Turkish president says 'terrorist' Assad cannot be part of Syria solution

During visit to Tunisia to sign key agreements, Erdogan makes some of his harshest statements yet against Syrian president

Erdogan speaks during a press conference on 27 December in Carthage (AFP)

Wednesday 27 December 2017

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday called Syrian President Bashar al-Assad a terrorist and said it was impossible for Syrian peace efforts to continue with him.

Erdogan made his comments while in Tunis to sign key agreements along with 10 government ministers and more than 150 businessmen on the final leg of a tour that has also taken him to Chad and Sudan.

'How can we embrace the future with a Syrian president who has killed close to a million of his citizens?'

- Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan

Syria's foreign ministry quickly responded by accusing Erdogan of himself supporting terrorist groups fighting Assad in Syria's civil war.

Early on in the war, Turkey demanded the removal of Assad from power and backed rebels fighting to overthrow him. But it has toned down its demands since it started working with Assad's allies Russia and Iran for a political resolution.

"Assad is definitely a terrorist who has carried out state terrorism," Erdogan told a televised news conference with his Tunisian counterpart Beji Caid Essebsi in Tunis.

"It is impossible to continue with Assad. How can we embrace the future with a Syrian president who has killed close to a million of his citizens?" he said, in some of his harshest comments for weeks.

Border threat

Though Turkey has long demanded Assad's removal, it is now more focused in Syria on the threat from Islamist militants and Kurdish fighters it considers allies of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), who it says have formed a "terror corridor" on its southern border.

Turkey says the Syrian Kurdish YPG militia, which Ankara views as an extension of the outlawed PKK which has fought a campaign in southeast Turkey since the 80s, cannot be invited to Syrian peace talks in the Kazakh capital Astana.

The YPG is the main element in a force that Washington has assisted with training, weapons, air support and help from ground advisers in the battle against the Islamic State group. The US support has angered Ankara, a NATO ally of Washington.

Despite its differences with Russia and Iran, Turkey has worked with the two powers in the search for a political solution in Syria.

The three powers brokered a deal to set up and monitor a "de-escalation zone" to reduce fighting between rebels and Syrian government forces in Syria's rebel-held northwestern Idlib province.

READ MORE►

Saudi king, Turkey PM discuss Jerusalem status at talks

"We can't say (Assad) will handle this. It is impossible for Turkey to accept this. Northern Syria has been handed over as a terror corridor. There is no peace in Syria and this peace won't come with Assad," Erdogan said.

Syria's state news agency SANA quoted a foreign ministry source as saying Erdogan "continues to misdirect Turkish public opinion with his usual froth in an attempt to absolve himself of the crimes which he has committed against the Syrian people through advancing support to the various terrorist groups in Syria". 

Investment deals

During his visit to Tunis, Erdogan also signed agreements on defence, investment and the environment.

"We affirmed the desire of the two states to strengthen cooperation... taking into account the circumstances affecting Tunisia," Essebsi said.

The Tunisian leader went on to praise "the understanding shown by the Turkish president regarding these circumstances".

Tunisia's trade imbalance has increased considerably, reaching $649m in the first 10 months of 2017, and the country has reinstated customs duties on certain products imported from Turkey.

"Turkey supports Tunisia in difficult times," said Erdogan. "The development of Tunisia is the development of Turkey."

Journalists staged a protest when Erdogan arrived in the country on Tuesday night to denounce violations against freedom of expression in Turkey and the imprisonment of numerous media workers there.

America Is Nowhere Near a Constitutional Crisis

Even if Donald Trump fires Robert Mueller, the country's constitutional system still wouldn't be threatened.

President Donald Trump on his way to West Virginia on August 3, 2017. (Win McNamee/Getty Images) 

BY ERIC POSNER

 | DECEMBER 26, 2017, 11:53 AM

Last week, Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) warned that a “constitutional crisis” would erupt if U.S. President Donald Trump fires special counsel Robert Mueller. Trump has not said that he will fire Mueller, but he has made clear his displeasure with Mueller’s investigation; Trump’s allies have been attacking Mueller’s integrity for weeks; and Trump’s earlier firing of FBI Director James Comey indicates a willingness to take such an extreme step.

