Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Syria’s Cycle: Siege, Starve, Surrender, Repeat

The regime tore apart the author’s hometown in 2012. Now he reports on Syrians experiencing the same fate.

Under a brutal siege by the Syrian army, residents of Eastern Ghouta fled from their homes on March 15.
Under a brutal siege by the Syrian army, residents of Eastern Ghouta fled from their homes on March 15. PHOTO: OMAR SANADIKI/REUTERS


I spend my days trying to reach Syrians hiding from the war that is still raining down on them—even as I try to forget my own experience of that war six years ago.

In recent weeks, I have been able to connect by phone and text with people in the Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta. They are taking cover in basements and tunnels, scavenging for food to feed their hungry children. They utter brave sentiments even as I hear the fear quivering in their voices.
I am ashamed at some of the questions I must ask: How are you feeling? What is it like underground? What happens when the rockets hit nearby? Sometimes they reply sharply: Are you serious with these questions?

It is only then that I tell them I’m from the city of Homs, from the neighborhood of Baba Amr—the first place that the regime of Bashar al-Assad surrounded and bombed into submission, back in 2012. The government wanted to force rebels to withdraw but also to make an example of the city.
This revelation establishes an immediate bond between me, a Syrian journalist exiled in Germany, and them, Syrians being bombed by their own government. Eastern Ghouta is one of the last rebel-held pockets that the regime wants to capture as it consolidates control.
I know the answer to my own journalistic question about the sound of an approaching rocket: The terrifying whoosh makes you wonder if this will be the moment that your soul leaves your body.
Before Eastern Ghouta there was Wadi Barada. And before that, Aleppo. And before that too many towns and neighborhoods to list. All of them subjected to the same playbook of siege and bombardment: Starve or surrender.

Baba Amr, a low-income area on the edge of Homs, was the setting for many of my happiest childhood memories, as the spoiled youngest child of five. I would go every morning to buy fresh baked pita bread and a piece of cake or pastry at the neighborhood bakery. The owner, Abu Hasan, never called me by my name. He referred to me as ibn al aanseh—son of the teacher—a show of respect to my mother, who was the principal of the elementary school.

At the age of 16, I took my first date to a small clearing in Baba Amr that could barely be called a park. I didn’t have any money to buy her a soda or bag of chips. We just sat on a bench and talked for hours.

My parents made education our priority and encouraged us to focus on learning English. My dad would always say, “English will help you in your future.” In 2010 I began my first year at the university in Homs, studying civil engineering.

In 2011, as the effort of Syrians to participate in the “Arab Spring” turned into a civil war, Baba Amr was one of the first areas taken by antigovernment rebels, and it soon became a target of the regime. When I saw people I knew being shot, I became an activist and used my knowledge of English to reach out to human rights organizations.

The author in Baba Amr in early 2012, wearing borrowed body armor. PHOTO: COURTESY NOUR ALAKRAA

The author in Baba Amr in early 2012, wearing borrowed body armor.What we experienced in Baba Amr pales in comparison to what residents of Ghouta are living through, but I can relate. I know the answer to my own journalistic question about the sound of an approaching rocket: The terrifying whoosh makes you wonder if this will be the moment that your soul leaves your body.

After some 20 days of incessant siege and shelling, I fled Baba Amr with others who had been in hiding with me. We waited until nightfall and sneaked toward the edge of the neighborhood, which had been bombed so much that most landmarks were unrecognizable. We finally reached an unfinished water pipe, measuring about five feet high by three feet wide.

For two hours we walked, bent over, through the dank pipe. The smell of mold was suffocating, and there was no light visible at the end of it to guide us. When we finally reached the opening, we had to stay quiet and couldn’t even light a cigarette because an army checkpoint was nearby.

In the six years since I left Baba Amr, I have tried to leave behind these painful memories and to draw attention to the suffering of the Syrian people. I was inspired by the brave American journalist Marie Colvin, who worked for the U.K.’s Sunday Times.

Marie and I lived in the same large house in Baba Amr—a group of activists had rented it, and when journalists later moved in, I became a “fixer” helping some of them to navigate dangerous areas and meet sources. When Marie and I both managed to escape, I was just relieved and happy to be safe, but she couldn’t stop thinking about the people still trapped inside, and she went back.
One of my friends suggested that we hide in a small water tank on the roof of his house. In the end, we fled. I’ve not been back since.
She called CNN, the BBC and other television outlets to tell viewers, “The Syrian army is simply shelling a city of cold, starving civilians.” The next day she was killed when shells struck her building.

The idea that Marie sacrificed her life to help my people lighted a way forward for me. I became a journalist myself to try to tell these hard truths about what was happening in Syria and, maybe, to prompt foreign leaders to do something to stop the bloodshed.

In 2012, Syria wasn’t as complicated as many Western leaders say that it is now. I hoped that the United Nations and the civilized powers of the world would quickly intervene to force a political solution. That didn’t happen.

I continued to report on those who didn’t make it out of Syria. That meant I was never far from my own war memories, and sometimes the feelings they provoked were as raw as the day I first experienced them.

