ads
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Supreme Court denies request to halt border wall construction
07/31/20 2:49 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Federal appeals court vacates Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's death sentence
07/31/20 12:45 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Herman Cain dies at age 74: reports
07/30/20 7:39 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
NASA’s Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover launches epic mission to Red Planet
07/30/20 4:57 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon CEOs grilled on Capitol Hill in wide-ranging hearing
07/29/20 3:47 PM
New world news from Time: What China’s New Deal with Iran Says About Its Ambitions in the Region
As long-simmering U.S.–China tensions come to the boil, a sweeping bilateral accord being negotiated between Beijing and Tehran is ringing alarms in Washington. It has the potential to dramatically deepen the relationship between America’s principal global rival and its long term antagonist in the Middle East, undermining White House attempts to isolate Iran on the world stage.
“Two ancient Asian cultures,” runs the opening line of a leaked 18-page Persian-language draft obtained by the New York Times earlier in July. “Two partners in the sectors of trade, economy, politics, culture and security with a similar outlook and many mutual bilateral and multilateral interests will consider one another strategic partners.”
The leaked document has come to light during a month that has seen tit-for-tat closures of a U.S. consulate in China and a Chinese consulate in the U.S.; meanwhile, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini renewed a vow to deal America a “reciprocal blow,” for the killing of Quds Forces Commander Qasem Soleimani in January and on July 27, satellite images showed that Iran had moved a dummy U.S. gunship into the Strait of Hormuz—apparently for target practice. But amid concern in Washington over a new China–Iran axis, there are several reasons to be skeptical of what the accord’s contents promise.
Here’s what to know about the state of China-Iran relations, what they portend for the future of the Middle East, and why the new accord might not live up to the hype:
What’s in the deal?
Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif confirmed on July 5 that Iran was negotiating a 25-year deal with China. According to the leaked draft, it paves the way for billions of dollars worth of Chinese investments in energy, transportation, banking, and cybersecurity in Iran. The draft also dangles the possibility of Chinese–Iranian co-operation on weapons development and intelligence sharing, and joint military drills, according to the Times, which also reports the deal could increase the value of bilateral trade to $400 billion. But the accord has yet to be greenlit by Iran’s parliament or publicly unveiled, and the authenticity of the leaked Persian-language document has not been officially confirmed.
Public debate over the deal continues to rage in Iran, but comment from China has been scarce. When asked about it by a reporter on July 13, China’s foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said only: “China attaches importance to developing friendly cooperative relations with other countries. Iran is a friendly nation enjoying normal exchange and cooperation with China. I don’t have any information on your specific question [about the draft agreement].”
How did the deal come about?
In January 2016, China’s President Xi Jinping visited Tehran to open a “new chapter” in relations between the two countries. That visit took place a year after the U.S. and other world powers concluded a deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program known as the JCPOA; and two before President Trump unilaterally pulled the U.S. out of the agreement. Cased in ceremonial language, the partnership China and Iran announced set out a goal of developing trade relations worth $600 billion —a fanciful figure even before the U.S. reinstated sanctions on Iran in 2018.
Yet trade with Iran has not been a priority for China in recent years and, for the most part, it has abided by U.S. sanctions. Beijing invested less than $27 billion in Iran from 2005 to 2019 according to the American Enterprise Institute, and annual investment has dropped every year since 2016. Last year, China invested just $1.54 billion in Iran—a paltry sum compared to the $3.72 billion it invested in the UAE or the $5.36 billion it invested in Saudi Arabia. Although China continued to purchase some Iranian oil after the U.S. imposed secondary sanctions, it did so at “what appears to be a token level” says economist Esfandyar Batmanghelidj, founder of a think tank that promotes trade between Europe and Iran.
China’s oil imports from Iran plummeted 89% year-on-year this March, as Beijing tried to secure a trade deal with the U.S. In June—officially, at least—China imported zero crude from Iran, compared to an all-time high from the Islamic Republic’s archrival Saudi Arabia.
Why does Iran want a deal with China now?
It needs the business. President Trump has waged a campaign of “maximum pressure” on Iran’s economy since 2018, threatening to sanction countries in Europe and elsewhere who buy oil and other exports from the Islamic Republic. He promised that this would help to “eliminate the threat of Iran’s ballistic missile program; to stop its terrorist activities worldwide; and to block its menacing activity across the Middle East.” American sanctions are yet to achieve these objectives but they have pushed Iran deep into recession.
Tehran sees a new accord with China as a way to extract more from a relationship that has so far entailed only “lukewarm” commitment, says Batmanghelidj. Yet even if trade between the two nations undergoes the sort of boost outlined in the leaked draft, “China cannot fully compensate for the shortfall in European trade.”
