JOBS POLICIES, ANALYSIS, AND RESOURCES
Latest Jobs Posts
Continued Bloodshed Marks the 3rd Year of the Russian War on Ukraine
Brief #133 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Yelena Korshunov
The article vividly depicts the ongoing devastation in Ukraine’s conflict, highlighting the resilience of communities amidst relentless violence. As tensions escalate and civilian casualties mount, questions linger about the conflict’s trajectory and its broader implications for regional stability.
Suggestions for the Democratic Party’s Foreign Policy Platform
OP ED
by: U.S. Resist News
Diving into the complexities of contemporary foreign policy, our latest op-ed offers insightful suggestions for the Democratic Party’s global stance. With a focus on national security and fostering democratic alliances, it advocates for a nuanced approach to international relations in an interconnected world.
Digital Diplomacy: How Social Media is Reshaping International Relations
Brief #132 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Inijah Quadri
Dive into the realm of digital diplomacy and its profound influence on international relations. From leveraging platforms like Twitter for transparent dialogue to navigating cybersecurity risks, discover how social media is redefining diplomatic engagement in the modern age.
Ukraine: Over Two Years of War
Brief #131 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Abran C
The two-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is marked by ongoing conflict, with G7 leaders reaffirming support for Ukraine while President Putin extends his reign and vows to advance further. Despite international condemnation and support for Ukraine, the war continues, resulting in significant casualties and displacement, while geopolitical tensions escalate in a broader global conflict landscape.
Everyone Wants a Gaza Ceasefire, but Can’t Agree on the Terms
Brief #130 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Courtney Denning
Efforts to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza have faced obstacles despite broad political support and 61% of Americans backing the initiative. However, a U.S. veto prevented the United Nations Security Council from passing the measure, despite overwhelming international support.
Teen Pornographers and Trump’s Black Friends: Can Deepfakes Be Controlled?
Brief #109 – Technology Policy Brief
by : Mindy Spatt
Regulators worldwide are grappling with the proliferation of AI-generated deepfakes, which pose significant threats ranging from election manipulation to the spread of explicit content targeting minors. While some legislative efforts have been initiated, concerns persist over the effectiveness of voluntary regulations and the need for comprehensive legal measures to address the emotional and reputational harm caused by deepfakes.
El Salvador’s President Addresses His Country’s Gang Problem
Brief #129 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Abigail Hunt
El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele tackles the nation’s gang crisis with a prolonged anti-gang emergency decree, which has significantly reduced murders. However, concerns arise over human rights violations and discriminatory policies targeting indigenous communities, raising questions about the president’s approach and ambitions beyond El Salvador’s borders.
The Controversial Reactions to Deploying the National Guard to New York Subways
Brief #159 – Social Justice Policy Brief
by: Devyne Byrd
Governor Kathy Hochul’s deployment of the National Guard for subway bag searches in NYC has sparked controversy over potential racial discrimination and the criminalization of mental health issues, with advocacy groups and officials opposing the plan, advocating investment in public services for safety.
The Tragedy in Haiti
Brief #128 – Foreign Policy Brief
by: Abigail Hunt
Escalating gang violence and political chaos grip Haiti as over 3,500 inmates escape prison, with gangs now controlling most of Port-au-Prince. The U.S. has announced plans to deploy troops to stabilize the situation, amid Haiti’s tumultuous history of colonialism and ongoing socioeconomic struggles.
A Closer Look at US Global Leadership: Navigating the Complex Dynamics of Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan
A Closer Look at US Global Leadership: Navigating the Complex Dynamics of Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan
Foreign Policy Brief #116 | By: Inijah Quadri | January 29, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.theguardian.com
__________________________________
In an era of evolving geopolitical landscapes, the United States faces the challenge of exerting effective global leadership amidst complex international conflicts and tensions. Three prominent areas of concern include the situations in Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan. Each region presents unique challenges that test U.S. foreign policy principles, strategic interests, and its commitment to global stability. These situations require nuanced approaches, balancing the pursuit of peace, respect for national sovereignty, and the need to uphold international law.
Analysis
a. Ukraine: The U.S.’s support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia demonstrates a strong commitment to European security and the principles of national sovereignty. This involvement, marked by substantial military aid to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia, not only underscores the long-term impact of U.S. foreign policy on European stability but also influences Russia’s international stance. While this support is a significant factor in the ongoing conflict, it also brings into question the extent and implications of U.S. involvement, especially in terms of potential escalation and destabilization within the broader European region. Such a scenario could lead to shifts in military and economic alliances across Europe.
Nevertheless, the current approach aligns with the success seen in historical contexts, such as U.S. support in the Balkans during the 1990s, which helped to stabilize the region post-conflict. However, in this instance, the US was instrumental in helping to broker a peace deal. Continuing with existing support, the U.S. should likewise bolster diplomatic efforts through platforms like the United Nations, NATO, and possibly BRICS, to seek a peaceful resolution, mirroring successful diplomatic engagements like the Dayton Agreement.
