JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Checking in on 14 Years of Obamacare: Part 3
Policy Brief #174 – Health and Gender
by: Geoffrey Small
Fourteen years after the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), its impact on innovative medical care and cost-saving measures remains mixed. While Obamacare has expanded access and encouraged preventative care, the anticipated financial savings have not fully materialized, highlighting the ongoing complexity of achieving affordable healthcare in the U.S.
Clean Skies: The Potential of Electric Aviation
Brief #167 – Environment Policy Brief
by : Inijah Quadri
Electric aviation is set to revolutionize air travel by drastically reducing carbon emissions and noise pollution, promising a sustainable future for the industry. As technological advancements accelerate, electric-powered aircraft are poised to reshape regional economies and global trade, making cleaner skies a reality.
Harvey Weinstein’s Cornerstone Conviction Overturned
Brief #165 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by: Devyne Byrd
In a stunning 4-3 decision, the New York Court of Appeals has overturned Harvey Weinstein’s cornerstone 2020 rape conviction, a verdict that once symbolized the triumph of the #MeToo movement. This reversal ignites a fierce debate on the legal handling of sexual violence cases and the admissibility of prior accusations, leaving survivors and advocates in turmoil.
A Journey Through Words: An Interview with Palestinian Writer Rula Arafat
Brief #142 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Aziza Taslaq
Rula Arafat, a renowned Palestinian writer from Nablus, weaves powerful narratives of love, war, and peace, reflecting the profound struggles and hopes of her homeland. Through her evocative prose, Arafat captures the essence of Palestinian identity, making readers feel as if they are walking the streets of Palestine and living its stories firsthand.
The Swing States Series: #1 Pennsylvania
Brief #130 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Abigail Hunt
Pennsylvania, a pivotal swing state in the 2024 presidential election, has a rich history and a diverse electorate that could tip the balance for either Biden or Trump. Key issues influencing voters include urban versus rural concerns, gender voting trends, and significant youth turnout, making Pennsylvania a critical battleground once again.
A Better Path to Repaying Student Loan Debt
Brief #91 – Education Policy Brief
by: Rudolph Lurz
President Biden’s approach to student loan forgiveness, initially marked by a broad cancellation proposal, has evolved towards expanding the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program and implementing income-driven repayment plans. This shift aligns more closely with traditional Democratic values and offers a more sustainable solution for managing student debt.
A Primer on The Electoral College
Brief #129 – Elections & Politics Policy Brief
by: Abigail Hunt
Embark on a comprehensive exploration of the Electoral College system, starting with its role in U.S. Presidential elections, tracing its historical origins, navigating constitutional complexities, and shedding light on the ongoing debate about its significance in American democracy.
The Week That Was: Global News in Review
Brief #141 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Ibrahim Castro
Discover the seismic shifts and pressing issues shaping our world in this week’s Global News Review. From controversial refugee deals to record-breaking military expenditures, delve into the headlines that demand your attention and understanding.
Demographic Shifts in the U.S: Challenges and Opportunities
Brief #164 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by: Inijah Quadri
The United States is experiencing profound demographic transformations characterized by an aging population, declining birth rates, and increased immigration. These demographic shifts are reshaping the socio-economic landscape, impacting public policy from healthcare to education, and altering the workforce dynamics.
Who Attacked The Moscow Concert?
Who Attacked The Moscow Concert?
Foreign Policy Brief #134 | By: Arvind Salem | April 01, 2024
Featured Photo: www.apnews.com
__________________________________
Less than a week after President Putin’s landslide re-election, gunmen attacked the Crocus City concert hall outside Moscow, shooting and killing people before burning the whole building. This marked the deadliest terrorist attack in Russia in over a decade: killing over 139 people and injuring 180 more.
The group that has claimed responsibility, and has been determined as responsible by U.S. intelligence, is Islamic State Khorasan (ISIS-K), with Khorasan referring to a historical region that included parts of Iran, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan. ISIS-K emerged in late-2014 and has a reputation for being extremely brutal. They have already carried out extremely high profile and damaging attacks: including the attack on Kabul Airport in 2021, killing 13 U.S. troops during the evacuation of Afghanistan. However, the group has recently been on the wane as the Taliban, a group that ISIS-K deems too moderate, have attempted to defeat the group, leading to a fall in their attacks in Afghanistan, yet their bombings still continue.
Further, ISIS-K has a historical vendetta against Russia that motivated their attack. Most notably, they despise Russia for their support of the Syrian government and against ISIS in the Syrian Civil War. Aspects of their hatred stretch even farther: ISIS disapproved of Russia for its brutal tactics in the various Chechen wars stretching back to the 1990s. In 2022, ISIS-K claimed responsibility for an attack near Russia’s embassy in Kabul, killing 6 people.
Policy Analysis:
Despite their historic feud, the Kremlin is not pinning this attack on ISIS-K, but rather has pinned this attack on Ukraine. Of course, this would be extremely politically expedient for Putin: furthering support for his war on Ukraine. Putin has been active in pushing this narrative: he has not mentioned ISIS in connection with the attacks. Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova accused the United States of pinning this attack on ISIS to take away focus from Ukraine’s involvement.