But how extreme a step is it? Would a constitutional crisis really occur, and if it did, why would it matter? The answers to those questions are not as obvious as most commentators, and some policymakers, seem to think.

 “Constitutional crisis,” like “Russian collusion,” is not a technical legal term with an agreed meaning. What’s clear is that the temptation to define a constitutional crisis as any case in which the meaning of the Constitution is disputed deserves to be avoided. Virtually every clause of the Constitution is disputed, but crises are rare because Americans have shown they accept that ultimately the meaning will be settled by major government institutions.

The one undisputed constitutional crisis in American history was the Civil War. When the national government refused to recognize secession by the Southern states, an impasse arose because there was no way that the disagreement could be resolved through constitutional means. Federal property, like Fort Sumter, was claimed by the states and the national government alike. Because the South rejected the national government, no national institution — not the federal courts, not Congress — could resolve the dispute in a constitutional way. War resulted, with more than 600,000 deaths.

There have been a number of lesser crises that had a constitutional dimension but were not really constitutional crises because they were resolved through constitutional methods. The presidential elections of 1800 (eventually won by Thomas Jefferson), 1824 (won by John Quincy Adams), 1876 (won by Rutherford B. Hayes), and 2000 (won by George W. Bush) resulted in impasses because of legal or constitutional ambiguities about voting or voting procedures, but they were all resolved — by negotiation in the first three cases and by the Supreme Court in the fourth.

Two impeachments and one near-impeachment also have been cited as constitutional crises. Andrew Johnson was impeached — though acquitted by the Senate — after he tried to fire his secretary of war, Edwin Stanton, in violation of a statute passed by Congress to keep Stanton in office. Richard Nixon resigned before he was impeached, but he would very likely have been impeached for Watergate and related shenanigans. Bill Clinton was impeached for perjury after carrying on an affair with a White House intern. In all three cases, a political crisis surely existed. Normal politics stopped while the impeachments were resolved. But in all cases, the crisis was resolved through constitutional means, and most government institutions, from the Army to the Postal Service, functioned normally.

Another frequently cited example is Franklin D. Roosevelt’s court-packing plan. During the Great Depression, a right-wing Supreme Court thwarted some of Roosevelt’s efforts to pull the government into the modern era so that it could address the economic calamity. After his landslide election in 1936, Roosevelt sought to increase the size of the Supreme Court so that he could appoint like-minded jurists to outvote hard-liners. While Roosevelt’s efforts outraged people, Congress refused to go along with them, and Roosevelt backed down. Later, the court reversed course and was eventually dominated by Roosevelt’s own appointments. Roosevelt’s presidency included other moments of high constitutional drama, but a crisis never broke, because Roosevelt was able to accomplish what he needed to do while staying within the system.

If Trump fires Mueller, another Civil War is not going to break out.

 The closest historical analogy is Nixon’s firing of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox in the Saturday Night Massacre of 1973. Nixon fired Cox to block the Watergate investigation.

At the time, many people declared that the firing sparked a constitutional crisis. And it surely felt that way — because no one knew how far Nixon would go to protect himself from further revelations and an eventual impeachment. But Nixon did not go very far. Cox was replaced by another special prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, who took up where Cox left off. Nixon ultimately obeyed an order from the Supreme Court to turn over the tapes. He did not pardon his subordinates, who went to jail. When informed that he would be impeached, he resigned rather than barricading himself in his office. The essential characteristic of a constitutional crisis — a disagreement about constitutional obligations that could not be resolved through constitutional means — was absent.

Whether (and how) a constitutional crisis might arise if Trump fires Mueller is rather mysterious. Trump may have the power to fire Mueller directly; even if he does not, he can ensure that someone else in the Justice Department fires Mueller, simply by firing anyone who refuses until someone does, as Nixon did. Mueller could try to contest the firing in court. If a judge ordered Mueller’s reinstatement, and Trump obeyed the judge, a crisis would be averted. If the judge ruled against Mueller, a crisis would also be averted. A crisis would occur only if a judge ordered reinstatement and Trump disobeyed. While a possibility, this seems unlikely.

