Trump, Tillerson Tap Russia Hawk Volker for Ukraine Envoy

The former NATO ambassador inherits a simmering conflict in Ukraine and a showdown with Russia.

• BY ROBBIE GRAMER-JULY 7, 2017

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson tapped former U.S. ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker to be special representative to Ukraine, as the Trump administration grapples with how to end conflict in the war-shattered country more than three years after Russia’s invasion.

With Volker’s appointment, announced hours before President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin met face-to-face for the first time, the Trump administration now has a Russia hawk with extensive diplomatic experience charged with running the day-to-day slog ending a frozen conflict.

“The fact that they appointed [Volker] is a sign this administration is serious about Ukraine,” John Herbst, former U.S. ambassador to Kiev, told Foreign Policy.

That seriousness could push all sides into honoring the Minsk accords, an internationally-monitored ceasefire plan hastily brokered in 2015 as the conflict flared up.

“Kurt’s wealth of experience makes him uniquely qualified to move this conflict in the direction of peace,” said Secretary Tillerson in a statement released Friday. “The United States remains fully committed to the objectives of the Minsk agreements, and I have complete confidence in Kurt to continue our efforts to achieve peace in Ukraine.”

But his job could be made more difficult by Trump and Tillerson, who six months into office haven’t yet outlined a clear Ukraine strategy.

“It’s still a mystery as to where Trump and Tillerson are when it comes to Russia, when it comes to Ukraine,” said Jim Townsend, a former senior Pentagon official for Europe and NATO policy. “What will be [Volker’s] marching orders? What is he supposed to do?”

Volker has close ties to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a hawkish Senate heavyweight who hasn’t backed down from clashing with Trump on foreign policy and defense issues. Volker is currently the executive director of Arizona State University’s McCain Institute for International Leadership, named after the senator and his family.

Volker’s appointment could also signal growing U.S. cooperation with Germany after months of chilliness. Several diplomatic sources tell Foreign Policy German Chancellor Angela Merkel asked Trump to appoint a special envoy for Ukraine during her visit to Washington in March. While Berlin and Washington butt heads over trade and climate change, it at least appears Merkel’s wish was granted on Ukraine.

Germany and France have unwillingly replaced the United States in the driver’s seat when it comes to ending the Ukraine conflict. Merkel and her French counterpart championed the Minsk accords in 2015 with Ukraine, Russia, and Russian-backed Ukrainian forces to bring about a ceasefire.

While the deal is a stepping-stone for long-term peace and the basis of EU sanctions on Russia, it’s hanging by a thread. Herbst said there are 70 to 80 ceasefire violations a day on the frontlines of the conflict, mostly by the Russian-backed separatists. The conflict in Ukraine has killed 10,000 and displaced some 2 million since it first began in 2014.

Tillerson’s new Ukraine envoy could breathe some much-needed life back into the drive for peace, whose momentum has slowed in recent years.

“Unfortunately, there is some ‘Ukraine fatigue’ in Europe right now. It has become accepted as a background condition in European security,” said Tobias Bunde, a European security expert at the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin. “Berlin would be quite happy if the United States would bring its power back to the negotiating table,” he said.

Volker will be the first U.S. special representative to Ukraine who holds that position exclusively.
Under former President Barack Obama, then-Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland held the special envoy role. Volker is expected to deal primarily with Vladislav Surkov, one of Putin’s closest advisors, in his new role.

And he could be thrown into the deep end right from the beginning. He’s expected to travel with Tillerson to Kiev on July 9 as the secretary of state meets with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and members of Ukrainian civil society.

What’s more, his appointment comes after Tillerson repeatedly insisted he wouldn’t appoint any new special envoys until finishing a review of the State Department’s organization. Current and former State Department officials tell Foreign Policy there’s been a proliferation of special envoys in recent years that duplicate the department’s efforts and suck power from the regional bureaus.

While Volker navigates the maze of peacemaking on Ukraine, he’ll also have to walk the tight-rope of Russia politics in Washington as the Trump administration struggles to shrug off its scandals and multiple investigations into its ties to the Kremlin.

In that sense, Volker will be a rare breed in the Trump administration, understanding how power works in the capital.

“There aren’t many [Trump] appointees that know how to ‘play the piano’ of Washington. But Kurt knows how to play the piano,” Townsend told FP.

Volker served as U.S. ambassador to NATO from 2008 to 2009 under both former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Prior to that, he served in a variety of roles at the State Department and National Security Council.

He’s come out as a hawk against Russia and advocated in the past for sending Kiev lethal aid, something the last administration shied away from. That could soothe Washington’s European allies, who worried in the early days of the Trump presidency he could sell European security guarantees and support for Kiev down the river for some form of grand bargain with Putin.

“[Volker’s] appointment is reassuring,” said Bunde. “He won’t be the guy who hands over eastern Ukraine to Russia.”

Photo credit: AUDE VANLATHEM/AFP/Getty Images

G20 Hamburg Summit

There is no denying that Merkel made capital of the G20 Hamburg Summit. We saw Tri-lateral diplomacy in action between Germany, France and China.

by Victor Cherubim- Jul 8, 2017

( July 8, 2017, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) With so many world leaders attending the twelfth G20 Summit over the weekend of 7 & 8 July 2017, we can easily say, “imagination is on offer, if not on sale,” at the Messehallen Convention Centre, for diplomatic deals to be initiated, if not done, among leading nations and agree on a common framework of future action.

