coalition of Never Trump Republicans who’d really rather not pull the lever for Biden and onetime Trump voters who now find him tiresome. She also seems to be appealing to the types of Americans the GOP needs to win in a general election: the college-educated, women, suburbanites. DeSantis, who was once expected to bring the strongest primary challenge to Trump, no longer seems to have a lane at all: Voters who love the former president don’t need DeSantis as an option, and many of the voters who hate Trump have come to see DeSantis as a charmless, watered-down version of the big man himself. “He’d be Donald Trump in a Ron DeSantis mask,” one GOP voter told me in Londonderry.

    Haley and DeSantis are surely both well aware that they’re vying for second place. The two have traded attack ads throughout the past month, and a few days ago, Haley was on the radio mocking the governor’s alleged use of heel lifts in his cowboy boots. Overall, though, the trend seems to be that, as the candidates introduce themselves to more and more Americans, DeSantis is losing fans and Haley is gaining them.

    At a town-hall event that Thursday evening in nearby Nashua, Haley channeled Stevie Nicks in a white eyelet top and flared jeans—a look that probably worked well for her audience of a few hundred more silver-haired New Hampshirites. The vibe was decidedly un-Trumpian. At one point, the audience burst into admiring applause when a scheduled speaker highlighted Haley’s past life as an accountant.

    In a disciplined, 30-minute stump speech, she laid out her conventionally conservative plans for shrinking the federal government, securing the border, and lowering taxes—but she also tossed in a few ideas that might appeal to Democrats, including boosting childhood-reading proficiency, reducing criminal-recidivism rates, and adjusting policy to support “the least of us.”

    She took questions from the crowd, and when abortion inevitably came up, Haley was ready. “I am unapologetically pro-life,” she said. “But I don’t judge anyone for being pro-choice.” As president, she elaborated, she’d restrict abortion in late pregnancy and promote “good quality” adoption.

    Haley tends to speak with such a straight face that she appears almost stern. And she begins many sentences as though she is imparting a very wise lesson: “This is what I’ll tell you.” The voters I met found this appealing. Three separate women told me that they like Haley because they see her as a “strong woman.” One of them, Carol Holman, who had driven from nearby Merrimack with her husband, had voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020. But she’s ready for a change.

    “People are getting tired of hearing about Trump’s problems,” Holman told me, as she buttoned up her leopard-print coat. Holman loved Haley’s performance in the second debate, and couldn’t wait to hear from the candidate in person. “She knows how to do it; she’s not just a blowhard,” she said, citing Haley’s time as a governor. “She made up my mind tonight!”

    The unfolding war in the Middle East also seems to have prompted more voters to take a second look at Haley’s campaign, given her two years of experience at the UN. “People are nervous right now, and she acknowledged a little bit of that fear,” Katherine Bonaccorso, a retired schoolteacher from Massachusetts, told me.

    Haley sees the attacks on Ukraine and Israel “as a security issue” for America, Jeanene Cooper, who volunteers as a co-chair for Haley’s campaign in Rockingham County, New Hampshire, told me. “She believes in peace through strength.” In a television interview after the Hamas assault in southern Israel, Haley advised Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “finish them.” Haley has long been hawkish on foreign policy; it’s one of the major differences she has with Trump and DeSantis, who tend to be more isolationist.

    The more people hear Haley, the more she’ll rise, Cooper said. It’s time, she added, for the lower-polling candidates—such as former Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, South Carolina Senator Tim Scott, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and Ramaswamy—to drop out and endorse Haley. As for DeSantis, she added, he can’t fall that far and “think that somehow it’s going to come back.” (The DeSantis campaign has countered such assessments recently, saying they’re confident in the governor’s potential in Iowa—and arguing that polling at this stage in the primary season is not always predictive.)

    The third GOP primary debate, which will be held Wednesday in Miami, could give Haley a further boost. And new rules for the fourth debate in December would reportedly require candidates to have reached 6 percent in the polls, which, if their present numbers hold, would narrow the stage to three candidates: DeSantis, Haley, and Ramaswamy (assuming that Trump continues to boycott the debates).

    The path for Haley to progress requires DeSantis to fall flat. If she can knock him out of the way, Haley could come in second to Trump in the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary, and then score strongly in her home state of South Carolina, where voters know her best. Trump’s legal standing is an important variable: At least one of the former president’s criminal trials is scheduled to begin just before Super Tuesday, which could cause some of his supporters to switch candidates. If the more mainstream Republicans drop out and endorse her, that could theoretically bring her close to beating out Trump to clinch the GOP nomination.

    That’s a lot of ifs. The added national scrutiny that comes with being a primary front runner could send Haley’s star plummeting just as quickly as it rose. But the biggest problem for her and her supporters is the same conundrum that Republican candidates faced in 2020, and again in the 2022 midterm elections: The stubborn core of the GOP base wants Trump and only Trump, even if others in the party are desperate to wake up in an alternate reality.

    [ad_2]

    Elaine Godfrey

    Source link

  • Russia fumes at the West’s charm offensive in its backyard, saying it’s ‘luring’ its friends away

    Russia fumes at the West’s charm offensive in its backyard, saying it’s ‘luring’ its friends away

    [ad_1]

    Russian President Vladimir Putin during a press conference on Oct. 13,2023, in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.

    Contributor | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Russia is watching very closely as Western nations try to build alliances in what has traditionally been seen as its “backyard” and sphere of influence.

    One top official in Moscow was fuming as he claimed the West was “luring” its “neighbours, friends, and allies” away from Russia.

    The latest Western leader to court Central Asia is French President Emmanuel Macron. Visiting oil- and mineral-rich Kazakhstan on Wednesday, he complimented the former Soviet state for refusing to side with Moscow against Ukraine.

    “I don’t underestimate by any means the geopolitical difficulties, the pressures … that some may be putting on you,” Macron said as he addressed his Kazakh counterpart, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, in Astana.

    “France values … the path you are following for your country, refusing to be a vassal of any power and seeking to build numerous and balanced relations with different countries,” he said.

    Macron visited Uzbekistan on Thursday, with a delegation including business leaders as France looks to forge deeper ties in a region rich in natural resources, from oil and gas to uranium.

    Moscow’s disdain

    The French leader’s comments are likely to have enraged Moscow, which is already watching Western efforts to court Central Asia with suspicion and disdain. CNBC has asked the Kremlin to comment on Macron’s trip and is awaiting a response.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview last week that the West was trying to pull Russia’s “neighbours, friends and allies” away from it.

    “Look at how Western powers are wooing Central Asia,” Lavrov told the BelTA news agency, in comments published by Russia’s Foreign Ministry.

    “They have created numerous formats such as ‘Central Asia plus’ involving the United States, the EU, and Japan … On top of the Central Asia plus EU format, the Germans have created their own format. The French won’t be wasting time and will do the same,” he said.

    “These frameworks for diplomatic engagements are aimed at luring our Central Asian neighbours, friends, and allies towards the West which promises them economic and trade incentives and delivers relatively modest aid programmes.”

    L-R: Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev, Turkmenistan President Serdar Berdimuhamedow, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Tajik President Emomali Rahmon and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko enter the hall during the Commonwealth of Independent States’ Head of States Meeting at the Ala-Archa State Residence on Oct. 13, 2023, in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan.

    Contributor | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Lavrov said alliances with the West could not be “compared with the benefits the Central Asian countries enjoy from cooperating with Russia … in sensitive areas such as border security, law enforcement training, and traditional security.”

    He claimed that Western countries were “funneling money and resources into equipment and technology supplied to these regions” in a bid to woo them, adding, “We openly discuss these matters with our Central Asian brothers.”

