Activists: Indonesian Counterterrorism Law Threatens Civil Liberties

Human rights activists in Indonesia are raising concerns about a revised counterterrorism law they say may restrict freedoms of expression and association.

In the wake of several shocking terrorist attacks in East Java and Riau this month, including two suicide bombings carried out by families, Indonesia’s House of Representatives unanimously passed a revised counterterrorism law that would allow police to more broadly prosecute suspected terrorists and terrorist activity.

The revisions were originally proposed after a terrorist attack in Jakarta in January 2016, but floundered for two years until this month, when they were quickly passed after the Surabaya bombings. President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo was under pressure to pass the revisions after the attacks and threatened to issue a presidential decree if the House did not act promptly.

The new law allows police to hold suspects for up to 221 days in detention before they are brought to court, allows the military to join police in counterterrorism operations, and expands the definition of terrorism along broad lines that may criminalize activist groups.

“We mainly have concerns with [the] articles that expand the definition of terrorism to include any kind of violence,” said Papang Hidayat of Amnesty International Indonesia, as well as those that allow for prolonged detention. “In Indonesia, we still have a flawed criminal procedures court, inherited from Dutch colonial rule, which does not recognize rights like habeas corpus. Nor is torture considered a criminal act. So, the revised law raises major human rights concerns.”

Civil liberties

The revised law passed after three days of discussion, according to Andreas Harsono, a researcher with Human Rights Watch in Jakarta. “The last three days were only used to argue about the definition of terrorism,” he said.

The language in the law’s Article 1.2 broadens the definition to include “violence or threat of violence which creates or intends to create an atmosphere of terror or widespread fear, creating multiple casualties and/or resulting in damage or destruction of vital strategic objects, the environment, a public facility, or an international facility with ideological, political or security disturbance motive.”

Harsono said this could be used to target the peaceful activism of indigenous groups, environmentalists, and religious or political organizations.

One potential target of the revised law is Papuan activists, from the two contested easternmost provinces of Indonesia, Papua and West Papua, where the Indonesian government has been embroiled in a conflict with indigenous inhabitants for over five decades.

“There are two areas in Papua where criminals are tried against the state … Jayapura and Timika,” said Harsono. “Thus, if you attack a point in Freeport [the world’s largest gold mine, which is located in Papua] or a police officer in Freeport, you might technically be branded a terrorist.”

Many countries have had to strike a balance between privacy and security in devising their counterterrorism laws, including the United States, which controversially expanded government surveillance with the Patriot Act after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Mitigating the impact

“The revised law was definitely a response to the recent attacks in Surabaya,” Hidayat said.

Amnesty International Indonesia has written an open letter to the parliament with its concerns.

He is particularly worried about the growing role of the Indonesian military in counterterrorism operations.

“The Indonesian military has no accountability,” he said. “They can only be tried in their [internal] tribunal system.”

The move to involve the military in counterterrorism — in Article 43 of the revised law — came just days after the Joint Special Operations Command, a domestic counterterrorism squad, was revived. Per the revised law, military involvement would require both a request from the police and the president’s approval.

“The involvement of the military must be limited going forward,” Hidayat said. “But this can only be done by presidential decree.”

It is unlikely that Jokowi will roll back any provisions so soon after the revisions were pushed through, particularly since he is standing for re-election next year and national security will be a major policy issue.

The law was passed “in an effort to protect the entire nation and all the blood of Indonesia,” Muhammad Syafii, chairman of the Special Committee for the Revision of Terrorism Law, said last week.

Officials in Indonesia’s House of Representatives could not be immediately reached for comment.

Activists say the revised law could also further curb freedom of expression in Indonesia, which already has punitive blasphemy and defamation laws. Its Article 1.4 defines the threat of violence as “speech, writing, picture, symbol or body language, with or without electronic or non-electronic form which could create widespread fear.”

Indonesian citizens can be arrested for Facebook posts, and blasphemy charges have a 100 percent conviction rate.

your ad here

Trump Asks ABC for Apology After Flap Over Barr’s Racist Comments

One day after the ABC TV network canceled Roseanne Barr’s television show following racist remarks she posted about Valerie Jarrett, an African American who served as a White House adviser to President Barack Obama, U.S. President Donald Trump broke his silence Wednesday, suggesting the network owes him an apology for reasons he did not fully explain.

Barr, who is white, tweeted Tuesday that Jarrett is a product of the Muslim Brotherhood and the “Planet of the Apes.”

She later tweeted she was sorry “for making a bad joke” about Jarrett. But before it was deleted, her tweet read: “Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby = vj.”

Her offensive remarks triggered intense backlash, including ABC’s cancellation of her show which had been renewed for a second season.

“Roseanne’s Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show,” said ABC entertainment President Channing Dungey.

Pointing fingers

Trump’s Twitter response was somewhat surprising after White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee-Sanders said in response to a question about Barr Tuesday that he is focusing on trade, North Korea and other issues and “not responding to other things.”

After saying Tuesday she would stop tweeting, Barr resumed posting, blaming the effects of the sleep medication Ambien for her racist remarks in one of her more than 100 subsequent postings.