In 2015, when a resident of the town of Moadamia, under siege for two years, told me about the crippling hunger they were experiencing, I understood. I remembered not having eaten for two days and feeling as if I were drunk, no longer able to think properly or make a decision.

In 2012, the Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs was devastated by the Assad regime.
In 2012, the Baba Amr neighborhood of Homs was devastated by the Assad regime. PHOTO: JOSEPH EID/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

In 2016, when I saw images from Aleppo of five-year-old Omran—the bloodied, bruised child pulled from rubble who briefly caught the world’s attention—I remembered seeing my neighbors and their children running through the streets barefoot to escape from the shells landing around them. I recalled seeing the mangled bodies of children in the field hospital and wondering, “Why did they deserve this? Why were they being attacked so far away from the front lines?”

Now, as the Assad regime captures more and more of Eastern Ghouta, I have found it harder to connect with my sources on the ground. Are they still alive? Did the regime arrest them?

My anxiety for them brings back memories of the days when regime forces were advancing into Baba Amr, taking the neighborhood street by street, pushing us into a shrinking pocket. I can still feel that panic, like a hand gripping my stomach from the inside. We feared being caught and arrested, not knowing what the soldiers would do to us. One of my friends suggested that we hide in a small water tank on the roof of his house. In the end, we fled. I’ve not been back since.

When Assad’s forces stormed Baba Amr, my childhood home was ransacked, and my bike, TV and even my teddy bear were stolen. My family is now scattered among Homs, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Germany.

Ghouta will end up under Assad’s control, like all the previously besieged areas. Some of its people will flee from their homes, as I did, hoping perhaps that their children will be able to return one day.
Others will stay and suffer more, which seems to be the Syrian people’s punishment for daring to rise up and resist their brutal government.

Chinese Police Dynamite Christian Megachurch


The Golden Lampstand Church in Shanxi Province was destroyed this week by paramilitary police officers, according to local news reports and foreign activists.CreditChinaAid, via Associated Press

HONG KONG — Chinese police officers demolished one of the country’s largest evangelical churches this week, using heavy machinery and dynamite to raze the building where more than 50,000 Christians worshiped.

The Golden Lampstand Church in Shanxi Province was one of at least two Christian churches demolished by the authorities in recent weeks, part of what critics describe as a national effort to regulate spiritual life in China.

Under President Xi Jinping, the government has destroyed churches or removed their steeples and crosses as part of a campaign that reflects the Communist Party’s longstanding fear that Christianity, viewed as a Western philosophy, is a threat to the party’s authority.

The church in 2009.CreditAndy Wong/Associated Press

Global Times, a state newspaper, described the building’s destruction as part of a “citywide campaign to remove illegal buildings,” and quoted an unidentified official as saying that the church had been “secretly” constructed without proper permits and was initially disguised as a warehouse.

Members of the megachurch, however, have previously clashed with the authorities, including in 2009 when the police confiscated Bibles and imprisoned several of the congregation’s leaders.

On Tuesday, officers of the People’s Armed Police, a state paramilitary organization, detonated explosives in the church’s underground sanctuary and destroyed the rest of the building, according to ChinaAid, an American watchdog group that monitors religious freedom in China.

“The repeated persecution of Golden Lampstand Church demonstrates that the Chinese government has no respect for religious freedom or human rights,” said Bob Fu, the group’s founder.

The authorities used dynamite and heavy machinery to raze the Protestant megachurch.CreditChinaAid, via Associated Press

ChinaAid said that the building was built by the married evangelists Wang Xiaoguang and Yang Rongli with nearly $3 million in contributions from local Christians, but that it had never been registered with the authorities, a legal requirement.

Officially, Chinese citizens are free to practice the religion of their choice, but the government tightly controls spiritual life, and in some cases bans certain groups, like Falun Gong.

On Dec. 27, the authorities also demolished a Catholic church in Shaanxi Province, southwest of Shanxi Province, destroying an altar and confiscating vestments, according to ChinaAid.
More than 60 million Christians live in China, at least half of whom worship in unregistered churches.

Rights groups vow to fight Trump's 'transphobia masquerading as policy'

White House announces formal ban on transgender people serving in the military, following up on Trump’s controversial policy pledge
 
At least four cases challenging the ban are working their way through the courts. Photograph: Michael N/Pacific/BarcroftImages
 

After Donald Trump’s order late on Friday supporting a ban on transgender troops except under “limited circumstances”, gender rights groups said they would “vigorously defend” existing legal injunctions on the implementation of the exclusionary measures.
 
Jennifer Levi, the Glad transgender rights project director, told the Guardian: “It’s extremely disappointing to see these gross misstatements about transgender people’s ability to serve, particularly given the thousands of people who have been serving for decades, including in high positions of responsibility.”

On Friday, the White House said retaining troops with a history or diagnosis of “gender dysphoria” – wanting to transition gender – “presents considerable risk to military effectiveness and lethality”.
The ban, a modification of Trump’s full ban issued last summer in a tweet, disqualifies US troops who have had gender reassignment surgery.