    Mark Galeotti, a London-based political scientist, lecturer and author of several books on Russia, told CNBC Thursday that Macron’s visit to Central Asia would have touched a nerve in Moscow but that Central Asia had increasingly been looking elsewhere, to Europe, China and the United States, for trade and security guarantees.

    “Yes, the Russians are grumbling at what they see as Macron’s posturing … but it’s more that this kind of initiative reminds them of the fact that, really, they are losing their authority in Central Asia.”

    “There clearly is concern [in Russia at Central Asia’s geopolitical trajectory], but more than anything else, I think the concern is driven by a painful awareness, that, in a way, Central Asia has already been lost,” Galeotti said.

    “Essentially, Moscow’s main hold on Central Asia had long been, essentially, as a security guarantor,” he noted, adding that “Russia was the country you went to when you were looking for assistance in security matters.”

    “But ever since February of last year [when it invaded Ukraine], we’ve seen a very rapid decline in Russia’s authority in Central Asia.”

    Strained brotherhood

    The degree to which a sense of “brotherhood” is felt in Central Asia’s leadership toward Russia is debatable.

    Central Asian states have to tread a fine line with Moscow, being careful not to alienate or antagonize their powerful neighbor while also trying to forge their own independent international trade and foreign policies with the West and China.

    This ambivalent position has often led Central Asian states “sitting on the fence” when it comes to certain geopolitical matters, such as the war in Ukraine.

    Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, as well as neighboring Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan, were among 35 U.N. members that abstained on a U.N. General Assembly resolution condemning Russia’s annexation of four mostly Russian-occupied territories in Ukraine last year. Central Asian state Tajikistan was absent from the vote.

    Voting results shown during a U.N. General Assembly emergency meeting to discuss Russian annexations in Ukraine at the U.N. headquarters in New York City on Oct. 12, 2022.

    Ed Jones | Afp | Getty Images

    Only one of Russia’s neighbors, Belarus — its closest ally in its backyard — was among the five countries to reject the resolution condemning the annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia regions. The other countries were North Korea, Nicaragua, Russia and Syria.

    Central Asian states have been accused of helping Russia to dodge Western sanctions imposed on it for the invasion of Ukraine, with European and Chinese products exported to Central Asia and then funneled into Russia.

    Nonetheless, the war in Ukraine has created the irony that a distracted Russia has lost a degree of power, control and leverage over its own wider “backyard” made up of former Soviet states, stretching from the South Caucasus region — which includes Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia — to Central Asia.

    Russia has already felt aggrieved to see former Soviet republics incorporated into the West, such as Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, and to watch as others like Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova head in the same direction. Kyiv’s leaning toward the West over the past 20 years laid the foundation for the conflict we see today, with Russia looking to reassert its power and influence over its neighborhood.

    Russia’s “final backstop of authority was the possibility that it could invade or intervene,” Galeotti noted, “but now, with 97% of the Russian army mired in Ukraine, no one’s really worried about that anymore.”

    China’s role

    There’s certainly a tussle for influence that’s taking place in Central Asia, with China also “courting” the region to a certain extent.

    China held a summit with Central Asian states in early summer, months before U.S. President Joe Biden met with the leaders of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan in September, as part of the first ever presidential summit of the “C5+1” format launched in 2015. The group pledged to expand their economic and security cooperation.

    Jim Watson | Afp | Getty Images

    Chinese President Xi Jinping meets with Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, chairman of the People’s Council of Turkmenistan, at the Third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, in Beijing on Oct. 19, 2023.

    Xinhua News Agency | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

    “While there clearly is alignment between Russia and China when it comes to Central Asia, and particularly when it comes to keeping ‘the West’ out of the region after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, Russia is unlikely to relinquish completely its traditional grip on the region, nor is China likely to actively wrestle Moscow for greater control in the near future,” global security analysts Anastassiya Mahon and Stefan Wolff wrote in analysis for the U.K.-based Foreign Policy Centre think tank.

    “While there is undoubtedly a rebalancing of power afoot between Russia and China, this is likely to take the form of a gradual power transition.”

    The analysts noted that “while the West will hardly be seen as an alternative in such a hegemonic power transition from Russia to China, the transition itself, nevertheless, offers opportunities.”

    The U.S., U.K., and EU can strengthen their own engagement and cooperation with Central Asia, they noted, “precisely because this presents the states there with a chance for some re-balancing of their own and for strengthening their traditional aspiration for a multi-vector foreign policy.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Un santuario en Irán izó una bandera negra en luto, no para llamar a la guerra

    PolitiFact – Un santuario en Irán izó una bandera negra en luto, no para llamar a la guerra

    [ad_1]

    Una bandera negra izada en una mezquita en Irán llevó a usuarios en las redes sociales a decir que el país estaba llamando a la guerra. 

    “#Urgente ¿Viene lo peor? En #Irán a sido izada una #BanderaNegra en el #SantuarioRazavi en #Mashhad, provincia de #Khorasan”, dicen los subtítulos del video en Facebook del 18 de octubre. “Esto significa un llamado a la #guerra o la #Venganza”.

    La publicación fue marcada como parte del esfuerzo de Meta para combatir las noticias falsas y la desinformación en su plataforma. (Lea más sobre nuestra colaboración con Meta, propietaria de Facebook e Instagram).

    El video en Facebook saca de contexto el significado de la bandera.

    La bandera negra fue una declaración de luto, no de guerra, como respuesta al bombardeo del 17 de octubre en el hospital de al-Ahli en Gaza. Este ataque dejó a cientos de muertos.

    El Santuario Razavi, también conocido como el Santuario de Imam Reza en Mashhad, Irán, publicó una foto idéntica a la del video en Instagram. Según el subtítulo, el cual trató de censurar algunas palabras, la bandera negra se alzó en “respuesta a los crímenes barbáricos del régimen Zio**nis**t (Sionista), especialmente el bombardeo del hospital Al-M**u’am**dani (Al-Mu’amdani)”.

    El Santuario Razavi es dirigido por Astan Quds Razavi, el cual también publicó un anuncio sobre la izada de la bandera negra. Basados en la versión de la página web traducida al inglés, esta dice, “Siguiendo el martirio de cientos de residentes en la Franja de Gaza en los crímenes barbáricos del régimen usurpador Sionista, el santuario Razavi va a tomar un sentimiento de luto”.

    Los noticieros controlados por el estado iraní y otros también reportaron que el Santuario Razavi levantó la bandera negra en luto por las víctimas de las explosiones en los hospitales y otros “crímenes” cometidos por Israel.

    En la verificación de una declaración similar, Reuters también relaciono la declaración del 18 de octubre publicada por Astan Quds Razavi, la organización administrativa del santuario, diciendo que la bandera fue cambiada a “luto público” dado a las muertes en Gaza después de la explosion en el hospital. 

    Basados en los comunicados de prensa del Santuario Razavi que fueron traducidos en Google, el santuario planeo más eventos, incluyendo una convocación de personas y una marcha en apoyo para expresar solidaridad a los palestinos.

    No es poco común que el santuario levante una bandera negra en luto, esto lo hace para los aniversarios de martirio. 

    Una bandera negra izada en octubre por el Santuario Razavi en Irán no fue un llamado a la guerra. Calificamos la declaración como Falsa.

    Este artículo originalmente fue escrito en inglés y traducido por Maria Briceño.

    Read a version of this fact-check in English.

    Lea más reportes de PolitiFact en Español aquí.

    __________________________________________________________________________

    Debido a limitaciones técnicas, partes de nuestra página web aparecen en inglés. Estamos trabajando en mejorar la presentación.