Hamburg is Europe’s third largest port with a cosmopolitan atmosphere, noted for its brand new architectural marvel, the Elb philharmonie Concert Hall, where leaders will gather for dinner on the first day of the summit.

They say everything at such gatherings is settled at least, in principle, or “kicked into grass,” on the first day of the Summit. Consensual agreement is the order of the day at these gatherings to showcase a united front. Around 4800 journalists from around the world are covering the event, with the summit highly choreographed with little left for chance. Any policy differences, such as Climate Change, free trade and migration will undoubtedly be papered over from behind closed doors, ahead of final communiqué. Serious disagreements exist among world leaders among major issues. Non contentious issues such as, action on future health epidemics, global taxation perhaps, money launderings may feature.

Chancellor Angela Merkel chose this city where she was born, a hub with the most potent symbol of left wing dissent, perhaps, to send a message to the world that among unrest, among disorder, there is a sense of “enforced” overwhelming order. She is known for her ability to forge sensitive compromise among leaders with disparate views. It does take a lot of courage to keep Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Recep Erdogan and besides Malcolm Turnbull of Australia and Joko Widodo of Indonesia together and yet be separate, that they don’t tear each other apart. This embodies the world of today?

The so called, “diplomatic process”?

The cohesiveness of the G20 process is witnessed by the formal and informal sessions on the sidelines of the Summit. This is a way to keep everyone at the G20 “strategically amused.” Each of the above leaders has come with their own agenda. It is indeed a job to keep them engaged and in some way to downsize their differences. This is undoubtedly a tall order, no mean task.

President Trump is having a break, a release from the so called “media engagement” back in the States. He wants to build bridges to Russia, for his own reasons. He wishes it seems, to prepare for the coming (no one knows when) confrontation with China on its actions or inactions with North Korea and the South China Sea?

Despite the well rehearsed stance of the “America First” policy and its withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Agreement, the German Presidency of this Summit wants to make the most of the “unreeled” public policy for environmental sustainability, gender equality and social inclusiveness, without upsetting America.

The German agenda is quite naturally to support a European “destiny” independent of the US or even fear of Russia. There is nothing new about Franco-German cooperation, but the degree of cooperation has “waxed and waned” over years. With President Emmanuel Macron, whose vision is none other than that of Gen.de Gaulle’s vision of France; there is common cause between President Macron and Chancellor Merkel.

The likely beneficiary of the new Franco-German European outlook will undoubtedly be China. We saw the facial expression, the physical gesture and the way Angela Merkel accompanied President Xi Jinping after the welcoming ceremony for leaders at the Summit. The body language spoke volumes for China/Europe friendship.

How did Angela Merkel square the circle of friendship?

There is no denying that Merkel made capital of the G20 Hamburg Summit. We saw Tri-lateral diplomacy in action between Germany, France and China.

Many will want to know how Merkel cleverly brought back Russia into the fold of World Leaders. Since President Obama had isolated Russia on many fronts, including closing down Russian embassy offices in and around New York
before he left office, We also noted President Putin was isolated not only from the G8 but also isolated from Europe because of the continuing sanctions related to actions in Ukraine.

Angela Merkel worked out a diplomatic strategy to arrange a one to one private meeting between President Trump and President Putin to coincide with the timing of the meeting on Climate Change among all other committed Powers. Was it a concession or a diplomatic move? Who knows? This suited everybody.

President Putin hoped to get some leverage from this one to one meeting, with President Trump to remove this exclusion. President Trump, in return, wanted President Putin to put in a word to deescalate the North Korean ICBM crisis with China? It was common knowledge that President Putin and Russian diplomats knew that in the current “US climate,” any great breakthroughs were or are undoubtedly difficult if not impossible. But everything is possible in diplomacy, with the first, one to one, face to face meeting, between Russia and U.S.

A meeting on the sidelines with Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for a trade deal with Japan after BRExit, was what Merkel enabled from the Summit for Theresa May.

Invited Guests

More than 20 Heads of State or Governments as well as international organisations attended the G20 Hamburg Summit, with Guest invitees, the Presidents and Prime Ministers of Guinea, Senegal, Kenya, Netherlands, Spain, Norway, Vietnam and Singapore. Each of these guests was chosen by the German Presidency, for their own reasons.

Uninvited Guests

Every summit is blighted by protests of all sorts, with thousands of demonstrations, marching pageants, anarchists and left wing radicals with banners proclaiming “Capitalism will end anyway, you decide when?” the Green Peace activists project the slogan “No Trump, Yes Paris.” and the anarchists. wanted to destroy everything in front of them. Over 20,000 police with dogs, horses, helicopters, water cannon, pepper sprays and 4.8 miles of steel barriers had to be deployed to prevent anarchy by the 80,000 demonstrators.

The most laughable event that took place was the First Lady of United States, Melania Trump, thanks to these demonstrations, was holed in her luxury hotel room unable to get out and participate in some the events for dignitaries.