Trump could also pardon everyone involved in the investigation. If he did, Mueller would have nothing to do. Again, there is no crisis.

Why, then, does Warner say that a constitutional crisis would occur? He may think that Congress will impeach Trump if he fires Mueller or issues blanket pardons. This does not seem likely for the time being, but even if impeachment hearings begin, we are still in the realm of the constitutional order. Congress might also try to thwart Trump in other ways — by refusing to confirm his appointments or pass legislation that he wants. But this seems less like a crisis than business as usual.

What Warner is actually saying is that serious political consequences will follow if Trump fires Mueller. That may well be the case. Trump’s already dismal poll numbers might fall further; congressional Republicans might pay a price at the next election. Or maybe not. But these consequences are political, not constitutional. If Trump and Republicans lose elections because Trump fires Mueller, then the constitutional system is working as it should.

If there is a constitutional dimension to a possible firing, it arises from a characteristic that Trump shares with Nixon: a demonstrated ruthlessness along with contempt for constitutional and political norms. This certainly may make us wonder what would happen if Congress or the courts really tried to put a halt to Trump’s obstruction of the Mueller investigation. Trump is more likely to disobey a judicial order, or to withhold documents sought by Congress, or even to barricade himself in his office after being impeached and convicted, than Barack Obama or George Bush ever would have been. And if any of those things happened, then a constitutional crisis would exist. Once the president flagrantly violates constitutional norms, then it is no longer clear which part of the government citizens are supposed to obey. While civil war remains as remote as ever, political unrest including possible violence and government paralysis seem like possible outcomes.

But all of this still seems pretty unlikely, and remote from where we are today. A lot would have to happen after Mueller is fired for a constitutional crisis to occur — not least, we would probably first need a Democratic victory in the 2018 congressional elections, without which impeachment hearings are unimaginable.

The element of truth in Warner’s admonition is that there is now a widespread feeling, especially on the left, that the constitutional system we have inherited has stopped operating properly. It allowed Trump to be elected despite his repudiation of many treasured constitutional values, and, even before Trump, the constitution seemed to lead too frequently to gridlock, interfering with governance rather than facilitating it.

Unfortunately, there is little we can do about this problem. The Constitution builds in its own guarantee of obsolescence by requiring voting thresholds for amendment that can rarely be met in a large, heterogeneous, and increasingly polarized society. Even as recognition of the infirmity of our constitutional system spreads, the people can do nothing about it. If a constitutional crisis exists, this is it, and it will be with us long after Trump leaves office.

Republicans’ failure on health care is even greater than they realize

 President Trump said on Dec. 20 that by passing the GOP tax bill, Republicans “essentially repealed Obamacare because we got rid of the individual mandate.” (Reuters)

By Paul Waldman December 27 at 8:47 AM

President Trump is under the impression that he just repealed the Affordable Care Act, an illusion for which he will receive much well-deserved mockery. The truth, however, is that he and the Republican Congress have made a dramatic impact on the future of American health care, not to mention health-care politics. With every step they take, the arrival of a universal government health insurance system gets closer.

Let’s begin here:

Donald J. Trump

✔ @realDonaldTrump

Based on the fact that the very unfair and unpopular Individual Mandate has been terminated as part of our Tax Cut Bill, which essentially Repeals (over time) ObamaCare, the Democrats & Republicans will eventually come together and develop a great new HealthCare plan!

6:58 AM - Dec 26, 2017

• 22,757 22,757 Replies
• 18,638 18,638 Retweets
• 97,643

Needless to say, repealing the individual mandate does not repeal the ACA; most of the law’s provisions are still in place. Does the president actually believe that Democrats and Republicans are going to come together to pass a health-care plan? Who knows. Perhaps he has a firm grasp on the politics of the moment but is trying to give Americans hope for a future of bipartisan cooperation. Or perhaps he is as much a fool as he appears. It also might be that he knows full well that he hasn’t repealed the ACA, but finds political utility in proclaiming victory when his actual repeal effort was such a spectacular failure.