“guys I did something unforgiveable so do not defend me. It was 2 in the morning and I was ambien tweeting-it was memorial day too-i went 2 far & do not want it defended-it was egregious Indefensible. I made a mistake I wish I hadn’t but…don’t defend it please.”

The maker of Ambien, Sanofi S.A., responded to Barr’s claim saying, “While all pharmaceutical treatments have side effects, racism is not a known side effect of any Sanofi medication.”

Iger, who once considered challenging Trump for the presidency in 2020, indeed called Jarrett to inform her about the show’s cancellation.

“He wanted me to know before he made it public that he was canceling the show,” Jarrett said.

Jarrett has not commented on Trump’s response nor has Iger replied to Trump’s suggestion he was treated differently by the network.

Barr’s TV show was a new version of her 1988-97 sitcom “Roseanne.” It returned this year with Barr playing a character who is supportive of President Trump.

Barr in real life is an avid supporter of Trump. He hailed the new show two months ago for its strong ratings.

“Look at her ratings! Look at her ratings,” he said at a speech in Richfield, Ohio. “Over 18 million people,” Trump said, “and it was about us.” They haven’t figured it out yet; the fake news hasn’t quite figured it out yet. They have not figured it out. So that was great.”

your ad here

Trump Asks ABC for Apology After Flap Over Barr’s Racist Comments

One day after the ABC TV network canceled Roseanne Barr’s television show following racist remarks she posted about Valerie Jarrett, an African American who served as a White House adviser to President Barack Obama, U.S. President Donald Trump broke his silence Wednesday, suggesting the network owes him an apology for reasons he did not fully explain.

Barr, who is white, tweeted Tuesday that Jarrett is a product of the Muslim Brotherhood and the “Planet of the Apes.”

She later tweeted she was sorry “for making a bad joke” about Jarrett. But before it was deleted, her tweet read: “Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby = vj.”

Her offensive remarks triggered intense backlash, including ABC’s cancellation of her show which had been renewed for a second season.

“Roseanne’s Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show,” said ABC entertainment President Channing Dungey.

Pointing fingers

Trump’s Twitter response was somewhat surprising after White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee-Sanders said in response to a question about Barr Tuesday that he is focusing on trade, North Korea and other issues and “not responding to other things.”

After saying Tuesday she would stop tweeting, Barr resumed posting, blaming the effects of the sleep medication Ambien for her racist remarks in one of her more than 100 subsequent postings.

“guys I did something unforgiveable so do not defend me. It was 2 in the morning and I was ambien tweeting-it was memorial day too-i went 2 far & do not want it defended-it was egregious Indefensible. I made a mistake I wish I hadn’t but…don’t defend it please.”

The maker of Ambien, Sanofi S.A., responded to Barr’s claim saying, “While all pharmaceutical treatments have side effects, racism is not a known side effect of any Sanofi medication.”

Iger, who once considered challenging Trump for the presidency in 2020, indeed called Jarrett to inform her about the show’s cancellation.

“He wanted me to know before he made it public that he was canceling the show,” Jarrett said.

Jarrett has not commented on Trump’s response nor has Iger replied to Trump’s suggestion he was treated differently by the network.

Barr’s TV show was a new version of her 1988-97 sitcom “Roseanne.” It returned this year with Barr playing a character who is supportive of President Trump.

Barr in real life is an avid supporter of Trump. He hailed the new show two months ago for its strong ratings.

“Look at her ratings! Look at her ratings,” he said at a speech in Richfield, Ohio. “Over 18 million people,” Trump said, “and it was about us.” They haven’t figured it out yet; the fake news hasn’t quite figured it out yet. They have not figured it out. So that was great.”

your ad here

TPS Cancellations Leave Many Unanswered Questions

Over the next 18 months, roughly 310,000 people in the United States may lose their ability to live and work legally in the country, as the Trump administration ends the humanitarian Temporary Protected Status program for several nations that have seen the effects of armed conflict and natural disasters improve in the last year, according to federal officials.

But those same officials aren’t sure where those TPS beneficiaries will end up once their status expires. An unprecedented number of people will lose their legal privilege to remain in the country within a relatively short timeframe.

Neither government officials nor lawyers nor activists have a good understanding of what’s about to happen. And U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the federal agency that oversees the TPS program, said it does not track the outcomes of former TPS recipients, so it can’t extrapolate.

TPS is a non-immigrant status, which means that those who receive it are not on a pathway to permanent residency or citizenship — they are, as the name states, in a temporary holding pattern triggered by a crisis in their home country.

Royce Bernstein Murray, policy director at the American Immigration Council, notes that when paired with the potential extinction of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy — ended by Trump in 2017 and now ensnared in the judicial system — there are potentially a million currently legal foreign-born people in the U.S. who will lose their protected status.

And for a government that cites “national security” as its rationale for immigration restriction policies — humanitarian or otherwise — officials could lose track of those million or so people.

“Who gains when we take away people’s ability to come forward and be forthright about who they are and where they are?” Bernstein Murray said.

“Many of us have long argued that it’s better for everyone — the immigrants themselves and society at large — for people to have a way to come forward, to be vetted, to provide their information, so we know who’s here. No need to wonder where populations are and whether they pose a safety risk,” she added.