It is worth noting that the U.S.’s stance on Ukraine is deeply intertwined with its domestic politics. Notably, the MAGA Republicans have shown reluctance to support further funding for Ukraine, tying their approval to demands for stricter immigration policies. This standoff reflects a broader political divide within the U.S., where foreign policy objectives are increasingly used as leverage in domestic policy negotiations. Such internal conflicts not only complicate the U.S.’s commitment to Ukraine but also send mixed signals to international allies and adversaries alike.
b. Gaza: The Gaza Strip’s situation, exacerbated by the Israel-Palestine conflict, presents a different challenge. In the context of Israel and Gaza, President Biden faces pressure from progressive Democrats urging a more balanced approach towards the Israel-Palestine conflict. This faction advocates for greater support of Palestinian rights, posing a challenge to the traditional U.S. foreign policy that heavily favors Israel. While the situation in Gaza is particularly dire, with frequent humanitarian crises, the U.S. has historically been a staunch ally of Israel. Yet it faces calls to address the humanitarian needs in Gaza and promote a just solution to the conflict.
To avoid being labeled as two-faced, this necessitates a careful balance of U.S. foreign policy. Biden’s navigation of these internal pressures is also delicate, as he must balance progressive demands with the potential backlash from a significant domestic Jewish constituency, which traditionally influences U.S. policy in the region.
Here, the U.S. has the opportunity to play a constructive role by increasing humanitarian aid and facilitating dialogue. Learning from the success of the Oslo Accords in the 1990s, in which the U.S. played a pivotal role in mediating, similar diplomatic efforts could be employed to rejuvenate peace talks. The U.S. can leverage its influence to support UN resolutions that focus on alleviating the crisis and promoting a two-state solution.
c. Taiwan: Taiwan’s situation involves the U.S.’s strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly the island’s role as a major chip manufacturer. This economic interdependence complicates the U.S.’s role in the region. While supporting Taiwan’s defense capabilities is crucial for maintaining regional stability and securing U.S. economic interests, any significant shift in policy could have domestic economic repercussions. Additionally, the U.S. must consider the broader impact on its relationship with China, a key player in global economics and politics.
The U.S. follows a policy of strategic ambiguity towards Taiwan, supporting its defense capabilities while not formally recognizing it as an independent state. This stance aims to deter Chinese aggression without provoking a direct conflict. The potential risks of the U.S.’s strategic ambiguity towards Taiwan include misinterpretation by China, possibly leading to miscalculations or unintended escalations. In the current global political climate, this approach risks alienating regional players who seek clear commitments. Thus, while maintaining a balance, the U.S. must be cautious to ensure its policy does not inadvertently escalate tensions or create strategic vulnerabilities.
The U.S. policy of strategic ambiguity, while supporting Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities, is a measured approach to maintaining regional stability. This stance is reminiscent of the U.S.’s Cold War policies, which effectively deterred conflicts through strategic ambiguity. Enhancing diplomatic efforts to reduce cross-strait tensions and encouraging China’s peaceful rise are vital. The U.S. can advocate for Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, drawing on the successful precedent of U.S. support for China’s WTO entry, which facilitated more engagement in global affairs.
The U.S. approach in these regions reflects a balancing act between moral imperatives, strategic interests, and international norms. The effectiveness of U.S. policies in these complex scenarios is a subject of ongoing debate, highlighting the challenges of contemporary global leadership. In each scenario, however, it remains imperative that the U.S. navigate its web of internal pressures and interests while striving to maintain its global leadership role and adhere to its foreign policy principles.
Engagement Resources
- Council on Foreign Relations (https://www.cfr.org/): Provides in-depth analysis of global issues, including U.S. foreign policy towards Ukraine, Gaza, and Taiwan.
- United States Institute of Peace (https://www.usip.org/): Offers resources on conflict resolution and peacebuilding, relevant to the situations in Ukraine and Gaza.
- Brookings Institution (https://www.brookings.edu/): Conducts research on U.S. policy in the Asia-Pacific, with a focus on Taiwan and China-U.S. relations.
- Amnesty International (https://www.amnesty.org/): Provides reports on human rights issues in conflict zones like Gaza.
- RAND Corporation (https://www.rand.org/): Offers analysis and research on defense and security, relevant to U.S. policy in Ukraine and Taiwan.
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.
Who Will Mitt Romney’s Successor Be?
Who Will Mitt Romney’s Successor Be?