On the other side, Ukraine levied an accusation that this was a false flag operation commissioned by Putin to rally support for the war against Ukraine and mobilize Russian forces. This wouldn’t be the first time Putin is suspected of a false flag operation. In 1999, a series of apartment bombings by “Chechen terrorists” killed more than 300 Russians and injured 1,700 more. The bombings served as a pretext for Vladimir Putin to launch the second Chechen war. However, the “Chechen terrorists” turned out to be employees of the Federal Security Service, or F.S.B. Putin, of course, disputed that these people were involved in the bombing, and when numerous journalists attempted to investigate this claim they all wound up poisoned or shot dead. Despite these historical circumstances it is clear that ISIS is truly behind these attacks.
Yet, the divisive response to this attack underscores the flaws in the way that most observers tend to view foreign policy: everyone is either allied with Russia or allied with the United States. In the Cold-War and post Cold-War era, this framework could neatly capture most developments in foreign policy. However, with ISIS, they are only out for themselves, and defy any broader foreign policy framework or alliance that they are placed in. Therefore, instead of working together to fight ISIS, the United States and Russia are too focused on fighting each other to join forcs and attack ISIS.
Engagement Resources:
- UNHCR : The UNHCR is a UN Refugee Agency that helps displaced families in conflict zones, including Ukraine. Readers who are concerned about the mobilization of the Russian military to attack Ukraine may wish to support them by donating through this organization.
- Save the Children: Save the Children is an organization that organizes humanitarian aid for children. Those worried about Ukrainian children in light of the Russia-Ukraine War may wish to donate through this organization.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Checking in on 14 Years of Obamacare: Part 2
Checking in on 14 Years of Obamacare: Part 2
Health and Gender Policy Brief #172 | By: Geoffrey Small | April 01, 2024
Featured Photo: www.news.gallup.com
__________________________________
March 2024 highlights fourteen years since The ACA (Affordable Care Act) has been enacted. When it was passed more than a decade ago, there were three primary goals of the ACA, or more popularly referred to as Obamacare. According to HealthCare.gov, the first was to make affordable health insurance more available for the American public. The second goal was to encourage states to expand their Medicaid coverage to all individuals whose income is significantly below the federal poverty level. Finally, the ACA would provide federal support to “innovative medical care delivery methods designed to lower the costs of health care generally.” This part in the series will analyze the ACA’s impact on the expansion of Medicaid coverage in each state.
Policy Analysis
Medicaid, along with Medicare, was introduced during the Social Security Amendments of 1965. Medicare is a federal health insurance program that covers everyone over the age of 65, and some people who suffer from specified disabilities or conditions. Medicaid is a joint federal and state program that provides coverage for individuals who have a low enough income to qualify. Medicaid funding works by states accepting matched federal funding upon agreeing to baseline healthcare coverage standards that the federal government establishes. Even though Medicare was universally established and administered in 1965, states had to agree to opt into Medicaid to receive matched funding from the federal government. By 1982, all states agreed to offer the baseline Medicaid program. When the ACA was introduced, the individual market was significantly overhauled. The ACA required that all U.S. citizens have healthcare coverage, or face a financial penalty, while insurers had to provide coverage for essential health needs regardless of pre-existing conditions. These policy changes required states to administer an expanded Medicaid market for previously uninsured individuals and those having coverage hardships due to pre-existing conditions.
Photo taken from KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation)
A recent Kaiser Family Foundation study concluded that 10 states have not fully adopted the ACA’s expanded coverage requirements. As of March 20th, 2024, Wyoming, Texas, Wisconsin, Kansas, Tennessee, Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina have not adopted all of the expanded requirements under the ACA. The KFF study indicates many of these states still have a strong opposition to withdrawing work requirements from their Medicaid coverage guidelines. In 2017, the Trump administration notified state governors that the 1115 waiver under the 1965 Social Security Amendments can be used to establish work-requirement policies in order for individuals to qualify for Medicaid. This waiver was originally designed for states to develop innovative policies in advancing Medicaid coverage that may conflict with federal regulations.
The Affordable Care Act is considered a massive overhaul of our healthcare system. A 14-year debate has since ensued between scholars, policymakers, and the mainstream media related to the three primary goals. Within each goal lies nuanced data detailing the progress our society has made since the law was passed. Studies show the ACA expansion of Medicaid standards have directly impacted the reduction of previously uninsured individuals. Some states still refuse to apply the expansion implemented by the ACA. The Trump administration’s changes to the 1115 waiver were designed to allow some states to restrict their Medicaid access. However, the Biden administration has worked to reverse the Trump administration changes to the 1115 waiver, which undermined ACA expansion, by denying new work waiver applications from states and legally challenging existing state legislation for work requirements.
This is the second part in a series. For Part 1 of the Obamacare series, click here. For the rest of the series, click here.
Stay in-the-know! Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.