Iraqi Kurds admit independence could take years after vote

KRG politicians concede years of international negotiations could follow a September referendum approving break from Baghdad

Masoud Barzani, the president of the Kurdistan Regional Government (AFP)

Wladimir van Wilgenburg-Saturday 8 July 2017

ERBIL – True independence for Iraqi Kurdistan could take years to realise after a referendum later this year due to complex negotiations with foreign states hostile to the breakaway from Baghdad, senior officials have conceded to Middle East Eye.

"A day, a month, two years, three years, nobody knows, this depends on the negotiations [with Baghdad and other countries]," said Hoshyar Siwaily, the head of foreign relations for the ruling Kurdistan Democratic Party.

"It depends on the negotiations, if it progresses, and if we can agree with Baghdad on the first day, independence could come in one day. If we have difficulties with Baghdad, it might take some time.

A day, a month, two years, three years, nobody knows, this depends on the negotiations

- Hoshyar Siwaily, head of KDP foreign relations

"When the first stage is complete [the referendum], we will try through peaceful means to persuade Baghdad, the regional countries and international community.

"After that we will start the fourth stage: the actual declaration of independence. During the fifth stage, we will persuade the international community and the UN to recognise this," Siwaily said.

Hemin Hawrami, a senior adviser to Iraqi Kurdistan's president, Masoud Barzani, meanwhile said that he understood the widespread opposition from neighbours and western states for the 25 September vote on independence.

"There is no recognition before the declaration, and all the reactions were expected," he said.

"We don't look it as negative in general. They are not against democratic principles, but [the] timing, yes.

"Maybe they are not happy with the timing, but our argument is that: if not now, tell us when?" he said.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey's president, has said the KRG would 'regret' their push for independence (AFP)

Widespread opposition

Turkey and Iran, two regional powers with sizeable Kurdish populations, have strongly opposed the Iraqi Kurdish decision. Turkey's president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, on Wednesday said the vote was the "wrong way to go" and that the Kurdish government would "regret it".

Iraq's central government has said: "No party can, on its own, decide the fate of Iraq in isolation."

States including Germany, the UK and the US have opposed its timing and the Kurdish leaderships failure to discuss the vote with Baghdad.

"We understand the aspirations of the Kurdish people," said Boris Johnson, the British foreign secretary, last month. "But a referendum at this time will distract from the more urgent priorities of defeating Daesh [Islamic State].

Any referendum or political process towards independence must be agreed with the government of Iraq

- Boris Johnson, British foreign minister

"Any referendum or political process towards independence must be agreed with the government of Iraq in Baghdad," he added.

Michael Stephens, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, told MEE that the West would not be able to stand against a mutually agreeable solution.

"It is after all up to Iraqis to decide their own fate," he said. 

"But unilateral moves can't be supported both for the precedent they set and also because of the potential for conflict and instability that arises as a result of not co-ordinating the referendum's terms properly with Baghdad."

However, the Kurds say the central Iraqi government would never have accepted the push for referendum, and therefore they preferred unilateral action and then talks with Baghdad, the regional neighbours and the international community afterwards.

"We are waiting for the establishment of high-level referendum committee," said Hawrami.

"This committee will consist of members from all participating political parties, and they will visit all regional countries and capitals around the world to explain our rationale.

The Iraqi government of Haider al-Abadi says no decision can be made in isolation (AFP)

"Barzani, in every single meeting [with Western, Iraqi and regional officials], has stated that federalism in Iraq has failed, partnership with Baghdad has failed, and we don't accept being their subordinates.

"So Kurdistan is going to hold a referendum on its own self-determination right for independence.

"Is the Arab part of Iraq united?" Hawrami asked about the ongoing problems between the Shia-led government and the Sunni community in Iraq.

"Is it without any regional intervention? Are the Iraqi borders with the other countries controlled? Do we have an inclusive government in Baghdad?

"The Arab part of Iraq is divided already, and sticking to the 'one Iraq' policy is just beating around the bush without solving the issues that have led to regional instability.

'Federalism in Iraq has failed, partnership with Baghdad has failed, and we don't accept being their subordinates'

- Hemin Hawrami, KRG presidential adviser

"The 'one Iraq' policy is a Pandora's box, not the independence of Kurdistan."

A Western diplomatic official in Iraqi Kurdistan said the vote was merely to set a "negotiating position" for the Kurds, after which they could declare independence within two to five years.

"It's to measure support, set a baseline, show they mean it," the official said.

"But it's a process, and the referendum is part of this process. The ultimate objective is independence. But that's the negotiating position."

'Wishful thinking'

Hawrami also admitted the difficult task of assuring world and regional powers that an independent Kurdistan would be "an asset and not a threat".

"We need to visit more countries and give them assurances," he said.

"And especially for Turkey, Kurdistan is going to be a more strategic ally in terms of the energy security.

"This referendum is for Iraqi Kurdistan, it has nothing to do with Kurds in Turkey, Syria, or Iran," he insisted.

"That's why the Iraqi Kurds will move carefully after the referendum."

"Some people accuse us and ask why, after the referendum, we won't immediately declare independence. This is naive thinking," Siwaily said.

"How can you expect one week after 25 September, after the results, without reading the international situation, without talking to Baghdad, without revolving the problems peacefully, to declare independence?

"You have to be realistic. Wishful thinking is different from the reality. It has taken us 100 years to get to this stage."