But as Robert Pear of the New York Times notes, the elimination of the individual mandate has the effect of making the ACA more of a government insurance plan than it was under Barack Obama:

In short, President Barack Obama’s signature domestic achievement is becoming more like what conservatives despise — government-run health care — thanks in part to Republican efforts that are raising premiums for people without government assistance and allowing them to skirt coverage.

By ending the tax penalty for people who do not have coverage, beginning in 2019, Republicans may hasten the flight of customers who now pay the full cost of their insurance. Among those left behind under the umbrella of the Affordable Care Act would be people of modest means who qualify for Medicaid or receive sizable subsidies for private insurance.

On the whole, that’s a bad thing, since premiums will rise even more quickly and more people will be uninsured. But those with low incomes will be getting free or low-cost insurance courtesy of the government, which everyone else will continue to notice. We wind up with a system made up of 1) people who get coverage from the government and are happy with it; 2) people who get coverage from their employers, and like the coverage but don’t like the cost; 3) a small number of people who pay the full cost of private coverage, which is increasingly unaffordable; and 4) people who are uninsured and wish they could get on a government plan such as Medicare or Medicaid.

(Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

You can imagine an alternate universe in which instead of going hellbent for repeal, Republicans made a decision to embrace some modest fixes to the ACA and expand opportunities for private coverage. Had they done that, the pressure to move to a universal government program might have been sapped. Instead, Republicans failed to kill the ACA but did just enough damage to it to give Democrats the opening to go much further.

And go further they will. Every Democratic presidential candidate in 2020 will present some kind of universal plan, which many of them will call “single payer” (even if none of them are likely to actually be true single payer). The Democratic base has moved to the left on this issue, no longer willing to accept technocratic tweaks to the existing system. And thanks to Republicans, the broader public seems more ready to hear proposals for universal coverage built on government insurance. The more those ideas get debated by mainstream Democratic figures (i.e. not just Sen. Bernie Sanders), the more it seems like a reasonable policy alternative.

Think for a moment about what that 2020 primary debate is going to be like. It will probably resemble 2008, in which the major candidates had very similar plans but disagreed on the details. By the time their debate was over, a rough consensus had been reached, and Obama and the party had a mandate to pursue that version of health-care reform once they took office (or if you like, had no choice but to do it). In 2020, the candidates will be arguing not about whether we need universal coverage but about exactly how to get it. There may be some advocating “Medicare for all,” while others will propose hybrid systems that keep private insurance in place but still greatly expand government’s role.

Trump and other Republicans will shout that the Democrats are proposing socialist schemes that will give bureaucrats control of your health care, but whatever shred of credibility they had with the public on this issue has withered away. And they won’t be offering any substantive alternative, because as the past year has proved, they’re constitutionally incapable of thinking seriously about health care.

That was their political problem as well. Not only couldn’t they come up with a reasonable plan to replace the ACA; they couldn’t even come up with a political plan to repeal it. They assumed that they could toss around some empty rhetoric about “patient-centered” insurance and the magic of the free market, and no one would notice that they wanted to snatch coverage from tens of millions of Americans. It was doomed from the start.

And now Republicans have created the worst of all possible worlds, at least from where they sit. They’ve only made Americans more insecure about their health care, they’ve pushed the Democratic Party to the left, and they’ve brought the arrival of a universal system based on government insurance closer than it ever was. Who says the Trump presidency hasn’t produced important achievements?

India to borrow more than budgeted, may breach fiscal deficit target

An India Rupee note is seen in this illustration photo June 1, 2017. REUTERS/Thomas White/Illustration/Files

Manoj Kumar-DECEMBER 27, 2017 

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India will borrow an additional 500 billion rupees ($7.79 billion) this fiscal year ending March, the government said on Wednesday, a higher-than-expected borrowing that could breach the fiscal deficit target for the first time in four years.