Continued Bloodshed Marks the 3rd Year of the Russian War on Ukraine
Continued Bloodshed Marks the 3rd Year of the Russian War on Ukraine
Foreign Policy Brief #133 | By: Yelena Korshunov | March 29, 2024
Featured Photo: www.news.sky.com
__________________________________
“We were sitting in the kitchen when we heard a loud explosion. It was very close,”- my mom said to me on the phone. Today is March 15th, she is in Odessa, a beautiful city on the Ukrainian Black Sea shore. She is not willing to leave her homeland to become a refugee at 86. Since February 24, 2022, my days start with news from Ukraine and especially from my hometown. On the morning of March 2nd at 6:00 am the news was sad and tense, “Russian missile hit the residential building at night. 10 people were killed, 4 kids among them.” 7:30am: “ 13 people killed, 5 kids among them. A family of three – all killed. Rescue work continues. There may still be people under the rubble.” And later that day the photos. Pictures of happy smiling families, laughing children, big-eyed babies. They all were killed by “Russian peace” that night.
Today, March 15th, I called my Odessa friends, “Are you safe? Everybody’s alive?” “I am. It’s a nightmare, people are laying on the streets,” my school friend in Odessa said. At the time I called her, all these people were still laying in puddles of their blood, still warm. Minutes ago they were alive rushing to work, school, and shopping. They had plans for that day. Had dreams. Loved. None of them will ever love again, kiss their children, pet their pets. They will never see a blossom that is coming so soon with this beautiful Spring.
21 killed, more than 70 injured in the morning of March 15th. That was only the first strike, and right after, when nearby residents and first responders arrived in a rush to help the wounded, another drone targeted a crowd of rescuers. I remember this terrorist’s strategy of a delayed attack very well from the time I lived in Jerusalem. They had activated an explosive device on Ben Yehuda street in the heart of the city. A lot of people were killed and injured. When ambulances arrived there was a car blocking their way to the attacked street. When people rushed to the car to move it making a pass for the ambulance, it was exploded by a bomb stuffed with nails causing even more deaths, wounds, and torn off bodies of those who tried to save the others’ lives.
Recently the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said he held military meetings to identify Russia’s “most vulnerable spots” where Ukrainian forces could cause the “most damage.” “The more the Russian state loses and the greater the price of its aggression, the closer the end to this war will be,” he said. According to Forbes, since the beginning of 2024, there have been 11 Ukrainian drone strikes on Russian enterprises related to the oil industry– mainly oil refining. On March 12, fires due to drone strikes occurred at oil depots in the Nizhny Novgorod and Oryol regions in Russia. The Nizhny Novgorod Oil Refinery, one of the largest in Russia, had to shut down its unit. On March 13, authorities in the Rostov region announced that downed drones had fallen on the territory of the Novoshakhtinsky oil refinery.
Since the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, the border regions of the Russian Federation have been subject to Ukrainian shelling and drone attacks. In recent days, attacks on Belgorod and the Belgorod region have become more intense amid reports of battles with Russian formations fighting on the side of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the border areas of the region. As a result, at least 20 people in Belgorod have already been killed and more than a hundred injured, according to statements by the regional governor. While Belgorod residents try to get the attention of the authorities, a popular Russian TV presenter Vladimir Solovyov called the complaints of Belgorod residents about the shelling a “vile hysteria.”
Spring is coming. Sakura have started blooming in DC, while across the ocean the third year of shelling and murder is blowing out lives as easy and fast as leaves from the trees. What happens if a Ukrainian shield is ultimately broken by Russia’s bombs? Will we still enjoy blooming trees under the peaceful American sky? Or will it be our men’s turn to take up arms and defend our land from Putin’s seizing ambitions?
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Suggestions for the Democratic Party’s Foreign Policy Platform
Suggestions for the Democratic Party’s Foreign Policy Platform
OP ED | By: U.S. Resist News | March 29, 2024
Featured Photo: www.currentaffairs.org
__________________________________
We are living in an inter-connected, interdependent world. Any going back to an isolationist foreign policy, as the Republicans seem to suggest, would be unrealistic and counter-productive to US interests. On the other hand continuations of the reckless overseas military interventions, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, would be greatly unpopular and foolish.
The Democratic Party needs to adopt a foreign policy that combines a continued emphasis on protecting US national security with a strong commitment to promoting a democratic world order. We should continue our effort to build alliances with democratic countries to counter the aggressive actions of authoritarian states such as Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and others. We should collaborate with other countries and the United Nations to curtail conflicts within and between nations and address the humanitarian and governance needs of failed states like Haiti, Sudan, and Syria. We should work with like-minded countries to contain the spread of weapons of mass destruction and hopefully eliminate them.
Bringing a just end to wars in Ukraine and Gaza should be a major goal of US foreign policy. Continued American funding and strategic support for Ukraine in their conflict with Russia should be a top priority. Russia’s expansionist efforts in Ukraine and elsewhere should be contained. The Biden administration must moderate its weapons support for Israel until and unless they stop their seemingly genocidal-like war in Gaza. Aid to Palestinians in Gaza must be allowed to flow freely, and the US should join the chorus of other nations advocating for a two state solution to the Palestinian situation. Hamas must be branded as a terrorist organization and their efforts curtailed.
We should maintain our mixed policy of cooperation, competition, and containment towards the Chinese. The South China Sea should remain an open waterway, and the independence of Taiwan should be protected. Trade with China should be sanctioned but carefully reviewed to guard against price gouging, US worker displacement and goods that contaminate the environment.
