Thursday, January 25, 2018

U.S. Sanctions Weapon is Under Threat — But Not From Bitcoin

Forget cryptocurrencies. The real threat to American sanctions power is rapid technological innovation in finance.

Bitcoin and other financial innovations are proliferating, Jan. 1, 2013. (Zach Copley/Flickr)

JANUARY 24, 2018, 10:59 AM

Venezuela’s announcement that it will soon launch its own virtual currency, “El Petro,” with the express idea of evading U.S. financial sanctions, set alarm bells ringing in Washington about the looming threat to one of the principal weapons in the U.S. foreign-policy arsenal. News of of the virtual currency from Caracas comes on the heels of similar announcements from Moscow, which for years has been seeking a way around the U.S. dollar’s chokehold on its sanctions-strapped economy.

But the threat to America’s ability to sanction bad actors comes less from cryptocurrencies like El Petro or bitcoin, and more from accelerating technological developments in the financial sector that promise to elbow the United States out of its gatekeeper role. That includes new ways of conducting financial transactions, including through the blockchain — the decentralized ledger technology that underpins bitcoin but that is increasingly being used for regular transactions by banks, shipping companies, and other firms.

“Just like the U.S. ended up getting the most benefit from the creation of the internet, the question for the U.S. is: How can we be relevant in a world of decentralization?” said Yaya Fanusie, a former CIA analyst who now serves as the director of analysis for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank.

Thanks to the spectacular rise in value of bitcoin, now hovering at a market capitalization of about $200 billion, and clear interest from states such as Venezuela and Russia in creating their own alternatives to the dollar, concern is growing about threats to U.S. sanctions muscle.

U.S. Sens. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) last week grilled the Donald Trump administration about Venezuela’s efforts to “thwart” U.S. sanctions. The U.S. Treasury has already warned investors that using El Petro could run afoul of U.S. sanctions.

But plenty of experts are skeptical that Venezuela, which has proved unable to maintain a stable traditional currency, could somehow successfully launch a virtual one nominally backed by millions of barrels of undiscovered oil.

“The idea that it is a currency backed by reserves is pure fiction,” said Francisco Monaldi, a Latin American energy expert at the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University. “So you are left with a currency issued by a country in hyperinflation and in default.”

Likewise, while bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are used by many criminal and illicit enterprises, they offer little scope for evading sanctions, experts say.

For starters, despite rapid growth in the use of bitcoin and other virtual currencies, their value still represents just a tiny amount of U.S. dollars and other major currencies in circulation. And they’re much more volatile, making them less appealing to regimes trying to conduct large-scale illicit business.

Additionally, bitcoin, the most widely used virtual currency, isn’t necessarily anonymous but rather pseudonymous; in many cases, experts can determine the true identity behind unnamed bitcoin transactions.

There’s more concern over efforts by Russia, China, and other states to create a parallel financial architecture that could bypass the existing system, which allows U.S. and European regulators to keep tabs on who is sending money where.

For example, since 2015, Russia has sought to develop its own alternative to SWIFT, the Brussels-based platform that connects the world financial system. Alongside China, Moscow has also discussed cobbling together an alternative payments system that would work for emerging economies cooperating in the so-called BRICS group, which includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.

Those developments worry experts because they could potentially make it easier for companies and individuals to keep doing business despite U.S. sanctions.

“If there is a new SWIFT out there that bypassed Europe and the U.S. altogether, that would be a massive challenge for terror finance, money laundering, and sanctions evasion,” said Richard Nephew, who helped implement Iran sanctions in the Barack Obama administration and is now a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.

But so far, Russia and China have made little headway in launching a parallel financial system. Big banks — and more than 11,000 financial institutions that are linked into SWIFT — are still leery about joining a new organization.

That’s not stopping them from clambering onto another big bandwagon, though — the rise of so-called distributed ledger technologies such as blockchain that can streamline all sorts of financial transactions and dramatically cut costs.

Those ledgers don’t need to use virtual currencies like bitcoin. IBM and Maersk, the shipping giant, are using blockchain technology to streamline global supply chains and save costs, all with regular currencies like the dollar, euro, and yen. Major international banks are buildingcompeting blockchain-like platforms that could make all sorts of financial transactions quicker and cheaper.