     

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Vivek Ramaswamy says 50% of Gen Z Americans support Hamas. We say that’s Mostly False

    PolitiFact – Vivek Ramaswamy says 50% of Gen Z Americans support Hamas. We say that’s Mostly False

    [ad_1]

    Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy recently discussed Jewish Americans’ fears and the domestic threats they face after Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7. He then suggested that Generation Z is not supportive. 

    Generation Z, born between the late 1990s and early 2010s, “is divided 50-50 on whether they support Hamas or Israel,” Ramaswamy said at the Oct. 28 speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition in Las Vegas. “Young people in the country are lost.”

    Is it true that Hamas — the political and military organization that governs Gaza and is classified as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department — has strong support among Gen Z? Although Ramaswamy’s comment came after a spate of antisemitic incidents at U.S. colleges, the evidence that Gen Z widely supports Hamas is thin.

    One poll found a roughly 50-50 split among younger respondents, but it was based on a small subsample of people, and that age group also gave other answers in the poll that seemed to contradict support for Hamas. Three other polls found lower rates of support for Hamas.

    We contacted Ramaswamy’s campaign for comment but did not receive a reply. 

    Harvard-Harris poll has similar finding, with a caveat 

    A Harvard-Harris poll conducted in October after the Hamas attacks seems to fit Ramaswamy’s talking point.  One question asked, “In general in this conflict, do you side more with Israel or Hamas?” 

    Overall, the poll of 2,116 respondents found that 84% of Americans sided with Israel and 16% with Hamas. But the support for Israel differed sharply by age, with the highest rates of support for Israel among the oldest respondents.

    Among 18-to-24-year-olds, 52% supported Israel and 48% supported Hamas. However, the sample size for this age group was small, about 199 people.

    Generally, fewer respondents means a larger margin of sampling error. That’s because the fewer people polled, the less likely the sample of respondents will fully reflect the entire group’s beliefs.

    Peculiarities with responses in Harvard-Harris poll

    Another concern: The 18-to-24 age group gave other responses that seemed to contradict support for Hamas. 

    By 2-1 margins, respondents in that group said Hamas’ Oct. 7 action “was a terrorist attack”; that the attacks “were genocidal in nature”; that Israel has “a responsibility” to retaliate “against Hamas terrorists”; and that Hamas “is a terror group that rules Gaza with force and fear and is not supported by them.”

    Dritan Nesho, founder and chief executive officer of HarrisX, the company that conducted the poll, said these seemingly contradictory views might be related to Gen Z’s youth and relatively unformed views on the conflict. Nesho said Gen Z respondents typically haven’t long followed the Middle East and its political complexities. 

    The data showing divergent answers to poll questions signals that many respondents of this age “don’t have a clear distinction between Hamas the terrorist organization and the Palestinian national movement,” Nesho said.

    Other polls show less Hamas support 

    The Harvard-Harris poll also appears to be an outlier.

    We found three other polls conducted around the same time that asked questions about blame for Israel and Hamas. None showed support for Hamas as high as the Harvard-Harris poll. 

    The strongest rebuttal comes from a Generation Lab poll taken Oct. 11 to Oct. 16 that surveyed only college students, 833 of whom said they knew of Hamas’ attacks. Of that group, 67% described the attacks as an act of terrorism by Hamas, compared with 12% who saw it as a justified act of resistance. The poll also found that 52% blamed the attack on Hamas, compared with 11% who blamed it on Israel.

    Two other polls examined responses from slightly different age ranges than the Harvard-Harris poll. Those also showed higher support for Israel.

    An NPR-PBS-Marist poll conducted Oct. 11, found that 48% of the 223 18-to-29 year olds surveyed said the U.S. government should “support Israel,” while 12% said it should “criticize Israel.” Though the sample size also is small, the levels of support for Israel and Hamas are different from the more equal levels shown in the Harvard-Harris poll. 

    A Quinnipiac poll, taken Oct. 12 to Oct. 16, found that 19% of 18-to-34 year olds said Israel is more responsible for the outbreak of violence, while 55% said Hamas is. Again, the levels of support are not equal, as they were in the Harvard-Harris poll. The Quinnipiac poll did not specify the number of 18-to-34 year olds surveyed.

    Our ruling

    Ramaswamy said, “Gen Z is divided 50-50 on whether they support Hamas or Israel.”

    A Harvard-Harris poll found that among 18-to-24 year olds, 48% said they sided with Hamas. However, that was based on a small subsample of 199 people. And that age group also gave other poll answers that seemed to contradict support for Hamas. 

    Three other polls found lower Hamas support among Generation Z.

    For some people, any level of support for Hamas among Americans will be viewed as troubling.  But Ramaswamy has exaggerated by saying it’s 50%.

    The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Three charged with sending Russia over $7 million in electronics to aid war on Ukraine

    Three charged with sending Russia over $7 million in electronics to aid war on Ukraine

    [ad_1]

    Federal prosecutors allege that these dozens of boxes, recovered from defendant Nasriddinov’s residence in Brooklyn, contained thousands of semiconductors and other electronic components.

    Source: DOJ

    Three people were arrested in New York City on Tuesday on charges of illegally smuggling millions of dollars’ worth of electronics to Russia in order to aid the country’s invasion of Ukraine.

    Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn accused Nikolay Goltsev, Salimdzhon Nasriddinov and Kristina Puzyreva of evading sanctions in order to send Russia equipment used in their precision-guided missile systems.

    Some of that equipment “has been used on the battlefield in Ukraine,” Breon Peace, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said in a press release.

    The defendants allegedly dispatched hundreds of shipments of restricted items, worth nearly $7.2 million, to Russia over the course of a year.

    Nasriddinov, 52, a dual national of Russia and Tajikistan, was arrested in Brooklyn, where he resides. Goltsev, 37, and 32-year-old Puzyreva, dual Russian-Canadian nationals who live in Montreal, were arrested in Manhattan.

    Prosecutors have asked a judge to detain the defendants pending trial, arguing that they each pose a “serious flight risk.”

    The complaint alleges that the defendants used two corporate entities to source and purchase dual-use electronics from U.S. manufacturers and distributors, and then secretly export them to Russia.

    Some of the electronic components and integrated circuits were designated as being “of the highest concern due to their critical role in the production of advanced Russian precision-guided weapons systems,” according to the complaint.

    Goltsev used aliases, including “Nick Stevens,” as part of his efforts to procure items from the U.S. entities, prosecutors said. Those items were sent to various locations in Brooklyn, then shipped to intermediary corporations in countries including Turkey, Hong Kong, India, China and the United Arab Emirates, before finally being re-routed to Russia, according to the prosecutors.

    The defendants knew that the electronics had military application, the prosecutors alleged, citing messages sent between Goltsev and Nasriddinov.

    The 23-page document lists four unnamed co-conspirators, who are described as Russian nationals living in Russia.

    Some of the same types of components were found in Russian weapons platforms and signals intelligence equipment that were seized in Ukraine, prosecutors alleged.

    They specified that that equipment includes the Torn-MDM radio reconnaissance complex, the RB-301B “Borisoglebsk-2” electronic warfare complex, the Vitebsk L370 airborne counter missile system, Ka-52 helicopters, the Izdeliye 305E light multi-purpose guided missile, Orlan-10 unmanned aerial vehicles and T-72B3 battle tanks.

    “With these defendants in U.S. custody, we have disrupted a sophisticated procurement network allegedly used to procure critical technologies for the Russian military’s advanced weapons systems,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

    The U.S. government ramped up its export controls on Russia, restricting its access to tech and other key items, in response to the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine last year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Jack Lew confirmed by Senate as Biden’s ambassador to Israel

    Jack Lew confirmed by Senate as Biden’s ambassador to Israel

    [ad_1]

    Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew testifies before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing on his nomination to be the next U.S. ambassador to Israel, on Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C., on Oct. 18, 2023.