Analysts said the fiscal deficit could now rise to 3.5 percent of gross domestic product, against Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s stated target of 3.2 percent.

SPONSORED

India is having to raise the extra funds as the federal government has already spent over $200 billion in the eight months to October, about 60 percent of the budgeted spending, while revenue collections were just 48 percent of the target.

“The government will raise additional market borrowings of 500 billion rupees only in fiscal year 2017/18 through dated government securities,” the finance ministry said in a statement.

The government’s tax collections plunged after the launch of the national Goods and Services Tax in July that complicated tax filings for business and hit the economy.

Aditi Nayar, an economist at ICRA, the Indian arm of rating agency Moody‘s, said the additional borrowing could lead to “modest fiscal slippage” as the government was likely to miss its revenue receipts target.

“Given the clouded outlook for revenues, sticking to the fiscal consolidation roadmap would entail compression of expenditure, which would dampen the expected economic growth recovery in March quarter,” Nayar said.

Jaitley had earlier planned to raise 5.8 trillion rupees ($90.45 billion) in 2017/18 via bond sales to bridge the fiscal deficit.

Reuters reported earlier that the government was considering cutting capital expenditure by at least 300 billion rupees in the March quarter to partially contain a widening fiscal deficit.
($1 = 64.1250 rupees)

Syria: Evacuation of critically ill from Eastern Ghouta

Wednesday 27 December 2017

Aid agencies are evacuating critically ill Syrians from Eastern Ghouta, an area home to around 400,000 people that has been under government siege since 2013. 

Children comprise around half of the population in one of the last rebel strongholds in the country, where medical supplies and food have been in short supply.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Syrian Red Crescent and the Syrian American Medical Society (SAMS) are among the organisations involved in the evacuation.

Robert Mardini, ICRC regional director, wrote on Twitter that he was "encouraged to see the beginning of a lifesaving operation".

 ICRC Syria

✔@ICRC_sy

Tonight the @SYRedCrescent with @ICRC team started the evacuation of critical medical cases from #EasternGhouta to #Damascus. #Syria

6:02 PM - Dec 26, 2017

•  1414 Replies
•  142142 Retweets
•  140140 likes

Twitter Ads info and privacy

ICRC posted photos on the social media site showing ambulances and aid workers on site.
SAMS said evacuations had begun for at least 29 people in critical condition. Four were taken to medical care in Damascus on Wednesday. The remainder would be escorted out over the coming days.

"The list includes 18 children and four women suffering from heart disease, cancer, kidney failure, and blood diseases, in addition to cases requiring advanced surgery that are not available in the besieged area," SAMS said, adding that a total of 641 people needed urgent medical care.

Because of the ongoing siege and the shortage of medical supplies, 17 patients at least have died over the past few months.

SYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETY

Medicine is being rationed, and people are dying of complications due to the limited availability of simple procedures like dialysis.

"The medical situation in East Ghouta has reached a breaking point. Because of the ongoing siege and the shortage of medical supplies, 17 patients at least have died over the past few months because they were not able to access medical care," SAMS said.

Eastern Ghouta was supposed to be one of the "de-escalation zones" brokered a year ago by Iran, Russia and Turkey, but people there do not trust the agreements, and their greatest fear now is not having a place in their country.

Surviving on corn, cabbage and cauliflower

Al Jazeera's Zeina Khodr, reporting from Beirut in neighbouring Lebanon, said the evacuation of the 29 critically ill is a "welcome move, but is not enough".

"It's just a small fraction of those who need urgent medical care," she said.

Last month, the UN called for at least 500 people in need of urgent medical attention to be allowed to leave the besieged region.

A man is seen in an ambulance during medical evacuation from the besieged town of Douma, eastern Ghouta [Reuters]

UN reports and Al Jazeera interviews in Eastern Ghouta confirmed reports that residents are drinking large amounts of water to suppress hunger, with food intake reduced to one meal a day.

The Assad government has allowed in some aid, but the UN says its current level of assistance covers just about 10 percent of the besieged population of Eastern Ghouta.