Writing for the immigration-restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies, David North noted that two of the highest source countries for TPS beneficiaries — El Salvador and Honduras — had fewer recipients in 2014 and 2015. They dropped 29 percent and 42 percent, respectively, compared with the peak re-registration numbers in 2001 and 2003.

What could account for those differences? The same outcomes the U.S. may see in the coming 18 months, as TPS expires: adjusting to a different immigration or non-immigrant status, moving to another country, going back to their home country, dying or becoming undocumented. 

​Options for TPS recipients

There isn’t much — if any — data about what happens to TPS recipients once their status expires or is canceled. Even if there were, the next 18 months will be unprecedented in the volume of recipients who lose legal status.

Barring a dramatic change from Congress or the Trump administration, there are limited options for TPS recipients who are going to lose their status.

Some TPS recipients may go home. Of course, this was the intent of TPS — to wait until the countries were stable and able to welcome their expatriate nationals back. But it is unclear how many TPS recipients do, in fact, return once their status expires. There are some cases from the 1990s and early 2000s of countries for which TPS was terminated, but again, USCIS said it does not “actively track” former TPS beneficiaries. Former recipients could, in theory, also move to a third country.

However, nationals from some countries have been in the U.S. for decades. They’ve raised families, kept jobs and built self-sufficient lives. For about 2,100 TPS recipients, largely from El Salvador (92.3 percent) but also Honduras (7.5 percent) and Nicaragua (0.2 percent), the CIS study found high levels of labor force participation — 94 percent among men and 82 percent of women.

About 1 in 3 own their homes, and 4 in 5 pay income tax, according to the data from the Center for Migration Research. 

“TPS holders’ in-between legal status is reflected in their in-between conditions, as they generally do better than undocumented immigrants on the various indicators discussed in this report but not as well as those immigrants who are authorized or perhaps naturalized, or the U.S. population in general. As such, TPS represents a step in the right direction,” according to the report.

TPS recipients may also:

* Revert to their original status — for example, if they came on a student visa, got TPS, and are still a student;

* Stay illegally and risk deportation if they are caught or detained;

* Adjust to a different status — through marriage, work, family or asylum.

In some cases in the 1990s, Congress acted to provide for a permanent status for nationals from some countries. However, momentum for such action does not appear to be building for residents about to lose their legal status.

The Trump administration terminated TPS for six countries in 2017 and 2018, extended it for two others, and will make decisions about two more this year.

your ad here

TPS Cancellations Leave Many Unanswered Questions

Over the next 18 months, roughly 310,000 people in the United States may lose their ability to live and work legally in the country, as the Trump administration ends the humanitarian Temporary Protected Status program for several nations that have seen the effects of armed conflict and natural disasters improve in the last year, according to federal officials.

But those same officials aren’t sure where those TPS beneficiaries will end up once their status expires. An unprecedented number of people will lose their legal privilege to remain in the country within a relatively short timeframe.

Neither government officials nor lawyers nor activists have a good understanding of what’s about to happen. And U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the federal agency that oversees the TPS program, said it does not track the outcomes of former TPS recipients, so it can’t extrapolate.

TPS is a non-immigrant status, which means that those who receive it are not on a pathway to permanent residency or citizenship — they are, as the name states, in a temporary holding pattern triggered by a crisis in their home country.

Royce Bernstein Murray, policy director at the American Immigration Council, notes that when paired with the potential extinction of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy — ended by Trump in 2017 and now ensnared in the judicial system — there are potentially a million currently legal foreign-born people in the U.S. who will lose their protected status.

And for a government that cites “national security” as its rationale for immigration restriction policies — humanitarian or otherwise — officials could lose track of those million or so people.

“Who gains when we take away people’s ability to come forward and be forthright about who they are and where they are?” Bernstein Murray said.

“Many of us have long argued that it’s better for everyone — the immigrants themselves and society at large — for people to have a way to come forward, to be vetted, to provide their information, so we know who’s here. No need to wonder where populations are and whether they pose a safety risk,” she added.

Writing for the immigration-restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies, David North noted that two of the highest source countries for TPS beneficiaries — El Salvador and Honduras — had fewer recipients in 2014 and 2015. They dropped 29 percent and 42 percent, respectively, compared with the peak re-registration numbers in 2001 and 2003.

What could account for those differences? The same outcomes the U.S. may see in the coming 18 months, as TPS expires: adjusting to a different immigration or non-immigrant status, moving to another country, going back to their home country, dying or becoming undocumented. 

​Options for TPS recipients

There isn’t much — if any — data about what happens to TPS recipients once their status expires or is canceled. Even if there were, the next 18 months will be unprecedented in the volume of recipients who lose legal status.

Barring a dramatic change from Congress or the Trump administration, there are limited options for TPS recipients who are going to lose their status.

Some TPS recipients may go home. Of course, this was the intent of TPS — to wait until the countries were stable and able to welcome their expatriate nationals back. But it is unclear how many TPS recipients do, in fact, return once their status expires. There are some cases from the 1990s and early 2000s of countries for which TPS was terminated, but again, USCIS said it does not “actively track” former TPS beneficiaries. Former recipients could, in theory, also move to a third country.