The United States should work to strengthen the fairness and effectiveness of global institutions starting with the United Nations, and participate their efforts to deal with global issues such as climate change, immigration, world health, human rights, and the misuse of social media.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Digital Diplomacy: How Social Media is Reshaping International Relations
Digital Diplomacy: How Social Media is Reshaping International Relations
Foreign Policy Brief #132 | By: Inijah Quadri| March 28, 2024
Featured Photo: www.medium.com
__________________________________
In the realm of international relations, the digital age has ushered in an era of digital diplomacy, where social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram serve not just as tools for social networking but as instruments of diplomatic engagement. This transformative shift has enabled governments, diplomats, and international organizations to communicate directly with global audiences, bypassing traditional media channels.
The utilization of social media for diplomatic purposes—often termed “Twiplomacy” when referencing Twitter—has grown exponentially, offering a platform for public diplomacy, crisis communication, and international dialogue. However, this digital expansion also brings challenges, including the spread of misinformation, cyber espionage, and the potential for exacerbating international tensions.
Analysis
Digital diplomacy harnesses social media’s power to reach and engage with a global audience instantaneously. It democratizes diplomacy, traditionally the domain of elite government officials, and opens it up to public scrutiny and participation. An example of this is the Swedish Foreign Ministry’s initiative, which utilizes Twitter for diplomatic communication, fostering transparency and dialogue with global citizens. Similarly, emerging platforms like TikTok are being explored for their potential to engage younger demographics through short-form video content, demonstrating digital diplomacy’s adaptability to new social media trends. The United Nations’ use of TikTok to raise awareness on a number of issues and the Government of New South Wales TikTok health broadcasts showcase how these platforms can extend the reach of diplomatic and informational campaigns, making complex issues accessible and engaging to a global audience. The implications of these “blown up” efforts underscore the importance of communicating with audiences at different levels—levels they prefer to be engaged on.
Yet, this digital engagement is not without its pitfalls. The immediacy and public nature of social media can sometimes lead to diplomatic faux pas or exacerbate tensions. For instance, tweets from world leaders have occasionally escalated both stock market and diplomatic tensions, demonstrating how digital diplomacy requires a careful balance between openness and diplomatic prudence. Furthermore, platforms like TikTok, while offering unique opportunities for engagement, also present challenges related to data privacy and geopolitical influence, underscoring the complexities of navigating digital diplomacy in the social media era.
Moreover, the current political climate surrounding TikTok exemplifies the multifaceted challenges of digital diplomacy. The app’s Chinese ownership has sparked bipartisan concerns in the United States, leading to legislative efforts by both Republicans and Democrats to enact a ban on TikTok, citing national security concerns. This development underscores the geopolitical complexities of digital platforms that transcend national boundaries. Concurrently, the Biden administration’s engagement with TikTok to reach younger voters highlights the strategic importance of social media in diplomacy and domestic politics. This dichotomy between security concerns and political outreach reflects the broader tensions inherent in digital diplomacy, where the tools that facilitate international engagement can also pose significant national security risks.
One of the most notable examples of digital diplomacy’s impact is the use of social media during crises. The U.S. State Department’s “Virtual Embassy Tehran” offers a platform for dialogue with Iranian citizens despite the absence of formal diplomatic relations, showcasing digital diplomacy’s potential to bridge divides.
However, the digital sphere is also fraught with challenges, including the risk of misinformation and cyber espionage. Websites can be hacked, and social media platforms can be manipulated to spread false information, affecting international relations and public perception of global events. The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election highlighted the potential for foreign interference through social media, underscoring the need for vigilance and cybersecurity measures in the digital diplomacy arena.
Addressing these challenges requires a concerted effort by international actors to establish norms and regulations governing digital diplomacy. Initiatives such as the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation represent steps toward mitigating the risks associated with digital engagement in international relations.
Digital diplomacy represents a significant shift in how nations engage with each other and the global public. It offers opportunities for more direct and transparent communication but also poses challenges that must be navigated carefully. As digital platforms continue to evolve, so too will the strategies and policies governing their use in international diplomacy, necessitating ongoing dialogue, research, and cooperation among nations.
Engagement Resources
Click or tap on the resource URL to visit links where available
- The DiploFoundation (https://www.diplomacy.edu/): An organization dedicated to improving the understanding and practice of diplomacy in the digital age, offering training and research on digital diplomacy.
- Twiplomacy Study (https://twiplomacy.com/): An annual study that analyzes the use of Twitter by world leaders and governments, providing insights into trends and strategies in digital diplomacy.
- EU Code of Practice on Disinformation (https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/code-practice-disinformation): A voluntary framework aimed at combating online disinformation, including commitments by major social media platforms to increase transparency and accountability.
- Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (https://www.cisa.gov/): The United States federal agency responsible for protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure from physical and cyber threats, offering resources and guidelines for enhancing cybersecurity in the context of digital diplomacy.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Ukraine: Over Two Years of War
Ukraine: Over Two Years of War
Foreign Policy Brief #131 | By: Ibrahim Castro| March 25, 2024
Featured Photo: www.hyperallergic.com
__________________________________
February 24, 2024 marked the two year anniversary of Russia’s invasion and assault on Ukraine. Now going on the third year the war still has no appearance of ending. During a G7 meeting that took place during the second anniversary of the war, G7 leaders produced a joint statement reaffirming their commitment to supporting a comprehensive and lasting peace in Ukraine, tightening sanctions on Russia and continuing to send Ukraine military and economic aid. President Zelensky has continued his plea for arms deliveries, pledging that Kyiv would not use weapons from Western allies to strike Russian territory. Ukrainian troops are currently trying to hold back Russian advances despite an escalating ammunition shortage.
The Russian presidential elections were held last week over three days and coincided with the 10 year anniversary of Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. On March 18, 2024, President Vladimir Putin extended his reign over Russia in what was a landslide election victory, though it as one international observers said was neither free nor fair. In his post election speech, Putin declared his determination to advance deeper into Ukraine and renewed threats against Western states should they interfere. Thus, with the knowledge that the war will continue in the near and medium term future, and the recent unfortunate anniversary that came and went once again, it is worth reflecting on what has happened so far in this war that has brought us to this point in time.
Civilian and Troop Deaths
Last month Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that 31,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed in the two years since Russia launched its invasion. It’s the first time that Kyiv has confirmed the number of its losses since the start of war in early 2022. OHCHR has estimated the number of deaths of civilians in Ukraine at 10,582 up to this point, with many more expected to be discovered in high intensity areas of fighting once the war ends and a more accurate number can be reached. An estimated 3.7 million people are internally displaced and nearly 6.5 million people have fled into neighboring countries in the region including Poland, Hungary, other EU member states and other countries globally. Poland has welcomed the greatest number of Ukrainian refugees, taking in nearly 60 percent.
Over 45,000 Russian troops are estimated to have been killed since the start of the war. The Kremlin does not release its figures on military casualties and so an accurate number is difficult to determine. Instead the numbers on Russian casualties are based on journalists’ research on data from sources such as obituaries in the media, messages on social networks by relatives of the victims, reports from local administrations, and data from cemeteries. The war was launched with 190,000 Russian troops, as of 2024 the number of troops fighting has risen to an estimated 450,000. The Kremlin also issued a decree raising the maximum number of members of the armed forces to 2.2 million, using mercenary groups, ethnic minorities and even immigrants to aid in its war.
International Responses to the War
Russia’s war in Ukraine has received international condemnation, though the international community does not see eye to eye on how to handle relations and attempt to bring an end to the war. The UN General Assembly with a majority of the world’s nations has on multiple occasions condemned Russia’s invasion into Ukrainian territory. The International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2023 issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin, leaving him unable to travel to member states of the ICC under threat of arrest. Additionally much of Europe has been extremely critical of the war, with the EU and US arming Ukraine. Since the start of the war, the EU and its member states have made available over $101 billion in financial, military, humanitarian, and refugee assistance, with another $54 billion promised for the next four years. The US has allocated 113 billion in funding to Ukraine since the start of the war. US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin emphasized last week that the US “will not let Ukraine fail,” even as Congress has stalled funding for Ukraine that would allocate $60 billion to continue its fight against Russia.
Outside of Western states support for Ukraine and disavowal of Russia is not so clear cut. There have been unprecedented economic sanctions enacted against Russia, but have failed to lead to economic turmoil because China, India, Brazil, South Africa and other countries from the Global South have continued to trade with Russia. Countries like China and Brazil have offered to mediate peace talks and have steered away from sending weapons or imposing sanctions. In 2022, the first year of the war, Russia’s economy shrank by 2.1%. However, it is estimated that its economy grew by 2.2% in 2023 and will achieve slight growth of 1.1% in 2024. Oil imports from Russia to Europe have been banned, 70% of the assets of Russian banks have been frozen, Western companies have fled, and Russia was removed from the global banking system SWIFT.
Russia has made a concerted effort in attempting to strengthen ties with countries in the Global South in order to offset resource cuts from Europe and the US. During the Cold War, the West’s embargoes worked because its economic strength forced adversarial countries to have fewer trading partners. Today that pressure has lessened with the larger number of partners available in an increasingly multipolar world.
NATO and Russia
NATO member states walk a tight-rope in attempting to aid their non-member ally Ukraine while avoiding direct confrontation with Russia which would spark regional war and very likely a third world war. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that NATO enlargement and encroachment near Russian territory is one of the main reasons for the incursion into Ukraine. Putin has claimed that Moscow views any attempt to expand NATO to its borders as a “direct threat”. One of Russia’s demands in proposed negotiations is the promise that Ukraine will never be a member of the alliance. Yet although Putin sought to weaken NATO through the invasion, the alliance instead reaffirmed its commitments and added both Finland and Sweden to its ranks.
What’s Next?