    Leah Millis | Reuters

    WASHINGTON — Former Treasury Secretary Jack Lew was confirmed by the Senate Tuesday to serve as President Joe Biden‘s ambassador to Israel at a critical time for the enduring U.S.-Israel alliance.

    Lew, 68, served as treasury secretary in the Obama administration, and as White House budget director in two Democratic administrations.

    A lot has changed in Israel in the nearly two months since Biden nominated Lew on Sept. 5. A surprise attack by Hamas Oct. 7 left more than 1,400 people dead in Israel, nearly all of them civilians.

    In response, Israel vowed to destroy the militant group. Over the past three weeks, Gaza has been under near constant air strikes by the Israeli military.

    The Palestinian Health Ministry reports more than 8,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the start of the Hamas-Israel War. Earlier this week, Israel began a new phase in its military operation, a ground offensive into Gaza.

    Speaking at his Senate confirmation hearing Oct. 18, Lew said Israel’s security was a “paramount” concern for the United States.

    “I will do my utmost to end the horrific attacks by Hamas and to ensure that Israel has what it needs to defend itself,” he told the senators, “and I will spare no effort in working to help American citizens now captive to return home safely.”

    The United States has been without a Senate-confirmed ambassador to Israel since July, when Tom Nides departed the post. Stephanie Hallett, a career diplomat, has served in the interim.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The UK is gearing up for a pivotal summit on AI. Here’s what you need to know

    The UK is gearing up for a pivotal summit on AI. Here’s what you need to know

    [ad_1]

    British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak delivers a speech on artificial intelligence at the Royal Society, Carlton House Terrace, on Oct. 26, 2023, in London.

    Peter Nicholls | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    The U.K. is set to hold its landmark artificial intelligence summit this week, as political leaders and regulators grow more and more concerned by the rapid advancement of the technology.

    The two-day summit, which takes place on Nov. 1 and Nov. 2, will host government officials and companies from around the world, including the U.S. and China, two superpowers in the race to develop cutting-edge AI technologies.

    It is Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s chance to make a statement to the world on the U.K.’s role in the global conversation surrounding AI, and how the technology should be regulated.

    Ever since the introduction of Microsoft-backed OpenAI’s ChatGPT, the race toward the regulation of AI from global policymakers has intensified.

    Of particular concern is the potential for the technology to replace — or undermine — human intelligence.

    Where it’s being held

    The AI summit will be held in Bletchley Park, the historic landmark around 55 miles north of London.

    Bletchley Park was a codebreaking facility during World War II.

    Getty

    It’s the location where, in 1941, a group of codebreakers led by British scientist and mathematician Alan Turing cracked Nazi Germany’s notorious Enigma machine.

    It’s also no secret that the U.K. is holding the summit at Bletchley Park because of the site’s historical significance — it sends a clear message that the U.K. wants to reinforce its position as a global leader in innovation.

    What it seeks to address

    The main objective of the U.K. AI summit is to find some level of international coordination when it comes to agreeing some principles on the ethical and responsible development of AI models.

    The summit is squarely focused on so-called “frontier AI” models — in other words, the advanced large language models, or LLMs, like those developed by companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Cohere.

    It will look to address two key categories of risk when it comes to AI: misuse and loss of control.

    Misuse risks involve a bad actor being aided by new AI capabilities. For example, a cybercriminal could use AI to develop a new type of malware that cannot be detected by security researchers, or be used to help state actors develop dangerous bioweapons.

    Loss of control risks refer to a situation in which the AI that humans create could be turned against them. This could “emerge from advanced systems that we would seek to be aligned with our values and intentions,” the government said.

    Who’s going?

    Major names in the technology and political world will be there.

    U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris speaks during the conclusion of the Investing in America tour at Coppin State University in Baltimore, Maryland, on July 14, 2023.

    Saul Loeb | AFP | Getty Images

    They include:

    Who won’t be there?

    Several leaders have opted not to attend the summit.

    French President Emmanuel Macron.

    Chesnot | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    They include:

    • U.S. President Joe Biden
    • Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
    • French President Emmanuel Macron
    • German Chancellor Olaf Scholz

    When asked whether Sunak feels snubbed by his international counterparts, his spokesperson told reporters Monday, “No, not at all.”

    “I think we remain confident that we have brought together the right group of world experts in the AI space, leading businesses and indeed world leaders and representatives who will be able to take on this vital issue,” the spokesperson said.

    “This is the first AI safety summit of its kind and I think it is a significant achievement that for the first time people from across the world and indeed from across a range of world leaders and indeed AI experts are coming together to look at these frontier risks.” 

    Will it succeed?

    The British government wants the AI Summit to serve as a platform to shape the technology’s future. It will emphasize safety, ethics, and responsible development of AI, while also calling for collaboration at a global level.

    Sunak is hoping that the summit will provide a chance for Britain and its global counterparts to find some agreement on how best to develop AI safely and responsibly, and apply safeguards to the technology.

    In a speech last week, the prime minister warned that AI “will bring a transformation as far reaching as the industrial revolution, the coming of electricity, or the birth of the internet” — while adding there are risks attached.

    “In the most unlikely but extreme cases, there is even the risk that humanity could lose control of AI completely through the kind of AI sometimes referred to as super intelligence,” Sunak said.

    Sunak announced the U.K. will set up the world’s first AI safety institute to evaluate and test new types of AI in order to understand the risks.

    He also said he would seek to set up a global expert panel nominated by countries and organizations attending the AI summit this week, which would publish a state of AI science report.

    A particular point of contention surrounding the summit is Sunak’s decision to invite China — which has been at the center of a geopolitical tussle over technology with the U.S. — to the summit. Sunak’s spokesperson has said it is important to invite China, as the country is a world leader in AI.

    International coordination on a technology as complex and multifaceted as AI may prove difficult — and it is made all the more so when two of the big attendees, the U.S. and China, are engaged in a tense clash over technology and trade.

    China’s President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Joe Biden at the G20 Summit in Nusa Dua on the Indonesian island of Bali on Nov. 14, 2022.

    Saul Loeb | Afp | Getty Images

    Washington recently curbed sales of Nvidia’s advanced A800 and H800 artificial intelligence chips to China.

    Different governments have come up with their own respective proposals for regulating the technology to combat the risks it poses in terms of misinformation, privacy and bias.

    The EU is hoping to finalize its AI Act, which is set to be one of the world’s first pieces of legislation targeted specifically at AI, by the end of the year, and adopt the regulation by early 2024 before the June European Parliament elections.

    Stateside, Biden on Monday issued an executive order on artificial intelligence, the first of its kind from the U.S. government, calling for safety assessments, equity and civil rights guidance, and research into AI’s impact on the labor market.

    James Manyika, senior vice president of research, technology, and society at Google, said AI was a “transformative technology” with potential to help address some of society’s most pressing challenges” — but he added it was vital to ensure the benefits are “broadly distributed.”

    “Our hopes for the Summit are twofold. First, that it helps facilitate countries across the world developing a shared understanding of both the near and long-term opportunities and risks of frontier AI models. Second, that it prioritizes international coordination to ensure a consistent approach to AI governance,” ,” Manyika said in emailed comments shared with CNBC ahead of the summit.

    Emad Mostaque, CEO of open-source British AI company Stability, said the U.K. has a “once in a generation opportunity to become an AI superpower” and ensure that AI benefits all, not just the Big Tech firms.

    “We believe this is best achieved through a shared vision of the positive transformation this technology will unleash as well as a clear understanding of the emerging risks, so that we can innovate with integrity and align our efforts and systems to ensure our safety and security,” Mostaque said.