However, nationals from some countries have been in the U.S. for decades. They’ve raised families, kept jobs and built self-sufficient lives. For about 2,100 TPS recipients, largely from El Salvador (92.3 percent) but also Honduras (7.5 percent) and Nicaragua (0.2 percent), the CIS study found high levels of labor force participation — 94 percent among men and 82 percent of women.

About 1 in 3 own their homes, and 4 in 5 pay income tax, according to the data from the Center for Migration Research. 

“TPS holders’ in-between legal status is reflected in their in-between conditions, as they generally do better than undocumented immigrants on the various indicators discussed in this report but not as well as those immigrants who are authorized or perhaps naturalized, or the U.S. population in general. As such, TPS represents a step in the right direction,” according to the report.

TPS recipients may also:

* Revert to their original status — for example, if they came on a student visa, got TPS, and are still a student;

* Stay illegally and risk deportation if they are caught or detained;

* Adjust to a different status — through marriage, work, family or asylum.

In some cases in the 1990s, Congress acted to provide for a permanent status for nationals from some countries. However, momentum for such action does not appear to be building for residents about to lose their legal status.

The Trump administration terminated TPS for six countries in 2017 and 2018, extended it for two others, and will make decisions about two more this year.

your ad here

Young People Feel More Empowered, AP-NORC/MTV Poll Finds

Don’t tell 20-year-old Nestor Aguilera he can’t effect change in politics.

The Indiana University business major protested outside President Donald Trump’s recent appearance in Aguilera’s home of Elkhart, Indiana. And while he admits he didn’t vote in 2016, he’s promising to show up for this fall’s midterm elections.

 

“If young people decide to go out there and vote, we have the power to affect what the government does,” Aguilera said. “We could have a big impact.”

 

Aguilera is among a small — but significant — surge of young people who say they feel politically empowered in latest Youth Political Pulse survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and MTV. It’s a change from a past survey that comes after a school shooting in Florida that elevated the voices of high school students in American politics, and five months before Americans will decide whether Trump’s Republican Party will maintain control of Congress for another two years.

 

A slim majority, 54 percent, of people ages 15 to 34 — a group that is typically the least likely to vote — continue to believe they have little or no effect on government. But 46 percent of young people now believe they can have at least a moderate effect, a significant increase from two months earlier, when 37 percent said the same.

 

In that time, a group of students from Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where a February shooting killed 17, has succeeded in keeping the debate about gun safety in the news. They joined Tuesday with the New York-based organization HeadCount in an effort to hold voter registration drives at 90 percent of the nation’s high schools before this year’s senior class graduates. It’s one of the many efforts by organizations aligned with Democrats on gun control that seeks to capitalize on the increase in interest among young people in politics.

 

The recent rise in political engagement is particularly apparent among Americans ages 15 to 22, a group that includes teenagers who will be eligible to vote in a presidential election for the first time in 2020. The poll found that 48 percent now think they can have at least some effect on the government, after just 33 percent felt that way in March.

 

There’s also an uptick in the number of young people who say politicians care what they think: 34 percent of 15-to-34-year-olds report that elected officials care at least a moderate amount about what they think, while just 25 percent said so two months ago.

 

At the same time, two-thirds say they think the government is not functioning well, and just over half — 52 percent — say they rarely or never read or watch news about the midterm elections.

 

While many young people continue to feel powerless in the current political environment, the modest increases revealed in the poll could be further evidence of a Democratic wave building against the GOP this fall. Young people are far more likely to side with Democrats than Republicans. The new poll finds that they are also especially likely to have concerns about the Republican president.

 

Just 30 percent of people ages 15 to 34 approve of Trump’s job performance, the poll found. In April’s AP-NORC survey of all American adults, 40 percent said they approved of the president’s work at the White House.

 

On gun control, 4 in 10 teens and young adults give the government an F grade on addressing the issue. Still, gun-related issues have fallen on the list of concerns for young adults since the first Youth Political Pulse survey, which was conducted just after February’s school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

 

Just 6 percent now list gun laws as their single top concern facing the country, down from 21 percent in March.

 

At least 4 in 10 young people in the latest poll also give the government failing grades on handling immigration, environmental issues, racism and higher education costs.

 

One poll respondent, 21-year-old Samantha Bitzer, a political science major at Michigan State University, says she’s determined to encourage her friends to engage more in politics.

 

“I don’t think that enough young people care at the moment,” said Bitzer, who calls herself a moderate Republican and voted for Trump. “People are super mad, but he’s actually doing everything he said he would.”

 

Despite the rise in engagement, it’s far from certain that young people will reshape the political landscape this fall. Young voters, with few exceptions, have struggled to maintain interest in politics over the last half century. Just 15 percent of eligible voters ages 18 to 20 cast ballots in the last midterm election, for example.

 

“Do I feel like I could actually make a difference or influence things? Probably not,” said 23-year-old Charly Hyden, who works for a nonprofit in Lexington, Kentucky. “I feel exhausted. I go out on protests and try to do things, but I feel like it doesn’t matter.”

 

“Maybe I’d feel differently if I were still in high school,” she said.

___

 

The Youth Political Pulse poll of 939 young Americans ages 15 to 34 was conducted April 23 to May 9 by the AP-NORC Center and MTV. The poll was conducted using NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all young people is plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.