On top of the sanctions, low oil prices, the worst COVID-19 outbreak in the Middle East, the accidental downing of a Ukrainian airliner, and waves of protests have heaped further strain on Tehran. “The Rouhaini government needs to show something for its seven years in office,” says Ariane Tabatabai, author of No Conquest, No Defeat: Iran’s National Security Strategy. “People are exhausted and they just want to know that something good is going to happen at some point. This might be a way for the government to say: just hang in there, things will get better.”
What’s in it for China?
Discounted Iranian oil would provide a useful extra source of energy for China, which surpassed the U.S. as the world’s largest crude importer in 2017 and has long sought to diversify in its supply. Meanwhile, Iran’s geography opens an additional terrestrial route for Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)—the sprawling global infrastructure development strategy adopted by the Chinese government in 2013. But Iran is neither a vital node for BRI nor a vital oil supplier for China. Beijing sees Iran as “a depressed asset” it can pick up at low cost, says Jon Alterman, Director of the Middle East Program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). “China does not need Iran, but Iran is useful to China.”
Part of that usefulness comes from Tehran’s enmity with Washington, he adds. Rising tension between the U.S. and Iran potentially commits American military assets to the waters around the Persian Gulf, drawing resources away from the Western Pacific, where China seeks to establish naval dominance. Furthermore, disagreements over how to address Iran’s nuclear program drive a wedge between the U.S. and its allies—a boon for China, whose investment-centered foreign policy is based on bilateral partnerships rather than broader alliances.
By negotiating with Iran during a trade war, Beijing is signaling it is undaunted by the U.S. attempts to isolate Iran, and feels rising impunity over violating U.S. sanctions. But the vagueness of the deal leaves room to maneuver should Joe Biden win the American Presidential elections in November. A final draft of the Democratic Party’s platform advocates a “returning to mutual compliance” with the JCPOA.
How has the U.S. responded?
In a statement to the Times, the U.S. State Department warned that China would be “undermining its own stated goal of promoting stability and peace” by defying U.S. sanctions and doing business with Iran.
Experts say the potential deal shows the limits of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign. The policy was based on the idea that “Iran, and the world, had no good options but to comply with U.S. wishes” says Alterman. But for 40 years, Iran’s leadership has invested in an array of asymmetrical tools to escape foreign pressure, he says. The notion that Iran’s leaders would simply fold under U.S. pressure was always a “dangerous fantasy.”
Where else is China engaged in the Middle East?
Iran is one of China’s five principal partners in the Middle East—and the other four are all U.S. allies. Saudi Arabia is China’s largest trading partner in the region and foremost oil supplier; the UAE comes second in balance of trade and sees itself as a logistics hub in Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI); and Egypt is important to China in part because of Chinese concern for transit through the Suez canal. Like Iran and the two Gulf states, Cairo is designated one of China’s “comprehensive strategic partners.” China also maintains close ties with Israel, with whom it co-operates on security and counterterrorism. Separately, Iraq is China’s third-largest oil supplier.
Beijing’s array of bilateral engagements in the region shows an investment-centric approach to foreign policy, rather than a Cold War-style network of alliances based on shared ideology. Key to that is making sure its strategy in one country doesn’t jeopardize its strategy in another. For U.S. allies like Israel, that means fears of a military China–Iran axis are overblown.
Beijing’s objective is “not to create a military alliance against the United States and certainly not against Saudi Arabia and Israel,” ran a recent editorial from Tel Aviv’s Institute for National Security Services. But it added that the risk of Iran threatening regional stability “should be emphasized by Israel to high-level Chinese parties.”
Saudi Arabia “is a far more important oil partner for China,” says Matt Ferchen, a China foreign policy expert at the Berlin-based Mercator Institute for China Studies, adding that Beijing’s diplomats are likely in close consultation with Riyadh over the terms of the deal.
Is China becoming a rival to the U.S. as the dominant global power in the Middle East?
With trillions of dollars spent on wars since 2001, more than 800,000 people killed, and unrelenting instability, America’s adventurism in the Middle East has come at an extraordinary cost. The U.S. desire to downsize its military presence in the region predates the Trump Administration and is expected to continue—in one form or another—no matter who wins November’s elections.
But that doesn’t mean China wants to fill the void. “If anything the Chinese are exploring what they can get without replicating what the U.S. did,” says CSIS’s Alterman. That exploration involves developing a series of bespoke commercial relationships that are not backed by conventional military force.
In an October 2019 survey of policymakers on Iran, Chinese respondents told London-based think tank Chatham House that Beijing’s interests in Iran are predominantly economic, and take priority over security and geopolitical interests. Investment that comes without demands for neoliberal economic reforms is an attractive option for ailing regimes.