    Shortcomings of the summit

    Some tech industry officials think that the summit is too limited in its focus. They say that, by keeping the summit restricted to only frontier AI models, it is a missed opportunity to encourage contributions from members of the tech community beyond frontier AI.

    “I do think that by focusing just on frontier models, we’re basically missing a large piece of the jigsaw,” Sachin Dev Duggal, CEO of London-based AI startup Builder.ai, told CNBC in an interview last week.

    “By focusing only on companies that are currently building frontier models and are leading that development right now, we’re also saying no one else can come and build the next generation of frontier models.”

    Some are frustrated by the summit’s focus on “existential threats” surrounding artificial intelligence and think the government should address more pressing, immediate-term risks, such as the potential for deepfakes to manipulate 2024 elections.

    “It’s like the fire brigade conference where they talk about dealing with a meteor strike that obliterates the country,” Stefan van Grieken, CEO of generative AI firm Cradle, told CNBC.

    “We should be concentrating on the real fires that are literally present threats.”

    However, Marc Warner, CEO of British AI startup Faculty.ai, said he believes that focusing on the long-term, potentially devastating risks of achieving artificial general intelligence to be “very reasonable.”

    “I think that building artificial general intelligence will be possible, and I think if it is possible, there is no scientific reason that we know of right now to say that it’s guaranteed safe,” Warner told CNBC.

    “In some ways, it’s sort of the dream scenario that governments tackle something before it’s a problem rather than waiting until stuff gets really bad.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Zelenskyy’s top aide slams West over ‘war fatigue’

    Zelenskyy’s top aide slams West over ‘war fatigue’

    [ad_1]

    World leaders should stick by Ukraine, despite the additional demands of dealing with the Israel-Hamas war, the Ukrainian president’s powerful chief of staff told POLITICO in an interview from Kyiv.

    Andrii Yermak, head of the office of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, also pushed back hard on the idea, voiced last week by Italy’s Prime Minister Georgia Meloni in a call with Russian pranksters, that many are growing tired of the war in Ukraine. On Friday Ukraine faced its biggest barrage of drone attacks in weeks on critical infrastructure in the south and west of the country.

    Meloni said in the prank call — in which she thought she was speaking to the president of the African Union — that there was “a lot of fatigue … from all sides,” and that “everyone understands that we need a way out.” 

    Yermak retorted: “Even if there are people who feel this fatigue, I’m sure they don’t want to wake up in a world tomorrow where there will be less freedom and less security, and the consequences of this last for decades.” And he suggested Meloni brush up on her history.

    “Think for a moment, if Britain in 1939 had felt tired of Poland, or if the U.S. … felt tired of Britain, would there be such a thing as Poland today, Britain, or Europe as we see it now? We could not afford fatigue then or now. That will repeat itself for sure if these people with ‘fatigue’ stop supporting Ukraine,” Yermak said.

    A stalemate in the counteroffensive being waged by Ukraine’s army has led to predictions of a frozen conflict, as the Kremlin hopes that a changeable international situation — with the Middle East in foment and a U.S. election year ahead — will sap commitment to supporting Zelenskyy’s demand for assistance.

    Yermak insisted that Ukraine “will never live in the frozen conflict mode” and warned that complaining of  “war fatigue” would rebound on Western powers as much as it would on Ukraine, claiming that the narrative was being driven by a Russian propaganda push to weaken allies’ resolve as the Israel-Hamas war distracted attention in global capitals.

    Testing Western unity

    Fighting in Gaza and a fragmented international response to Israel’s campaign to wipe out Hamas’ operational base — which is testing the unity of Western allies — has led to concerns that support for Kyiv could wane, as the war-torn country vies with Israel for dwindling supplies of shells and more limited diplomatic bandwidth in the United States and the EU to deal with two major conflicts simultaneously.

    Regarded as a key decision-maker on the Zelenskyy team and a personal friend of the president, Yermak said: “What we are hearing from [foreign] leaders and allies is that support will stay as it was” before the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas.

    On the need to maintain stocks of shells and other munitions via the allies in the U.S. and Europe, however, he admitted that some shortages were arising. “During the war, [there are] a lot of shortages and I think these days it is impossible to cover 100 percent of your troops or get everything that you need because war is war — you’re always falling short of something. This is why we want to increase domestic production of munitions, with the support of our allies.”

    Upcoming talks in the U.S. on ramping up cooperation to enhance Ukraine’s defense capability and enable it to build out its air defense system would, he pledged, be “very specific and a hands-on conversation.”

    Yermak admitted that some munition shortages were arising | AXEL HEIMKEN/AFP via Getty Images)

    Reports of weapons intended for Ukraine surfacing in Gaza have circulated on social media in recent days, but Yermak strongly denied that armaments sent to Ukraine were ending up outside the country. “Ukraine fully controls the situation. I think this is yet another Russian fake … The bigger the lie, the easier it can be for people to believe,” he said.

    Friend of Israel

    Ukraine is striving to establish itself as a firm ally of Israel and Yermak penned an article for the Haaretz newspaper in the wake of the Hamas atrocities, saying “the similarities of our tragedies are not accidental.”

    He cited Iran’s backing for Hamas and supply of drones and weapons to Moscow as evidence of a “pole [axis] of evil” and added: “Russia is aggressor number one. And the second after Russia is Iran. And I think these two have an interest in what is happening in the Middle East as well.”

    But he also spoke of the need for a broad alliance to aid Ukraine and singled out Qatar for thanks after its mediation in secret talks to secure the release of four children taken from Russian-occupied territory and returned to Ukraine in a gesture intended to shore up Doha’s push to act as an intermediary between Moscow and Kyiv. Ukraine has identified some 20,000 children forcibly removed from its territory since the full-scale invasion in February last year.

    Yermak also confirmed that the majority of drones used in the attacks on Friday on Ukrainian infrastructure were supplied by Iran. Asked if his country’s defenses could keep pace with the growing volume of airborne and drone attacks from Russia, the chief of staff said. “We are prepared to strike back and defend ourselves, but we have to keep strengthening our air defenses.”

    EU report card

    Ukraine’s hopes of speedy accession to full membership in the European Union rest heavily on the report card set to be published on Wednesday on the progress of Ukraine and other aspiring EU members. It could pave the way to the start of formal accession talks after Kyiv was offered candidate status in June, subject to agreements to overhaul its judiciary and deal with widespread corruption.

    Asked if he expected Ukraine’s bid to start EU accession talks would begin shortly, a bullish Yermak indicated that a visit to Ukraine by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Saturday boded well for his country’s EU ambitions

    “Yes, this is what we are expecting because we are doing everything to make it happen,” he said. “And I think that the visit of Ursula von der Leyen … is a very powerful step on that way.”

    On her visit to Kyiv on Saturday, von der Leyen strongly hinted that the Commission will recommend that EU countries open accession negotiations with Ukraine. EU leaders will discuss the matter at a summit in December.

    Von der Leyen’s predecessor as head of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, claimed recently that Ukraine was unfit for EU membership because it was “corrupt at all levels of society.”

    Asked about that allegation, a clearly irked Yermak shot back: “I don’t recall Mr. Juncker visiting Ukraine in the last couple of years. So it’s a bit strange for me to hear these words from him. … I am categorically dismissing the statement that Ukraine is very corrupt. These challenges happen all over the world, but could you please give me an example of one other country that, under conditions of this horrific war, would undertake the reforms on such a scale.”