Fearing Chinese response, groups protest Unesco heritage status in Tibetan area

(File) The Chinese national flag is raised during a ceremony marking the 96th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China (CPC) at Potala Palace in Lhasa, Tibet Autonomous Region, China, July 1, 2017. Source: CNS/He Penglei via Reuters

8th July 2017

TIBETAN rights groups have criticised a UN cultural organisation’s decision to extend world heritage status to an extensive plateau area in a heavily Tibetan area, saying it reinforces Chinese control in the region.

The groups argue the Unesco designation will allow Chinese authorities to remove residents from the area, known as Hoh Xil in Qinghai province, and threaten its environment and nomadic culture.

“The (Unesco) Committee ignored the reality that Tibetans, and nomads in particular, are stewards of the landscape whose role is essential to sustaining the wildlife,” said Kai Mueller, executive director of the International Campaign for Tibet.

The area has an elevation of more than 4,500 metres (14,764 feet) and is home to several endemic species as well as the entire migratory route of the endangered Tibetan antelope.

SEE ALSO: Sixty years after fleeing Tibet, refugees in India get passports, not property

The designation of protected areas does not give Unesco any powers of enforcement, but has proved to be controversial in areas plagued by conflicting territorial claims.

On Friday, Unesco also designated an ancient shrine in the occupied West Bank, revered by both Jews and Muslims, as a “Palestinian World Heritage Site in Danger”, angering Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who called the decision “delusional”.

The Tibetan rights groups argue the Unesco designation could accelerate Chinese efforts to move nomads into settled villages.

“Unesco is supposed to uphold and safeguard the world’s culture, but this shameful decision will do exactly the opposite and will ultimately assist China in denying Tibetans their fundamental rights,” Pema Yoko, executive director of advocacy group Students for a Free Tibet, said in a statement.

SEE ALSO: Tibet ‘not seeking independence’, says Dalai Lama as China lashes out at India

At a UN forum in March, China was pressed by members to ease its clamp-down on Tibet, in a rare show of direct criticism from member countries. There are also large Tibetan communities in neighbouring provinces like Qinghai and Sichuan.

China’s foreign ministry and Unesco did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Saturday.

China rejects criticism from rights groups and exiles who accuse it of trampling on the religious and cultural rights of the Tibetan people, saying its rule has brought prosperity to a once-backward region.

Chinese representatives argue the new Unesco status is designed to help protect the area and will not impact traditional culture.

According to ICT, Chinese representatives on Friday circulated a statement saying they would “fully respect the will of the local herders and their traditional culture”.

The latest decision brings China’s total number of Unesco world heritage sites to more than 50. – Reuters

‘Killed’ in Vietnam and buried with comrades, one Marine returned from the dead
Retired Marine Ronald L. Ridgeway was 18 years old in 1968 when his patrol was attacked in Vietnam. He was captured and held prisoner for five years before being released, a time during which he was believed dead. (Matthew Busch for The Washington Post)--A family photo shows Ridgeway addressing the public in 1973, shortly after his release from POW camps in Vietnam. (Family photo)


After his disappearance, Ridgeway’s name was etched onto a tombstone in a St. Louis cemetery, along with those of eight fellow Marines who went missing in the 1968 ambush. (Fred Waters/Associated Press)--A 1973 photograph of Ridgeway after his return to the United States. (Matthew Busch for The Washington Post)


By Michael E. Ruane July 8 at 9:00 AM

HALLETTSVILLE, Tex. — Ronald L. Ridgeway was “killed” in Vietnam on Feb. 25, 1968.
The 18-year-old Marine Corps private first class fell with a bullet to the shoulder during a savage firefight with the enemy outside Khe Sanh.

Dozens of Marines, from what came to be called “the ghost patrol,” perished there.
At first, Ridgeway was listed as missing in action. Back home in Texas, his old school, Sam Houston High, made an announcement over the intercom.

But his mother, Mildred, had a letter from his commanding officer saying there was little hope. And that August, she received a “deeply regret” telegram from the Marines saying he was dead.

On Sept. 10, he was buried in a national cemetery in St. Louis. A tombstone bearing his name and the names of eight others missing from the battle was erected over the grave. His mother went home with a folded American flag.

But as his comrades and family mourned, Ron Ridgeway sat in harsh North Vietnamese prisons for five years, often in solitary confinement, mentally at war with his captors and fighting for a life that was technically over.

Last month, almost 50 years after his supposed demise, Ridgeway, 68, a retired supervisor with Veterans Affairs, sat in his home here and recounted for the first time in detail one of the most remarkable stories of the Vietnam War.

As the United States marks a half-century since the height of the war in 1967 and ’68, his “back-from-the-dead” saga is that of a young man’s perseverance through combat, imprisonment and abuse.

He was 17 when he signed up with the Marines in 1967. He was 18 when he was captured, 19 when his funeral was held and 23 when he was released from prison in 1973.

[The ‘lucky ones’: Marines who survived Vietnam gather to remember]

“You have to be willing to take it a day at a time,” he said. “You have to set in your mind that you’re going to survive. You have to believe that they are not going to defeat you, that you’re going to win.”

‘Everybody’s dead’

About 9:30 on the morning of Feb. 25, Pfc. Ridgeway’s four-man fire team charged an enemy trench line.

The curving trench seemed empty when they got there. But as Ridgeway and the others made their way along it, suddenly an enemy grenade dropped in.

“We back around the curve,” he recalled. “It blows up.”