 

 

 

your ad here

Young People Feel More Empowered, AP-NORC/MTV Poll Finds

Don’t tell 20-year-old Nestor Aguilera he can’t effect change in politics.

The Indiana University business major protested outside President Donald Trump’s recent appearance in Aguilera’s home of Elkhart, Indiana. And while he admits he didn’t vote in 2016, he’s promising to show up for this fall’s midterm elections.

 

“If young people decide to go out there and vote, we have the power to affect what the government does,” Aguilera said. “We could have a big impact.”

 

Aguilera is among a small — but significant — surge of young people who say they feel politically empowered in latest Youth Political Pulse survey from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and MTV. It’s a change from a past survey that comes after a school shooting in Florida that elevated the voices of high school students in American politics, and five months before Americans will decide whether Trump’s Republican Party will maintain control of Congress for another two years.

 

A slim majority, 54 percent, of people ages 15 to 34 — a group that is typically the least likely to vote — continue to believe they have little or no effect on government. But 46 percent of young people now believe they can have at least a moderate effect, a significant increase from two months earlier, when 37 percent said the same.

 

In that time, a group of students from Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where a February shooting killed 17, has succeeded in keeping the debate about gun safety in the news. They joined Tuesday with the New York-based organization HeadCount in an effort to hold voter registration drives at 90 percent of the nation’s high schools before this year’s senior class graduates. It’s one of the many efforts by organizations aligned with Democrats on gun control that seeks to capitalize on the increase in interest among young people in politics.

 

The recent rise in political engagement is particularly apparent among Americans ages 15 to 22, a group that includes teenagers who will be eligible to vote in a presidential election for the first time in 2020. The poll found that 48 percent now think they can have at least some effect on the government, after just 33 percent felt that way in March.

 

There’s also an uptick in the number of young people who say politicians care what they think: 34 percent of 15-to-34-year-olds report that elected officials care at least a moderate amount about what they think, while just 25 percent said so two months ago.

 

At the same time, two-thirds say they think the government is not functioning well, and just over half — 52 percent — say they rarely or never read or watch news about the midterm elections.

 

While many young people continue to feel powerless in the current political environment, the modest increases revealed in the poll could be further evidence of a Democratic wave building against the GOP this fall. Young people are far more likely to side with Democrats than Republicans. The new poll finds that they are also especially likely to have concerns about the Republican president.

 

Just 30 percent of people ages 15 to 34 approve of Trump’s job performance, the poll found. In April’s AP-NORC survey of all American adults, 40 percent said they approved of the president’s work at the White House.

 

On gun control, 4 in 10 teens and young adults give the government an F grade on addressing the issue. Still, gun-related issues have fallen on the list of concerns for young adults since the first Youth Political Pulse survey, which was conducted just after February’s school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

 

Just 6 percent now list gun laws as their single top concern facing the country, down from 21 percent in March.

 

At least 4 in 10 young people in the latest poll also give the government failing grades on handling immigration, environmental issues, racism and higher education costs.

 

One poll respondent, 21-year-old Samantha Bitzer, a political science major at Michigan State University, says she’s determined to encourage her friends to engage more in politics.

 

“I don’t think that enough young people care at the moment,” said Bitzer, who calls herself a moderate Republican and voted for Trump. “People are super mad, but he’s actually doing everything he said he would.”

 

Despite the rise in engagement, it’s far from certain that young people will reshape the political landscape this fall. Young voters, with few exceptions, have struggled to maintain interest in politics over the last half century. Just 15 percent of eligible voters ages 18 to 20 cast ballots in the last midterm election, for example.

 

“Do I feel like I could actually make a difference or influence things? Probably not,” said 23-year-old Charly Hyden, who works for a nonprofit in Lexington, Kentucky. “I feel exhausted. I go out on protests and try to do things, but I feel like it doesn’t matter.”

 

“Maybe I’d feel differently if I were still in high school,” she said.

___

 

The Youth Political Pulse poll of 939 young Americans ages 15 to 34 was conducted April 23 to May 9 by the AP-NORC Center and MTV. The poll was conducted using NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all young people is plus or minus 4.3 percentage points.

 

 

 

your ad here

Ross: US-EU Trade Deal Could be Reached

 

U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said Wednesday a U.S.-European Union trade deal could still be reached even if the United States imposes tariffs on EU steel and aluminum imports.

EU and U.S. officials are holding last-minute negotiations two days before U.S. President Donald Trump decides to apply tariffs on Europe.

The threat of tariffs has increased prospects of retaliation and a global trade war that could hinder the global economy.

“There can be negotiations with or without tariffs in place,” Ross said at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. “There are plenty of tariffs the EU has on us. It’s not that we can’t talk just because there’s tariffs.”

The Trump administration is also exploring possible limits on foreign auto imports, citing national security. 

The EU wants exemptions on steel and aluminum tariffs, which Trump hopes will benefit the U.S., or impose tariffs on U.S. peanut butter, orange juice and other products.

In a speech at the OECD, French President Emmanuel Macron said Europe should stand its ground in the face of unilateral actions and warned against trade wars.

“Unilateral responses and threats over trade wars will solve nothing of the serious imbalances in world trade. Nothing,” he proclaimed.