Others are taking notice. Last month, as Lebanon negotiated with the IMF amid its crippling economic and political crisis, Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrullah urged Beirut to “look east” for support. And last year, months before resigning in the face of bloodily repressed protests, Iraq’s former Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi promised that Baghdad–Beijing relations would undergo a “quantum leap.”
How has the Iranian public responded?
Vociferously, against the deal. Although the terms of the deal have not been publicly unveiled, critics have already likened it to the humiliating Treaty of Turkmenchay, which Persia signed with Russia in 1828. On social media, Iranians claimed the accord entails Iran giving up land to China, or allowing China to stage its troops in the country.
Those rumors are unsubstantiated, but the public skepticism is not. Iran has in the past turned to China to relieve economic pressure but “China has never been able to deliver, or willing to deliver for that matter,” says Tabatabai. Zoomed out, the leaked draft may appear comprehensive, but there are scant specifics on what individual projects will involve. “It’s more like a roadmap. There are a lot of promises and very broad contours for what future negotiations might entail,” she tells TIME, “but I don’t think it is going to do what the government hopes it will achieve.”
With reporting by Charlie Campbell / Shanghai
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Trump administration halts new DACA applications as it considers canceling program
07/28/20 1:53 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Barr spars with Dems on Trump ties, riots at fiery House hearing
07/28/20 1:08 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Miami Marlins' season on pause as coronavirus outbreak hampers club
07/28/20 12:22 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
WATCH LIVE: Casket of Congressman John Lewis carried into Capitol Rotunda by honor guard
07/27/20 10:25 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
WATCH LIVE: “Remembering Representative John Lewis,” from 11 am-12 pm ET, on Fox News Channel and FoxNews.com
07/26/20 7:55 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Hurricane Hanna makes landfall in Texas, with winds reaching 90 mph
07/25/20 4:39 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
WATCH LIVE: 'Selma Salutes Congressman John Lewis' service takes place in Alabama, public viewing to follow
07/25/20 4:09 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Regis Philbin, iconic television host, dead at 88, family says
07/25/20 12:40 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Supreme Court denies Nevada church's appeal of attendance restriction amid coronavirus pandemic
07/24/20 5:49 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Former Trump attorney Michael Cohen released from prison
07/24/20 10:37 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Chicago pulls Columbus statue from Grant Park overnight: reports
07/24/20 1:30 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
China orders US to close consulate in Chengdu
07/23/20 10:57 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
FOX NEWS POLL: Biden tops Trump in battlegrounds Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania
07/23/20 3:02 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Trump: GOP canceling Jacksonville convention events amid coronavirus outbreak
07/23/20 2:36 PM
New best story on Hacker News: Ask HN: Is all of FAANG like this?
441 by faang0722 | 327 comments on Hacker News.
This last year I finally landed a SDE job at a FAANG company! However, I'm considering quitting because I am not happy. The good: I get paid better than my last jobs. I can browse internal resources to satisfy my curiosity about how things work. The bad: Basically no work gets done and there's no motivation to do any. The dev tools, docs and tech debt impart such a slow iteration speed that even when I am working a full 8 hours, only a few very small changes get done, yet somehow this is even more than most of the rest of my team can muster during an entire week. Because of this, I normally work about one day trickle out my changes during the the week. The other days I only open my computer for standup and if I get an IM. As far as I can tell, if I can be just barely the best on the team by doing there's nothing the company will offer me to work harder. If I get asked about why it takes long to make a simple change I can point to the environment and shrug my shoulders. Of course, it's possible the rest of the team is doing that too, but I have no way of knowing. This amounts to a glacial development pace and when I look back at the progress made since I joined and estimate the cost to the company (salary, servers, etc) it's frankly disgusting. I don't feel what I'm doing is ethnically wrong, because the company is evidently pleased with my current productivity, but I find it unsatisfying and like a waste of my time on earth. So my question is: Is all of FAANG like this? If the market value of such incompetence if FAANG salary, how can I do good work and get paid preportionally?
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Riot Declared in Portland After Mayor’s Visit
07/23/20 1:49 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Trump announces 'surge' of federal agents to Chicago, other cities, amid spikes in violent crime
07/22/20 1:23 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
FBI confirms suspect in shooting at NJ judge's home is tied to separate killing of California lawyer
07/22/20 10:39 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Hurricane Douglas becomes first of season in Eastern Pacific
07/22/20 8:12 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
China claims US ordered it to close Houston consulate
07/22/20 1:57 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Tsunami warning issued for parts of Alaska
07/22/20 12:01 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Chicago shooting wounds at least 9 on South Side, police say
07/21/20 6:10 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Chinese hackers charged by Justice Department with trying to steal US coronavirus research, other sensitive information
07/21/20 9:02 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
St. Louis' top prosecutor charging couple who flashed guns at crowd marching to mayor's office
07/20/20 2:16 PM
New world news from Time: Trump’s Biggest Foreign Policy Win So Far
The British government announced that U.K. telecom carriers will be banned from installing new Huawei equipment for their 5G network by year’s end, effectively cutting China’s tech champion out of the country’s 5G future… a future which Chinese companies had grand plans to dominate. It’s time we acknowledge that the U.S. fight for tech supremacy versus China has been the single most successful foreign policy of the Donald Trump Administration. It’s not even close.