“We throw a couple grenades,” he said. “We backed off. . . . Then we realized the firing [from Marines] behind us had almost died down to nothing.”

When they stood up to look around, they saw North Vietnamese soldiers walking through the underbrush toward them. “I guess they thought we were all dead,” he said.

“We cut loose on them,” he recalled. “They were easy targets.”

Ridgeway had been part of a platoon of about 45 men sent out from the besieged Khe Sanh combat base, in what was then northern South Vietnam, to find enemy positions, and perhaps capture a prisoner.

The enemy’s noose around the Marine base had been tightening, with heavy mortar and artillery fire, and the patrol was hazardous. Six thousand Americans were surrounded by 20,000 to 40,000 North Vietnamese soldiers.

On that foggy morning, the patrol’s leader, 2nd Lt. Donald Jacques, 20, strayed off course and was drawn into a deadly ambush, Jacques’s company commander, Capt. Kenneth W. Pipes, said.
More than two dozen Marines, including Jacques, were killed.

[A young officer’s death is captured by a doomed photographer]

One of the Marines in the trench with Ridgeway, James R. Bruder, 18, of Allentown, Pa., was cut down as the enemy returned fire, according to author Ray Stubbe’s book about Khe Sanh, “Battalion of Kings.”

“Stitched him across the chest and killed him,” Ridgeway remembered.

The fire team leader, Charles G. Geller, 20, of East St. Louis, Ill., took a peek, and a bullet creased his forehead, knocking him down.

“Everybody’s dead,” Geller said, according to Stubbe’s book. “Everybody behind us is dead. . . . What are we going to do?”

They had to retreat. Geller left first, running back across the field where they had charged, followed by Ridgeway.

The son of a Southern Pacific railroad worker, Ridgeway came from a working-class neighborhood of Houston. He had a younger brother.

His parents were divorced. He had left high school and joined the Marines because “I wanted to get away,” he recalled.

As he and Geller ran to the rear, they came upon Willie J. Ruff, 20, of Columbia, S.C., who was lying on his back with a broken arm.

“We were in a hurry,” Ridgeway said. “But we stopped. He was wounded.”

As Geller knelt beside Ruff, a bullet hit Geller in the face, leaving a terrible wound. Then Ridgeway was struck by a round that went through his shoulder. All three men were now down.

“All we could do was lay there and play dead,” he said. “We were in the wide open.”

Ridgeway said he drifted in and out of consciousness. When Geller, who was delirious, got to his knees, the enemy threw a grenade, killing him.

Ridgeway said the North Vietnamese then began shooting at Marines who had fallen in front of their trenches. “They’re popping the bodies to make sure they’re dead,” he said.

One bullet hit the dirt near him. A second glanced off his helmet and struck him the buttock, he said.
“When that hit, it jarred the body,” he said. “They figured they got me. Left me for dead and kept working their way down past me.”

Ridgeway passed out again. When he woke up, it was dark and American artillery was pounding the area.

Ruff said he had been hit again and begged Ridgeway not to leave him. Ridgeway said he wouldn’t. At some point that night, Ruff died.

Ridgeway was awakened the following morning by someone pulling on his arm. He thought at first it was fellow Marines.

But when he looked up, he realized it was a young North Vietnamese soldier trying to pull off his wristwatch.

Agony and identification

After the firefight, the shattered survivors of the patrol made it back to the combat base, and the dead were left on the battlefield.

A rescue mission was deemed unwise by higher-ups, who feared losing even more men and depleting the base’s defenses, according to Pipes, who is now retired and lives in California.

In a telephone interview, he said that with binoculars, he could see Marines’ bodies strewn on the battlefield. “It was worse than agony,” he said. No further patrols outside the combat base were immediately permitted.

“We couldn’t go get them,” he said. “They laid out there for six weeks.”

On March 17, he wrote to Ridgeway’s mother: “I am sorry that I can offer no tangible basis for hope concerning Ronald’s welfare.”

Finally, on April 6, the Marines were able to return to the battlefield, Pipes said.

What was left of the dead was brought back to Khe Sanh’s temporary morgue, where Pipes and others went about the grisly task of identifying the dead. “There wasn’t much there but bones and shoes and boots . . . [and] dog tags,” he said.

In the end, of the 26 missing and presumed killed in action on Feb. 25, remains of all but nine were positively identified, according to Pipes and Stubbe.

The unassociated body parts were sent home and placed in two caskets that would be buried beneath a large tombstone bearing the nine names of those unaccounted for, Stubbe said.

The day of the funeral at the Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery was sunny and cool. Ridgeway’s mother attended, and there were flags and solemn honors. A newspaper photographer took pictures.

Far away, in North Vietnam, the rainy season was on, and Ridgeway was in his seventh month as a POW.

The work of surviving

As he sat alone in his windowless cell beside a wooden bed and the bucket he used for waste, Ridgeway went about creating a “make-believe” life.

There was no one to talk to, and he was only allowed out once a day to empty the bucket.
So he imagined that he was somewhere else, that he owned a pickup truck, that he had a wife and children, that he would go fishing.

It was a mental exercise, he said, and he found that spending three days in his make-believe world would take up a whole day in solitary.

Ridgeway said that by then, his captors considered him a “die-hard reactionary” and all Marines “animals.”

