U.S. border protection officials in San Diego said Friday that 20 people had been rescued from flooded drainage pipes west of the San Ysidro Port of Entry.
A Border Patrol agent found three people trying to enter the United States illegally late Thursday near a drainage tube about 3 kilometers west of the port of entry, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Border Patrol’s parent agency.
In a release, CBP said the three people told agents there were people trapped inside the drainage tubes, with water rising because of heavy rain in the area.
After a search, local emergency officials aided CBP agents in recovering 17 people, sending seven of them to a nearby hospital for medical care.
About an hour later, three more people were discovered in the drainage tubes and were taken into custody. One was sent to the hospital.
CBP said it apprehended 15 men, three women and one juvenile male from Mexico, and one Guatemalan man. It said all would be processed for illegally entering the United States.
Twitter Chief Executive Jack Dorsey has wrapped up of a trip to Africa by pledging to reside on the continent next year for up to six months.
Dorsey tweeted this week: “Africa will define the future (especially the bitcoin one!). Not sure where yet, but I’ll be living here for 3-6 months mid 2020.”
The CEO of the social media giant did not say what he planned to do on the African continent.
Twitter, which is based in San Francisco, did not offer more details on Dorsey’s plans.
On Dorsey’s recent trip, he visited entrepreneurs in Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria and South Africa.
Dorsey, 43, co-founded Twitter with several other entrepreneurs in 2006. He ran the company until he was ousted in 2008 but was brought back seven years later to again lead the platform.
Dorsey also co-founded the payment processing app Square and is also CEO of that operation. The tech exec holds millions of stock shares in both companies, and Forbes estimates his net worth at $4.3 billion.
Twitter, along with other social media companies, has faced criticism of its handling of misinformation and has come under scrutiny ahead of next year’s U.S. presidential election. Dorsey announced in October that Twitter would ban political advertisements on the platform.
The conflict in Syria created a global humanitarian crisis, with millions displaced and millions more fleeing to other countries. Turkish military operations that began in early October may be creating a new wave of displacement. Where are these Syrians going? VOA’s Turkish service filed this report, narrated by Ege Sacikara.
Iraqi security forces used live ammunition against mostly unarmed demonstrators Thursday, killing at least 40 people in one of the bloodiest days since anti-government protests began last month, security and medical officials said.
At least 25 people were killed and more than 200 wounded when security forces opened fire on protesters who had blocked key roads and bridges in the southern city of Nasiriyah.
Baghdad said it had sent military troops to restore order across southern Iraq, where protests have grown increasingly violent. Demonstrators have occupied buildings and bridges and have clashed with security forces, who have used tear gas and live ammunition almost daily since protests began.
‘A war zone’
Amnesty International denounced the violence in Nasiriyah, calling it a bloodbath.
“The scenes from Nasiriyah this morning more closely resemble a war zone than city streets and bridges. This brutal onslaught is just the latest in a long series of deadly events where Iraqi security forces meted out appalling violence against largely peaceful protesters,” said Lynn Maalouf, the group’s Middle East research director.
FILE – An Iraqi woman reacts as she looks at a makeshift memorial with personal belongings of those who were killed at anti-government protests at Tahrir Square in Baghdad, Iraq, Nov. 23, 2019.
Al Jazeera reported that Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi fired Lieutenant-General Jamil al-Shammari less than a day after he was put in charge of bringing order to Dhi Qar, of which Nasiriyah is the capital. Local media also reported late Thursday that the governor of Dhi Qar had resigned.
In Baghdad, security forces shot and killed four people and wounded at least another 22 as protesters tried to cross the Ahrar Bridge, which leads to the Green Zone, the heavily fortified seat of Iraq’s government.
Attack on Iranian consulate
The clashes came a day after protesters burned down an Iranian consulate in the holy city of Najaf. The staff at the consulate were unharmed because they had evacuated just before the attack, the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency reported Thursday. Iran Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi called for a “responsible, strong and effective” response to the attack.
This was the second time protesters had attacked an Iranian diplomatic mission. Earlier this month, protesters threw Molotov cocktails over the consulate walls in Karbala, but the fire did not catch.
The demonstrators are demanding an end to government corruption and what they perceive as increasing Iranian influence in Iraqi affairs.
More than 350 people have been killed and thousands more wounded since October.
The new U.S. ambassador to El Salvador says the United States is looking forward to reintegrating migrants there from other Central American nations who are seeking asylum in the United States. Ambassador Ronald Johnson, speaking in his first interview since his appointment in July, told VOA there was not a timeline on when El Salvador would start taking in migrants. “I don’t have a timeline on it, but I do think that the intent is that it will be implemented in a way that is not burdensome to any of the countries,” Johnson said.
The top U.S. commander in Latin America and the Caribbean says illicit narcotics money is now a “big part” of financing Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s government. “If you’re a cartel leader, you now see an easy pathway through Venezuela into commercial shipping and air to distribute your product, and Maduro and his illegitimate regime are getting a cut,” Admiral Craig Faller, the commander of US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), told VOA in an exclusive interview.
Europe is taking on propaganda videos and social media accounts that glorify terrorism and extremism in an effort to limit the space for extremist groups to recruit people online, the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, known as Europol, said this week.
The decision was made following two days of meetings last week by Europol’s European Union Internet Referral Unit (EU IRU), at its headquarters in The Hague, Netherlands, the agency said in a statement Monday.
“This coordinated action focused on the dissemination of online terrorist content. Among the items referred were propaganda videos and social media accounts glorifying or supporting terrorism and violent extremism,” the agency said in a statement.
The crackdown came after meetings between law enforcement and judicial authorities in Europe aimed at launching a joint effort to disrupt Islamic State’s online activities, the agency said, adding that they have been addressing this issue since 2015.
“Since July 2015, the EU IRU of Europol has been working with law enforcement authorities and online service providers to address the terrorist abuse of the internet in the framework of the EU Internet Forum,” the statement added.
FILE – Telegram co-founder Pavel Durov, center, smiles as he leaves after a press conference following his meeting with Indonesian Communication and Information Minister Rudiantara in Jakarta, Indonesia, Aug. 1, 2017.
Telegram
In an operation last week, Europol and law enforcement authorities in 12 European countries removed more than 26,000 items supporting Islamic State’s ideology.
“They have disappeared from an important part of the internet,” Eric Van Der Sypt, a spokesperson for the Belgian prosecutor’s office, said at a news conference at Europol headquarters in The Hague.
For the operation, the agency had been collaborating with nine online service providers, including Telegram, Google, Files.fm, Twitter, Instagram and Dropbox.
Among them, Telegram was the online service provider that contained the most extremism-related material, according to Europol, which praised Telegram for “its efforts to root out … malicious content.”
Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov responded Tuesday to Europol’s appreciation via his official Telegram channel.
“After the ISIS attacks in Europe, we have zero tolerance for their propaganda on our platform,” Durov said, using an acronym for the militant group.
“At the same time, we’ll continue to defend our users’ absolute right to privacy like no other service, proving that you don’t have to sacrifice privacy for security,” he added.
Telegram has been used by IS members because the app provides encryption for private communications.