“There is a big movement toward distributed ledger technology for everything — contracts, supply chains, foreign exchange — and it’s not even remotely driven by an interest in evading sanctions,” said Elizabeth Rosenberg, who worked on sanctions at the Treasury under Obama and is now director of the Energy, Economics, and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, a think tank. “It’s just a general pursuit of cheaper costs.”

But the practical upshot, for people inside the U.S. Treasury trying to make sure sanctioned people and companies can’t carry on business as usual, could be just the same.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, the United States has relied heavily on financial sanctions to rein in bad actors. Whether targeting terrorists, Iran’s and North Korea’s quest for nuclear weapons, Russia’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula, or Venezuela’s rights abuses, financial sanctions are often the first resort for U.S. policymakers.

And while other actors often help reinforce U.S. financial sanctions — the European Union leaned on Iran, and China is pressuring North Korea — the fact that New York and the U.S. dollar sit at the epicenter of global finance gives the United States outsized leverage. That is what could be threatened by the brave new world of financial innovation, experts say.

“What will limit U.S. leverage is this transformation of the financial system so that financial activity shifts out of U.S. jurisdiction,” Rosenberg said. “If you are using a different platform, whether a blockchain-type ledger or simply abroad, then the U.S. has much less capacity to see it or halt it.”

The Daily 202: Trump surprises his lawyers and alarms his friends by saying he will talk with Mueller

President Trump told reporters on Jan. 24 that he is “looking forward” to speaking to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. (Video: David Nakamura/Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

With Breanne Deppisch and Joanie Greve.

By James Hohmann January 25 at 8:31 AM

THE BIG IDEA: President Trump announced last night that he is “looking forward” to speaking with special counsel Robert Mueller's team, that he “absolutely” would do so under oath and that an interview could happen in the next two or three weeks. “I would love to do it, and I would like to do it as soon as possible,” the president said.

-- In the room where it happened: “The comments came during an impromptu meeting in the West Wing, where reporters were gathered to speak with senior officials for a background briefing about immigration,” Josh Dawsey, David Nakamura and Devlin Barrett report. “Trump walked into the meeting unannounced and began talking. The president later told reporters to quote him on the record. Trump’s remarks took White House officials by surprise and came as his lawyers were negotiating with Mueller’s team on a potential interview. The president’s lawyers have repeatedly encouraged him not to post tweets or make comments about the investigation without their knowledge, saying such comments could damage him.”

-- The president’s proclamation reflects his preternatural self-confidence that he can talk his way out of any pickle. He insists he’s done nothing wrong, and he recognizes the bad optics of refusing to cooperate. Perhaps he thinks he can publicly convey support for transparency, even as he privately drags his feet, puts up roadblocks and makes demands that Mueller won’t agree to.
A conventional politician would be boxed in by this kind of proclamation, but Trump has long demonstrated a Houdini-like willingness to wiggle out of commitments. We’ve still never seen those tax returns, for example, which he promised he’d put out during the campaign and then backtracked on after the election.

But this Russia investigation is different than previous quagmires Trump has found himself bogged down by. If he drags his feet now, more Americans could conclude that he’s worried and/or trying to hide something.
-- Clean up on Aisle 9: The president’s lawyers quickly sought to clarify his statements. From the front page of today's New York Times: “Ty Cobb, the White House lawyer leading the response to the investigation, said Mr. Trump was speaking hurriedly and intended only to say that he was willing to meet. ‘He’s ready to meet with them, but he’ll be guided by the advice of his personal counsel,’ Mr. Cobb said. He said the arrangements were being worked out between Mr. Mueller’s team and the president’s personal lawyers.

Exclusive: EU’s negotiating guidelines for the Brexit transition

25 JAN 2018

The transition on offer is every bit as annoying to Jacob Rees-Mogg and fellow Brexiteers as he was signalling at the Brexit Select Committee yesterday. There is only a limited right for Britain to even make an appearance at meetings where the U.K. will have no voting rights.

The U.K. nonetheless has to follow all EU laws including any new ones that might pop up (the government says the EU law-making process is so slow there won’t be any surprises on that front – Mr Rees-Mogg begs to differ).
The document also makes clear that the U.K. has to abide by existing EU agreements with third countries, which covers many areas but not least among them are the 50 or so trade agreements that have been signed by third countries with the EU.