But it allows current transgender service members who have not undergone reassignment surgery to remain, as long as they have been medically stable for 36 consecutive months in their biological sex before joining the military and as long as they are able to deploy across the world.

The defense secretary, Jim Mattis, also recommended that anyone diagnosed with gender dysphoria since the Obama administration ended the Pentagon’s longtime ban on transgender service in 2016 may continue to serve.

However, enlisted men and women who have not already been approved to transition gender would still face exclusion.

In a memo released on Friday, Mattis argued that “men and women who serve voluntarily accept limitations on their personal liberties – freedom of speech, political activity, freedom of movement – in order to provide the military lethality and readiness necessary to ensure American citizens enjoy their personal freedoms to the fullest extent.”

At least four cases challenging the ban are working their way through the courts. Glad’s Levi said the Trump administration’s order would not affect the group’s legal strategy to block the ban through the courts from moving forward.

She said: “We knew that this implementation plan was going to be announced , and we will continue to defend the cases. It’s the same ban we’ve been challenging and we will continue to challenge.”

Other rights groups also condemned the policy, which reverses Obama’s 2016 order.

“What the White House has released tonight is transphobia masquerading as policy. This policy is not based on an evaluation of new evidence,” Joshua Block, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union’s LGBT and HIV Project, said in a statement.

“It is reverse-engineered for the sole purpose of carrying out Trump’s reckless and unconstitutional ban, undermining the ability of transgender service members to serve openly and military readiness as a whole.”

Other groups, including the American Military Partner Association, also criticized the measures.
“This administration chose to announce this policy late on a Friday night, under cover of darkness, because they are embarrassed by it, and they should be,” David Stacy, director of government affairs at the Human Rights Campaign, told the Military Times.

“We have 15,000 or more transgender troops and their families who are going to wake up tomorrow with their lives in chaos.”

Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, said: “This latest memorandum is the same cowardly, disgusting ban the president announced last summer. No one with the strength and bravery to serve in the US military should be turned away because of who they are.”

Bu the policy changes have divided active-duty troops. According to a Military Times poll, 53% said they supported Trump’s comments last summer stating the military should not “accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity” because the services “cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption”.

More than one in three troops surveyed – 38% – said they strongly approve of Trump’s stance. But 35% of troops surveyed disapproved of the comments, 24% strongly.

France mourns 'hero' officer who took place of hostage in attack


Brian LoveSybille de La Hamaide-MARCH 24, 2018

PARIS (Reuters) - France was in mourning on Saturday for a French security officer who died from gunshot wounds after voluntarily taking the place of a female hostage during a supermarket siege by an Islamist militant.

Arnaud Beltrame, 44, a gendarme who once served in Iraq, had been raced to hospital fighting for his life after being shot by the gunman during the siege at the Super U store in the southwestern town of Trebes near the Pyrenees mountains.

His actions were described as heroic by politicians across the political spectrum and calls for a national tribute increased on social media networks.
“He fell as a hero, giving up his life to halt the murderous outfit of a jihadist terrorist,” President Emmanuel Macron said in a statement shortly before dawn on Saturday.


Friday’s attacker was identified by authorities as Redouane Lakdim, a 25-year-old Moroccan-born French national from the city of Carcassonne, not far from Trebes, the tranquil town of about 5,000 people where he struck on Friday afternoon.

Lakdim was known to authorities for drug-dealing and other petty crimes, but had also been under surveillance by security services in 2016-2017 for links to the radical Salafist movement, Paris prosecutor Francois Molins said on Friday.

The attacker, whose rampage began when he fired on a group of police joggers and also shot the occupants of a car he stole, killed three people and injured 16 others on Friday, according to a government readout.

Beltrame’s death took the number killed to four.

He was part of a team of gendarmes who were among the first to arrive at the supermarket scene. Most of the people in the supermarket escaped after hiding in a cold storage room and then fleeing through an emergency exit.

He offered to trade places with a hostage the attacker was still holding, whereafter he took her place and left his mobile phone on a table, line open. When shots rang out, elite police stormed the building to kill the assailant. Police sources said Beltrame was shot three times.

Politicians from the left and right called Beltrame a “hero” on Twitter, including opposition leader Laurent Wauquiez, far-right National Rally party leader Marine Le Pen and Olivier Faure, set to become the next Socialist party head.

#ArnaudBeltrame was a trending topic on the social network where people expressed their respect and gratitude for the officer, and thoughts for his wife. Several cities, the National Assembly and police stations lowered their flags in his honour.

The Grand Mosque of Paris, the largest in the country, said the Muslim community joined in mourning for a man who had “fallen heroically under the bullets of the terrorist Redouane Lakdim in the exercise of his mission.”

British Prime Minister Theresa May hailed Beltrame’s courage and sacrifice on Twitter, saying they would never be forgotten.