He hadn’t cooperated with his guards. He had lied to interrogators, pretended he was green kid who had never fired his rifle and gave them bogus military information.

The startled North Vietnamese soldier had locked and loaded his rifle when he realized Ridgeway was alive that morning.

Ridgeway expected to be killed. “You didn’t hear about prisoners being taken,” he said. But he was bandaged, fed and marched away, through Laos and into North Vietnam.

He spent time in several jungle camps, held in wooden leg stocks, and he eventually wound up in enemy prisons.

He got lice, malaria and dysentery and lost 50 pounds. He wore pink-and-gray-striped POW pajamas and rubber sandals, all of which he brought home with him when he was freed.

He was beaten with bamboo canes and tied up during interrogations.

One interrogator the Americans named “Cheese” — because he seemed to be the big cheese — was especially cruel.

He spoke English and sat up on a high chair as he questioned POWs tied on the floor. When he nodded his head, a guard would strike the prisoner with the bamboo cane.

He had a face like a rat, Ridgeway recalled, and was a “mean . . . sadistical son of a b----.”
Ridgeway said he didn’t dwell on the notion that people back home might think he was dead. They would be fine. His job was to survive.

In January 1973, he was in North Vietnam’s notorious Hanoi Hilton prison when his captors abruptly announced that the POWs were to be freed as part of a peace agreement before the U.S. withdrawal from Vietnam.

Marine Ronald L. Ridgeway was presumed “killed in action” while fighting in Vietnam on Feb. 25, 1968. But Ridgeway had been captured as a prisoner of war and later released in 1973.(Maine Military Museum – and Learning Center)

When the list of POWs being released became public, Ridgeway’s name was on it.

Back in Houston, his mother banged on a neighbor’s door and said, “Ronnie’s alive!”

Memory etched in stone

Ron Ridgeway was released on March 16, 1973. He came home, got married and went to college.
“I came back in basically one piece,” he said. “I came back able to live my life. . . . We went over with a job to do. We did it to the best of our ability. We were lucky enough to come back.”

Poor Diet, Plus Alzheimer's Gene, May Fuel Disease

A new study indicates a relationship between diet and the growth of plaques and other signs of brain inflammation.

 Photo Credit: Naeblys/Shutterstock

University of Southern California-July 7, 2017, 12:00 PM GMT

A diet high in cholesterol, fat and sugar may influence the development of Alzheimer’s disease in people who carry the ApoE4 gene, a leading risk factor for the memory-erasing disease, indicates a new USC study.

The study on mice, published on June 12 in the journal eNeuro, is the latest to explore the association between obesity and Alzheimer’s disease, both of which are associated with inflammation and both of which affect millions of people.

For the study, researchers at the USC Davis School of Gerontology compared the effects of a poor diet on groups of mice that either had the Alzheimer’s-associated ApoE4 gene or the relatively benign variant of the gene, ApoE3. After eating an unhealthy diet, the mice with the ApoE4 gene showed more Alzheimer’s plaques – a marker for inflammation – in their brains, but those with ApoE3 did not.

“Part of what the results are saying is that risk doesn’t affect everybody the same, and that’s true for most risk factors,” said Christian Pike, the lead author of the study and a professor for the USC Davis School of Gerontology. “Your genes have a big role in what happens to you, but so does your environment and your modifiable lifestyle factors. How much you exercise becomes important and what you eat becomes important.”

Rising health care crisis

Alzheimer’s and obesity are among the intractable problems that USC researchers in multiple disciplines are seeking to unravel.

Both are widespread and costly. An estimated 5.4 million Americans have Alzheimer’s, which costs an estimated $286 billion a year. The USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economicspredicts the number of U.S. patients diagnosed with Alzheimer’s will more than double to 9.1 million in the next 35 years. By then, total care costs will top $1.5 trillion.

An estimated 72 million American adults are obese – representing about 30 percent of the nation’s adult population, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Annual health care costs for obesity in the United States range between $147 billion to $210 billion.

As a research institution devoted to promoting lifelong health, USC has more than 70 researchers across a range of disciplines who are examining the health, societal and political effects and implications of the disease. In the past decade, the National Institute on Aging has nearly doubled its investment in USC research. The investments include an Alzheimer Disease Research Center.

The Alzheimer’s-obesity link

ApoE4 and ApoE3 are two variants of a gene that codes for a protein, apolipoprotein E, which binds fats and cholesterol to transport them to the body’s lymphatic and circulatory systems and to the brain. The ApoE4 variant is linked to increased inflammation, Alzheimer’s and cardiovascular disease.

ApoE3, which does not increase risk for the disease, is much more common variant, appearing in an estimated 70 to 75 percent of the population. ApoE4 appears in around 10 to 15 percent of the population.

Science has shown that Alzheimer’s affects more women than men. Having one copy of ApoE4 quadruples women’s risk for developing the disease. But having two copies of ApoE4 is an issue for men and women, raising their risk for the disease by a factor of 1

Still, some people with ApoE3 and ApoE4 never develop Alzheimer’s. Knowing this, Pike wanted to explore whether obesity and diet, in the presence of either gene, would affect the disease’s development.

Unhealthy vs. healthy diet

For 12 weeks, a group of mice with ApoE4 were placed on a control diet that was 10 percent fat and 7 percent sucrose, while another group of mice with ApoE4 ate a Western diet that was of 45 percent fat and 17 percent sucrose. A similar test was run on mice with ApoE3.