The U.K. has said it would like to continue the current arrangements which countries like South Korea and Canada have with the EU28 when the EU is only 27. The reply comes back from some of those countries: I’m sure you would, but we might have other ideas. South Africa has been the most outspoken but others (often those with agricultural interests) are thought to be sniffing around the idea of not simply signing a rollover agreement on the dotted line.

One EU official says the U.K. does not appear to have approached the EU for help on this even though it would be happy to facilitate dialogue. The same official said the U.K. could easily find that quite a few countries are happy for the U.K. to continue all the obligations that EU trade treaties impose but are keen to reopen the benefits.

The EU official said he could easily imagine third countries pressurising the U.K. for future commitments to be written into future U.K. bilateral trade agreements as the price for a temporary rollover.

Senior UN figures under investigation over alleged sexual harassment

World Food Programme official suspended pending inquiry as UNAids declines to comment on scrutiny of deputy director

Have you encountered harassment in the aid sector? Share your story

Rebecca Ratcliffe Thu 25 Jan 2018 15.15 GMT

The United Nations is investigating two senior figures over allegations of sexual harassment.
The World Food Programme’s country director in Afghanistan, Mick Lorentzen, has been suspended while a disciplinary process is under way.

Luiz Loures, an assistant secretary general of the UN, and deputy executive director of programme at UNAids, is also the subject of an investigation. The Guardian understands that he has not been suspended.

On Thursday, the WFP announced an overhaul of its sexual harassment policies, following mounting criticism over how UN agencies handle such cases.

Last week, a Guardian investigationuncovered a widespread culture of silence surrounding sexual harassment and assault at the UN, with employees feeling unable to report complaints for fear of losing their jobs.

Three alleged victims said they had lost their jobs, or been threatened with termination of contract, after reporting sexual harassment or assault. Two cited concerns with investigations, and said there had been errors in transcripts, or that key witnesses had not been interviewed. Alleged perpetrators were allowed to remain in senior positions – with the power to influence proceedings – throughout investigations.

The UN said it has a zero tolerance approach to sexual harassment and that it is taking steps to increase the support given to victims.

UNAids said that while it could not comment on individual investigations, or disclose information about them, it observed “a clear regulatory framework for all investigation processes and proceedings” based on the same regulations that govern World Health Organization staff.
Luiz Loures of UNAids, left, and World Food Programme official Mick Lorentzen. Photograph: UN photo and UNAids Brazil

Loures was appointed deputy executive director of programme at UNAids by Ban Ki-moon, the former secretary general, in January 2013.

Lorentzen, whose suspension was first reported by the Italian Insider, studied at the University of Leicester and previously served in the British armed forces, according to his WFP biography. He has worked for the UN in senior positions across Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo.

The WFP said a staff member had been suspended while an investigation of sexual harassment was launched. “The staff member concerned has been suspended while the disciplinary process is under way,” the agency said in a statement.

David Beasley, executive director of WFP, said in a letter to staff this week: “We must and will find ways to make sure that people feel confident that they will be protected when they report misconduct.”

Beasley announced a series of changes, including an end to the existing six-month time limit for reporting violations and a provision allowing the consideration of anonymous complaints, and complaints from former employees.

The revised policy will also consider the investigation of abusive conduct even if a specific victim does not come forward, and will include stronger punishment for retaliatory action against victims.
“Punishments [for retaliation] can include disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment,” said Kiko Harvey, WFP’s inspector general and director of the office of inspections and investigations. She said the office had received three alleged sexual harassment cases in 2017.
Megan Nobert, an international criminal and human rights lawyer, who founded Report the Abuse, the first organisation to challenge the silence surrounding sexual violence in the aid sector, said more detail is needed about how the policies will be implemented.

Nobert said: “I am encouraged to see that [WFP] are taking continued positive steps in the right direction to addressing internal sexual violence issues. We need to ensure that this progress continues however, and that other UN agencies follow suit.”

Last week, another UN body, Unesco, confirmed that Frank La Rue, assistant director general for communication and information at Unesco, had been “relieved of his duties until further notice” following allegations of harassment.

The UN said in a statement that not all UN entities apply the same staff rules, but added: “Secretary general [António] Guterres has engaged the heads of United Nations agencies across the system to look at the bigger picture. This means examining and improving policies, and following up on our capacity to launch investigations and to support victims in all UN agencies.

“As the head of the chief executive board of the UN, the secretary general also created last November a system-wide task force on addressing sexual harassment to review policies, investigative capacities and victims’ protection/support across the system, as well as aligning policies.”