Flowers and messages in tribute to the victim are seen in front of the Gendarmerie of Carcassonne, the day after a hostage situation in Trebes, France March 24, 2018. REUTERS/Regis Duvignau

ARRESTS

Police arrested two people as part of the investigation into the attack, one of them a woman connected to Lakdim, on Friday and a 17-year-old man said to be one of his friends overnight, judicial sources said.

Searches at the attacker’s home showed notes referring to Islamic State that appeared to be a will, as well as a phone and a computer, judicial sources said.

Investigators also found three improvised explosive devices, a 7.65 millimetre handgun and a hunting knife in the supermarket, the source said.

A photo released by the French Gendarmerie shows Lieutenant-Colonel Arnaud Beltrame, the gendarme who voluntarily took the place of a hostage during a deadly supermarket siege in southwestern France on Friday, March 23, 2018. Beltrame has died, Interior Minister Gerard Collomb announced on Saturday, March 24. Gendarmerie Nationale/Handout via REUTERS

The Islamic State (IS) militant group claimed responsibility for the attack. Macron said security services were checking the claim.

U.S. President Donald Trump condemned “the violent actions of the attacker and anyone who would provide him support.”

“We are with you @EmmanuelMacron!” he added on Twitter.

More than 240 people have been killed in France in attacks since 2015 by assailants who either pledged allegiance to Islamic State or were inspired by the ultra-hardline group.

France is part of a group of countries whose warplanes have been bombing Islamic State strongholds in Iraq and Syria, where in recent months IS has lost much of a self-proclaimed “caliphate” of territory it seized in 2014.

One multiple attack by Islamist gunmen and suicide bombers killed 130 people in Paris in November 2015 while another killed close to 90 when a man ran a truck into partying crowds in the Riviera seaside city of Nice in July 2016.

Beltrame was a qualified parachutist who served in Iraq in 2005. He also worked as part of the elite Republican Guard that protects the presidential Elysee Place offices and residence in Paris, Macron said.

Friday’s assault was the first deadly Islamist attack in France since October 2017, when a man stabbed two young women to death in the port city of Marseille before soldiers killed him.

Several attacks over the past year or more have targeted police and soldiers deployed in big numbers to protect civilians and patrol sensitive spots such as airports and train stations.

The news of Beltrame’s death was first announced by France’s interior minister, who said in a Twitter post: “Dead for his country. France will never forget his heroism, bravery and sacrifice.”

‘Never again!’ Students demand action against gun violence in nation’s capital

Jaclyn Corin of Parkland, Fla., and Naomi Walder of Alexandria, Va., told The Post's Nicole Ellis why they attended the March for Our Lives in D.C. on March 24. 
 

Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators gathered in the nation’s capital and cities across the United States on Saturday to demand action against gun violence, the latest and most visible show of force by a student-led political movement born in the wake of a deadly school shooting in Parkland, Fla.

Led by students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where a shooter’s rampage last month left 17 dead, the teens who took the stage at the March for Our Lives in downtown Washington called for Congress to enact stricter gun-control laws in response to the nation’s relentless two-decade stretch of campus shootings. Hundreds of “sibling protests” were taking place in cities across the United States, including Philadelphia, New York, Chicago and Los Angeles.

Although the D.C. march was bankrolled by left-leaning celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey and George and Amal Clooney, students who survived the Parkland shooting have been its faces. Their unequivocal message on Saturday: The inaction that has repeatedly characterized federal lawmakers’ response to school massacres and everyday gun violence would no longer be tolerated.

“To the leaders, skeptics and cynics who told us to sit down, stay silent and wait your turn: Welcome to the revolution,” Cameron Kasky, a Stoneman Douglas student, said to a standing-room-only crowd that packed at least 10 blocks of Pennsylvania Avenue. “Either represent the people or get out. Stand for us or beware. The voters are coming.”

About 20 speakers — all of them children or teenagers — spoke to a strikingly diverse crowd that included students from every background: black and white, rich and poor, suburban and inner-city.
Together, they sang along to Miley Cyrus and Ariana Grande, shed tears during a chorus of “Happy Birthday” to a Parkland victim, and chanted “Never again!” as one of the movement’s leaders, Emma González, stood silently on the stage.

One of the rally’s most emotional speeches was delivered by Zion Kelly, a senior at Thurgood Marshall Academy in Washington, whose twin brother, Zaire, was shot and killed by a robber in September. Choking back tears before a rapt crowd, Kelly described the close bond he had with his brother.

“From the time we were born, we shared everything. I spent time with him every day because we went to the same schools, shared the same friends, and we even shared the same room,” he said. “I’m here to represent the hundreds of thousands of students who live every day in constant paranoia and fear on their way to and from school.”

Because many of the demonstrators were children, authorities in the nation’s capital said they were taking extra security precautions.

“To be honest, I’m scared to march,” Stoneman Douglas senior Carly Novell said in a Saturday morning tweet, citing the risk that a shooter might terrorize those gathered to protest in Washington. “This is a march against gun violence, and I am scared there will be gun violence on the march. This is just my mindset living in this country now, but this is why we need to march.”