On the unhealthy diet, both the mice with ApoE4 and those with ApoE3 gained weight and became pre-diabetic. But most significantly, those with ApoE4 on the unhealthy diet quickly developed the signature plaques that obstruct cognition and memory.

However, Alzheimer’s symptoms did not worsen for the ApoE3 mice that ate a Western diet.

“What happens to you in life is a combination of the genes that you have, the environment and behaviors, such as diet,” Pike said. “Our thinking is that the risk of Alzheimer’s associated with obesity is going to be regulated to some degree by the genes that we have.”

The results in the mice indicate a relationship between diet and the growth of plaques and other signs of brain inflammation for mice with ApoE4.

Pike said further study is needed to understand the relationship between the two. Research already has shown that even a brief spate of poor diet can inflame glia, the brain cells responsible for immunity response.

“That means there are probably components directly in the diet, and one of those are fatty acids, like palmitic acid, that trigger inflammation because they can go in and directly affect glia,” Pike said. “But that may be just one inflammation-related component of Alzheimer’s disease.”

“There’s probably a variety of different signals that affect the brain,” he added. “People even suggest that signals coming from the gut – the microbiome – are influential.”

Pike noted that women and men with risk factors for Alzheimer’s may also respond differently to the effects of diet – an issue worth further exploration, he said.

The study was co-written by Alexandra Moser, a Ph.D. student in the USC Neuroscience Graduate Program.

Ninety percent of the study was supported by National Institutes of Health grant AG034103. The five-year $1.6 million grant awarded in 2011. Ten percent of the study was covered by another NIH grant, AG051521. The five-year $3 million grant was awarded in 2015. Both grants cover several research studies.

A reappraisal of evidence and claims

Emerging Buddhist-Muslim Rivalry in Sri Lanka?

by G. H. Peiris-July 7, 2017, 10:07 pm 

(Continued from yesterday)

3.3. Bhikkus in Parliament: "Crossing a Line"?

What happened in the period leading up to the elections of 2004 was that a plenary meeting of the SU decided to reconstitute the party with a new name (JHS) and a new leadership, and to field Bhikku candidates at the election in alliance with the SLFP. Who had popular appeal and "name recognition" among the ordinary folk – vitally important under the "preferential voting" system in vogue. Note also that, by 2004, the monks who contested in the elections held that year and several others of the JHU had become well known to the public because they had figured at the vanguard of the massive public protests against some of the potentially disastrous reforms mooted by Chandrika and Ranil (referred to above). It was these circumstances, and not what John has portrayed as a posthumous impact of Soma, that prompted the JHU to become a force to be reckoned with in parliamentary politics in 2004. In any event, there was no "crossing the line" from the temple to politics of our country because throughout the ages there was no such line to cross.

3.4. Bodu Bala Sēnā (BBS): What John Holt has missed

Having had the opportunity of observing the BBS in action since its 'post-war' advent to the political limelight of Sri Lanka and of reading some of its Sinhala publications, and having followed as closely as I can the related media coverage, my impressions and speculations on the BBS are as follows:

The BBS’s flock is not numerically significant though it has a spatial scatter of cells consisting of loyal youth – mostly, rebels in search of a cause. Some of its meetings, however, are well attended largely by curious onlookers. Preparatory work for its political rallies entails a great deal of effort and expenditure. There appears to be no shortage in the supply of the required funds.

Ven. Galabodaatte Gnānasāra was in the executive committee of the JHU in 2004. He left the JHU, claiming that it had become subservient to the interests of President Rajapaksa and his party, and hence had lost its purpose. It was probably this loudly proclaimed stance that enabled him to get external sponsorship for his foreign travels. C. A. Chandraprema with his impeccable record in investigative journalism has in fact unearthed evidence indicating that he is likely to have received sponsorship and support from the United States while having clandestine links with the UNP leadership (see, The Island of 22 June 2017). And, the Norwegian government providing funds for his trip to Europe has since been an open secret. Ven. Gnānasāra denies with vehemence and anger this support from external sources, and claims that the overwhelming majority of his flock (including the Sangha) is from the rural poor who make immense material sacrifices to support the BBS cause.

At his public performances Ven. Gnānasāra frequently hurls insults at the Rajapaksas. Going by the dictum that "in politics nothing is what it appears to be" this could be interpreted in various ways. Whatever the interpretation, there could be no denial that in the period leading up to the national elections of 2015, he was a boon to Ranil Wickremasinghe and a bane to the Rajapaksa camp.

This brings me to the elusive question of whether at least some of the outbursts of violence attributed to the BBS have been stage-managed. It is known that this type of destabilization, sponsored by the CIA, did occur in Pakistan, and that it led successively to the eviction of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto from office, his conviction for murder by a kangaroo court, and his being hanged. Bhutto’s real ‘offense’ was that, although he received massive US military assistance in his war against the Balochi tribes in 1974, he thereafter began to lean increasingly towards China in his foreign relations. No less a person than Ramsay Clarke (one time Attorney General of the US) has borne testimony to this fact; and taking into account several writings by Pakistani scholars on this episode as well, and the more recent global experiences with various ‘Springs’, and the hostility of the self-proclaimed "international community" towards Sri Lanka, one cannot rule out the possibility of Sri Lanka being the victim of yet another US-led attempt at "making the world safe for democracy". Disastrous US interventions also occurred in the period leading to the six-year 'People's War' in Nepal. Certain scholars there believe that the 2001 assassination of King Birendra and nine members of the royal family in a palace carnage was a CIA plot and was not, as widely publicised in its aftermath, the product of the broken heart and demented mind of Prince Dipendra, the heir to the throne.