Asia: Executive Director of Hong Kong-based AHRC accused of harassment against women

Sri Lanka Guardian made enquiries from the lips-zipped Chairman who attempted to undermine the serious complaint of the victim — but no response was received

Three years have been passed; no action against the alleged perpetrator

by Our Special Correspondent- Jan 25, 2018

(January 25, 2018, Beijing, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Executive Director of the Hong Kong-based Asian Human Rights Commission, a non-governmental organisation (NGO) claiming to be promoting and protecting human rights in the targeted nations and also advocating for re-designing and re-engineering the justice institutions in Asia, has been accused of harassment against female staff members who previously worked in the organisation.

Bijo Francis, the Executive Director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, is an Indian national lawyer originally from Thrissur, Kerala. After graduating, according to reliable sources, he managed to obtain a part-time employment opportunity with one of the local human rights organisations in the same state.

Later, he flew to Hong Kong to complete the masters in law at the University of Hong Kong. It was partly facilitated by the former executive director of the AHRC, Basil Fernando along with a well-connected human rights activist, Dr. Philip Setunga. Dr Setunga later discontinued his service with the AHRC after a failed attempt by the then executive director, Basil Fernando, to remove him.

*Parts of the communications with the lips-zipped Chairperson*

It was during this time at the university that Bijo Francis joined the AHRC as a “volunteer”. Afterwards, he started working as the “head of the country desk” of India.
`
Later he engineered the situation to take the head position of the organisation after a series of crises erupted during the tenure of his predecessor, a well-known and well-respected Chinese human rights activist.

According to reliable sources, the incumbent Executive Director has been accused of harassing the female staff members. On several occasions, many of the victims chose to leave the organisation and remain silent.

But, at least one of the female staff members had the courage to make a written complaint against the harassments she encountered, and she demanded the executive director be held to account for abusing his privileges and powers to harass the female staff members and put the credibility of the organisation in jeopardy.

Apparently, the victim believed in the internal mechanism as she thought the credibility earned by this organisation, the Asian Legal Resource Centre, the sister organisation of the AHRC, holds General Consultative Status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

According to the email complaint made by the complainant, a former employee of the Asian Human Rights Commission, (almost all employees were appointed under the Asian Legal Resource Centre; which is an umbrella organisation of the AHRC) accused the Executive Director Bijo Francis for making a hostile situation against female staff members:

“First of all, you have treated my complaint as mere ‘views’, not as a complaint. This need to be corrected. It was a complaint against the Executive Director, Mr Bijo Francis for harassment and creating the hostile working environment for me. It is not clear to me why Mr. Francis was not called for hearing,” one of the victims wrote in the response to express the disappointment of the deliberate negligence and ignorance maintained by the long-service Chairman (Chairperson) of this organisation to shield the alleged perpetrator, Bijo Francis.

The victim is pointing at John J. Clancey, Chairman of the AHRC/ALRC, an American who has lived in Hong Kong for decades, for his negligence on this serious issue.

Replying to the complaint after a period of 10 months merely proves his insincerity in tackling this very serious issue.

According to the information available on the public domain, “John J. Clancey has been working as a solicitor with Ho, Tse, Wai & Partners since he was admitted as a solicitor in 1997. He is a founding member of the Executive Committee of the Chinese Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group; one of the legal advisers of the Professional Teachers Union; Legal Adviser of the Hong Kong Workers’ Health Centre.”

Meanwhile, responding to the victim, after keeping mum for over ten months, John Clancey wrote:

“I presented your views to the board, after which members of the management had input, followed by questions from and a discussion with board members. The Board then accepted that the management had sufficient reasons……”

Our investigation revealed that this response was a pathetic attempt to protect the alleged perpetrator. Clancey did not take this issue seriously and in failing to do so helped the alleged perpetrator, Bijo Francis, to continue his authority without hindrance.

“Your reply was another layer of trauma for me and I was taken aback with the language of the email justifying the wrongdoings of the Executive Director,” a victim wrote back to Jack Clancey for his irrational response to the serious complaint.

Meanwhile, “John J. Clancey as the Chairman of this organisation has lied to the victim,” reliable sources who have been the members of the management committee of the AHRC/ALRC mentioned in his response, have revealed:

“There was not a single discussion about the harassment against the female staff member by this Executive Director with the management committee members. We believe the response by the Chairman has twisted the real problem and undermined the graveness of the victim by saying that there was an input by the Members of the Management Committee,” sources added.