When Eurasia Group first wrote about the global tech cold war back in 2018, it wasn’t clear the Trump administration would be able to pull this off. Far from it.
Yes, the U.S. had the advantage going into the battle, but China had spent the better part of the last decade frantically playing catch up, from plowing resources into market leaders like Huawei to engaging in alleged corporate espionage and IP theft to get China’s technology capabilities to the point where it could realistically compete with the U.S., if not always on innovation than at least on price. (Beijing denies systematically stealing U.S. IP.)
Before the current Trump administration, the U.S. government’s tech policy was effectively allowing Silicon Valley companies to steer the course for the country’s tech future, with Washington responding as necessary.
Meanwhile, China had announced a strategy to dominate the world of 5G technology, seeing it as the highway to its geopolitical supremacy. It was inevitable that China’s publicly-backed tech ambitions would someday clash with the U.S.’s private sector-driven approach; under Trump, it finally has. And while the tech fight often gets folded into Trump’s broader all-out fight with China—a fight that still has a ways to go and is being waged across multiple fronts (among them Hong Kong, Xinjiang, trade, and the South China Sea)—the tech component is starting to yield real results.
Countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan have all cut out Huawei from their 5G infrastructure plans at the urging of the U.S. Europe has been more hesitant; while Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia and a few others have pledged to keep companies like Huawei out of their future infrastructure, bigger hitters like Germany, France and Italy have taken a more cautious approach to blanket bans against Chinese hardware in their telecoms systems, though critical decisions are expected to be made in the next few months.
That’s what makes the U.K. decision so significant. The move has the potential to cost the U.K. upwards of £7 billion and hold up 5G rollout in the country by three years. The British government has been agonizing over the decision for months, but what ostensibly pushed them to take the decision was U.S. sanctions against Huawei that forced the company to seek third-party vendors for some of its hardware, introducing new cyber security threats that the U.K. would rather avoid (alongside the ire of the U.S., especially post-Brexit). Other European and Western holdouts will find it difficult to ignore those same considerations when planning for their own 5G futures.
And to his credit, it was under Trump that the issue of tech divergence with China has been prioritized, exposing and publicizing the challenge of a system that potentially gives an authoritarian, state capitalist country such wide-ranging data and surveillance capacity. The Trump administration instituted yet more restrictions on Huawei just, the latest in its months-long push to get allies to fall in line with its adversarial tech approach toward Beijing.
It’s the effectiveness of this last bit that is most surprising—this isn’t exactly friendly multilateral diplomacy. Not many countries would willingly cede to the demands of a White House better known for browbeating traditional U.S. allies than diplomatically engaging with them in good faith.
But there are two critical things the U.S., and by extension the Trump administration, has going for it when it comes to tech. The first is Silicon Valley; for all the billions China has pumped into its own tech industry, the most innovative and cutting-edge tech and talent is still coming out of the U.S.. What’s more, under Trump tech in the U.S. has gone from being just another industry to a critical strategic sector, which will continue no matter who wins the upcoming presidential election in November. Of course, there is a real concern that the continued success of this tech decoupling will ultimately limit the talent available to Silicon Valley and deprive them of the massive Chinese consumer market which will in turn hit their R&D budgets and ability to innovate… but that’s a problem for the next president (though maybe Trump’s if he wins a second term).
The second thing the Trump administration has going for it is that despite Trump’s unorthodox style of diplomacy, at this point a decoupled tech sphere between China and the West is the preferred policy and strategic outcome of virtually every U.S. ally given current geopolitical realities. When the alternative is China potentially using its own dominant position in the market to divide and conquer—a particular concern for the EU that has seen China making aggressive moves into the union’s eastern bloc—that focuses minds fast. When your country’s tech future is at stake, you care less about the person sitting in the White House than the actual policy coming out of that White House.
America First has often been criticized as America Alone. And that’s a fair criticism. But on the issue of tech decoupling, it’s America out front… with most allies on board. And for Trump, that’s far and away his biggest foreign policy win.