The only thing that is certain to happen with this war in the near future is its continuation. Russia is very unlikely to back down at this stage with such a high cost having been taken from the Russian public and its international reputation. Ukraine has already vowed numerous times to not end the war without reclaiming all of its territory, and its allies, the EU and US have proposed funding packages that would provide arms to Ukraine for the next few years. Additionally, new conflicts such as the war in Gaza, and tensions with China in the Asia pacific has seen the opposing sides of this conflict stretch over to the others as well, further polarizing the international community and straining international relations. The war in Ukraine is part of a larger global conflict, a New Cold War between global powers and Ukraine is stuck fighting a war of attrition against a much larger opponent. We can only hope not to have many more anniversaries or milestones of war.
For more articles and in-depth analysis on the Ukraine War, click here. Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Everyone Wants a Gaza Ceasefire, but Can’t Agree on the Terms
Everyone Wants a Gaza Ceasefire, but Can’t Agree on the Terms
Foreign Policy Brief #130 | By: Courtney Denning| March 20, 2024
Featured Photo: www.hyperallergic.com
__________________________________
Calls for a ceasefire in Gaza have been echoed from what seems to be every side of the political aisle for months, yet none has emerged. Sixty-one percent of United States citizens support a permanent ceasefire, and nd while 13 of the 15 countries in the United Nations Security Council voted in favor of a ceasefire, the one dissenting vote from the U.S. vetoed this measure.
Instead, U.S. officials proposed an alternative plan for a temporary ceasefire and the release of hostages. This has left many to wonder why the seemingly popular resolution has not been implemented.
Analysis:
The political bodies at the center of this war have both publicly supported a ceasefire, but have not agreed on its terms. Hamas officials said that the Israeli government is “stalling” by not agreeing to remove troops from northern Gaza. Israeli officials accused Hamas of doing the same by demanding that senior military leaders be included in a hostage exchange, which they see as far too extreme and dangerous.
Outside forces, which are usually necessary for negotiating terms, are also at a standstill. After the U.S. vetoed the U.N. ceasefire measure, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urgently called for a ceasefire to be implemented at the start of Ramadan, a Muslim holy month that began on March 11. The Security Council, which must make decisions unanimously, is unable to force a ceasefire as long as the U.S. opposes the specified terms.
Subtle word choices in Vice President Kamala Harris’ speech on March 3 reveal why the U.S. may be holding out. Harris, like many other liberals and Democrats, emphasized the struggles and suffering of the Palestinians as her main reason for supporting a ceasefire. She said that Israel needs to “do more to significantly increase the flow of aid,” further signaling her support for the people of Gaza as opposed to the Israeli government.
However, while referencing ongoing negotiations, Harris said that “Hamas needs to agree to that deal,” insinuating that all parties are waiting on Hamas in order to proceed with a ceasefire. So although her humanitarian concerns sprout from sympathy for Palestinians, she still places political blame on Hamas.
Harris straddled the line between liberals’ support of Palestine and the historic allyship that the U.S. has with Israel. But this partisan debate in the United States has gotten in the way of a ceasefire.
The U.S. is the reason that the U.N. Security Council has not been able to implement a ceasefire, and government officials will continue to get in the way of peace as long as they prioritize politics over human lives.
Engagement resources:
- Show support for a ceasefire: https://www.amnesty.org/en/petition/demand-a-ceasefire-by-all-parties-to-end-civilian-suffering/
- Learn more about ceasefires and their impact: https://peacemaker.un.org/thematic-areas/ceasefires-security-arrangements
For more articles and in-depth analysis on the Israel-Gaza War, click here. Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
Teen Pornographers and Trump’s Black Friends: Can Deepfakes Be Controlled?
Teen Pornographers and Trump’s Black Friends: Can Deepfakes Be Controlled?
Technology Policy Brief #109 | By: Mindy Spatt | March 20, 2024
Featured Photo: www.pymnts.com
__________________________________
Regulators and regulators are scrambling to find ways of containing the harms of AI, including the proliferation of deepfakes, which can distort elections and are responsible for a new form of pornography appearing in middle schools around the country. Guidelines passed by the EU, while more than the US has managed, don’t fully address the problem. Some federal legislation has been proposed in the US, but so far hasn’t gone anywhere. A handful of states have taken action.
ANALYSIS
Images of Donald Trump surrounded by adoring black supporters looked to me like obvious fakes. But fake images such as these are not always identifiable and are often being used to influence elections. With concerns over deepfakes growing in the last few years, Google had said it would require political ads using AI to include a prominent disclosure; it is unclear whether the Trump pics were so marked.
According to the Center for Countering Digital Hate, which studied the most popular AI image tools including ChatGPT Plus and Microsoft’s Image Creator, the tools created election disinformation in 41% of cases surveyed, including images that could support completely false claims about candidates or elections.
Voluntary self-regulation is unlikely to solve the problem, but legislators and regulators have been slow to respond to this growing threat. The EU recently approved, with much fanfare, landmark regulations addressing AI, but they don’t ban deepfakes entirely. The rules do require transparency by creators of artificial images in the form of a disclosure of both the origin of the image and the techniques used to create it. Skeptics question whether the EU rules, which haven’t gone into effect yet, will be enforceable and whether they go far enough.