This year, the Syrian government has approved only 26 percent of UN requests to deliver assistance to besieged areas. The ministry of foreign affairs has the authority to remove any items from aid shipments.

People in Eastern Ghouta are eating boiled corn, cabbage and cauliflower because of a lack of cooking fuel, cooking oil and other essentials.

Families besieged in Syria's Eastern Ghouta struggle to survive

Syria's conflict, which started with peaceful anti-government demonstrations in March 2011, escalated into a full-blown war that has claimed more than 300,000 lives and driven about half of the country's prewar population of 22 million from their homes.

Forces loyal to Assad and those opposed to his rule continue to battle each other, as well as fighters from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) group.

Parents demand Aung San Suu Kyi is cut from children’s book of role models

The Myanmar leader should be cut from Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls, critics insist

Aung San Suu Kyi’s lack of response to the plight of the Rohingya Muslims has led to calls for her to be edited from a book of inspirational women. Photograph: Lynn Bo Bo/EPA

Aung San Suu Kyi ‘avoided’ discussion of Rohingya rape during UN meeting

Jane Merrick-Sun 24 Dec ‘17 00.05 GMT

It is one of the most popular children’s books of 2017, a collection of stories about female role models from Amelia Earhart and Marie Curie to Hillary Clinton and Serena Williams, inspiring girls to aim high and challenge the status quo.

But Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls, likely to be in many Christmas stockings, has run into controversy because of one of the 100 women included in its pages. When the book was written last year, Aung San Suu Kyi was deemed a worthy subject: winner of the Nobel peace prize and epitome of courage in the face of oppression. But her fall from grace over her response to violence against Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims, described by the UN as possible genocide, has triggered calls for her to be taken out of future editions. In response, the authors, Elena Favilli and Francesca Cavallo, are considering removing her from reprints.

The book, aimed at children aged six and over, devotes two pages to each of its role models, including commissioned illustrations by female artists. It quotes Aung San Suu Kyi as saying: “Since we live in this world, we have to do our best for this world.” It charts her story from her protests against the junta through 21 years of house arrest to her release and leadership: “She won the Nobel peace prize, and inspired millions of people in her own country and across the world, all without leaving her house.”

On the book’s Facebook page, Lenka Uzakova wrote: “As much as 99 per cent of book is inspiring, I found it absolutely disgusting that you have included someone suspected of genocide in the book. Aung San Suu Kyi has no place between those women. Someone who does nothing and perhaps is directly involved in massacres, rapes, burning of kids alive … I am speechless she is in the book.”

Another parent, Gerri Peev, said: “I bought this book for my three-year-old daughter as an antidote to the tyranny of ‘pink princess publishing’. It is filled with inspiring female role models who don’t rely on a prince to sort their lives out. I was dismayed to see this page effectively canonising Aung San Suu Kyi. I hope the publishers issue another edition, updating her fall from grace over the Rohingya massacre.”

Labour MP and shadow justice minister Yasmin Qureshi, who has raised concerns in parliament about the Rohingya crisis, said: “I often wonder how it can be possible to go from being one of the most admired and respected civil rights champions, a symbol of courage, patience and principle, to someone who shows such lack of compassion.

“I have no doubt that history will remember her as the leader who watched on while mass killing, systematic rape and ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands who were forced to live in squalid refugee camps. I’d encourage the authors to consider that there is an entire generation of young Rohingya children who are stateless and hopeless, suffering a miserable existence. Aung San Suu Kyi’s refusal to condemn makes her complicit.”

In a statement the authors said: “We’re monitoring the situation closely and we don’t exclude the idea of removing her from future reprints.”

Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls was first published in the US and is described as the “most-funded original book in the history of crowdfunding”. It is published in the UK by Particular Books, part of Penguin Random House. Last week Blackwell’s named it as its book of the year, beating among others Arundhati Roy’s The Ministry of Utmost Happiness.

Aung San Suu Kyi, who has won more than 120 international honours, including the Nobel prize, was last week stripped of her Freedom of the City of Dublin award and earlier lost her Freedom of Oxford accolade. The Dublin decision came after musician and activist Bob Geldof returned his own Freedom of the City in protest. St Hugh’s College Oxford, where Aung San Suu Kyi studied, has taken down her portrait.