Callie Stone, 18, was walking down Pennsylvania Avenue before the march wearing a denim jacket emblazoned with “Nasty Woman,” a term President Trump used to insult Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election and that progressive women adopted as a moniker.


With Stone was her mother, whom Stone had told the previous day that she wasn’t sure she wanted to raise children in a world where students fear going to school. “But I said, ‘Look at you, at your generation — you all are bringing us hope,’” said Kelly Stone, 54.

Kelly Stone was a middle school student in Canada in 1975 when a gunman killed two people and himself at Brampton Centennial Secondary School, which she went on to attend. She said that incident has cast a long shadow over her life and that of her daughter.

Nearly 200 people have died in school shootings since the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, which left 13 dead and inaugurated a relentless two-decade stretch of campus gun violence. During that period, more than 187,000 students attending at least 193 primary or secondary schools have experienced a shooting on campus during school hours, according to a Washington Post analysis.

“We’ve grown up knowing this could happen to us,” Stone said.

Just on Tuesday, 16-year-old Jaelynn Willey was fatally shot at Great Mills High School in Southern Maryland by a 17-year-old ex-boyfriend, who died as well. One other boy was injured in the gunfire. Willey was taken off life support two days ago.

Great Mills students, wearing their green-and-gold school colors, were among those thronging the main stage Saturday afternoon.

Carmen Hill, 17, a Great Mills senior, said Willey had been in her fifth-period American Sign Language class. She said it was time for elected officials in Washington to take heed of the anger and activism that has seized the country in recent weeks.

“If they weren’t listening,” Hill said, “they are now.”

Organizers had hoped for a crowd of half a million in Washington. Police did not provide crowd estimates, though by 1 p.m. about 207,000 people had ridden the Metro, officials said. That was more than three times the average Saturday ridership, although it did not approach the 470,000 people who used the system by 1 p.m. for the Women’s March last year.

The White House issued a statement Saturday praising the marchers, despite their calls for tougher gun-control measures than President Trump supports.

“We applaud the many courageous young Americans exercising their First Amendment rights today,” White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters said in the statement, in which she added that “keeping our children safe is a stop priority of the President’s.”

The president himself was in Florida at Trump International Golf Club, located about 35 miles from Parkland.

Nevaeh Williams, a 16-year-old who lives and attends school in the poor, predominantly African American neighborhoods of Southeast Washington, said that while the focus on reducing gun violence was welcome, it was belated for young people who face it daily on the streets of the District and in other cities.

Williams’s cousin was shot four years ago. A classmate, Zoruan Harris, the quarterback for the football team, was fatally shot in 2016.

“As soon as stuff happened in Florida, everyone wanted to do something,” Williams said. “But every week someone gets shot in D.C.”

More than 800 events were scheduled to take place around the world Saturday, according to March for Our Lives organizers. Beyond major cities, they included rallies in Las Vegas, where a gunman killed 58 people at a country music festival last year; in Parkland, Fla., home to Stoneman Douglas; and in Jonesboro, Ark., where the community is marking the 20th anniversary of a middle school shooting that left four students and a teacher dead.

Survivors or relatives of those killed in other mass shootings were also at the march in Washington, including some from Columbine, Sandy Hook and Marysville Pilchuck High School in Washington state, where four were fatally shot in 2014.

By midafternoon Saturday, the rallies had proceeded peacefully, with small and scattered counterprotests by opponents of stricter gun control.

In Washington, a group of several dozen protesters in tactical gear bearing a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag stood by FBI headquarters, conversing with march demonstrators and enduring the occasional yell or middle finger.
 In Boston, a group of about 25 counterprotesters gathered in front of the gold-domed Massachusetts statehouse to decry calls for tougher gun laws.

“I think it’s a little ridiculous,” Benjamin Johnson, 21, from New York, said of the March for Our Lives event. “After a tragedy like this one,” he said of the Parkland shooting, “everyone looks past the motives of the shooter and immediately focuses on guns. If you run over someone with a car, they don’t blame the car. But if someone is shot, they immediately blame the guns.”

Lori Aratani, Moriah Balingit, Kayla Epstein, Mary Hadar, Joe Heim, Marissa J. Lang, Luz Lazo, Erin Logan, Justin Wm. Moyer, Antonio Olivo, Dana Priest, Katie Shaver, Rachel Siegel, Ellie Silverman, Kelyn Soong, Shira Stein, Patricia Sullivan and Julie Zauzmer contributed to this report.

Saturday, March 24, 2018

Bolton Expected to ‘Clean House’

The incoming national security advisor aims to ax dozens of White House officials as he dismantles McMaster’s NSC.

John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, waves as he leaves Trump Tower in New York on Dec. 2, 2016. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images) 

BY , , 
 | 
No automatic alt text available.Incoming National Security Advisor John Bolton and people close to him are expected to launch a massive shake-up at the National Security Council, aiming to remove dozens of current White House officials, starting with holdovers from President Barack Obama’s administration, according to multiple sources.

Those targeted for removal include officials believed to have been disloyal to President Donald Trump, those who have leaked about the president to the media, his predecessor’s team, and those who came in under Obama.