RELATED VIDEO: How we can end harassment at work , TED talk by Gretchen Carlson

“It is unbelievable, because, the Chairman is a known person in Hong Kong for protecting human rights, but the way he has acted in this traumatic problem is putting his own credibility on the knife edge,” sources further observed.

The management committee at the time the incident was reported consisted of five members including: the Executive Director (the alleged perpetrator), the Director for Policies and Programmes, Basil Fernando, a Chinese female staff member, Louise Sun, who is currently working from Australia, and others from Pakistan, the Philippines and Sri Lanka.

When Sri Lanka Guardian started investigating this incident we contacted John J. Clancey by email on two occasions while sending a carbon copy of the same emails to the other Board of Directors as well as the Executive Director, Bijo Francis and Director for Policies & Programmes, Basil Fernando.

Meanwhile, earlier, in 2014, an ex-employee of the ALRC, John S. Sloan, (Editorial Assistant) asked Clancey if he was aware of the wrongdoings of Francis against the members of the staff and he was threatened by Clancey with legal action if he involved him (Clancey) in the issue.

In our enquiry, we asked the Chairman of the AHRC/ALRC, whether there was any complaint against the current Executive Director regarding harassment against female staff members; and what, if any, was the action taken by the Board of Directors as the governing body of the Organisation. Were there any investigative reports compiled by the Board of Directors as the answer to this serious issue, the Sri Lanka Guardian enquired.

John S. Sloan, Editorial Assistant, ex-employee of the AHRC/ALRC

But, unfortunately, Sri Lanka Guardian has received no response so far. The enquiry remains open and the Chairman of the AHRC/ ALRC still has an opportunity to submit his take on this issue.

Meanwhile, the Asian Human Rights Commission has issued a liable statement against the Sri Lanka Guardian and one of its editors last year. In our preliminary response we, Sri Lanka Guardian, have asked 17 questions to be answered as they have admitted some of our news stories published in last year are about them. But, none of the responsible parties in this organisation has provided answers.

According to the reliable sources, the next annual board meeting of the AHRC/ALRC will be held in the last days of this month (January 2018). News is circulating among local partners of this organisation that the incumbent Executive Director will ask for “permission” to terminate a few more staff members working in this organisation.

We, as the people’s media entity advocating truth and justice, would like to repeat our request that this organisation to review the complaint made over the years ago and prove through an impartial investigation to the general public that the competent authority of your organisation is absolutely cleared of the accusations.

We are looking forward to hearing from you. If you are truly working on justice, let the justice be done in your own house first before anywhere else.

“We Still Have a Choice Today: Nonviolent Coexistence or Violent Coannihilation” — MLK

Marilyn Langlois – EDITORIAL, 15 Jan 2018

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s prophetic words, uttered April 4, 1967, continue to haunt and challenge us. The wisdom, commitment to humanity, and charisma he embodied during his fleeting 39 years on this earth are badly needed now amid the ongoing proliferation of military aggression, killing machines and fomenting hate.

Dr. King would be 89 years old today, January 15, had his life not been taken prematurely 50 years ago. Thanks to Dr. William Pepper’s tireless and meticulous efforts over several decades, we have solid evidence that he was killed by agents of the US Army and Memphis Police, the jury’s unanimous conclusion after hearing months of testimony in a little-known 1999 civil trial brought by the King family.

Prior to King’s death, growing movements urged him to run for US President on a third party ticket or as Vice-presidential candidate to Presidential hopeful Robert F. Kennedy on the Democratic Party ticket. Either outcome would have positioned him well to lead the nonviolent social revolution he called for to re-orient society towards prioritizing the needs of the poor and vulnerable, an alarming prospect to the military establishment in service to the super-rich.

Dr. Pepper has a personal stake in uncovering the truth about the King assassination. The two became friends and colleagues in the antiwar movement after King read Pepper’s 1967 Ramparts Magazine article, “The Children of Vietnam” bringing Dr. King to tears and outrage.