    [ad_2]

    Anne McElvoy

    Source link

  • Oil prices slip in cautious trading ahead of Fed meeting even as Middle East tensions spike

    Oil prices slip in cautious trading ahead of Fed meeting even as Middle East tensions spike

    [ad_1]

    In an aerial view, the Valero Houston refinery seen on August 28, 2023 in Houston, Texas.

    Brandon Bell | Getty Images

    Oil prices dipped even after Israel sent ground forces into the Gaza Strip, raising tensions in the Middle East, as investors closely monitor the U.S. Federal Reserve’s monetary policy meeting later this week.

    Global benchmark Brent was down 1.06% at $89.52 per barrel. The U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures last declined 1.16% to $84.55 per barrel.

    “I think the market had priced in the incursion on Friday and tonight is more ‘sell the fact,'” Bob McNally, president of Rapidan Energy Group, told CNBC via email. He said the ground operations were “limited so far” and noted other macroeconomic concerns.

    The Fed is expected to leave rates unchanged at the end of its two-day meeting on Wednesday, after the U.S. economy grew faster than expected at a 4.9% annual pace in the third quarter.

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a Saturday press conference that Israel has entered its second phase of the war, in what he expects will be “long and difficult” as the country expands its ground operations in the strip.

    Oil prices surged late Friday, with Brent jumping above $90 per barrel as Israel said its troops were ‘increasing the ground operation’ in Gaza as it seeks to eradicate the militant group Hamas.

    “While a major oil supply disruption is not our base case, the oil market last week became a little too complacent about the likelihood of a major Israeli ground incursion in Gaza, and the risk of a wider regional war,” McNally continued.

    The escalation of the war raises the risk around supply disruptions that have been hanging over the market since Hamas’s attack.

    Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Research

    Markets are likely to add an additional war-risk premium given the latest developments.

    More risk premium may be factored into the price of crude oil this week, McNally forecasts. ANZ echoed similar projections.

    “The escalation of the war raises the risk around supply disruptions that have been hanging over the market since Hamas’s attack,” ANZ wrote in a daily note on Monday.

    While U.S. crude futures were up only 3.3% since Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, the potential for a broader conflict to evolve is keeping markets on edge, the bank continued.

    While both Israel and the Palestinian territories are not major oil players, the conflict sits in a wider key oil producing region, raising concerns the war could widen beyond Gaza. On Sunday, U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said the U.S. sees an “elevated risk” of the conflict spilling over to other parts in the Middle East region.

    Stock Chart IconStock chart icon

    Oil prices year-to-date

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Israel-Hamas war is affecting the financial outlooks of these large companies

    The Israel-Hamas war is affecting the financial outlooks of these large companies

    [ad_1]

    The ‘Rhapsody of the Seas’ cruise liner carrying US citizens leaves the Israeli port of Haifa to be evacuated to the Mediterranean island of Cyprus on October 16, 2023, amid the ongoing battles between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas. 

    Aris Messinis | AFP | Getty Images

    Some of the world’s most well-known companies are already seeing the Israel-Hamas war weighing on operations.

    On Oct. 7, militant group Hamas struck Israeli towns in a surprise attack and took more than 200 hostages. More than 7,000 people have been killed in Gaza, per Palestinian health officials, while the Israeli Defense Forces said more than 1,400 have been killed in the country.

    Corporations that do business or have operations in the region have already begun seeing the war change their financial outlooks as the unrest weighs on everything from advertising dollars to tourism to supply chains. These early admissions come as world leaders grow increasingly concerned that the conflict will further intensify, with international calls for a cease-fire being rejected.

    United Airlines said fourth-quarter performance could vary depending on the length of flight suspensions in Tel Aviv. Its updated range for adjusted earnings per share came in below analysts’ forecasts.

    “We have unmatched geographic diversity with a large domestic network complemented by the largest long-haul international network and both are solidly profitable,” CEO Scott Kirby said earlier this month. “While this is a great attribute, it does create some short-term risk and volatility as we’re seeing right now with the transitory hit to margins this quarter as a result of the tragedy in Israel.”

    Travel changes

    United is one of several carriers including Delta Air Lines and American Airlines that have rushed to change schedules as the conflict has unfolded. Notably, El Al, the Israeli flag carrier, said it would fly on the Jewish Sabbath for the first time in more than four decades to help bring reservists abroad back to the country.

    Across the travel industry, the war is on the mind of corporate leaders. Plane-maker Boeing said in a regulatory filling that the conflict could potentially affect certain suppliers, in addition to airlines.

    About 1.5% of Royal Caribbean capacity in the fourth quarter had planned to visit Israel, CEO Jason Liberty said on the cruise line’s call on Thursday. A few of the adjusted sailings that were previously expected have home ports in Haifa, a city in the northern region of the country.

    The company also offered free use of its Rhapsody of the Seas vessel to the U.S. government to aid in the evacuation of Americans from Israel. Between the changed itineraries and use of the ship, the company estimated it would have an impact of 5 cents per share on its earnings. The company expects to see between $6.58 and $6.63 in adjusted earnings per share for the year.

    El Al Airlines airplane flying on February 2023.

    Nurphoto | Nurphoto | Getty Images

    “I would … like to recognize the incredible effort from our shoreside teams and crew on board Rhapsody of the Seas who have been working tirelessly with the U.S. Department of State to help safely evacuate Americans from Israel,” Liberty said. “My heartfelt gratitude goes out to all involved.”

    Still, Liberty said the cruise line’s customer base is sticky, so it may become more of a question of where they are going to travel rather than if they are going to cancel their plans.

    “They’re going to go somewhere with us,” he said. “That’s what we’re focused on making sure they’re doing.”

    ‘Unpredictable nature’

    Technology companies were among those seeing the conflict affect the workforce, advertising spending and supply chains.

    Snap said in its latest earnings release that it saw pauses in spending from a “large number of primarily brand-oriented advertising campaigns” immediately after the war began. That has weighed on revenue quarter to date.

    While the company said some of the campaigns that initially paused have now resumed, the company has also seen others that didn’t originally stop advertising now pause. Snap said it would be “imprudent” to offer formal guidance on what to expect for the current quarter “due to the unpredictable nature of war.”

    Meta finance chief Susan Li said the Facebook and Instagram parent has seen softer advertising spending so far in the quarter, correlating in timeline with the start of the conflict. Li noted that it isn’t necessarily due to any one event, but cooler spending has aligned in the past with the start of conflicts such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine last year.

    “This is something that we’re continuing to monitor,” Li told analysts during the company’s earnings call on Wednesday. “We’ve reflected the latest trends and advertiser reaction that we’ve seen into our Q4 outlook — which, again, we think reflects the greater uncertainty and volatility in the landscape ahead.”

    Align Technology is expecting increased headwinds from the uncertainty and potential supply chain issues tied to the conflict, according to Chief Financial Officer John Morici. He said the fourth-quarter operating margin, when adjusted for generally accepted accounting principles, should be down from the prior quarter as the company offers severance to adjust to headcount changes in this situation.

    Multiple corporations including Aon and West Pharmaceutical noted a continued focus on supporting employees and their family members who live and work in the region. Israel is known in part for its vibrant startup and technology scene, with entrepreneurs now wondering how to push forward in the new normal, especially as citizens get called to serve in reserve units.

    ServiceNow CEO William McDermott said during the company’s call with analysts on Wednesday that employee Shlomi Sividia was among those murdered at the Supernova Music Festival. He said Sividia was “highly respected, admired and a good friend to many.”

    “We stand in solidarity with our team and with their families. Terrorism has caused the unfathomable humanitarian crisis that now engulfs millions of people in Israel and Gaza,” McDermott said. “Our hearts pray for the innocent on all sides. Even with optimism in short supply, we choose to honor the dream of a peaceful and prosperous future for the Middle East region.”