FILE – This image posted online Dec. 6, 2015, by supporters of the Islamic State militant group on an anonymous photo sharing website shows Syrians inspecting a damaged building in the aftermath of an airstrike that targeted areas in Raqqa, Syria.
Online recruitments
According to a report released this summer by George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, Telegram serves “as a stable online platform for pro-IS content, an ecosystem for building extremist networks, an effective and secure internal communications tool, and a forum for recruiting new IS members.”
Experts charge that Islamic State’s online recruitment strategy, with the use of encrypted apps and automated bots, poses a challenge for European law enforcement units that want to monitor its online activities.
“Research shows that European policymakers and companies alike often focus on the restriction and removal of internet content to contain the spread of extremist messaging. But that censorship can lead extremists to focus their recruitment activities elsewhere,” Kate Cox, a senior analyst at RAND Europe, told VOA.
“What is needed are approaches that are grounded in intelligence collection involving close partnerships between law enforcement and social media companies in order to map extremist networks, identify capabilities and highlight potential targets,” Cox added.
Some experts point out that even though a lot has been done to exert more control over the online space to prevent the IS propaganda, there are many “offline” networks that could pose a threat of terrorist recruitment in Europe.
“I think over the last two years, there has been a lot of effort to exercise more control on the online space [IS online presence] both with active takedown measures and regulatory measures … but it’s not the primary channel of recruitment,” Raphael Bossong, a researcher at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, told VOA.
“All research shows that it is also and much more importantly the social ties, more contacts that people have, and then once they have a certain environment, a certain personal involvement, they may be going further into the online world,” Bossong said.
Free speech
According to experts, Europe’s anti-terrorism measures are broadly defined, and efforts by tech companies to counter the problem of extremist material online are faced with obstacles because it overlaps with free speech and people’s ability to express themselves online.
“The European Union’s own Directive on Combating Terrorism has a vague definition of terrorism that risks negative consequences for free expression, particularly online, and could have a range of downstream impacts, such as on the right to public protest and demonstration,” according to a report released this month by the Reuters Institute at the University of Oxford.
“Free expression is at risk when governments pass counterterrorism laws that use imprecise and unclear passages criminalizing the ‘glorification of terrorism and its provocation,’ ” the report added.
There is also the debate among free speech advocates and experts over issues pertaining to people’s privacy and the broader security implications of allowing jihadist groups like Islamic State to operate on these platforms.
“There are obvious tensions — privacy and free speech on the one hand, and safety and security on the other,” Maura Conway, a Dublin-based academic who studies fighting online extremism and is coordinator of VOX-Pol, told VOA.
“The role of the internet, and social media in particular in this case, in violent extremism and terrorism was not something that internet companies wished to countenance early in their development, but is certainly an area that they now acknowledge is one in which workable solutions need to be found,” Conway added.
Rikar Hussein contributed to this report, and some information for this report came from Reuters.
Albanian Defense Minister Olta Xhacka becomes emotional while reading names of victims of the strongest earthquake to hit Albania in more than three decades.
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has agreed to expand its anti-bias training and expressly forbid anti-Semitism in campus policies as part of an agreement with the U.S. Education Department following complaints about a March conference featuring a rapper accused of anti-Jewish bias.
The university announced the changes Monday after reaching a resolution with the department’s Office for Civil Rights. The deal puts an end to the inquiry without any admission of wrongdoing on the school’s part, and without any official finding from the department on the allegation of illegal discrimination.
Interim Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz reiterated that the university will not tolerate any form of harassment, and he encouraged students and faculty to report any problems.
“I reaffirm the university’s commitment to creating a place where every member of our community feels safe and respected and can thrive in an environment free from anti-Semitism and all forms of discrimination and harassment,” Guskiewicz wrote in a letter that was sent across campus Monday.
Under the agreement, the university must add a statement to its policies saying that anti-Semitic harassment is prohibited and may violate federal law. The school’s current rules prohibit discrimination based on religion or ethnic ancestry but do not specifically address anti-Semitism.
The school is also required to add a new section on anti-Semitism to existing training programs for students, faculty and staff. And for each of the next two academic years, the university must hold at least one campus meeting to discuss any concerns about anti-Semitism or other forms of harassment.
A Nov. 6 letter from the Education Department says the provisions detailed in the agreement will “fully resolve the issues giving rise to the complaint.”
‘Heartbroken and deeply offended’
The agency opened a civil rights investigation after receiving a complaint about a March academic conference titled “Conflict Over Gaza: People, Politics and Possibilities.” The event included a Palestinian rapper who performed a song that some critics called anti-Semitic. The university’s chancellor said the performance left him “heartbroken and deeply offended.”
Two weeks after the conference, anti-Semitic flyers were found on campus warning of an “evil Jewish plot to enslave and kill,” according to the Education Department. The complaint argued that the school’s support of the conference amounted to discrimination against students of Jewish descent. It said the flyers were further evidence of a “hostile environment” created by the event.
FILE – Education Secretary Betsy DeVos listens during a Cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington, July 16, 2019.
On April 15, U.S. Rep. George Holding, a North Carolina Republican, wrote a letter to Education Secretary Betsy DeVos raising concerns that the conference was supported with federal grant funding. He described the rap performance as “brazenly anti-Semitic.”
In response, DeVos ordered a separate investigation examining the organization behind the conference, the Duke-UNC Consortium for Middle East Studies, which is housed at UNC and jointly operated with Duke University.
Grant money
That inquiry, which is still ongoing, aims to determine whether the consortium is properly using a federal grant that’s awarded to dozens of universities to support foreign language instruction. The Duke-UNC consortium received $235,000 from the grant last year.
An Aug. 29 letter from the department threatened to cut the program’s grant funding, saying the consortium offered too many classes on art, film and culture and not enough on Middle Eastern languages. It also said the program promoted “positive aspects” of Islam but not other religions.
Officials at UNC rebuffed the claims, saying the program has hosted events including a visit to a Jewish center to explore Jewish traditions, and presentations on Christianity in Lebanon. The school also said it ranks among the top in the nation in enrollment of students studying the Arabic, Turkish and Urdu languages.
Still, the school agreed to review the program’s activities and document how its expenses relate to the goals of the federal grant.
In October, the department agreed to release grant money to the program for next year, but a department spokeswoman on Tuesday said future funding beyond that could be in question.
The inquiry has provoked a wide outcry from academic groups and free speech advocates who call it a threat to academic freedom. Two Democrats in Congress have asked DeVos to provide information on the inquiry, saying it’s dangerous to tie federal funding to specific curriculum demands.
The Middle East Studies Association recently called the investigation “an unprecedented and counterproductive intervention into academic curricula.” But in a response to the group, Robert King, the assistant secretary for postsecondary education, said the department has a duty to make sure grants are being used for their intended purpose.
“Federal grants are not blank checks from public coffers,” he said, “and the department intends to ensure that taxpayer funds are spent in alignment with Congressional directives.”
Many new refugees in America experience culture shock when they first arrive in the United States. Many have to deal with a new language, culture, and even holidays. But settled refugees can play a big role in helping new arrivals adapt to life in the U.S. One example is the Ethiopian Community Center, which hosts a Thanksgiving meal every year for new refugees. VOA’s Shahnaz Nafees has more on the event.