In an apparent reference to Trump’s proposed tariffs, Macron said, “These solutions might bring symbolic satisfaction in the short term. …. One can think about making voters happy by saying, ‘I have a victory. I’ll change the rules. You’ll see.’” 

Macron also called on the EU, the U.S., China and Japan to draft a World Trade Organization reform plan for the G-20 summit in Argentina later this year.

“The new rules must meet the current challenges of world trade: massive state subsidies creating distortions of global markets, intellectual property, social rights and climate protection,” he said. 

But Macron’s multilateral approach has produced limited results to date, as Trump has withdrawn from the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran nuclear deal, and is threatening to disrupt trade relations between China, the EU and other economic powers.

 

 

your ad here

Ross: US-EU Trade Deal Could be Reached

 

U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said Wednesday a U.S.-European Union trade deal could still be reached even if the United States imposes tariffs on EU steel and aluminum imports.

EU and U.S. officials are holding last-minute negotiations two days before U.S. President Donald Trump decides to apply tariffs on Europe.

The threat of tariffs has increased prospects of retaliation and a global trade war that could hinder the global economy.

“There can be negotiations with or without tariffs in place,” Ross said at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. “There are plenty of tariffs the EU has on us. It’s not that we can’t talk just because there’s tariffs.”

The Trump administration is also exploring possible limits on foreign auto imports, citing national security. 

The EU wants exemptions on steel and aluminum tariffs, which Trump hopes will benefit the U.S., or impose tariffs on U.S. peanut butter, orange juice and other products.

In a speech at the OECD, French President Emmanuel Macron said Europe should stand its ground in the face of unilateral actions and warned against trade wars.

“Unilateral responses and threats over trade wars will solve nothing of the serious imbalances in world trade. Nothing,” he proclaimed.

In an apparent reference to Trump’s proposed tariffs, Macron said, “These solutions might bring symbolic satisfaction in the short term. …. One can think about making voters happy by saying, ‘I have a victory. I’ll change the rules. You’ll see.’” 

Macron also called on the EU, the U.S., China and Japan to draft a World Trade Organization reform plan for the G-20 summit in Argentina later this year.

“The new rules must meet the current challenges of world trade: massive state subsidies creating distortions of global markets, intellectual property, social rights and climate protection,” he said. 

But Macron’s multilateral approach has produced limited results to date, as Trump has withdrawn from the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran nuclear deal, and is threatening to disrupt trade relations between China, the EU and other economic powers.

 

 

your ad here

Italy’s Political Turmoil Sends Shock Waves Across Europe

Europe’s financial markets are in a swoon, Italy is in political turmoil, a fresh eurozone debt crisis is in the offing and the continent’s euroskeptic populists are predicting gleefully the fast-approaching demise of the European Union.

So, what’s new?

For the past few years, all of the above could have been written virtually any day of the week, much of it fueled by hyperbole. But the political drama unfolding in Italy is of a different order and shaping up to be a much greater existential threat to the European Union than Britain’s Brexit vote two years ago, analysts say.

That is unless Italy can gain firmer political ground, and quickly.

“Italy is, not for the first time, in political crisis,” said Nick Ottens, chief editor of the transatlantic opinion website Atlantic Sentinel. “But this time, what happens in Rome could have a big impact on financial markets, the euro, and the longer-term future of the European Union as a whole.”

Tuesday, the global financial markets saw massive sell-offs of European equities and bank stocks, and currency traders dumped the euro, sending it plummeting to its lowest level against the dollar in nearly a year. Bond markets also swooned as global investors headed for the safety of U.S. Treasury securities, reviving memories of the debt crisis that bankrupted Greece and threatened to fracture the eurozone.

The sell-off came as Italian politicians struggled to shape an orderly way toward fresh elections after Sergio Mattarella, Italy’s president, vetoed the selection of an anti-euro finance minister by the anti-establishment Five Star Movement (M5S) and anti-immigrant Lega. That collapsed the nascent coalition government and prompted the resignation of the prime minister nominee after just 90 hours — a stunning turnaround even by Italy’s chaotic political standards. 

Mattarella’s decision to turn to a former IMF economist, Carlo Cottarelli, to head a caretaker government remains beset by problems. The president’s plan appears to have involved delaying elections until next year.

But Cottarelli, a Europhile, isn’t expected to win a vote of confidence in the Italian parliament because of opposition from the two populist parties, who together command a parliamentary majority, forcing Mattarella to call a populist-demanded early election, possibly as soon as July.

‘On Verge of Panic’

The Italian political turmoil is sending shock waves across Europe amid alarm the country is on a political trajectory to exit the eurozone, despite polling data suggesting Italians would prefer to stick with the euro, although they remain resentful of Brussels and EU-dictated austerity policies.

“On Verge of Panic,” was how the normally sober Economist magazine headlined its coverage Wednesday of the political crisis in Rome and what it may entail for Europe.

Brinkmanship and miscalculation by both old guard politicians in Italy and upstart populists risks worsening the Italian domestic crisis and transforming it into a continent-shaking European one, analysts and investors warn.