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #119 | By: Courtney Denning | January 29, 2024
Photo taken from: www.motherjones.com
__________________________________
Senator Mitt Romney (R-UT) is stepping down from his position in Congress, leaving a Utah Senate seat open in the 2024 election. Romney gained his seat in 2018 after his two bids for the presidency in 2008 and 2012, with him winning the nomination in 2012 but losing to Barack Obama. Prior to this, he served as the governor of Massachusetts from 2003 to 2007.
In recent years, Romney has garnered attention for his criticisms of former president Donald Trump. He has frequently expressed his fears for the future of the Republican Party if it continues in the way he believes Trump is leading it.
The race for his former Senate seat exemplifies this growing divide in the GOP. Since Utah is an overwhelmingly conservative state, the winner of this seat will likely be decided in the Republican primaries on June 25, 2024. Although most are confident that a Republican will win the seat, there are stark differences in the ideologies of the candidates running for this Republican nomination. The winner of this race will signal whether the traditional “Romney Conservatism” or the emerging “Trump Republicanism” will dominate the state’s politics.
Analysis:
Here are profiles of the leading candidates to replace Romney:
Curtis has been serving in Congress as a Representative of Utah’s 3rd district since 2017. An early survey taken even before he announced he was running for the spot placed Curtis as the front-runner for the election. Unlike other prominent Utah politicians, Curtis has not endorsed Donald Trump, but has promised to vote for him if he is chosen as the presidential nominee.
Brent Orrin Hatch is running for the same seat that his father, Orrin Hatch, held for 42 years. Hatch has been running his own law private practice for the past 30 years, and he focuses his campaign on fiscal responsibility and decreasing the budget deficit. He has officially endorsed Donald Trump for president.
Utah’s current Speaker of the House, Brad Wilson, is stepping down to run for the Senate as a self-proclaimed “conservative fighter” and Trump supporter.
Staggs, the soon-to-be former Mayor of Riverton, UT, has also thrown his hat into the ring. In his campaign video announcing his candidacy, Staggs has endorsed Trump and set himself apart from Romney, saying that he’s “not a career politician or a Massachusetts millionaire.” Staggs is running in opposition to Romney’s legacy, criticizing his voting record and positioning himself as an uncompromising conservative.
Phippen, a former staff member for Utah Sen. Mike Lee, also represents a stronger conservative push for the Senate seat. She refers to herself as “not a politician” and publicly aligns with Trump. She is anti-federal spending, pro-life, pro-border wall, and staunchly conservative.
Randall’s campaign centers strong families and “Utah values” with an emphasis on Christian virtues. His run is set apart by a frugal budget. Randall said that he wants to model his political career after that of current Senator Mike Lee, a strong supporter of Trump.
Democrat Archie Williams III and Robert Newcomb of the Independent American Party are also running for Utah’s Senate Seat.
Most candidates running for this Senate position have been outspoken supporters of Donald Trump, marking a potential shift from the legacy left by Romney. The one candidate that could be expected to follow more closely in Romney’s ideological footsteps is Rep. John Curtis, who has not yet officially endorsed Trump.
Engagement Resources:
- Here is a complete list of everyone who has submitted an FEC Statement of Candidacy for this race, plus more information on their campaigns: https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Senate_election_in_Utah,_2024
- This is the official website regarding the Utah 2024 elections: https://vote.utah.gov/current-election-information/
- A study of Utah Public Opinion from last year shows that Utah Republicans are likely looking for a candidate that stands in opposition to Romney, due to his high unfavorability: https://www.noblepredictiveinsights.com/post/state-of-2024-utah-senate-race
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.
Congressional Budget Struggles
Congressional Budget Struggles
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #118 | By: William Bourque | January 26, 2024
Photo taken from: www.finance.yahoo.com
__________________________________
The Congressional budget process is long and complex, throwing even the wonkiest of policy nerds for a loop. The biggest issue with the appropriation of funds is that the GOP doesn’t really want to do it. With Speaker McCarthy, GOP hardliners insisted that if he were to pass a continuing resolution that it would be the end of his tenure…and they weren’t bluffing. Speaker Johnson has put himself in a precarious position to say the least.
With a recently passed continuing resolution, Congress will have until March 1st for some agencies and March 8th for others. The legislation continues funding the government at current levels through that time, which hopefully allows time for a Republican-led House to get in order to pass a budget. The Senate, led by a slim Democratic majority, has generally been the leader in budget negotiations, with House Freedom Caucus members and inexperienced Speaker Mike Johnson struggling to find agreement.
The new agreement essentially gives the GOP more time to negotiate with the White House on immigration reform and Ukraine funding. Many GOP insiders say that they are likely to cave on the Ukraine funding if it means getting promises on harder immigration policy from the Biden Administration. In reality, the biggest spending fights this year will be on foreign spending on weapons and support for Ukraine and Israel, as well as the ongoing influx of immigration. The funding for Ukraine is something that is expected to be maintained, albeit at a lower rate. Funding for Israel, however, may be on the chopping block due to public opinion on the Israeli government’s actions in the occupied Gaza Strip. In a December poll by Pew, 59% of respondents believed that the Israeli government was at least partially responsible for the ongoing war. Biden’s support amongst progressives, Arab-Americans, and Americans under 25 has been waning over his handling of the conflict—and Congress will likely follow.