Critics say the widespread African tradition of giving cash and gifts to a bride’s family before marriage, known as a “bride price,” degrades women by putting a required, monetary value on a wife. In Nigeria, the financial pressure in a recent case ended in suicide, underscoring those concerns. But supporters of the bride price tradition uphold it as a cherished cultural and religious symbol of marriage, as Chika Oduah reports from Yola, Nigeria.
More than 60 doctors have written to British authorities asserting that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange urgently needs medical treatment at a university hospital.
The doctors said in a letter published Monday that Assange suffers from psychological problems including depression as well as dental issues and a serious shoulder ailment.
Assange is in Belmarsh Prison on the outskirts of London in advance of an extradition hearing set for February. He is sought by the U.S. on espionage charges relating to his WikiLeaks work.
The letter was sent to Home Secretary Priti Patel.
Dr. Lissa Johnson of Australia said an independent medical assessment is needed to determine if Assange is “medically fit” to face legal proceedings.
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday offered another conflicting account of a leadership shakeup at the Pentagon, while defending his decision to intervene on behalf of a Navy SEAL convicted of battlefield misconduct during the fight against the Islamic State terror group in Iraq.
FILE – Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer addresses graduates during the U.S. Naval War College’s commencement ceremony, in Newport, Rhode Island, June 14, 2019.
Asked about Sunday’s firing of the U.S. Navy’s top civilian, Secretary Richard Spencer, Trump told White House reporters, “We’ve been thinking about that for a long time.”
“That didn’t just happen,” he added during an appearance in the Oval Office with the Bulgarian prime minister. “I have to protect my war fighters.”
U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper attends a press conference, Nov. 15, 2019.
Trump also defended ordering Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Sunday to cancel a review board hearing for Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher.
Gallagher was acquitted by a military jury earlier this year of charges he murdered a wounded Islamic State terror group fighter during his deployment to Iraq in 2017. But he was found guilty of posing with the teenager’s body and demoted.
Earlier this month, Trump intervened, restoring Gallagher’s rank and pay. But some Navy officials, including Spencer, had said Gallagher would still need to appear before a review board, which would decide whether he could still retire as a SEAL and keep the Trident pin awarded to members of the elite unit.
“They wanted to take his pin away, and I said, No,'” the president told reporters Monday, calling Gallagher a “tough guy” and “one of the ultimate fighters.”
Hours earlier, Esper defended Trump’s order to abort the review board hearing for Gallagher.
“The president is the commander-in-chief. He has every right, authority and privilege to do what he wants to do,” Esper told reporters at the Pentagon.
But Esper’s account of the events that led to Spencer’s dismissal as Navy secretary appears to differ from Trump’s characterization that the firing had been under consideration “for a long time.”
Specifically, Esper alleged he learned after a White House meeting on Friday that Spencer had gone behind his back and tried to make a deal regarding the Gallagher case with White House officials.
“We learned that several days prior Secretary Spencer had proposed a deal whereby if president allowed the Navy to handle the case, he [Spencer] would guarantee that Eddie Gallagher would be restored a rank allowed to retain his trident and permitted to retire,” Esper told reporters.
“I spoke with the president late Saturday informed him that I lost trust and confidence in Secretary Spencer and I was going to ask for Spencer’s resignation,” the defense secretary added. “The president supported this decision.”
The White House late Monday pushed back against the idea that the president’s version of events and the Pentagon’s version were not aligned.
“Both of those things are true,” White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham told VOA, regarding Trump’s assertion that there had been plans to fire Spencer prior to his conduct in the Gallagher matter.
Yet other discrepancies remain.
In a letter acknowledging his termination Sunday, Spencer made no mention of the Pentagon’s allegations that he tired to broker a deal with the White House.Instead, he argued he could not abide by the president’s desire to bypass the review board process as required by the military justice system.
“The rule of law is what sets us apart from our adversaries,” he wrote. “I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believes violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Spencer kept to that account late Monday in an interview with CBS News, his first since his firing.
“What message does that send to the troops?” Spencer said of the president’s interfence, answering, “That you can get away with things.”
“We have to have good order and discipline. It’s the backbone of what we do,” he added.
But, Esper on Monday insisted Spencer’s assertions did not match with what the former Navy secretary had told him directly.
Esper also contradicted claims made by Spencer on Saturday that he had never threatened to resign.
I would like to further state that in no way, shape, or form did I ever threaten to resign. That has been incorrectly reported in the press. I serve at the pleasure of the President.
“Secretary Spencer had said to me that … he was likely, probably going to resign if he was forced to work to try to retain the Trident [pin for Gallagher],” Esper said. “I had every reason to believe that he was going to resign, that it was a threat to resign.”
“I cannot reconcile the personal statements with the public statements with the written word,” the defense secretary added.
Already, the president’s intervention in the Gallagher case and the firing of the Navy secretary have some Democratic lawmakers calling for an investigation.
“Throughout my work with Secretary Spencer, I’ve known him to be a good man, a patriotic American, and an effective leader,” Democratic Senator Tim Kaine, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement Monday.
“We have many unanswered questions,” Kaine said, calling Spencer one of several officials who “served our country well despite having to work under an unethical commander-in-chief.”
FILE – Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) speaks during Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 1, 2017.
“We’re working to get the facts,” the committee’s top Democrat, Senator Jack Reed, added in a separate statement. “Clearly, Spencer’s forced resignation is another consequence of the disarray brought about by President Trump’s inappropriate involvement in the military justice system and the disorder and dysfunction that has been a constant presence in this Administration.”
But the committee’s chairman, Republican Senator Jim Inhofe, indicated late Sunday he was ready to move on.
The president and defense secretary “deserve to have a leadership team who has their trust and confidence,” Inhofe said, acknowledging, “It is no secret that I had my own disagreements with Secretary Spencer over the management of specific Navy programs.”
Trump has nominated Ken Braithwaite, a former admiral and the current U.S. ambassador to Norway, to become the next Navy secretary.
White House Correspondent Patsy Widakuswara contributed to this report.
Turkey and the United States are seemingly closer to a collision course as Turkish media report Ankara testing a Russian anti-aircraft weapon system, despite threats of Washington sanctions.
Turkish F-16 jets flew low Monday across the Turkish capital, in a two-day exercise reportedly to test the radar system newly acquired Russian S-400 missile system.
Ankara’s purchase of the S-400s is a significant point of tension with Washington, which claims the system poses a threat to NATO’s defenses.
“There is room for Turkey to come back to the table. They know that to make this work, they need to either destroy or return or somehow get rid of the S-400,” a senior State Department official told reporters at a briefing Wednesday.
The official added that sanctions could follow if Ankara went ahead and activated the system.
Ankara’s purchase of the S-400 system violated U.S. Congress’s Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA).
FILE – Military vehicles and equipment, parts of the S-400 air defense systems, are seen on the tarmac, after they were unloaded from a Russian transport aircraft, at Murted military airport in Ankara, July 12, 2019.