Fox News Breaking News Alert
PROGRAMMING ALERT: 'Harris Faulkner Presents: The Fight for America,' 10 pm ET on Fox News
07/19/20 6:46 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
PROGRAMMING ALERT: President Trump on 'Fox News Sunday,' 7 pm ET on Fox News Channel
07/19/20 3:54 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
FOX EXCLUSIVE: President Trump speaks on coronavirus, his opinion of Dr. Fauci and predicts historic high for stock market
07/19/20 6:09 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Fox News Poll: Biden holds lead over Trump as coronavirus concerns grip nation
07/19/20 5:59 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
US Rep. John Lewis, civil rights icon, dead at 80
07/17/20 9:14 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
US Rep. John Lewis, civil rights icon, dead at 80
07/17/20 9:11 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Chicago police, protesters clash near Columbus statue in Grant Park
07/17/20 7:46 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Justice Ginsburg has been undergoing chemotherapy to treat recurrence of cancer
07/17/20 9:16 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Pentagon to ban displays of Confederate flag on military installations
07/17/20 8:40 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Russian hackers behind cyberattacks on coronavirus vaccine developers: UK intelligence
07/16/20 6:49 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Convicted murderer Wesley Ira Purkey executed by lethal injection, the second federal execution this week
07/16/20 5:55 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Trump replaces campaign manager Brad Parscale, as polls show Biden ahead
07/15/20 6:01 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Biden's Twitter account hacked in wide-ranging 'security incident' that targeted Obama, Gates, others
07/15/20 3:35 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Ruth Bader Ginsburg discharged from hospital and is ‘doing well’ after treatment for possible infection, Supreme Court says
07/15/20 1:29 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
WATCH LIVE: Trump, in Georgia, delivers remarks on the rebuilding of America's infrastructure
07/15/20 12:46 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Tommy Tuberville defeats former AG Jeff Sessions in Alabama GOP Senate runoff election
07/14/20 6:41 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted to hospital for ‘treatment of a possible infection,’ Supreme Court says
07/14/20 2:49 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
WATCH LIVE: President Trump holds Rose Garden press conference, expected to discuss China
07/14/20 2:31 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Trump administration rescinds rule on foreign students amid pressure from colleges
07/14/20 1:02 PM
New best story on Hacker News: Ask HN: My GitHub account got suspended without any notice
507 by ygcodes | 206 comments on Hacker News.
Hello friends, I'm a Full Stack Developer from India. I'm a maintainer at Gatsby, Open Sauced and Triager at ExpressJS, Nest.land, JSHttp etc. I use GitHub a lot, but recently my account got suspended midnight without any notice, From my knowledge I haven't spammed GitHub, I review 3 - 6 PRs in Gatsby per day, It's been a week without GitHub, I have three sponsors in GitHub, they are asking me tons of questions and one of my sponsor stopped sponsoring me (my payout balance got reduced). All of my office work got stopped, I'm the admin of the org that is used in our company. All employees now don't have access to the repo because it is returning 404. I got support from lot of people in Twitter but GitHub is not responding to my ticket for a week. I also created a petition is change.org https://ift.tt/2OoNEBd... some people supported me over there too. It would be great if GitHub unsuspends me. My support ticket number: 763327 GitHub Profile: https://github.com/yg Save Open source developers! Hope Nat Friedman and GitHub will see this!
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Roger Stone joins 'Hannity' for his first TV interview since his prison sentence was commuted by President Trump. Tune in to Fox
07/13/20 5:47 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
After a 25-year absence, Ford unveils the reborn Bronco with retro styling and off-road tech
07/13/20 5:12 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
California Gov. Newsom orders halt to indoor activities at bars, restaurants, movie theaters and other venues across the state a
07/13/20 1:09 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Kelly Preston, the actress, dead at 57
07/12/20 11:08 PM
New best story on Hacker News: Ask HN: What's the worst piece of software you use everyday?
423 by guu | 1299 comments on Hacker News.
Subversion was created because the authors were frustrated with problems in CVS[0]. What's a piece of software you find essential that you wish you could replace or rewrite? [0]: https://ift.tt/3gTxKL9...
Fox News Breaking News Alert
2 Texas police officers killed in line of duty, chief says
07/11/20 7:03 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
President Trump commutes Roger Stone's sentence, days before prison term set to begin
07/10/20 5:03 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Appeals court denies Roger Stone's request to delay start of sentence, says he must report to prison Tuesday
07/10/20 4:20 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
President Trump is expected to announce a commutation of Roger Stone's sentence as early as Friday evening, sources tell Fox New
07/10/20 1:10 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
President Trump’s New Hampshire rally postponed, White House says
07/10/20 9:19 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
PROGRAMMING ALERT: President Trump live exclusively on 'Hannity,' coming up on Fox News
07/09/20 6:02 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Michael Cohen, former Trump attorney, back in custody, his attorney says
07/09/20 11:36 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Supreme Court blocks Congress from getting Trump's tax records
07/09/20 7:40 AM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Supreme Court rules Trump is not immune from state grand jury subpoena over financial records
07/09/20 7:27 AM
New world news from Time: Why the Larger Climate Movement Is Finally Embracing the Fight Against Environmental Racism
The 2019 fire at the Philadelphia Energy Solutions refinery started with a simple failure: one leaky elbow pipe in a 1,400-acre facility covered with pipes, tanks and industrial towers. Within a few hours last June, enough gaseous propane had seeped into the air to ignite the facility into a fiery hellscape with an explosion hurling human-size pieces of industrial equipment into the air and shaking the ground miles away. Workers rapidly shut down the facility, which had for decades converted crude oil into usable products.