“Bolton can and will clean house,” one former White House official said.

Another source said, “He is going to remove almost all the political [appointees] McMaster brought in.”

A second former White House official offered a blunt assessment of former Obama officials currently detailed or appointed to the NSC: Everyone who was there during Obama years should start packing their shit.”

On Thursday evening, just hours after Trump tapped him for the job, Bolton held a call with longtime advisors, including Matthew Freedman, a Republican consultant who once advised Bolton at the State Department and the United Nations. Freedman is currently helping manage the transition, according to a source familiar with the call.

“Freedman is a very political guy that Bolton likes,” one Republican source said. “He is overly ambitious about cleaning house.”

Freedman disputed that account, saying he was not aware of the Thursday phone call. “I can tell you there is no list,” he said.

Another source close to Bolton said it was premature to be talking about personnel changes.

Trump and Bolton see eye to eye on a more hawkish foreign policy, especially when it comes to North Korea and Iran, and are equally averse to multilateral diplomacy, whether that means the U.N. or working with the European Union.

That has veterans of the Trump administration predicting that Bolton will quickly seek to install his own team at the NSC, which functions as a clearing house for policy advice and is supposed to integrate the different perspectives of U.S. government agencies.

Among the officials Bolton’s allies are urging him to fire is Nadia Schadlow, currently the deputy national security advisor for strategy. Schadlow was the primary author of the administration’s recently released National Security Strategy, which was viewed as a surprisingly mainstream document that reaffirmed many traditional U.S. foreign-policy positions. Another official likely to be targeted in a Bolton purge is McMaster’s deputy, Ricky Waddell.

It wouldn’t be the first purge to follow a change in Trump’s national security advisor. When Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster replaced retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn in the job last year, McMaster systematically eliminated officials seen as loyal to his predecessor. According to four sources close to the White House, those so-called “Flynnstones” — advisors loyal to Flynn — are believed to be plotting their return to the NSC.

Whether Bolton will sign off on the staff purge his allies and advisors are pushing is less clear, though he has been insistent about ousting so-called Obama holdovers. “You could easily say that people close to Bolton want these people to go,” one source said. Other sources stress that Bolton, a veteran bureaucratic infighter, makes his own decisions.

A source close to Bolton cautioned that any staffing changes would take time, given the need to process security clearances. That means Bolton will likely be stuck with his current staff for the May summit meeting between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Bolton is a known quantity for Trump, who has for years watched the former George W. Bush administration official on Fox News. He enters the White House with Trump’s ear, the source close to Bolton said, which promises to further raise tensions with chief of staff John Kelly. Whether Kelly and Bolton are able to forge a working relationship will mark an early test for both men’s ability to run a well-functioning staff.

Another question concerns Bolton’s traditionally hard-line stance toward Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin, which is at odds with Trump’s. Two sources familiar with Bolton’s relationship with Trump said one of the big unknowns was how Bolton’s approach to Russia will go over with the president or if he’s even aware of those differences.

Trump and Bolton have discussed staffing changes since at least last July, when Bolton was offered the job as McMaster’s deputy, the position currently held by Waddell. Trump told Bolton that the deputy job would lead to the top post, but Bolton declined, saying he’d rather wait until he was offered the national security advisor job, according to three sources familiar with the matter.
McMaster’s departure may have been hastened by leaks emanating from the White House. Two sources familiar with the matter said McMaster was going to stay on until early summer.

But when the Washington Post reported this week that Trump had congratulated Putin in a phone call on his fraudulent election win — after receiving written briefing materials from the NSC instructing him not to congratulate Putin — the president reacted furiously and blamed McMaster. The story caused Trump to speed up McMaster’s departure, the sources said.

Iranian contradiction in North Korean negotiations

     
 2018-03-24
Like it or not we find that we’re having to get used to the paradoxes, contradictions and confusions of the Trump era.  

None is more apparent than his attack on the landmark Iran de-nuclearisation agreement, fashioned by the Obama Administration and the Iranian government. President Donald Trump wants to unwind it, even though it has the 100% support of the UN Security Council which in an unanimous vote enshrined the agreement in international law.  
The Western politicians and pundits seem to have no historic memory- of when the US reneged or slowed down on the implementation of previous agreements
At the same time he is trying to lure the North Koreans into a de-nuclearization policy, at the least into a nuclear freeze to stop it developing its rocket science any further, so that it’s incapable of hitting the US with a nuclear-tipped missile. But, given Iran, why should the North Koreans go along with such a deal?  

Why should it make such a deal when it knows there is a chance that the US might renege on this at a future date, as Trump wants to do with Iran?  

The Western politicians and pundits seem to have no historic memory- of when the US reneged or slowed down on the implementation of previous agreements. President Bill Clinton fashioned a superb agreement, only to be left in the lurch by a Republican-dominated Congress that effectively undermined the deal by refusing to implement the commitment to end sanctions and to liberalize trade. If the Republicans hadn’t sabotaged that deal it is likely that North Korea would have no nuclear bombs today and would be happily warming itself on electricity from a safe light-water nuclear reactor that Clinton organized to be constructed- and now remains half built, a sad testimonial to what might have been.  