Despite September’s delivery of the S-400s, Washington appeared to step back, indicating that sanctions would only be imposed if Ankara activated the system.
Turkish Defense Minister Hulusi Akar reiterated Ankara’s stance, however, that the S-400 poses no threat to NATO systems.
“That’s what we have been saying since the beginning [of the dispute with the [U.S.]. [S-400s] will definitely be a ‘stand-alone’ system. We are not going to integrate this with the NATO systems in any way. It will operate independently,” Akar said Monday.
There is mounting frustration in Ankara with Washington over its stance, given President Barack Obama’s failure to sell U.S. Patriot missiles to Turkey.
“Russia has missiles, so do Iraq, Iran, Syria. So why doesn’t the U.S. doesn’t give us the patriot missile,” said Professor Mesut Casin, a Turkish presidential foreign policy adviser.
“Then we buy Russian S-400, and then you say you are the bad guy, you don’t obey the regulations, NATO principles, you buy Russian missiles.”
Congress called ‘anti-Turkish’
Monday’s testing of the S-400 radar system is widely seen as a challenge to Washington. Analysts claim it will likely add to calls in Congress to impose CAATSA sanctions and other measures against Turkey.
Sweeping new economic and political sanctions against Turkey are currently in Congress awaiting ratification.
“Congress is somehow has become so anti-Turkish. We have only a few friends remaining in the Congress,” said former Turkish ambassador Mithat Rende. “It so difficult to understand how they become so anti-Turkish so emotional.”
“CAATSA sanctions are waiting, and they are fundamentally important for the Turkish economy,” warned Asli Aydintasbas, a senior fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations.
The Turkish economy is still recovering from a currency crash two years ago, triggered by previous U.S. sanctions.
Trump, Erdogan
Ankara will likely be looking to President Donald Trump to blunt any new efforts to impose sanctions against Turkey. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is seen to have built a good relationship with Trump.
Earlier this month, Trump hosted Erdogan in the White House for what he called a “wonderful meeting.”
FILE – President Donald Trump speaks during a news conference with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the East Room of the White House, Nov. 13, 2019.
“Turkish relations is so reduced to these two guys [Erdogan and Trump],” said Aydintasbas. “The entire relationship is built on this relationship and will rely on Trump to restrict Congress’s authority and make those bills go away.”
However, Ankara’s test Monday of S-400 components will make it unlikely Washington will end a freeze on the sale of the F-35 jet.
Trump blocked the Turkish sale, over concerns the fighter jet’s stealth technology could be compromised by the Russian missile’s advanced radar system.
The F-35 sale is set to replace Turkey’s aging fleet of F-16s. Ankara is warning it could turn to Russia’s SU 35 as an alternative.
“All should be aware that Turkey will have to look for alternatives if F-35s [fighter jets] cannot be acquired for any reason,” Akar said.
Role of Russia
Russian President Vladimir Putin is courting Erdogan in a move widely seen as attempting to undermine NATO.
The two presidents are closely cooperating in Syria despite backing rival sides in the Syrian civil war. Bilateral trading ties are also deepening primarily around energy.
Analysts point out a large-scale purchase of Russian jets will likely have far-reaching consequences beyond Ankara’s S-400 procurement.
Training of Turkish pilots for the SU 35 would be in Moscow, as opposed to decades of U.S. training, while Turkey could find itself excluded from joint air exercises with its NATO partners.
Ankara, too, is warning Washington of severe consequences if it has to turn to Moscow to meet its defense requirements.
“Turkey will buy Russian aircraft if the F-35 freeze is not lifted,” said Casin. “If this happens, Turkey will not buy any more U.S. combat aircraft. This will be the end of the Turkish-U.S. relationship. I think like this; I am very serious.”
Putin is due to meet Erdogan in Turkey in January, an opportunity the Russian president is expected to use to try and confirm the SU 35 sale.
U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper has asked Navy Secretary Richard Spencer to resign, citing his handling of the case of a Navy SEAL accused of war crimes in Iraq.
Esper asked for the resignation Sunday and Spencer submitted it, Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said.
FILE – Navy SEAL Edward (Eddie) Gallagher, right, walks with his wife, Andrea Gallagher, as they arrive at a military court on Naval Base San Diego, in San Diego, California, June 26, 2019.
The request involved the case of Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, a Navy SEAL who was accused of war crimes committed during his deployment to Iraq in 2017. He was acquitted of the more serious charges of murder but found guilty of posing with the body of a teenaged Islamic State militant. As a result, Gallagher was demoted.
But U.S. President Donald Trump intervened in the case and pardoned him and restored his rank and pay.
When Trump learned last week that the Navy planned to bring Gallagher before a review board to determine if he could continue to wear the Trident Pin, which signifies membership in the elite commando unit, he intervened again.
Trump tweeted: “The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin. This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business!”
The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin. This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business!
The Pentagon said Esper asked for Spencer’s resignation after learning that the secretary had privately proposed to White House officials that if they stopped meddling in the Gallagher case, Spencer would make sure that Gallagher would be able to resign as a Navy SEAL. The Washington Post first reported this story.
That information was not disclosed to Esper during conversations he had with Spencer, Hoffman said.
“Unfortunately, as a result, I have determined that Secretary Spencer no longer has my confidence to continue in his position,” Esper said in a statement released Sunday.
Esper has told the president to consider Kenneth Braithwaite, current U.S. ambassador to Norway and a retired Navy rear admiral, as the next secretary of the Navy, Hoffman said.
Hong Kong pro-democracy forces appear headed for a landslide victory in local elections that saw record turnout, delivering a stunning rebuke to Beijing.
Early voting results Monday showed pro-democracy candidates winning nearly every seat they contested in Hong Kong’s 18 district councils. Pro-democracy candidates led the pro-establishment camp, 278 seats to 42.
If the trend continues, it would be a major symbolic blow to pro-China forces that dominate virtually all levels of Hong Kong’s politics.
It is the latest evidence of continued public support for a five-month-old pro-democracy movement that has become increasingly aggressive.
“Hong Kongers have spoken out, loud and clear. The international community must acknowledge that, almost six months in, public opinion has NOT turned against the movement,” student activist Joshua Wong said on Twitter.
The vote will not significantly change the balance of power in Hong Kong’s quasi-democratic political system. District council members have no power to pass legislation; they deal mainly with hyperlocal issues, such as noise complaints and bus stop locations.
However, the district council vote is seen as one of the most reliable indicators of public opinion, since it is the only fully democratic election in Hong Kong.
On Edge From Violence, Hong Kong Holds Local Elections video player.
Nearly 3 million people voted in the election — a record high for Hong Kong, and more than double the turnout of the previous district council election, in 2015.
Voters formed long lines that snaked around city blocks outside polling stations across the territory, many waiting over an hour to vote.
“This amount of people I’ve never seen. There are so many people,” said Felix, who works in the real estate industry and voted in the central business district.
By nighttime, most of the long lines at voting stations had tapered off, but nearby sidewalks remained filled with candidates and their supporters who held signs and chanted slogans in an attempt to persuade passersby to cast last-minute votes.