The workers escaped with only a few minor injuries, but the facility had already spent decades killing its neighbors in South Philadelphia. The refinery–the largest on the East Coast, dating back to the early days of the oil industry in the 19th century–was single-handedly responsible for more than half of the city’s cancer-causing air toxics, according to a report from the city. And it contributed to the 125 premature deaths that the American Thoracic Society and New York University say result from air pollution in Philadelphia each year. The South Philadelphia area surrounding the facility, where 60% of residents are Black, has some of the highest asthma-hospitalization rates in the city, where asthma numbers top those in all but a few U.S. cities. The explosion “was kind of a wake-up call for the rest of the city,” says Derek S. Green, an at-large city-council member in Philadelphia. “If you’re living there every day, the pollution is something that you were constantly dealing with.”
Eight months later and five miles away, a group of Black voters from across Philadelphia filed into a bland conference room of a downtown office building for a focus group on climate change organized by Third Way, a center-left Washington, D.C., policy think tank. The warming planet ranked low on the attendees’ list of priorities, at least at first, but the conversation turned passionate when it came to the pollution in their own backyard.
“You come out and it’s hard to breathe on most days,” said one attendee. Another noted that in Southwest Philadelphia, “all the African Americans grew up with asthma.” The Energy Solutions refinery drew near universal condemnation. “All y’all did was put out the fire,” said another attendee, pointing to the government response. “You didn’t do nothing for those thousand houses who have to breathe in this air. It’s messed up.”
These dynamics are nothing new. For decades, environmental-justice advocates in the U.S. have worked to bring attention to the heightened environmental risks faced by communities of color: higher levels of lead exposure, higher risks of facing catastrophic flooding, and poorer air quality, to name just a few. But progress has been slow on the national stage as the most powerful groups fighting for environmental rules, not to mention government leaders, have largely ignored them.
Today, that conversation is changing. With partisanship at record levels and Republicans still skeptical of climate rules, environmental activists have realized they need a big coalition to pass legislation, and that means getting the enthusiastic backing of people of color. To do that, they are not only talking about the environmental hazards faced by people of color but also putting their concerns at the core of their campaigns.
“Silo activism is exactly what the extremists want,” the minister and activist William J. Barber II told me ahead of a speech at a climate event last year. “Historically, the only way we’ve had great transformation in this country is when there’s been fusion of all coalitions.”
COVID-19, which is killing Black Americans at twice the rate of their white counterparts in large part because of environmental issues like pollution-caused asthma and heart disease, has only advanced the urgency for climate backers.
And so as the U.S. approaches an election and, potentially, a once-in-a-decade opportunity to pass climate legislation, finding a way to address centuries of systemic environmental racism has emerged as a key concern. The stakes are high: failure means not only that people of color will continue facing disproportionate environmental hazards, but also the possible failure of efforts to reduce emissions and take humanity off a crash course with dangerous global warming.
Long before the phrase I can’t breathe became a rallying cry for Black Lives Matter activists protesting the deaths of Black people at the hands of police, environmental-justice activists warned that pollution was choking and killing people of color in the U.S.
They had good reason: study after study in the 1970s and 1980s emerged to document how minority groups–and Black people in particular–suffered disproportionately from a slew of environmental hazards, and resonated with many who saw this in their own backyards. The research was crystallized in a landmark 1987 report called “Toxic Wastes and Race.” Across the country, race was the single greatest determining factor of whether an individual lived near a hazardous-waste facility, which in turn contributed to a range of ailments. Three of five landfills were in predominantly Black or Hispanic neighborhoods, the study found, affecting 60% of Americans in those groups.
Scholars explained the problem simply as environmental racism: discriminatory housing policy throughout the country forced people of color into the same neighborhoods, and racist lending practices meant land in those neighborhoods was worth less just because minorities resided there. This made the land ripe for polluting industries, which need large spaces for their facilities and were able to get local buy-in in part by arguing they created jobs. Moreover, the companies that owned and operated these facilities knew that minority groups largely lacked the political power to stop them.