    Companies specializing in defense have also been on alert as another international conflict breaks out.

    General Dynamics, the biggest U.S. artillery shell producer, had already been ramping up artillery production to meet needs amid the war in Ukraine, according to finance chief Jason Aiken. Now, the company is working to increase production to as high as 100,000 units per month, up from 14,000.

    “I think the Israel situation is only going to put upward pressure on that demand,” Aiken said during General Dynamics’ Wednesday earnings call.

    — CNBC’s Robert Hum, Morgan Brennan and Leslie Josephs contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • As US Strikes Syria to Send Iran a Message, War Fears Grow

    As US Strikes Syria to Send Iran a Message, War Fears Grow

    [ad_1]

    When President Biden issued an order on Thursday for two airstrikes, the targets were in eastern Syria but the intended recipient of the message he was sending was not. Both the weapons depot and the ammunition dump blown up by F-16 jets were linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, who defense officials say have employed proxy forces to execute a string of attacks against US bases in the region. 

    Biden is hoping to convince Tehran to end the conflict before things go too far. But escalating to stop things from further escalating requires a delicate touch, and some observers in the region fear Iran’s leaders have no interest in pulling back now.

    Since Hamas’ surprise Oct. 7 attack on Israel, U.S. forces have been increasingly getting drawn into hot engagements with forces armed, trained and advised by leaders in Tehran. Over the last three weeks, Iranian-backed militias have launched 19 ballistic drone attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria, injuring some 21 American troops. Last week, a U.S. naval ship in the Red Sea blew up a long-range rocket heading toward Israel that was launched by Iranian-backed forces in Yemen.

    Iran’s actions seem designed to draw the U.S. deeper into direct conflict, says Ryan Crocker, a retired diplomat who served as ambassador across the MIddle East, including Lebanon, Kuwait, Syria, Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan.

    If an attack by Iranian armed groups manages to kill any U.S. troops, Biden would be under tremendous pressure to respond forcefully, Crocker says, bringing the U.S. closer to a direct war with Tehran. If Iranian-backed forces “get lucky and kill 20 US military, the administration is gonna be compelled to make a major response, and in that target deck would have to be targets within Iran itself,” says Crocker, who is now a nonresident senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Which illustrates just how quickly the conflict that started with Hamas’s massacre in southern Israel could end up spinning into a wider war, with devastating consequences.

    U.S. military forces in the Middle East are on high alert for additional attacks. Biden has deployed the powerful USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier group in the Eastern Mediterranean in a show of force designed to prevent conflict in the region from spreading beyond between Israel and Hamas. Another carrier group, the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, is sailing toward the Mediterranean, will eventually move to the Persian Gulf, putting it in waters off the coast of Iran, defense officials say.

    Beyond the carrier groups, the U.S. also has jets stationed at Incirlik Air Base in southern Turkey and has added additional fighter jets to the region. And the three-ship Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, which holds 1,000 Marines, is on high alert nearby. 

    There are also U.S. troops stationed at Al Assad airbase in Iraq and Al Tanf garrison in Syria to help counter the Islamic State in the region. It was American troops on those two bases that have come under repeated attack from Iranian-backed forces this month.

    Biden used diplomatic channels this week to send a rare message directly to the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. “My warning to the Ayatollah was that if they continue to move against those troops, we will respond, and he should be prepared,” President Biden said at the White House on Thursday, hours before the strikes in Syria.

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin added in his own statement on Thursday, warning that “these Iranian-backed attacks against U.S. forces are unacceptable and must stop.” 

    “Iran wants to hide its hand and deny its role in these attacks against our forces,” Austin said. “We will not let them. If attacks by Iran’s proxies against U.S. forces continue, we will not hesitate to take further necessary measures to protect our people.”

    So far, “The administration has gotten it right,” says Jonathan Panikoff, director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Middle East Program. But he adds the risks in this current moment go beyond leaders on either side orchestrating targeted attacks in the region.

    “My biggest concern is the chances for unintended escalation,” Panikoff says.  

    Iran has spent years funding, arming and training militias in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, as well as backing Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, which has a robust arsenal of ballistic rockets that can strike deep into Israel.

    A rocket barrage from Hezbollah could inadvertently kill Israeli soldiers or be viewed as more intense than it was intended, Panikoff says.  That could set off a chain of events that would be hard to stop. “I worry mostly about the potential for ending up in a conflict that was not desired by anybody,” Panikoff says. 

    Hezbollah and the Israeli military frequently exchange fire on Israel’s northern border. So far, as Israel focuses on Gaza in its South, there isn’t a sign that Iran wants Hezbollah to launch a major attack on Israel’s other flank. 

    Looming over all of the brinkmanship in the region is Iran’s ambitions to have a nuclear weapon. When Biden came into office, he tried to start back up the nuclear deal designed to restrict Iran’s advancement toward a nuclear bomb that President Donald Trump had scrapped. But those efforts faltered.

    “I am confident they have the internal capability to produce a nuclear weapon,” says Crocker, the former long-time US diplomat, “so it’s simply a question of do they decide to pull the lever on that and develop one.”

    [ad_2]

    Brian Bennett

    Source link

  • Blinken Evades Questions About U.S. Asking Israel to Delay Ground Invasion

    Blinken Evades Questions About U.S. Asking Israel to Delay Ground Invasion

    [ad_1]

    U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken dodged repeated questions on Sunday about whether the U.S. was encouraging Israel to delay a possible ground invasion to allow for more time on diplomacy as troops and tanks prepare for a full-scale invasion into Gaza, even as over 200 people—including 10 Americans—are hostages.

    Responding to questions from CBS News’s Margaret Brennan and NBC News’s Kristen Welker, Blinken focused on “the slaughtering of men, women, children” that occurred during Hamas’s unprecedented attack on October 7, and reiterated his belief in Israel’s “obligation to defend itself.” “We are not in the business of second-guessing what they’re doing,” he told Welker.

    “These are decisions that Israel has to make,” Blinken added. “We can give our best advice, our best judgment, again, about how they do it and also how best to achieve the results that they’re seeking.”

    Asked Saturday whether he was encouraging Israel to delay an invasion, Biden responded: “I’m talking to the Israelis.” On Sunday, CNN reported that the administration is pressing for a delay, but a senior Israeli official denied the reports. “The U.S. is not pressing Israel in regards to the ground operation,” the official said.

    Blinken’s interviews came two days after the U.S., with the help of Qatar, secured the freedom of two Israeli-Americans held captive by Hamas: Judith and Natalie Raanan. Blinken said he’d spoken with both of them. “We are very appreciative of the assistance that we got from the Government of Qatar, to make sure that they could get out and now soon be reunited with their families,” Blinken said. “We’re hopeful that others follow.”

    In his Sunday interviews, Blinken also addressed the possibility of a broader war breaking out in the region, as Israeli strikes have hit Hezbollah targets in Lebanon and airports in Syria. On Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that if Hezbollah, which supports Hamas, enters the conflict, it “will be making the biggest mistake of their lives. And we will hit them with an unimaginable force. It will mean devastation for them and the state of Lebanon.”

    “We are concerned at the possibility of Iranian proxies escalating their attacks against our own personnel, our own people,” Blinken said to Brennan. “We’re taking every measure to make sure that we can defend them and, if necessary, respond decisively.” His comments echoed those of U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who warned of a “significant escalation of attacks” on U.S. troops or citizens.

    “If any group or any country is looking to widen this conflict and take advantage of this very unfortunate situation… our advice is: don’t,” he said Sunday on ABC’s This Week.