“I’m tired, but I think it’s more important to fight,” said Elvis Yam, who waited in line for an hour to vote in the morning and then volunteered to hold a campaign sign for a pro-democracy candidate in the University District.
Voters queue to vote at a polling station during district council local elections on Hong Kong Island, China November 24, 2019. REUTERS/Athit Perawongmetha
Mr. Ma, a voter in the South Horizons West constituency, said he sees the election as a continuation of the protest movement. “Many would like to have a change. So this election is very important,” he said.
Police promised a heavy security presence at voting locations. But outside many polling stations, there was no visible police presence. At others, teams of riot police waited in nearby vans. There were no reports of major clashes.
Hong Kong has seen five months of pro-democracy protests. The protests have escalated in recent weeks, with smaller groups of hard-core protesters engaging in fierce clashes with police.
The win “very clearly” shows the public is in support of the movement, says Ma Ngok, a political scientist at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
“This will, I think, give (Hong Kong) much better support internationally, and also create much more pressure for the Hong Kong government to respond to the demands of the protest,” Ma said.
Electoral staff helps a voter at a polling station during district council local elections in Hong Kong, Nov. 24, 2019.
Wider impact?
Even though district councils have little power, the vote could affect how the territory’s more influential Legislative Council and chief executive are selected in the future.
District councilors are able to select a small number of people to the 1,200-member election committee that chooses Hong Kong’s chief executive. They also have the ability to select or run for seats in the Legislative Council.
“That’s a big deal,” said Emily Lau, a former Legislative Council member and prominent member of the pro-democracy camp. “Because of this constitutional linkage, it makes the significance of the district council much bigger than its powers show you.”
Hong Kong saw a major surge in voter registration, particularly among young people. Nearly 386,000 people have registered to vote in the past year — the most since at least 2003.
Many Hong Kongers are concerned about what they see as an erosion of the “one country, two systems” policy that Beijing has used to govern Hong Kong since it was returned by Britain in 1997.
Bolivia’s Senate on Saturday unanimously approved a measure calling for new presidential elections that would exclude ousted leader Evo Morales — a key step toward pacifying a nation since an October 20 vote marred by reported irregularities.
The measure forbids reelection of anyone who has served the last two terms consecutively as president, effectively ruling out Morales, whose refusal to accept such term limits was a key issue in protests against him.
The bill now goes to the lower house, which like the Senate is dominated by Morales’ Movement Toward Socialism party.
The measure did not set a date for the vote.
Resignation
Morales’ claim of victory and a fourth term in the October 20 election prompted massive protests that led him to resign on November 10 at the army’s suggestion. An audit by a team from the Organization of American States found widespread irregularities in that election.
After Morales left for asylum in Mexico, his own supporters took to the streets in protest.
Officials say at least 32 people have died in demonstrations since the presidential election, which would be annulled by Saturday’s vote.
An agreement on elections between Morales’ party and the interim government helped pacify the country. Street blockades were lifted, allowing supplies to reach marketplaces Saturday in areas that had been short of groceries and gas.
Senator Oscar Ortiz said the bill calls for updating the electoral rolls and naming a completely new electoral tribunal to oversee the vote.
Senators approve a bill on holding new elections in La Paz, Bolivia, Nov. 23, 2019.
“We have to generate confidence in the population,” said Senator Omar Aguilar, from Morales’ party.
Later Saturday, interim President Jeanine Anez rejected a bill presented by Morales’ party that would have prevented the ousted president from being tried for alleged crimes committed during the exercise of his functions to date.
“With respect to approving this bill in favor of those who have committed crimes and who now seek impunity, my decision is clear and firm: I will not promulgate this law,” Anez said.
The bill remains paralyzed, lawmakers said.
On Friday, the interim government accused Morales of terrorism and sedition for purportedly organizing highway blockades intended to prevent food from reaching some cities.
Acting Interior Minister Arturo Murillo said the complaint relates to a video in which Morales is supposedly heard in a phone call coordinating the blockades from Mexico. Murillo said Bolivia’s government is seeking a maximum penalty, which is between 15 and 20 years in prison.
Morales has said the video is a “montage” by his opponents.
Iraqi security forces fired rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse crowds of protesters Saturday, killing two people in a third day of fierce clashes in central Baghdad, security and hospital officials said.
Two protesters were struck with rubber bullets and died instantly and over 20 others were wounded in the fighting on Rasheed Street, a famous avenue known for its old crumbling architecture and now littered with rubble from days of violence. Sixteen people have died and over 100 have been wounded in the renewed clashes. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations.
At least 342 protesters have died in Iraq’s massive protests, which started October 1 when thousands of Iraqis took to the streets to decry corruption and lack of services despite Iraq’s oil wealth.
Separately, Iraq’s parliament failed to hold a session Saturday because of a lack of a quorum. Lawmakers were supposed to read reform bills introduced to placate protesters. The next session was postponed until Monday.
Iraqi demonstrators throw fireworks toward security forces during anti-government protests in Baghdad, Iraq, Nov. 23, 2019.
The fighting has centered on Rasheed Street and started Thursday when protesters tried to dismantle a security forces barricade on the street, which leads to Ahrar Bridge, a span over the Tigris River that has been a repeated flashpoint. Security forces responded with tear gas and live ammunition.
The violence took off again Friday afternoon. Live rounds and tear gas canisters were fired by security forces from behind a concrete barrier on Rasheed Street.
On Saturday, fighting picked up in the late afternoon and again in the evening, with security forces firing rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse crowds.
Protesters have occupied part of three bridges — Ahrar, Jumhuriya and Sinak — in a standoff with security forces. The bridges lead to the fortified Green Zone, the seat of Iraq’s government.
Hong Kongers are voting Sunday in a local election widely seen as a de facto referendum on pro-democracy protests that have recently taken a more aggressive turn.
The territory is on edge following days of intense clashes between police and groups of mostly student protesters, though the violence has subsided in the past few days.
Though the district council members being chosen Sunday have little power, pro-democracy forces still hope for a big win that will confirm public support for the protests.
Police have promised a heavy security presence at voting locations. Public broadcaster RTHK reports officers will be stationed inside and outside polling stations in riot gear.
“If there’s any violence, we will deal with it immediately, without hesitation,” Chris Tang, Hong Kong’s police commissioner, said.
A riot policeman stands as voters line up outside a polling place in Hong Kong, Nov. 24, 2019. Voting was underway Sunday in Hong Kong elections that have become a barometer of public support for anti-government protests.
District councils
Hong Kongers are choosing more than 400 members of 18 district councils scattered across the tiny territory. The district councils essentially serve as advisory bodies for local matters such as building roads or schools.
“I think the political message is more important than anything else,” Ma Ngok, a political scientist and professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said. “If the democrats really score a landslide victory, it will show very clearly that the public is in support of the movement.”
Hong Kong has seen five months of pro-democracy protests. The protests initially took the form of massive demonstrations against a reviled extradition bill, which could have resulted in Hong Kongers being tried in China’s politicized court system.
The protests have escalated in recent weeks, with smaller groups of hard-core protesters destroying public infrastructure, defacing symbols of state power and clashing with police. Protesters defend the moves as an appropriate reaction to police violence and the government’s refusal to meet their demands.