It is estimated that 650,000 Rohingya Muslims have been forced to flee to neighbouring Bangladesh since the crackdown by Myanmar’s security forces began. Last week the aid charity Médecins Sans Frontières reported that at least 6,700 Rohingya, including hundreds of children, were killed in the first month of the crackdown.

Criticism of Aung San Suu Kyi’s response intensified last week when it emerged that two Reuters journalists have been detained and face 14 years in jail for reporting on the crisis.

Burma: Police to drop pending charges against Malaysian, Singaporean journalists

 27th December 2017

Mok arrives for her court hearing in Zabuthiri court at Naypyitaw, Myanmar, on Nov 16, 2017. Source: Reuters

THE two journalists working for Turkey’s state broadcaster, their interpreter and driver, who were jailed in Burma (Myanmar) in November for violating an aircraft law by filming with a drone, will have their additional charges dropped, police said.

Cameraman Lau Hon Meng from Singapore, reporter Mok Choy Lin from Malaysia, Aung Naing Soe – a local journalist who was interpreting for the pair – and driver Hla Tin were detained by police on Oct. 27 near Burma’s parliament building in the capital Naypyitaw.

They are currently each serving a two-month prison sentence under a colonial-era aircraft law, but all four still face further charges for importing the drone. The two foreign nationals have also been charged with an immigration offence.

SEE ALSO: Burma arrests two Reuters journalists covering Rohingya crisis 

Police Lieutenant Tun Tun Win and an immigration officer – the complainants – appeared in a Naypyitaw courtroom on Tuesday and asked that the court drop the charges.

Tun Tun Win told Reuters higher police officials had ordered the case dropped because the four did not mean to endanger national security by flying the drone.

Additionally, he said, the decision was intended “to forward the relationship between countries”, referring to the two journalists’ home countries, Singapore and Malaysia.

A law officer – the government’s prosecutor in the case – was expected to tell the court the charges were formally dropped in another hearing set for Thursday, defence lawyer Khin Maung Zaw told Reuters.

In these conditions, Aung Naing Soe still somehow smiling, thanking people for food, chocolate, books. He and Malaysian journalist Mok Choy Lin, Singaporean Lau Hon Meng and driver Hla Tin arrested in late October accused of flying drone in Myanmar capital Naypyitaw. pic.twitter.com/VKmSaDH1ax

— Joe Freeman (@joefree215) 16 November 2017

Joe Freeman‏ @joefree215

In these conditions, Aung Naing Soe still somehow smiling, thanking people for food, chocolate, books. He and Malaysian journalist Mok Choy Lin, Singaporean Lau Hon Meng and driver Hla Tin arrested in late October accused of flying drone in Myanmar capital Naypyitaw.

“The higher authorities already instructed to terminate with good intention, but the procedure can only be accomplished on that day (Thursday),” the lawyer said.

“The plaintiff, police lieutenant Tun Tun Win, appeared in court today and withdrew the charges against the four under the import-export act.”

According to Radio Free Asia, the lawyer added: “He said in court that the Detkhina district police station believes the four did not intend to endanger national security by flying the drone, so high-level police officials ordered that the case against them be dropped.”

SEE ALSO: China offers 3-step solution to end Burma’s Rohingya crisis 

The four are set to complete their sentences under the aircraft act on Jan 9, but may be released earlier for good behaviour, he added.

The case had raised concerns over freedom of the press in Burma, where a civilian government led by Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi took power last year but the military retains control of security matters, including the police.

Two Reuters journalists were arrested on Dec 12 after they went to meet police officers for dinner on the outskirts of Burma’s largest city Yangon. Wa Lone, 31, and Kyaw Soe Oo, 27, have now been in detention for two weeks with no access to visitors or to a lawyer.

They had covered the crisis in western Rakhine state that has driven 655,000 stateless Rohingya Muslims across the border to Bangladesh since August.