The brutal Vietnam War was the focus of King’s opposition to militarism. In the introduction of his recent book, The Plot to Kill King, Pepper notes,

He would have shed equal tears had he been alive to witness what his beloved nation has been doing to the impoverished masses, not only of Iraq, but against Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, and Syria… Vietnam was his Rubicon and it was here that he and I joined forces… Here, as never before, would he seriously challenge the interests of the power elite. Those interests all came down to money. The reader should keep in mind President Lyndon Johnson’s outburst at his CIA Vietnam briefer, Colonel John Downie, who in 1966 regularly urged him to get out of Vietnam. Finally in their ultimate session, a frustrated LBJ pounded the table and exclaimed: ‘I cannot get out of Vietnam, John, my friends are making too much money.’

Dr. King’s “Beyond Vietnam” speech at New York’s Riverside Church on April 4, 1967, exposes the cruelty, hypocrisy and greed inherent in the US military involvement in Vietnam and its repercussions at home and around the world. This speech is widely available on the internet and is worth re-reading or watching and listening to in its entirety. Here are some key passages, best expressed in his own words:

As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men [in US cities], I have told them that… rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they asked, and rightly so, ‘What about Vietnam?’ They asked if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government.

[US troops] must know after a short period there that none of the things we claim to be fighting for are really involved. Before long they must know that their government has sent them into a struggle among Vietnamese and the more sophisticated surely realize that we are on the side of the wealthy, and the secure, while we create a hell for the poor.

The war in Vietnam is but a symptom of a far deeper malady within the American spirit…

…our nation has taken the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments. I am convinced that if we are to get on to the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values… When… profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism are incapable of being conquered.

True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.

A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries and say, ‘This is not just.”

A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, ‘This way of settling difference is not just.’ This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nations homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

This call for a worldwide fellowship that lifts neighborly concern beyond one’s tribe, race, class and nation is in reality a call for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all mankind.

We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today… We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent coannihilation.

As readers of Transcend Media Service, I’m sure all of you are working in many ways to promote the former. In the spirit of Dr. King, here are four points in this direction:

We need to keep raising consciousness about eliminating the excessive greed and profit motives that underlie so much of the violence in the world today. See my Nov. 6 TMSeditorial, Quality of Life Floor and Wealth Ceiling: A House We Can All Live in. Even Pope Francis in his 2018 Epiphany address called for avoiding the pursuit of excessive money and resisting “inclinations toward arrogance, the thirst for power and for riches”; instead helping the poor and needy.
This past weekend (after press time), a major conference organized by the Coalition Against US Foreign Military Bases was held in Baltimore, Maryland, with the aim of educating people about the vast extent of US military presence around the world and mobilizing actions to shut down these bases and re-direct funds to more life-affirming purposes. All TMS readers living in a country with US military bases are invited to join the movement to send them packing!

North and South Korea are to be praised this past week for engaging in direct dialog and de-escalating the belligerent and hypocritical posturing of the US–hypocritical because the US refuses to get rid of any of its thousands of nuclear weapons, while insisting that North Korea disarm. Some cynics dismiss this rapprochement as a ploy by the North to divide Seoul and Washington, when it is the two Koreas that should be natural allies and the US really has no business meddling in their affairs.

While visiting North Korea in 2015, I learned the DPRK seeks reunification with their brothers and sisters in the south based on three principles:

Peaceful Means (mutual commitment to resolving issues nonviolently),

Federation (limited powers of central government with north and south retaining autonomy in many areas), and

Independence (negotiated by Koreans without foreign interference).

Seeing athletes from both North and South competing in the upcoming Winter Olympics in South Korea’s Pyeongchang County will send a strong and message of peace to the world.

North and South Korea at the 2017 World Figure Skating Championships in Helsinki.
Photo: Marilyn Langlois

Today throughout the US there will be grassroots community events, celebrations, marches and days of service, which bring together people of all ages, races and walks of life to commemorate Dr. King’s legacy, working towards realizing his vision of the Beloved Community, his American Dream:

“A land where men will not take necessities from the many to give luxuries to the few.”

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service in Richmond, California. (Peoples Eye Photography)

___________________________________________

Marilyn Langlois is a member of TRANSCEND USA West Coast. She is a volunteer community organizer and international solidarity activist based in Richmond, California. A co-founder of the Richmond Progressive Alliance, member of Haiti Action Committee and Board member of Task Force on the Americas, she is retired from previous employment as a teacher, secretary, administrator, mediator and community advocate.