On Tuesday, Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros said he feared the European Union could be heading toward another major financial crisis triggered by populist political parties intent on ripping the bloc apart. “The EU is in an existential crisis. Everything that could go wrong has gone wrong,” he said in a speech in London.

Italy is the third-largest country in the eurozone, the fifth-largest in the European Union, and as one of its founding members, conflict with Brussels will test the bloc far more than Brexit.

‘Italian democracy’s darkest night’

EU officials fear the Italian populists will grab an even bigger share of the popular vote in rerun parliamentary elections and only four months after Italians voted in a bad-tempered national poll, marred by violence, that resulted in a hung parliament.

“The political risk is becoming very complex,” said Mauro Vittorangeli of Allianz Global. “The political situation is totally unpredictable,” he added.

Lega leader Matteo Salvini intends to frame his party’s election campaign as a referendum on Italy’s EU relationship, arguing the populists’ plan for a coalition government failed because of interference from the “powers-that-be, the markets, Berlin and Paris” who want Italy to be “a slave, scared and precarious.”

A poll released last week suggested 61 percent of Italians believe their voice isn’t being heard in Brussels. Pollsters put the Lega’s support at 22 percent, five points up from its vote share in March’s election.

Likewise, M5S leader Luigi Di Maio, whose party won 32 percent of the March vote, is also blaming entrenched elites, foreign and domestic, for crashing the proposed populist coalition government. He has called on party supporters to attend to protest Mattarella’s actions, which he says amount to “Italian democracy’s darkest night.”

One thing that may hurt the populists and reduce their electoral support, argues economist Alberto Mingardi of the Istituto Bruno Leoni research group, is if voters start fearing “an impending financial disaster.” Or if Italians decide the populists are more to blame for the crisis than Italy’s president.

your ad here

Italy’s Political Turmoil Sends Shock Waves Across Europe

Europe’s financial markets are in a swoon, Italy is in political turmoil, a fresh eurozone debt crisis is in the offing and the continent’s euroskeptic populists are predicting gleefully the fast-approaching demise of the European Union.

So, what’s new?

For the past few years, all of the above could have been written virtually any day of the week, much of it fueled by hyperbole. But the political drama unfolding in Italy is of a different order and shaping up to be a much greater existential threat to the European Union than Britain’s Brexit vote two years ago, analysts say.

That is unless Italy can gain firmer political ground, and quickly.

“Italy is, not for the first time, in political crisis,” said Nick Ottens, chief editor of the transatlantic opinion website Atlantic Sentinel. “But this time, what happens in Rome could have a big impact on financial markets, the euro, and the longer-term future of the European Union as a whole.”

Tuesday, the global financial markets saw massive sell-offs of European equities and bank stocks, and currency traders dumped the euro, sending it plummeting to its lowest level against the dollar in nearly a year. Bond markets also swooned as global investors headed for the safety of U.S. Treasury securities, reviving memories of the debt crisis that bankrupted Greece and threatened to fracture the eurozone.

The sell-off came as Italian politicians struggled to shape an orderly way toward fresh elections after Sergio Mattarella, Italy’s president, vetoed the selection of an anti-euro finance minister by the anti-establishment Five Star Movement (M5S) and anti-immigrant Lega. That collapsed the nascent coalition government and prompted the resignation of the prime minister nominee after just 90 hours — a stunning turnaround even by Italy’s chaotic political standards. 

Mattarella’s decision to turn to a former IMF economist, Carlo Cottarelli, to head a caretaker government remains beset by problems. The president’s plan appears to have involved delaying elections until next year.

But Cottarelli, a Europhile, isn’t expected to win a vote of confidence in the Italian parliament because of opposition from the two populist parties, who together command a parliamentary majority, forcing Mattarella to call a populist-demanded early election, possibly as soon as July.

‘On Verge of Panic’

The Italian political turmoil is sending shock waves across Europe amid alarm the country is on a political trajectory to exit the eurozone, despite polling data suggesting Italians would prefer to stick with the euro, although they remain resentful of Brussels and EU-dictated austerity policies.

“On Verge of Panic,” was how the normally sober Economist magazine headlined its coverage Wednesday of the political crisis in Rome and what it may entail for Europe.

Brinkmanship and miscalculation by both old guard politicians in Italy and upstart populists risks worsening the Italian domestic crisis and transforming it into a continent-shaking European one, analysts and investors warn.

On Tuesday, Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros said he feared the European Union could be heading toward another major financial crisis triggered by populist political parties intent on ripping the bloc apart. “The EU is in an existential crisis. Everything that could go wrong has gone wrong,” he said in a speech in London.

Italy is the third-largest country in the eurozone, the fifth-largest in the European Union, and as one of its founding members, conflict with Brussels will test the bloc far more than Brexit.

‘Italian democracy’s darkest night’

EU officials fear the Italian populists will grab an even bigger share of the popular vote in rerun parliamentary elections and only four months after Italians voted in a bad-tempered national poll, marred by violence, that resulted in a hung parliament.

“The political risk is becoming very complex,” said Mauro Vittorangeli of Allianz Global. “The political situation is totally unpredictable,” he added.