Additional reporting by Reuters

'My restless legs were like bees biting under my skin'

Restless legs at night can be very disruptive and unpleasant

By Sally Abrahams-25 December 2017

For years, Mary Rose struggled to get off to sleep or to stay asleep, because she felt like she was being attacked by insects.

"Imagine having a swarm of bees buzzing inside the skin of your legs, biting you," she says, describing the sensation that overwhelmed her.

"It's really very, very painful."

Now in her 80s, the art historian has a condition called restless legs syndrome (RLS), which tortures her at night.

"It makes you want to scratch your legs and get up and walk about - it was just impossible to lie down and sleep because one's legs were twitching in this uncontrollable way," she explained.

The symptoms were so severe, she didn't want to go to bed at night.

'No sleep at all'

Mary Rose can't remember when the problem began, but the condition went undiagnosed for years.

"People would say 'oh you've got cramp; you must take quinine or sleep with corks in your bed'. And I did all these things."

Of course, they had no effect. She also tried rubbing ointment into her legs to ease the stinging sensation, but that never lasted long enough to let her sleep through the night. Visits to her GP also failed to bring relief.

Eventually, she was referred to the sleep clinic at Guy's and St Thomas's hospitals in London, where she's now being treated by neurologist Dr Guy Leschziner.

"Restless legs syndrome is a common neurological disorder that causes an irresistible urge to move, particularly at night, and is often linked with unpleasant sensations in the legs," Dr Leschziner explains.

"It affects up to one in 20 adults," he continues, "and can cause severe sleep deprivation."

At its worst, Mary Rose was surviving on only a few hours' sleep at night, sometimes even less.

"I have had complete nights without any sleep at all," she says.

"If I was very tired, I'd sleep, then wake for an hour or two and sometimes get up."

• My husband attacked me in my sleep?
• Would you sleep in your favourite shop?
• Do power naps like Ronnie O'Sullivan's do any good?
• I went driving and motorbiking in my sleep
• My boyfriend raped his ex 'in his sleep'

RLS is often hereditary but can be caused by other conditions including iron deficiency and pregnancy - and it's usually easy to treat.

For most people, simply avoiding caffeine, alcohol and certain medications can be enough, and gentle exercise - stretching or leg massage can help - but for some, drugs are necessary.

Mary Rose's condition is so severe that medication is the only option, so Dr Leschziner has been using a combination of drugs to try to control the symptoms. And it seems to be working, provided she keeps up the dosage.

"I'm free of restless legs," she exclaims with delight. "And sometimes I get an attack which is just so awful that I find I'm walking about all night. But it's my fault because I've forgotten to take the pills".

Distraction strategies

Even though the treatment is working, Mary Rose is still unable to get a full night's sleep.

"I'm sorry to say, the fact that my legs are more under control has not actually affected my sleep patterns.

"Three o'clock in the morning seems to be a time when I wake anyway."

Dr Leschziner says that's not unusual.

"What you describe is actually very common in people who've had their sleep disrupted for many years, in that sleep is a learnt habit."

The dread of the night ahead and the constant disruption of sleep can persist for many years.

Listening to music or audio books can help the brain to relax and bring on sleep

He said sometimes people needed sleep retraining - relearning that bed equals sleep rather than the torture of a difficult night ahead.

Armed with advice, Mary Rose has developed her own strategies to deal with the insomnia resulting from years of sleep disruption, caused by restless legs syndrome.

"By listening to my audio books or to music, my brain is beginning to stop running and so I do then feel ready for sleep.

"But that doesn't necessarily mean I sleep for more than a couple of hours," she said.

"What you're doing essentially is you're distracting yourself," explains Dr Leschziner.

"By thinking about the story or music you're listening to, you're no longer thinking about the process of going to sleep and therefore your brain switches into passive mode and then sleep happens upon you as if by accident."

Find out more

• Listen to the third episode of Mysteries of Sleep - on sleep deprivation - on BBC Radio 4 on Monday 25 December at 21:00
• Or catch up later on the BBC iPlayer
• Search for #mysteriesofsleep on social media