With this in mind, hundreds of early environmental-justice advocates gathered in Washington, D.C., for the first People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, in 1991. Over four days, the attendees discussed their experiences with environmental racism, from widespread cancer on Native American reservations where nuclear waste was dumped to higher-than-average asthma rates in predominantly Black communities near industrial sites. Going forward, their mission would be to put these concerns at the heart of environmental policy; they drafted 17 principles to reflect that. “That first People of Color conference is where environmentalism and conservationism were redefined,” says Richard Moore, co-coordinator of the Environmental Justice Health Alliance.
For a few years afterward, progress seemed to come quickly. In 1992, the 17 principles were distributed to thousands of environmental activists from around the globe who gathered in Rio de Janeiro for the U.N. Earth Summit. In subsequent international meetings, poorer nations would use the principles to argue for climate action that addressed their needs. In the U.S., President Bill Clinton signed an Executive Order in 1994 requiring agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and Federal Emergency Management Agency to consider environmental justice in their policies.
But when it came to the domestic conversation around new laws to address climate change specifically–already emerging as the defining environmental challenge of the time–some of the national environmental groups paid the activists little attention, fearing that concerns about racial justice would distract from efforts to reduce emissions. “We were taken for granted,” says longtime environmental-justice leader Beverly Wright, executive director of the Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, “like a gnat that just wouldn’t go away.”
The philosophy–focus first on stopping greenhouse gases and worry later about how to fix the disparate socioeconomic effects–still guides many climate activists to this day, but thus far it has proved a mistake. Not only did ignoring environmental-justice concerns leave people of color behind, but the decision also alienated a bloc whose support would have helped pass climate legislation.
The George W. Bush presidency saw little progress on climate issues, but when President Barack Obama took office in 2009, national environmental groups sensed an opportunity. To capitalize on it, they partnered with some of the country’s biggest corporations and lobbied for cap-and-trade, which would have set a limit on carbon-dioxide emissions and required companies to pay if they exceeded it. This was, in many ways, a smart compromise: cut emissions without alienating businesses that had the ear of the GOP.
Environmental-justice activists were furious. Not only were they left out of the discussion, but they argued that cap-and-trade would worsen the plight of people of color by allowing Big Industry to continue polluting minority communities so long as they cleaned up their act elsewhere. That argument, largely theoretical at the time, has since been backed up by research, including a 2016 study by researchers from four California universities that showed the state’s cap-and-trade program reduced the greenhouse-gas emissions that cause climate change but did nothing to alleviate the toxic pollution facing communities of color.
With those concerns in mind, the environmental-justice activists, along with many other progressives, actively fought against a federal cap-and-trade system. “We were brought in after they made their decisions,” says Wright. “Whatever decision they made, we were throwing bricks at the window.”
The legislation passed the House in 2009 by only seven votes, and the grand coalition supporting cap-and-trade fell apart before it could be brought to the Senate floor. Sensing the lack of a mandate for the policy, many of the corporate leaders who had supported cap-and-trade reversed their position. They had come to the table in hopes of a compromise, but they were just as happy to let the legislation fail and avoid new rules altogether.
The lack of support from environmental-justice activists didn’t doom cap-and-trade on its own, but a slew of analyses of why the bill foundered cited a failure to earn grassroots support. And there was a clear missed opportunity: both groups shared a common rival in the fossil-fuel industry, which is responsible for both greenhouse-gas emissions and air pollution and uses its deep pockets to fight regulation.
Since then, significant opportunities to advance the climate cause in the U.S. have been few and far between. Obama enacted a range of rules to slow emissions and cut pollution, most notably the Clean Power Plan, which targeted coal. But even members of his Administration have said the initiatives fell short.
Climate activists hope they will have another chance to pass bold legislation to reduce emissions if former Vice President Joe Biden wins the presidential election in November. With the 2009 failure in mind, environmental groups have sought to build grassroots support. That effort includes partnering with youth activists like the Sunrise Movement, which advocates for a Green New Deal. These groups have been widely credited with changing the climate conversation and helping the public understand the connections of climate to everyday life, but the environmental-justice activists have played a significant role too. National groups that once avoided talking about race have adopted the language of environmental-justice activists, pointing out that climate change will hit the most vulnerable the hardest and talking about the other social benefits of stemming emissions. “Centering reducing toxic pollution in frontline communities is both the right thing to do, and it’s also essential to building the power that we need to have the overwhelming support we need to overpower the fossil-fuel industry,” says Sara Chieffo, vice president of government affairs at the League of Conservation Voters.