Despite the protester violence, polls suggest the movement still enjoys widespread public support. Meanwhile, the approval of Hong Kong’s Beijing-friendly chief executive, Carrie Lam, has fallen to a record low of about 20%.
Quasi-democratic system
Under Hong Kong’s quasi-democratic system, district councils have no power to pass legislation. But the vote could affect how the territory’s more influential Legislative Council and chief executive are selected in the future.
“That’s a big deal,” said Emily Lau, a former Legislative Council member and prominent member of the pro-democracy camp. “Because of this constitutional linkage, it makes the significance of the district council much bigger than its powers show you.”
The pro-democracy camp has tried to use the protests as a mobilizing force ahead of the vote and is fielding an unprecedented number of candidates.
A volunteer medic searches for protesters inside a building on the campus of Hong Kong Polytechnic University, where dozens of pro-democracy protesters remain holed up, in the Hung Hom district of Hong Kong, Nov. 23, 2019.
But they have a lot of ground to make up. Pro-government forces make up the majority in all 18 district councils, with the so-called “pan-democrats” taking up only about 25% of the overall seats, Ma said.
Hong Kong has seen a major surge in voter registration, particularly among young people. Nearly 386,000 people have registered to vote in the past year, the most since at least 2003, according to the South China Morning Post.
Voter sentiment mixed
At a recent pro-democracy rally in central Hong Kong, many protesters said they plan to vote, but they were divided on whether the election will lead to real change.
“I’m not excited,” said Ip, giving only her first name. “I think voting is one of our ways to express our voice, but I doubt the results will be very good.”
Another demonstrator, who gave the name Ms. Chan, said she also intends to send a message by voting.
“The government needs to listen to the people,” she said. “They do many wrong things, so I think many people will go out and vote.”
Iran has extended a major shutdown of internet access into a seventh day to suppress domestic opposition to the government, prompting the United States to sanction the Iranian official overseeing the outage.
The #Iran internet shutdown is now in its 144th hour, keeping friends and family out of touch and limiting the basic rights of Iranians⏱
Subscribe to our network monitor channel to track national connectivity in real-time #IranProtests#Internet4Iran
In a tweet late Friday, London-based internet monitoring group NetBlocks said the shutdown had lasted a full six days and was “keeping friends and family out of touch and limiting the basic rights of Iranians.” A livestream of Iran’s internet connectivity rate on the group’s YouTube channel showed a slight improvement to 20%, after having risen to 15% from 5% on Thursday.
Some Iranian officials have said they expect internet access to be gradually restored in the coming days. But there was no government announcement of a date for an end to the shutdown, which began in the evening of November 16 as authorities tried to stop Iranians from sharing images of nationwide anti-government protests that had erupted the previous day.
A news agency of Iran’s Islamic Azad University, a private national university network, said in a Thursday article that seven other major universities in the country had their internet access restored. But it cited a public relations director for one of them, Sharif University, as saying the renewed access was “very slow.”
Iranian officials sparked the protests when they raised the subsidized price of gasoline by 50% on Nov. 15. The hike further strains the finances of many Iranians facing hardship in an economy already weakened by U.S. sanctions and government corruption and mismanagement.
In its first punitive response to the internet shutdown, the Trump administration sanctioned Iranian Information and Communications Technology Minister Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi on Friday.
The Treasury Department said Azari Jahromi’s ministry has been responsible for restricting the Iranian people’s access to the internet, including popular messaging apps used by tens of millions of Iranians to communicate with each other and the outside world. It added Azari Jahromi to its Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons list, freezing his assets under U.S. jurisdiction and prohibiting Americans from any dealings involving those assets.
British rights group Amnesty International has said it documented the killings of 106 protesters in the crackdown by security forces during the period Nov. 15-19.
Tehran has rejected Amnesty’s death toll as speculative but has declined to issue its own tally of protester fatalities. Authorities said several security personnel also were killed in violence by “thugs” who attacked stores and burned buildings in cities around the country.
Iranian leaders have said they succeeded in crushing the unrest after several days, while blaming the protests on incitement by foreign “enemies” and exiled opposition groups. The internet shutdown made it difficult to verify whether the demonstrations have ended.
FILE – U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo talks to journalists during a news conference during a NATO Foreign Ministers meeting at the NATO headquarters in Brussels, Nov. 20, 2019.
“The United States stands with the people of Iran in their struggle against an oppressive regime that silences them while arresting and murdering protesters,” said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in a Friday statement. “No country or company should enable the regime’s censorship or human rights abuses. The United States will expose these human rights abusers and record their shameful acts for history.”
A day earlier, Pompeo took the unusual step of tweeting an appeal, in Farsi and English, for Iranians to send “videos, photos and information documenting the regime’s crackdown on protesters.” He said people could do so via the @RFJ_Farsi_Bot Telegram channel. It was not clear when the State Department would reveal any content that it has received.
Azari Jahromi, who has 168,000 followers on his verified Twitter account, tweeted late Friday for the first time since the protests began, issuing a defiant response to being sanctioned by Washington.
I’m not the only member of club of sanctioned persons (Based on Trump’s fairytales). Before me, Iran ICT startups, Developers, Cancer patients and EB children were there. I’ll continue advocating access to Internet & I won’t let US to prohibit Iran development.#EconomicTerrorism
“I’m not the only member of [the] club of sanctioned persons (Based on Trump’s fairytales). Before me, [there were] Iran ICT startups, Developers, Cancer patients and EB [skin disease] children,” Jahromi wrote.
Iran has said U.S. sanctions targeting its oil, banks and other major industries represent a campaign of “economic terrorism” against the Iranian people. Washington has said humanitarian trade with Iran is exempt from its sanctions, whose aim is to deny resources to the Iranian government for malign activity.
“I’ll continue advocating access to Internet & I won’t let US to prohibit Iran development,” Azari Jahromi added.
A U.S. Treasury statement identified the 38-year-old as a former Iranian intelligence officer involved in surveillance operations that enabled the government to arrest protesters involved in peaceful opposition demonstrations in 2009. The Treasury said Azari Jahromi has been accused of personally interrogating multiple activists during that period.
In a VOA Persian interview, analyst Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies said Azari Jahromi has been a key figure in Iran’s censorship apparatus.
“Targeting him is both symbolic and effective, but should not be the end of the stick. It should be a first step toward the U.S. going after Iran’s entire telecommunications infrastructure, and that could include its satellites,” Taleblu said.
This article originated in VOA’s Persian service. Katherine Ahn contributed to this report.
About 250 Islamic State fighters have surrendered to Afghan security forces in eastern Nangarhar province, a traditional IS stronghold. Dozens of women and children have surrendered as well. Officials told VOA they would work toward deradicalizing those of Afghan origin and eventually would unite them with their families. The Kabul government has yet to determine the fate of the non-Afghan detainees. VOA’s Zabihullah Ghazi reports.