Lega leader Matteo Salvini intends to frame his party’s election campaign as a referendum on Italy’s EU relationship, arguing the populists’ plan for a coalition government failed because of interference from the “powers-that-be, the markets, Berlin and Paris” who want Italy to be “a slave, scared and precarious.”

A poll released last week suggested 61 percent of Italians believe their voice isn’t being heard in Brussels. Pollsters put the Lega’s support at 22 percent, five points up from its vote share in March’s election.

Likewise, M5S leader Luigi Di Maio, whose party won 32 percent of the March vote, is also blaming entrenched elites, foreign and domestic, for crashing the proposed populist coalition government. He has called on party supporters to attend to protest Mattarella’s actions, which he says amount to “Italian democracy’s darkest night.”

One thing that may hurt the populists and reduce their electoral support, argues economist Alberto Mingardi of the Istituto Bruno Leoni research group, is if voters start fearing “an impending financial disaster.” Or if Italians decide the populists are more to blame for the crisis than Italy’s president.

your ad here

UN: More Than 1 Million Children Going Hungry in Mali

UNICEF is warning that hundreds of thousands of severely malnourished children in Mali are at risk of dying, as the security situation in the country worsens.

The United Nations reports that attacks by extremists and criminals in northern and central Mali are rising at an alarming rate, with many civilians being deliberately targeted.

UNICEF spokesman Christophe Boulierac says more than a million children are going hungry because of severe food shortages.

“More than 850,000 children under the age of 5 are at risk of global acute malnutrition this year, including 274,000 children facing severe malnutrition and at imminent risk of death,” he said. “This represents a 34 percent increase and is largely due to the worsening food security situation in parts of the country.”

The U.N. reports 20 percent of the country is suffering from food insecurity and 1.2 million people lack water, sanitation and basic hygiene.

UNICEF says severe acute malnutrition rates are highest in the conflict affected areas in the north, exceeding the emergency level of 15 percent in Timbuktu. It cites Mali as one of the countries with the highest newborn and maternal mortality rates in the world.

Boulierac also says newborn deaths are rising because of malnutrition and lack of basic health services.

Northern Mail has been in turmoil since 2012, when Islamist militant groups temporarily seized control of the region.

​On a visit to Mali’s capital Bamako on Tuesday, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres paid homage to the U.N. peacekeepers who have been killed while serving what is considered the world body’s most dangerous peacekeeping mission.Twenty-one peacekeepers were killed in attacks by extremists last year.

While in Mali, Guterres appealed for funds to support the G5 Sahel force, which is composed of troops from Mali, Niger, Chad, Burkina Faso and Mauritania.The force was created to contain the West African jihadists active in Mali and nearby countries.

UNICEF calls the crisis in Mali one of the most forgotten in the world. It notes nearly 80 percent of the agency’s $37 million humanitarian appeal for this year remains unfunded.

your ad here

UN: More Than 1 Million Children Going Hungry in Mali

UNICEF is warning that hundreds of thousands of severely malnourished children in Mali are at risk of dying, as the security situation in the country worsens.

The United Nations reports that attacks by extremists and criminals in northern and central Mali are rising at an alarming rate, with many civilians being deliberately targeted.

UNICEF spokesman Christophe Boulierac says more than a million children are going hungry because of severe food shortages.

“More than 850,000 children under the age of 5 are at risk of global acute malnutrition this year, including 274,000 children facing severe malnutrition and at imminent risk of death,” he said. “This represents a 34 percent increase and is largely due to the worsening food security situation in parts of the country.”

The U.N. reports 20 percent of the country is suffering from food insecurity and 1.2 million people lack water, sanitation and basic hygiene.

UNICEF says severe acute malnutrition rates are highest in the conflict affected areas in the north, exceeding the emergency level of 15 percent in Timbuktu. It cites Mali as one of the countries with the highest newborn and maternal mortality rates in the world.

Boulierac also says newborn deaths are rising because of malnutrition and lack of basic health services.

Northern Mail has been in turmoil since 2012, when Islamist militant groups temporarily seized control of the region.

​On a visit to Mali’s capital Bamako on Tuesday, U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres paid homage to the U.N. peacekeepers who have been killed while serving what is considered the world body’s most dangerous peacekeeping mission.Twenty-one peacekeepers were killed in attacks by extremists last year.

While in Mali, Guterres appealed for funds to support the G5 Sahel force, which is composed of troops from Mali, Niger, Chad, Burkina Faso and Mauritania.The force was created to contain the West African jihadists active in Mali and nearby countries.

UNICEF calls the crisis in Mali one of the most forgotten in the world. It notes nearly 80 percent of the agency’s $37 million humanitarian appeal for this year remains unfunded.

your ad here

Suspected Militants Attack Afghan Interior Ministry in Kabul

An Afghan policemen is dead after an attack Wednesday on the headquarters of the interior ministry in the capital of Kabul.

The attack began when a car bomb detonated at the security checkpoint outside the ministry’s compound. A group of armed attackers then stormed through the gate and made their way onto the huge grounds of the compound, where they were met by security forces who repelled the attack.

Interior Ministry spokesman Najib Danish said five people were wounded in the attack. The Islamic State terror network has claimed responsibility.

The Taliban has vowed to step up attacks on Kabul as part of its annual spring offensive against the U.S.-backed government.  

your ad here