If Trump wants a deal with the North he will have to shelve his onslaught on Iran. He will have to stop his demonizing of the country and his drive to get the Arab countries to arm more and stand up to it. He has just consummated a large arms deal with Saudi Arabia meant for this purpose.  
If Trump wants a deal with the North he will have to shelve his onslaught on Iran. He will have to stop his demonizing of the country and his drive to get the Arab countries to arm more and stand up to it. 
The Arab countries are in a mess. Egypt is under the hammer of a vicious dictator, Syria is ablaze, Iraq is on its back following the US/UK invasion, Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states have provoked a serious crisis with Qatar and Saudi Arabia is killing thousands of innocents in Yemen. Only Jordan remains reasonably normal. Is the effort to demonize Iran an attempt to re-build a false unity among the broken-backed Arabs by backing Iran into a corner?  

Ironically, in the time of President Jimmy Carter, an attempt was made to bolster the regime of the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, to make sure Iran could militarily -- as a proxy of the US - dominate the Gulf. Indeed it helped it get going on its nuclear bomb research.  

The Islamic revolution changed all that. The US felt beholden to the deposed Shah, giving him refuge in the US. Iran became a fundamentalist theocracy, a rallying place for those of a militant tendency, whether they be Shi’ite or Sunni. Their first item of business was to see the Shah returned to Iran for a trial that would have encompassed everything from corruption to the abuse of human rights. Instead of this the US and many of its European partners chose to go nose to nose, magnifying every disagreement.  
Ironically, in the time of President Jimmy Carter, an attempt was made to bolster the regime of the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, to make sure Iran could militarily -- as a proxy of the US - dominate the Gulf. 
Then Saddam Hussein led Iraq into an eight-year war of attrition against Iran that was finally mediated to a standstill by the UN, leaving neither country a victor. The US under President Ronald Reagan had provided Iraq with arms and the fruits of its aerial reconnaissance. Most of the West turned a blind eye to Saddam’s use of chemical weapons- which Iran refused to use. The war, fought on Iranian territory, consumed tens of thousands of innocent lives.  

One way of paying back was for Iran to fund fundamentalist militia, in particular Hezbollah, that would use its armed strength to try to undermine Israel, make Lebanon more militant and to aid the Palestinians. Later, other Iranian-backed militia entered war-torn Iraq and fought against the American occupiers. Iran itself fought against Al-Qaeda. Later still, its militia came to the aid of the Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Hassad.  

All this Iranian activity is understandable although not agreeable. But this is what can happen when the US and its allies back a country into a corner.  

The de-nuclearization deal could have been be a step to slowing Iran’s military forays, but Trump’s animosity is forestalling that possibility.  

For the next three months the issue is can Trump learn from the history of American mistakes? For now he continues to deal destructively with Iran on the one side while he attempts to deal constructively with North Korea on the other, unaware of the contradiction.  

How can he reassure North Korea that a deal they sign won’t be broken? That is the question.  
Note: For 17 years the writer had been a foreign affairs columnist and commentator for the International Herald Tribune/New York Times.  

Brexit campaign was ‘totally illegal’, claims whistleblower



24 Mar 2018

A Brexit campaigner has told Channel 4 News that Vote Leave cheated in the 2016 referendum by over-spending. But the prime minister’s political secretary says the allegations are “factually incorrect and misleading”, and outs the accuser as gay.

A whistle-blower, who says he was “outed” as gay by the Prime Minister’s political secretary in a row over cheating claims in the Brexit campaign, has claimed that the EU Referendum “wasn’t legitimate”.

In an interview with Channel 4 News, Shahmir Sanni, who helped run the BeLeave offshoot campaign, said that “people have been lied to,” adding: “I know… that Vote Leave cheated.”

He said: “Leaving the European Union, I agree with. But I don’t agree with losing what it means to be British in that process; losing what it means to follow the rules; losing what it means to be quite literally a functioning democracy.”

Theresa May’s political secretary Stephen Parkinson has been accused of “outing” Sanni yesterday after he was asked to respond to claims of cheating by Brexiteers. Parkinson says the two had been in a relationship for 18-months, which he then implies coloured his judgement of events.

Channel 4 News can also reveal that Sanni went to the Electoral Commission with two other pro-Brexit campaigning friends on Thursday with their evidence.

They told the Commission in detail why they think Vote Leave broke the law during the Referendum, and exceeded the legal spending limits.

Earlier last week their lawyers gave the Commission signed statements from the three whistle-blowers. Channel 4 News has seen a duplicate of the 46-page account prepared by two top QCs, and three thick ring-binders of supporting documents.

The allegations

The cheating row centres around the links between Vote Leave and third-party campaign group BeLeave.

Under election laws, Vote Leave was only allowed to spend £7m on its campaign. But there were scores of other separate campaign groups who could each spend up to £700,000, if they registered as permitted participants.

However, spending by each of these groups had to remain truly independent, and not directed by, the main designated campaigns.