Here in the US Congressman Joe Morelle (D- Rochester, NY) takes aim at a form of AI pornography that often targets young girls with the Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act. Testifying in support of Morelle’s bill was Francesca Mani, a 15 year old from New Jersey who had fake nude images of her shared online, along with her mother. Her situation is unfortunately not unique. In another high-profile case, five students were expelled from a middle school in Beverly Hills for creating and distributing images of their 8th grade classmates that superimposed actual head shots with AI generated nude bodies.
In introducing the bill, Representative Morelle said “The spread of A.I.-generated and altered images can cause irrevocable emotional, financial, and reputational harm—and unfortunately, women are disproportionately impacted… it’s critical that we take proactive steps to combat the spread of disinformation and protect individuals from compromising situations online.” The Act would make it illegal to share altered or “deepfake” intimate images without consent and makes it clear that consent to create the image does not establish consent for sharing or disclosure. It would also create a right of private action for victims.
An unnamed New Jersey Jane Doe is suing over the same incident Mani testified about, asking a federal district court to stop further distribution of the images and order them destroyed. She is also seeking compensatory damages. This Jane Doe, her lawyers allege, “suffered and will continue to suffer substantial “substantial emotional distress, mental anguish, anxiety, embarrassment, shame, humiliation” and reputational harm caused by the images.
In another case in Florida, two boys, aged 13 and 14, were arrested and face felony charges for using AI to create explicit images of 12 and 13 year old girls. They were charged under a Florida law that makes it a crime to disseminate sexually explicit images without consent. About 10 states have similar laws on the books, but with the criminal charges, possibly the first in the nation, the issue is being taken to a whole new level, and Congress may be spurred to action.
Engagement Resources:
- The New EU AI Act- The Ten Key Things You Need to Know Now, Dentons, December 14, 2023
- Online Safety and Privacy Basics: How to Protect Yourself Against Deepfakes, December 22, 2023
- REPORT: FAKE IMAGE FACTORIES: How AI image generators threaten election integrity and democracy, Center for Digital Privacy March 06, 2024
Check out usrenewnews.org/AI for more news on AI technologies and trends. Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
El Salvador’s President Addresses His Country’s Gang Problem
El Salvador’s President Addresses His Country’s Gang Problem
Foreign Policy Brief #129 | By: Abigail Hunt| March 25, 2024
Featured Photo: www.vox.com
__________________________________
Two years ago, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele requested a month-long anti-gang emergency decree from the nation’s lawmakers. Gang violence plagued the country. Each month since its initial passage, lawmakers have voted to extend the decree. The most recent vote marked the 24th extension of the anti-gang effort, and it appears to have made a difference. The original decree was passed March 27th, 2022, after 62 people were murdered in a single day. In 2023, there averaged a murder every other day. As of March 9th, 2024, the AP reports, there have been just 18 murders this year, a significant improvement.
El Salvador is the heart of Central America. With an approximate 6.6 million people (in 2023 per CIA.gov), the population has grown at a steady pace in recent years. At 8,124 square miles, it is the smallest country in continental America, and the only country in Central America that has no Caribbean coastline. The history of El Salvador is ancient, and the descendants of those ancient ancestors live in the nation today. The modern-day indigenous are mostly Nahua-Pipil, and they comprise 10 percent of the population, according to a Minority Rights Group profile. Ten percent equates to about 600,000 people, per data from the National Council for Art and Culture at the Ministry of Education (CONCULTURA) and the National Salvadoran Indigenous Coordination Council (CCNIS).
Of the indigenous population, only five percent own their own land. By contrast, a whopping 95 percent of non-indigenous citizens own their own property. Indigenous families have more than twice the average number of children compared to their non-indigenous counterparts, and those children are almost twice as likely to be illiterate. The average indigenous home is a weak, shanty-like structure on communal or rented land. They have no voice in the government, and no political candidate bothers to consider them when shaping policy.
Sometime between 1700-2000 B.C.E., the earliest of the Olmecs settled in El Salvador. They were followed by the Toltecs, Pipil, Nahua, Lenca, and other tribes, weaving a deep and ancient history which continues to this day. In the 16th century C.E., more than three thousand years after tribes first settled the area, Spanish conquerors arrived to seize power. The power was not easily won but won nonetheless. By the mid-1500s, the area was under Spanish control. The conquerors stole the land and exploited the people, who were forced to labor long hours on plantations to build wealth for the Spanish overlords. The people have attempted uprisings, which have been quashed. In 1932, in response to armed rebellion which killed 32, the government slaughtered between 35,000 and 50,000 people in what is known as La Matanza. They targeted indigenous people.
During the country’s civil war in the 1980s, citizens from El Salvador fled to L.A., where the now-infamous MS-13 gang was founded. That gang and others spread among El Salvador migrants and other migrant groups, then returned to their home countries with them when many of those migrants were deported in the 1990s. Those gangs have continued to spread their reach and dig in their heels ever since.
In present-day El Salvador, President Bukele employs restrictive and racist policy which justifies force, targeting people based on appearance. Under the national emergency decree, still in effect, police arrested more than 78,000 suspected gang members, about 7,000 of whom have been released due to lack of evidence. Innocent indigenous people who live in the same rural areas the gangs set up camp are assumed guilty due to geographic proximity. This author found no readily available research on the racial and ethnic demographic makeup of the gangs themselves.