    Iranian foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said in a press conference Sunday that Israel’s bombardment of Gaza could have “far-reaching consequences.” “I warn the U.S. and its proxy Israel that if they do not immediately stop the crime against humanity and genocide in Gaza, anything is possible at any moment and the region will go out of control,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Jack McCordick

    Source link

  • UN committee deadlocked on climate disaster recovery fund

    UN committee deadlocked on climate disaster recovery fund

    [ad_1]

    Sultan Al Jaber, chief executive of the UAE’s Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) and president of this year’s COP28 climate summit gestures during an interview as part of the 7th Ministerial on Climate Action (MoCA) in Brussels on July 13, 2023.

    Francois Walschaerts | Afp | Getty Images

    United Nations representatives failed to secure a deal during late-night talks on how to implement a reparations fund for climate disaster recovery in developing nations.

    The “loss and damage fund” would call on rich countries to finance the recovery of climate disasters that have wrecked developing nations and set them behind on their sustainability goals.

    The commitment to establish the fund was one of the highlight announcements of last year’s UN Climate Conference, or COP27, after a series of down-to-the-wire negotiations. Part of the agreement at COP27 was the creation of a Loss and Damage Transitional Committee, which would be in charge of negotiating the details on how to set up and operate the fund.

    The group was made up of representatives from developing nations like Pakistan, Egypt and Venezuela, as well as rich countries like the United States and the United Kingdom.

    The 24-member committee met four times over the past week to settle on official recommendations for how to implement the fund. Those recommendations have been in dispute over the past year and are due to be completed in time to be adopted at this year’s COP28, which is set to take place at the end of November in Abu Dhabi.

    At the beginning of the fourth meeting, Sultan Al-Jaber, the director of COP28 and a United Arab Emirates minister, pressed the representatives to pick up the pace of their negotiations: “I don’t want this to be an empty bank account. This committee has to deliver its recommendations.”

    However, the talks slowed with representatives unable to reconcile their differences on how to operate the fund and who would pay for it.

    The fourth meeting bled into the late hours of Friday night and early Saturday morning, as committee members grew increasingly frustrated by the lagging progress.

    “I spent all day with a cold working on this, feeling like crap and I want to see it affected somewhere,” Diann Black-Layne, an environmental director for Antigua and Barbuda, said at the meeting.

    The meeting ended with no solid resolution and a plan to set up a fifth meeting on the issue, as the COP28 deadline inches nearer.

    “What message do I take back home?” said Ali Waqas Malik, representing Pakistan. “You came empty-handed. There is nothing on the table. No recommendations.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • ‘Incredibly harsh’: Up to 600 Americans are trapped in besieged Gaza

    ‘Incredibly harsh’: Up to 600 Americans are trapped in besieged Gaza

    [ad_1]

    Hundreds of American citizens are trapped in the besieged Gaza Strip under constant Israeli bombardment and have received no help in finding ways to escape, according to interviews with individuals on the ground. 

    The State Department says as many as 600 Americans are in the enclave that since Oct. 7 has come under heavy retaliatory airstrikes by Israel after the Palestinian militant group Hamas, which governs Gaza, launched a terror attack against southern Israel that killed at least 1,300 people.

    Follow our live coverage of the Israel-Hamas war

    The Israeli air campaign and full siege against Gaza which cut off electricity, food and water to the already blockaded territory has killed 3,785 people so far, according to Gaza’s health ministry.

    “America’s not helping us, Biden’s not helping us, the embassy is not helping us,” Amir Kaoud, a Palestinian-American at the Rafah crossing with several of his family members, told NBC News. 

    The Rafah crossing is at the border of southern Gaza and Egypt, and is one of only two points of entry and exit for the Palestinian territory. The other point of entry is at Gaza’s northern border with Israel. Both are currently closed, and thousands of people are camped out at the southern crossing in the desperate hope of getting out.     

    Palestinians, some with foreign passports hoping to cross into Egypt and others waiting for aid wait at the Rafah crossing in the southern Gaza strip, on October 16, 2023.

    Mohammed Abed | Afp | Getty Images

    “They keep saying the same thing every day, they’re trying to figure out a way to get us out. Nothing’s happening,” Kaoud said. “All the people, all the U.S. citizens in Israel, they’re getting out. Why not us?”

    Americans in Gaza who contacted the State Department said that they were met with emails that detailed evacuation options for people in Israel, but little that was helpful for those stuck in the Palestinian territory.

    ‘Double standard’  

    Emilee Rauschenberger, a U.S. citizen who was visiting in-laws in Gaza with her husband and five children when the war began, said she felt that her government “kind of feels absolved of it as a responsibility because of the politics of it all.” 

    “The double standard is incredibly harsh,” she told NBC News.

    The State Department has arranged evacuations by air and sea for U.S. citizens in Israel who want to evacuate. But it says that the situation is far more difficult for Gaza. “The armed conflict between Israel and Hamas is ongoing, making identifying departure options for U.S. citizens complex,” a State Department spokesperson told CNBC, adding that “the security environment in Gaza is distinct from the security environment in Israel.” 

    Smoke rises after Israeli airstrikes hit Rafah as the Israeli attacks continue on the thirteenth day of the clashes in Rafah, Gaza on October 19, 2023.

    Abed Rahim Khatib | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images

    Threat of bombings

    U.S. officials say they are working with the Egyptian authorities “round the clock” to get the Rafah crossing opened, but Egypt said in recent days that it had become inoperable due to Israeli airstrikes on the Gazan side. 

    Egyptian authorities say they won’t open the crossing without a guarantee from Israel that its humanitarian convoys, which have been waiting outside the border for days, won’t be attacked. Israel’s military said its strikes at Rafah were aimed at Hamas targets. 

    “There is an urgent need to alleviate the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza,” Egypt’s Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry said on Oct. 16. 

    Aid convoy trucks are seen at the Rafah border with Gaza on October 17, 2023 in North Sinai, Egypt.

    Mahmoud Khaled | Getty Images News | Getty Images

    Officials say a deal was reached Thursday to allow limited humanitarian aid into Gaza, but the details of when the crossing will actually open and what that would mean for foreign nationals in Gaza are still not clear. U.S officials said that the aid should be able to move into Gaza in the coming days. 

    Israel meanwhile has so far refused a temporary cease-fire unless Hamas releases the hostages that it kidnapped from Israel on Oct. 7. Israel’s government says Hamas has at least 200 hostages in captivity in tunnels underneath Gaza, including many children and elderly people.

    More CNBC coverage of the Israel-Hamas war

    False hopes

    Many of the Americans in Gaza have family members there that do not have U.S. citizenship. While they can apply for visas for their immediate family members, they would have to leave extended family members behind, creating an impossible situation, they say. They describe struggling to update their family members overseas due to weak signal and lack of electricity, and say they constantly hear the sounds of bombs and jets overhead, often having to suddenly relocate in the middle of the night.  

    Egypt's foreign minister hopes for de-escalation of Israel-Hamas war

    Israel on Oct. 13 directed the 1.1 million residents of northern Gaza to move to the southern half of the territory ahead of an expected ground invasion, the start of which has not yet been announced. The U.N. described such a sudden displacement of so many people amid a war zone as “impossible without devastating humanitarian consequences.” Gaza, already one of the most densely-populated places on Earth, now has nearly its entire population trying to survive on half of its territory. 

    For the Americans trapped there, and their families overseas, announcements of developments at the border created false hopes. Various reports that the crossing would open at a specific day and time repeatedly turned out to be incorrect. As already-slim food supplies dwindle, the masses of people gathered at the border crossing only grow.

    “We will continue to provide updates as we have them,” a line in the State Department’s message to Americans read. “We anticipate any opening will occur on short notice.” 

    [ad_2]

    Source link