Sanni tells Channel 4 News he was initially a Vote Leave outreach volunteer. But he claimed Stephen Parkinson then assigned him to another Brexit group called BeLeave, where he worked with the group’s founder, Darren Grimes.

BeLeave was based inside the Vote Leave headquarters and Grimes was photographed holding a Vote Leave poster on the day of the Referendum.

Sanni says that he and Grimes always reported to Stephen Parkinson.

“There was no time where anything BeLeave did didn’t go through Stephen,” Sanni said. “Any sort of article that I posted or an article that I wrote, I would run it through Stephen. I would say ‘is this OK?’.”

“This was after we had become a separate organisation – I sent Stephen a draft of my speech, and said ‘Hey, what do you think?’ I sought advice, as did Darren.”

Together, they claim they worked hand in glove with Parkinson.

In the last ten days of the campaign, Vote Leave donated a total of £625,000 to Grimes, who was registered as a permitted participant. The donations went directly to Canadian data firm Aggregate IQ (AIQ).

Sanni claims that Grimes was not truly independent of Vote Leave and was not in control of how the money was spent.

He claims Grimes and BeLeave were used by Vote Leave to get around limits on how much they could legally spend. If true, they could have overspent by almost ten per cent.

Documents seen by Channel 4 News show multiple links between AIQ and Cambridge Analytica’s parent company SCL.

Speaking about the donation, Sanni said: “When Darren told me that it was almost £700,000, the first thing I asked was ‘OK, so can I get my, you know, some of my travel expenses refunded, reimbursed?’,” he told Channel 4 News. “I didn’t have a job, I had just come out of graduation and I was volunteering.

“So I asked for money and Darren said ‘No I don’t think we can… the only way for them to give it to us is if they give it to AIQ.’ And that’s where at first I was like oh that’s a bit odd…”
Asked whether they could have refused to spend the money on AIQ, Sanni said: “We didn’t ever feel like we had that level of control. That’s what I mean, we never felt like we had control over the or, over the organisation itself…

“We were delegated responsibilities … but in terms of sort of money, we never had a say over that. We never had control over that.”

He claimed: “In effect they used BeLeave to over-spend, and not just by a small amount… Almost two thirds of a million pounds makes all the difference and it wasn’t legal…”

“They say that it wasn’t coordinated, but it was. And so the idea that… the campaign was legitimate is false.”

The responses

Tonight, Stephen Parkinson issued a “personal statement” to Channel 4 News:

“I have seen the statements issued by Shahmir and his lawyers, and am saddened by them. They are factually incorrect and misleading. My statement to Channel 4 News and The Observer was issued in my personal capacity and was solely a response to the serious and untrue allegations made against me by Shahmir, Chris Wylie, and others.

“It would be surprising if Shahmir, Mr Wylie, or those advising them thought I would be able to defend myself against those allegations without revealing my relationship with Shahmir. Sadly, the allegations they have chosen to make are so serious that I have been compelled to do so. I cannot see how our relationship, which was ongoing at the time of the referendum and which is a material fact in the allegations being made, could have remained private once Shahmir decided to publicise his false claims in this way.

“The matters raised in tonight’s Channel 4 News programme are already with the Electoral Commission.

“At the relevant time during the referendum period, the Commission advised Vote Leave that it was permissible to make a donation in the way it proposed to do to BeLeave.

“Twice since the referendum the Commission has investigated this matter, and twice it has found no evidence of wrongdoing. A third investigation into the same issue is currently taking place.

“The Electoral Commission has not contacted me in relation to any of these inquiries, but I will of course be happy to assist in them if they wish me to do so.

“I firmly deny the allegations in the programme. I had no responsibility for digital campaigning or donations on the Vote Leave campaign, and am confident that I stayed within the law and strict spending rules at all times.”

A solicitor for Vote Leave said: “Vote Leave has twice been cleared on this matter by the Electoral Commission. There are a number of new accusations and allegations being made in what you have sent us. While many of them seem irrelevant or trivial, some are serious and potentially damaging to the reputations of those caught up in those allegations. As has been the case throughout, Vote Leave is obligated to review – to the extent it can after this long elapsed period since the referendum – all such allegations, and is doing so. We will as appropriate share any relevant findings with the Electoral Commission, again as we have always done.”

Lawyers for AggregateIQ said: “AggregateIQ is a digital advertising, web and software development company based in Canada. It is and has always been 100% Canadian owned and operated.
AggregateIQ has never entered into a contract with Cambridge Analytica. AggregateIQ works in full compliance within all legal and regulatory requirements in all jurisdictions where it operates. It has never knowingly been involved in any illegal activity.

“All work AggregateIQ does for each client is kept separate. The services carried out by AggregateIQ for Vote Leave were in accordance with the instructions of Vote Leave. The services carried out for BeLeave were in accordance with the instructions of BeLeave. The accounts were kept separate at all times and there was no overlap or merging in any way.”

Darren Grimes denies all the allegations.
No more overtime: South Korea shuts off computers to stop people working late