Recently, Bukele won re-election, a first in the history of the nation (aided by a government stacked in his favor). He is in his early 40s and was re-elected with 80 percent of the vote. A popular figure due in part to his success in quelling gang violence, he is riding a high wave after reelection. Bukele recently posted on social media about Haiti with the caption, “We can fix it.” Other Latin American leaders have enacted similar measures to Bukele’s in their countries, with debatable success rates.
El Salvador’s emergency gang order suspended fundamental civil rights such as a person’s right to know the reason why they are being arrested and their right to a lawyer. Bukele wrongfully imprisoned one percent of the national population and is widely criticized as enforcing a police state. It seems Bukele believes he deserves to be handed control of another nation, a devastated and fractured country with a much larger population than El Salvador and a completely different culture, with a long history of fighting back against oppressive occupying forces. The 18th c. philosopher Edmund Burke wrote, “The greater the power, the more dangerous the abuse.” It is unlikely Haiti’s fate would be placed in Bukele’s eager grip. The solution to the issues in Haiti today are not solved by the implementation of a police state; a society’s infrastructure cannot be rebuilt with arrest records.
Engagement Resources:
- Associated Press. El Salvador extends anti-gang emergency decree for 24th time. It’s now been in effect for two years.
- Minority Rights Group. Indigenous peoples in El Salvador.
- University of Windsor. N. Roumie. Gangs and the Culture of Violence in El Salvador (What role did the US play?) the US play?). Vol. 5, Issue 1, Art. 3. October 9th, 2017.
- Central Intelligence Agency. El Salvador: Central America and the Caribbean. February 20, 2024.
Stay informed with the latest insights from our dedicated reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter. Your support is crucial in safeguarding fearless, independent journalism. If you appreciate our content, please consider donating today to continue in helping to protect democracy and empower citizenship.
The Controversial Reactions to Deploying the National Guard to New York Subways
The Controversial Reactions to Deploying the National Guard to New York Subways
Social Justice Policy Brief #159 | By: Devyne Byrd | March 19, 2024
Featured Photo: www.independent.co.uk
__________________________________
New York Governor Kathy Hochul introduced her plan to deploy the National Guard and State Police to conduct bag searches on the New York subway. Hochul stated it was a temporary measure to combat the rising crimes on the subway following a string of high-profile incidents that brought attention to the matter. She admitted the crimes were not statistically significant but were making residents uncomfortable. The governor stated, “If you feel better walking past someone in a uniform to make sure that someone doesn’t bring a knife or a gun on the subway, then that’s exactly why I did it.” Governor Hochul did not give a time frame for the temporary measure, explaining she did not want to tip criminals off with the information.
Though the increased police presence is the main and most controversial action, the Democratic Governor’s measures go further in a five-part plan. In addition to the National Guard, Hochul has allocated $20 million for mental health workers to assist those having crises, requested more money to add cameras, called for improved coordination between law enforcement and transit personnel, and proposed litigation that allows judges to bar those with criminal records from taking the subway, although it is not clear how this measure would be enforced.
The backlash to the plan was swift. Republicans critiqued the hypocrisy of the Democratic party proposing increased police presence, pointing out previous attempts by Republicans to take similar measures that were blocked. Democrats also objected to the plan on privacy grounds, questioning the effectiveness of the plan and the unintended consequences. A major critique of the policy is that it is likely to lead to racial discrimination and profiling. Though the policy is on its face racially neutral, opponents noted that it is reminiscent of New York’s previous stop and frisk program that allowed police officers to stop and search people they suspected were carrying weapons. That program was ruled unconstitutional as it disproportionately affected Black and Hispanic men. Critics of Hochul’s program suspect that the subway police presence will also lead to increased scrutiny of people of color in the same way. Shekar Krishnan, a representative of Queens voiced these fears, stating “We need to be investing in strategies that really keep us safe such as mental health services. Instead, what we are doing is fearmongering; that will only lead to Black and Brown New Yorkers being further over-policed.”
In response to Hochul’s controversial plan, on March 14th the Legal Defense Fund, advocacy organizations, and several New York City elected officials sent a joint letter to the Governor critiquing the plan and refuting the safety and psychological benefits that Hochul claims it would bring. The letter emphasizes the disproportionate harm increased policing will have on Black and Brown people, the criminalization of mental health issues, and the consequences banning people from the subway will have on their ability to meet basic needs. The letter also identifies the alternative solution of investing in public services claiming that “researched-backed studies make clear that public safety is achieved not by aggressive policing strategies, but rather through policies that promote economic stability.”
Engagement Resources
- A Subway Plan Aimed to Ease Fears. The Blowback Was Immediate – An article by the New York Times on the criticism Governor Hochul’s subway plan has faced.
- Letter to Governor Hochul – A letter to Governor Hochul written and signed by the Legal Defense Fund, advocacy organizations, and several elected officials in opposition to the five-point plan to deploy the National Guard.
Wanna stay in-the-know? Always get the latest updates from our reporters by subscribing to the U.S. Resist Democracy Weekly Newsletter, and please consider contributing to ‘Keeping Democracy Alive’ by donating today! We depend on support from readers like you to aide in protecting fearless independent journalism.