Advocacy group calls on McDonald's to remove antibiotics from beef, pork

A McDonald's Corp restaurant is seen in Los Angeles, California, U.S. October 24, 2017. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson

Lisa Baertlein-JANUARY 25, 2018

(Reuters) - A consumer and public health group is pressing McDonald’s Corp to set a timeline for phasing out the routine use of medically important antibiotics in the beef and pork it serves, amid warnings that the practice fuels dangerous drug-resistant superbug infections in people.

The petition drive by U.S. PIRG Education Fund is the latest in a broad campaign from the World Health Organization (WHO), investors, advocacy groups, and even nuns, to pressure farmers to curb or eliminate the use of those life-saving drugs on food animals.

In the United States, an estimated 70 percent of antibiotics that are important to fighting human infections and ensuring the safety of invasive procedures such as surgeries are sold for use on farms.

Scientists warn that the use of antibiotics to promote growth and prevent illness in healthy farms animals contributes to the rise of dangerous antibiotic-resistant superbug infections, which kill at least 23,000 Americans each year and pose a significant threat to global health.

As the world’s biggest hamburger chain and a significant buyer of pork for its bacon and McRib sandwiches, McDonald’s has an outsize influence on farm practices.

“The Big Mac can make a big dent in stopping the misuse of antibiotics in our food system,” said Matthew Wellington, antibiotics program director for U.S. PIRG.

McDonald’s in 2016 was the first major fast-food chain to shift its U.S. chicken supply to birds raised without medically important antibiotics, its effort spurred most of its rivals and major chicken suppliers to follow.

McDonald’s in August said would begin curbing the use of high-value human antibiotics in its global chicken supply in 2018 and begin working on antibiotic plans for other meats, dairy cows and laying hens.

The company was not immediately available after normal business hours for comment.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently said sales and distribution of medically important antibiotics for food production fell 14 percent from 2015 to 2016, the first decline in year-to-year sales since the agency began collecting the data in 2009.

FDA said chicken accounted for 6 percent of medically important antibiotic sales, while swine and cattle came in at 37 percent and 43 percent, respectively.

Burmese students protest for bigger education budget

Myanmar_National_Education_Law_Protests_1-2-1-1200x340

January 25, 2018

Students at Mandalay’s Yadanabon University are calling on the government to increase the national education budget and improve campus facilities as well as educational materials.

Yadanabon University Student Union is leading the protest camp, which has since been joined by dozens of students from nearby universities since it was set up on Monday, according to The Irrawaddy.

“The education budget was increased a bit after the student protests back in 2015, but it is still lower than the defence budget. Why?” said Ko Kyaw Thura Ye Kyaw, president of the student union.

“The education budget is very important for the country, so we are here to urge the government to increase it,” Ko Kyaw Thura Ye Kyaw said.

Students also called for campus accommodation to be built.

“There’s no hostel for students at our university. Students coming from distant places have to rent rooms nearby. This costs us a lot and offers no security at all,” the student leader said.

Last week, Burma’s Defence Ministry had asked for a 1.3 trillion kyats (US$1 billion) budget for a six-month period, during Parliament’s budget discussion ahead of the 2018-19 fiscal year, which starts on October 1.

The ministry’s proposed budget reportedly amounts to more than the combined total of the health and education budget. More than 2 billion kyats is proposed for military operations.

On Tuesday, Yadanabon University rector Dr Maung Maung Naing called the protest “illegal” for using loudspeakers and encouraging other students to join them.

“We invited representatives of the Ministry of Education to talk with them. However, they were not satisfied with this and continued the protest. If they don’t stop, we will have to handle the situation according to the law,” Dr Maung Maung Naing said.

Teachers unions at Yadanabon University and Mandalay University agreed with the student’s contention that the education budget should be bigger but condemned the way students have chosen to convey their grievances.

“Our country has many security issues, including the conflict in Rakhine State, so they should not be protesting like this,” said Daw Pa Pa Sein, a member of the Yadanabon University Teachers Union’s central committee.

“We also seek an increase in the education budget. But staging a protest on the campus is not the solution. It is disrupting classes,” Daw Pa Pa Sein said.

The Central Association of University Teachers Unions disagreed with the two Mandalay universities’ teachers and urged for talks between the government and student body to resolve the issue.

“Blaming the protesting students instead of offering guidance is a violation of the teachers’ duty. We urge the government and the responsible authorities to negotiate with the protesting students peacefully,” their statement reads.