The new alliance may be young, but it has quickly become deep and wide. Most important, national environmental groups, Democratic political organizations and members of Congress alike have allowed environmental-justice leaders to take the reins in crafting policies to address environmental racism. Last summer, after months of consultation, a group of leading environmental-justice activists announced a coalition under the banner of an Equitable and Just Climate Platform. The platform committed groups like the Center for American Progress, a mainstay of the Democratic political establishment, along with environmental groups like the League of Conservation Voters and the Natural Resources Defense Council to combatting “systemic inequalities” alongside climate change. “We need to address greenhouse-gas emissions,” says Cecilia Martinez, a professor at the University of Delaware’s Center for Energy and Environmental Policy, who helped lead the effort. “But we cannot do that divorced and disconnected from the other types of legacy pollution that have been harming our communities.”
On the campaign trail, Biden has spoken about racial disparities as a top concern for climate policy and appointed longtime environmental-justice leaders like Martinez to help. He framed the climate plank of his platform during the primary campaign, a $1.7 trillion spending proposal, as a plan for a “clean-energy revolution and environmental justice.”
On Capitol Hill, Democrats say they are now privileging the solutions proposed by communities affected by environmental racism. Representative Donald McEachin, a Virginia Democrat, described his proposed Environmental Justice for All Act as a collection of solutions–from amending the Civil Rights Act to allow people who face disproportionate pollution to sue, to requiring federal employees to receive environmental-justice training–suggested by those affected by environmental injustice. “This is a unique bill in that I didn’t have any part in authorship,” he says of the legislation.
Democratic leadership is taking note too. In late June, the House Committee on the Climate Crisis, formed in early 2019 by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, released a 500-plus-page report outlining a path forward on climate change. The opening of the report references the police killing of George Floyd, and the document incorporates a slew of policies to address environmental racism from the Environmental Justice for All Act.
Speaking on Capitol Hill in June, Pelosi cited the work of environmental-justice leaders among others in a coalition needed to pass legislation. “They have transformed the conversation,” she said. “We cannot succeed without the outside mobilization that they bring.”
On the surface, the environment and climate change may look like minor concerns in the scheme of issues facing Black Americans and other people of color today, especially when you take a cursory glance at the past five months. The COVID-19 pandemic has hit African Americans especially hard, killing them at twice the rate of their white counterparts. The economic challenges have hurt too, leaving the unemployment rate substantially higher for Latinx, Asian and Black Americans than for their white counterparts. And the highly publicized killings of African Americans like Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade and others have jolted the country into recognizing the systematic mistreatment of Black Americans by law enforcement.
And yet environmental racism is at the center of this moment: COVID-19 has hit Black people hard in large part because environmental hazards like air pollution lead to conditions like asthma and heart disease, which in turn make a person more likely to suffer the worst of the virus. To address systemic racism, the country needs to address environmental racism, and vice versa. “The system that created inequality in terms of pollution choking our neighborhoods is the same system that’s choking Black people and brown people when it comes to policing,” says Robert Bullard, a scholar of urban planning and environmental policy whose work earned him the moniker “the father of environmental justice.”
Climate change is only going to make the challenges for people of color worse. Just look at how Hurricane Katrina, a taste of superstorms to come, displaced New Orleans’ Black community; how Latinx agricultural workers are more likely to suffer in the stifling heat of farms; or how urban communities can be 22°F warmer than nearby areas that are less developed. Research has even linked higher temperatures to increased crime and police brutality. These realities may explain why surveys have shown people of color to be more concerned about climate change than their white counterparts.
This understanding has come slowly, but the increased attention to systemic racism and the urgency of climate change has made for a unique opportunity: address centuries of racism while saving the world from a global warming catastrophe. Indeed, tackling the two together may be a political necessity.
–With reporting by MARIAH ESPADA, MADELINE ROACHE and JOSH ROSENBERG
New best story on Hacker News: Tell HN: Google drops blogspot.in, breaking hundreds of thousands of permalinks
419 by sairamkunala | 186 comments on Hacker News.
When searched within India, Google's Blogspot points to username.blogspot.in as opposed to username.blogspot.com (also in search engines). Most permalinks users use to share are country specific which also reflect on Google Search. Looks like blogspot.in was picked up by a non Google entity. Domain Name: blogspot.in Registry Domain ID: DE2DC9C0E8E694C28ADEF0F444F121B45-IN Registrar WHOIS Server: Registrar URL: www.domainming.com Updated Date: 2020-06-29T20:00:06Z Creation Date: 2020-06-24T20:00:05Z Registry Expiry Date: 2021-06-24T20:00:05Z Domain Status: inactive https://ift.tt/1YHbQxf There is a ceritificate for the blogspot.in along with other blogspot.* domains. Would they end up revoking all the certificates if challenged? https://ift.tt/3gzxjWr
Fox News Breaking News Alert
Chief Justice John Roberts hospitalized last month after fall near home, Supreme Court confirms
07/07/20 7:09 PM
Fox News Breaking News Alert
CENTCOM commander doubts Russian bounty intel tied to US troop deaths in Afghanistan
07/07/20 3:14 PM