China and Pakistan urged the United States on Friday “to sift fact from fiction” before questioning their bilateral infrastructure development program, which Beijing is funding under its global Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
The reaction came a day after a senior American diplomat spoke critically of the multibillion-dollar collaboration, known as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and warned it would eventually worsen Islamabad’s economic troubles and benefit only Beijing.
Alice Wells, acting assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, testifies during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing Sept. 19, 2019, on Capitol Hill in Washington.
Speaking to an audience at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars on Thursday, Alice Wells, acting assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, said the U.S. offered a better model that would improve the fundamentals of Pakistan’s troubled economy. She also raised questions about the transparency and fairness of CPEC projects as well as related Chinese loans Islamabad has received.
Her remarks drew a strong response from Chinese and Pakistani officials on Thursday.
Beijing’s ambassador to Islamabad, Yao Jing, said Wells lacked “accurate” knowledge and relied primarily on Western media “propaganda” to level the accusations.
“I would like to remind my American colleague that if you are really making this kind of allegation, please be careful, show your evidence, give me evidence; we will take action,” Yao said while addressing reporters.
He said China and Pakistan are determined to ensure the infrastructure project is free of corruption.
The Chinese diplomat said CPEC is open to investment from anywhere in the world and China would happily welcome U.S. investment in it. Yao described Wells’ remarks as astonishing, saying he had personally briefed her twice on the program during her recent visits to Islamabad.
In this Nov. 30, 2018 photo, Mushahid Hussain, chairman of Pakistan’s Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, speaks to The Associated Press in Islamabad, Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Pakistani Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Mushahid Hussain described the allegations by Wells as disappointing. He noted that CPEC has ensured energy security for Pakistan and set the stage for an “industrial revolution” in the next stage of the massive project, which is already in progress.
“CPEC is central to Pakistan’s future and it’s a pivot of our strategic relationship with China and for which Pakistan has benefited already. We feel she had got her facts mixed up because of unfounded media reports. So, I think it is important to sift fact from fiction,” Hussain said.
Beijing has invested around $20 billion in Pakistan over the past five years to help upgrade and build ports, roads and power plants, effectively ending nationwide crippling electricity outages.
Most of the money has come as direct foreign investment, while some has been in the form of soft loans and grants. The overall investment of CPEC is estimated to grow to around $60 billion by 2030.
Critics in the U.S. and elsewhere see China’s BRI program as a “debt trap” for countries like Pakistan, which have struggling economies that would make it difficult for them to make Chinese loan repayments. Islamabad’s repayments are due in the next few years and analysts say that process will bring the country’s depleting foreign exchange reserves under pressure.
Ahsan Iqbal, left, Pakistan’s minister of planning and development, and Yao Jing, Chinese ambassador to Pakistan, attend the launching ceremony of a CPEC long-term cooperation plan in Islamabad, Pakistan Dec. 18, 2017.
Ambassador Yao dismissed those concerns, saying unlike Washington and West-governed lenders like the International Monetary Fund, Beijing does not offer or suspend financial loans for “political” reasons.
“China will never ever ask for these loan repayments as long as you are in need of this money. If Pakistan needs it, we keep it here,” he told the audience.
Yao took issue with the U.S. for questioning Chinese aid or loans he said were meant only to help partner nations to improve and stabilize their economies.
“The United States is the biggest loan taker from the world, and even China gave them in credit about $3 trillion,” said the Chinese envoy.
Wells noted, however, that even if loan payments are deferred, they are going to continue to hang over Pakistan’s economic development potential to hamper Prime Minister Imran Khan’s reform agenda.
She said CPEC relies primarily on Chinese workers and supplies, noting that local industry does not benefit from the initiative and that CPEC is not addressing the issue of rising unemployment in Pakistan.
Yao rejected the assertions, saying CPEC has provided more than 75,000 direct jobs to Pakistani workers and is expected to create as many as 2.3 million jobs by 2030.
The Chinese envoy said the project will have built several special economic free zones by then, enabling Pakistan to improve the quantity and quality of its exports to bring home much-needed dollars to boost its foreign exchange reserves.
Yao criticized Wells for using reported estimated costs of certain projects in her speech. He said those projects were still under discussion and their final cost had not been determined.
Two weeks of public hearings in the impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine have deepened the already sharp divide between Democrats and Republicans and have prompted many lawmakers to place more of a premium on party loyalty than the quality of testimony, some political analysts say.
With 2020 presidential and congressional elections looming, the stakes couldn’t be higher for the two parties. And lawmakers are adhering closely to the guidance of their party leaders.
In the recent U.S. House vote setting procedures for the public phase of the impeachment inquiry, not a single Republican defected to vote with the Democrats in favor of formalizing the inquiry. Only two Democrats voted against it.
Those numbers are in stark contrast to the 1998 vote formalizing the impeachment inquiry of then-Democratic President Bill Clinton. In that vote, 31 members of the president’s own party agreed with his Republican opponents’ decision to launch the investigation.
Competing narratives
Since the start of the public phase of the inquiry into whether Trump tried to pressure the Ukrainian government into announcing an investigation of Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, while withholding nearly $400 million of military aid to Ukraine, Democrats and Republicans seemingly have operated in parallel universes. Testimony has been twisted into competing narratives.
FILE – Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the EU, appears before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill, Nov. 20, 2019, during an impeachment hearing into President Donald Trump’s actions.
Wednesday’s testimony by Gordon Sondland, U.S ambassador to the European Union, illustrated this point.
House Democrats hailed Sondland’s testimony that linked Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and others to a campaign to pressure Ukraine’s new president to announce an investigation of Biden in return for a White House meeting and the release of the military aid.
Meanwhile, Republicans and Trump insisted that Sondland had cleared Trump of seeking a quid pro quo with Ukraine.
Cashing in on controversy
Both parties are fundraising robustly off the impeachment inquiry, sending floods of email to supporters in anticipation of impeachment becoming a central issue that mobilizes voters in the upcoming election.
Democratic and Republican lawmakers would argue they are acting according to conscience, not political expediency. But impeachment is not a legal trial but an inherently political process in which the framers of the U.S. Constitution invested the responsibility of impeachment in the legislative body of government.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California has said Democrats entered the impeachment inquiry in a “prayerful” way, mindful of their oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Trump accused Democrats of launching the inquiry because they feared losing in the 2020 presidential election.
Pelosi has repeatedly said Democrats see impeachment as a last resort that is part of their oversight responsibilities.
FILE – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., talks to reporters on the morning after the first public hearing in the impeachment probe of President Donald Trump.
‘Sad time for the country’
Democrats who control the House have tried to maintain an attitude of remaining above the political fray.
“This is a very sad time for our country. There is no joy in this,” Pelosi said.
Representative Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, author of the impeachment inquiry legislation, said, “We are not here in some partisan exercise. There is serious evidence that President Trump may have violated the Constitution.”
Republicans have characterized the inquiry not only as an attempt to cripple Trump’s political fortunes but also as a “coup” or an effort to nullify the results of the 2016 presidential election.
Representative Devin Nunes of California, the ranking Republican member on the House Intelligence Committee conducting the public hearings, regularly accuses Democrats of politicizing the process.