Public activities of the BBS appear to be controlled very largely by Ven. Gnānasāra ̶ a domineering personality who becomes quite frenzied when provoked. Even those who believe that his proclaimed grievances are not entirely devoid of substance are thoroughly embarrassed by his excessive aggression. He is so obviously a megalomaniac. He craves publicity which continues to be provided in abundance by certain private sector TV channels and newspapers that were arrayed against the Rajapaksa government. To these firms, moreover, kalārasa of any form – even pilikulrasa – is essential for enhancing advertising revenue, which also means that the more publicity he gets the more wildly entertaining he becomes, while continuing to perform his ascribed role in current political affairs.

While approaching the end of this essay I came across the article by Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka titled 'The issue is incitement: The BBS, Champika & the Gota factor' in The Island of 22 June 2017 which begins with the proposition that it is easier to resolve (legally and morally) whether a given statement (or action) is tantamount to incitement of violence than whether it represents 'extremism' (or 'ultra-nationalism' or 'chauvinism'). This, as most of Dr. Jayatyilleka's ideas, is incisive and thought-provoking, but when thought is provoked, seems tenuous either as a generalization on human experiences or in relation to a specific statement (or action) such as those by Venerable Gnānasāra Thero.

To illustrate, let me begin with a story from the Bible. Jesus Christ after his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, according to St. Matthew (21: 12-13), "went into the temple of God and cast out all of them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers, and the seats of them who sold doves, and said unto them, it is written, my house shall be called the House of Prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves". Rome might have looked at this episode as a minor affront to its imperial might; but no doubt it infuriated the "Sadducees and Pharisees"to a pitch that found expression in the harrowing mob violence and the crucifixion inflicted on Jesus a few days later. Now, would you say that the 'incitement' part of this story is different from the Prelate Ināmaluwē Sumangala's repeated assertion: "We cannot allow mosques to be built within this shuddhabhoomiya ('sacred area' adjacent to his temple).

To cite a few other random illustrations, was Marc Anthony as dramatized by Shakespeare bemoaning the death of his mentor or inciting violence against powerful senators of the Roman Empire? John Kennedy's grandiloquent declaration, "Violence in pursuit of liberty is not crime"- did it inspire at least some of the ideologues of the 'Civil rights' mob violence like James Baldwin who wrote 'The Fire Next Time'? What about the Bushes – father and son – and their rhetoric aimed at generating mass support for the ruthless bombardment of Iraq, or that of Obama prior to launching 'Operation Neptune Spear' cause an escalation of ISIS retaliatory violence? Closer home, what of the Marxist stalwarts of our own 'Old Left' who advocated extra-parliamentary strategies of capturing State power, and thus contributed to the homicidal and suicidal mindset of the youth who pursued that strategy two decades later. Illustrations are plentiful. You can think carefully and arrive at your own conclusions on whether "incitement" is easily definable, legally and morally, especially in relation to these 'holy wars' – Buddhist or Islamic or any other persuasion.

The problem about getting into the semantics of 'incitement' is that it diverts attention from the essence of the 'post-war' crisis in our country – the product of an externally sponsored, multifaceted 'regime change' project, a prominent facet of which was the alienation of the Muslim community from the Rajapaksa regime. The recent insidious revival of this effort is no doubt intended to protect the puppet regime installed in 2015. There are faint signs of our Muslim community gradually awakening to this fact.

The foregoing comment should not be misinterpreted as a refutation of Dr. Jayatilleka's forthright conclusion. I fully agree that the only possibility of reversing the trend of decay and disintegration of Sri Lanka could be the re-establishment of a regime consisting of a broad coalition of forces to which Mahinda Rajapaksa would provide leadership. I do not know of any duumvirates that have been particularly successful – those I know about like the one in the immediate aftermath of former Yugoslavia in the immediate aftermath of Tito, or the one we have at present here have been disastrous.

(concluded)

Presidency is used to shut down FCID- VAC

.

2017-07-07

The Executive Presidency was used to put an end to the Police Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) and the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC), Convener of the Voice against Corruption Movement (VAC) Wasantha Samarasinghe said yesterday.

Addressing a news briefing, he pointed out that both the Prime Minister and the President were jointly attempting to put a stop to investigations carried out by the two agencies by weakening the FCID and the Bribery Commission.

"Although there are thousands of complaints lodged with the FCID, only 450 cases are being investigated at present. I don’t understand for what benefit these pair are trying to postpone these investigations," he said.

He boasted that their movement has been extremely vocal on this issue. Hence, he said they had organized two seminars to educate the general public about the corrupt taking place within the government which was voted in under the disguise of bringing about 'Good Governance'.

"We urge the government to carry out transparent inquiries to identify and arrest all the wrong-doers not taking into account their importance or standing in society," he added. ( By Sheain Fernandopulle)

---

.