‘Impeachment mania’
“Democrats have exploited the Intelligence Committee for political purposes for three years, culminating in these impeaching hearings. In their mania to attack the president, no conspiracy theory is too outlandish for the Democrats,” Nunes said in his opening statement for the Nov. 20 hearing.
High-profile lawmakers on both sides often appear to be looking for a social media-friendly moment that supporters can amplify.
The Trump War Room Twitter account rebuts the hearings in real time with memes, while users who identify as part of the Democratic “Blue Wave” from the 2018 midterm election fight back. This deepens the perception there are two entrenched political perspectives with no room to meet in the middle.
FILE – Supporters of President Donald Trump rally outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington to protest his impeachment inquiry, Oct. 17, 2019. (Diaa Bekheet/VOA)
The online war is reflected in real life by alliances of some of the nation’s top political groups. On the conservative side, groups such as the Club for Growth and FreedomWorks have joined forces to raise money and public outcry against impeachment, according to The Washington Post.
On the Democratic side, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee distributes email soliciting donations and grass-roots action in Pelosi’s name, claiming, “I know Trump’s terrified of the work we’re doing every day to hold him accountable for his actions.”
Tight spot for Republicans
Analysts say congressional Republicans are in a tight spot, defending a president who virtually controls their party in a highly polarized political environment.
“The president has demonstrated an ability where he’s most assuredly struck fear in the hearts of every Republican, anybody who goes against him,” said Steven Billet, legislative affairs program director at the George Washington University Graduate School of Political Management.
“Go ask Jeff Flake. Go ask Bob Corker. Go ask all these other people that have turned against the president,” Billet said, referring to two former Republican senators critical of Trump who retired. “He went after them. He mobilized the base against [them] and struck fear in their hearts. He’s disciplining a party that’s already polarized and already moving to a more ideological place on the spectrum.”
Divided nation
The American public is divided almost evenly, according to a FiveThirtyEight aggregation of opinion polling on impeachment. While support for removing Trump from office has grown since Pelosi’s announcement formalizing the inquiry, 45.5% still do not support the move, while 47.7% do.
The lack of a clear consensus reflects longer-term trends. Polling data collected over recent decades show that Americans have become increasingly divided politically.
In a survey conducted just before Pelosi announced the formalization of the impeachment inquiry, Pew Research found that “both Republicans and Democrats express negative views about several traits and characteristics of those in the opposing party, and in some cases these opinions have grown more negative since 2016.”
Earlier this year, 85% of respondents said in another Pew survey that the tone and nature of political debate in this country had become more negative.
FILE – President Richard Nixon waves goodbye from the steps of his helicopter outside the White House after he gave a farewell address to members of the White House staff, Aug. 9, 1974.
Trump vs. Nixon
The political polarization does not bode well for Democrats who may hope Trump will eventually face pressure from his own party. In an interview Sunday with CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” Pelosi compared Trump’s actions to those of Richard Nixon, the only U.S. president to resign from office.
Nixon stepped down after the House Judiciary Committee approved articles of impeachment, avoiding a full floor vote. Nixon reacted partly because he faced considerable pressure from Republicans to sacrifice his own personal political fortunes for the good of the party.
If the House decides to impeach Trump, the vote is again expected to fall along party lines.
The next key test of loyalties will then occur when the House sends the articles of impeachment to the Republican-controlled Senate for a trial. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York will have to set ground rules covering everything from how many days a week the trial is held to how senators can cast their votes.
In today’s intense political environment, even the ground rules for debate will be up for debate.
The U.S. House of Representatives impeachment inquiry hearings picked up steam this week, as nine current and former U.S. officials testified about President Donald Trump’s controversial dealings with the Ukrainian government.
The historic impeachment inquiry was triggered by a whistleblower complaint about a July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in which Trump prodded Zelenskiy to undertake investigations that would help Trump politically, while the administration held up nearly $400 million of military aid to Ukraine.
U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland delivered blockbuster testimony Wednesday, linking Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and other senior officials to what he came to believe was a quid pro quo arrangement between the administration and Ukraine.
The highlights:
National Security Council aide Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman testifies before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 19, 2019.
Three officials were on the July 25 call
Lawmakers heard from three officials Tuesday who listened in on the call and corroborated a White House transcript of the conversation. Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, said he was shocked by how the call played out. Jennifer Williams, an aide in Vice President Mike Pence’s office, said she found the call “unusual and inappropriate.” Tim Morrison, who briefly served as director of Europe and Eurasia on the National Security Council, would only concede that “as a hypothetical,” the call would not be appropriate.
Transcript of the July 25 call
The whistleblower complaint alleged that White House officials were so worried about what had transpired during the call that they moved to lock down a transcript in an electronic system reserved for sensitive classified information. Vindman and Morrison, however, said they didn’t think there was anything nefarious about the move.
Vindman’s contact with an intelligence officer
Vindman disclosed that he discussed the July 25 phone call with a member of the intelligence community. House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes pressed Vindman to identify the officer, suggesting that Vindman might have been in contact with the whistleblower. Committee Chairman Adam Schiff interjected, saying he wanted to protect the whistleblower’s identity.
Volker revises his testimony
FILE – Kurt Volker, a former special envoy to Ukraine, leaves after a closed-door interview with House investigators as House Democrats proceed with the impeachment investigation of President Donald Trump, at the Capitol in Washington, Oct. 3, 2019.
Also testifying Tuesday, Kurt Volker, the former U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine, acknowledged that Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, had brought up the question of “investigations” during a key White House meeting between U.S. and Ukrainian officials. Volker had previously denied that the issue had come up, but he told lawmakers that Sondland made a generic comment about investigations which “all of us thought was inappropriate.”
Burisma/Biden investigation
Volker and Sondland contended they did not understand the connection between Burisma, the Ukrainian company where Hunter Biden was a director, and the push to investigate the Bidens until late this summer. Other witnesses have testified that most everyone involved in Ukraine policy was aware of the link well before the July 25 call. Volker said that had he learned that Burisma amounted to Biden, he would have raised objections.
Sondland links top officials to campaign
The most closely watched witness of the week, Sondland testified that everyone in the administration — Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Adviser John Bolton and acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney — was “in the loop.”
“The suggestion that we were engaged in some irregular or rogue diplomacy is absolutely false,” he testified.
Ukrainians inquired about the aid
Laura Cooper, the top Pentagon expert on Russia and Ukraine, testified Wednesday that Ukrainian officials asked the Defense Department on July 25 about the status of the frozen military aid, the same day Trump and Zelenskiy spoke by phone. While she couldn’t say whether the Ukrainians were aware of a hold on the aid package, the revelation could undermine a Republican claim that Trump couldn’t have “extorted” the Ukrainian leader if he wasn’t aware of the freeze.
Ukraine conspiracy theory
Former White House national security aide Fiona Hill, arrives to testify before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Nov. 21, 2019.
In a swipe at some Republicans on the committee, Fiona Hill, former director of Europe and Eurasia for the National Security Council, delivered a strong rebuttal of a discredited conspiracy theory about Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 election, one of two issues Trump asked Zelenskiy to pursue.
“This is a fictional narrative that has been perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services themselves,” Hill testified Thursday.