With immigration spending, many Republicans are focused on the Southern border, perhaps too much. Essentially, the Biden White House is going to make a deal with the GOP that they may have been aiming for anyways—but the GOP will provide sufficient political cover to make it happen. The money will likely be allocated for more border patrol officers as well as giving more ability to deport individuals who may be seen as high-threat. Immigration will be a top issue in the 2024 Presidential election, which is why Biden would be smart to take a harder line.
While they won’t be hugely controversial, there are a few other items that will be high-spend issues this year. Look for increased spending to come out of a final rule-making process for many government agencies as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law continues ramping up. These projects are key in many rural communities across the nation, and Biden will speak at length about this achievement on the campaign trail. Another huge Biden win was the Inflation Reduction Act, which is largely a climate and energy bill. Look for an increase in appropriations for renewable energy projects as well as transmission across the nation. This funding will be used to build utility-scale solar and wind power platforms as well as invest in the new hydrogen hubs program. Offshore wind projects are also becoming a present-day item, so expect to see increased funding in this year’s appropriations package—whenever it gets passed.
The controversial Congressional budget items will continue to be discussed up to the March 1st and 8th deadlines—with the ever-present threat of shutdown looming. Expect more of the same nonsense from Republicans, who will certainly lose their majority come January ’25.
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.
Situation Update: The Ukraine Crisis
Situation Update: The Ukraine Crisis
Foreign Policy Brief #115 | By: Abran C | January 25, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.thehill.com
__________________________________
Fighting on the ground
For the past few weeks the two sides have been trading missile and drone attacks, most recently at least 25 people have been killed and 20 others injured after a market on the outskirts of the Russian-controlled city of Donetsk. In the Ukrainian city of Kharkiv at least 17 people have been seriously injured last week, after Russian missiles hit residential buildings in the city. Kharkiv lies just 19 miles from the border with Russia in Ukraine’s northeast and has come under frequent bombardment since the beginning of the war. Russian artillery has frequently hit civilian infrastructure in Ukraine drawing widespread condemnation.
Late last week four oil tanks at a large storage facility in the Russian town of Klintsy in its western Bryansk region caught fire after the military shot down a Ukrainian strike drone. The fire caused by the strikes forced Russia to suspend operations at a huge Baltic Sea fuel export terminal. Additionally a drone attack on a bus stop in the Russian city of Belgorod killed 25 civilians last month, the deadliest attack on Russian territory since the start of the conflict.
The tit for tat strikes are emblematic of the stalemate the war has come, with both sides able to inflict damage but with neither side being able to overtake the other. This winter Ukrainian forces have taken a more defensive position in many areas of the frontlines after a counteroffensive last year was unable to break through heavily defended Russian lines in the occupied territories.
Zelenskyy urges Western allies for more support
Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in a recent speech at DAVOS has urged the West to tighten sanctions against Russia and step up its support for Kyiv to ensure that Moscow does not win the war. The first months of the war in 2022 saw the country lose a third of its economic output to occupation and destruction because Russia controls the heartland of Ukraine’s heavy industry. President Zelensky called for some of the Russian billions seized by world banks to be sent to rebuild Ukraine. Though Europe’s central bankers have been skeptical about setting a difficult legal precedent that could undermine global financial stability. It would mean that other countries may think twice about placing their assets in the West if they know those same assets could be seized.
Arming Ukraine
Last week Russia’s top diplomat Sergey Lavrov rejected a US proposal to resume dialogue on nuclear arms control, saying that it was impossible to engage in such talks while Washington provides military support to Ukraine. Lavrov charged that Washington’s push for the revival of nuclear talks has been driven by a desire to resume inspections of Russia’s nuclear weapons sites. He reaffirmed that Russia will pursue what it calls the “special military operation” regardless of Western pressure.
Roughly $137 billion in military and financial aid to Ukraine remains stalled in Washington and Brussels. As a result individual European allies have begun to make bilateral pledges worth billions to provide arms to Ukraine this year. For example, Estonian President Alar Karis said last week that Estonia would provide 1.2 billion euros in military assistance including howitzers and ammunition over the next four years. Estonia, which also shares a border with Russia, stated last November that it was raising defense spending to 3% of its GDP and urged other European nations to double their expenditure. Last year most EU countries committed to an increase in military spending, a record $58 billion was allocated to military investments, and were geared overwhelmingly towards the procurement of new equipment.
Check out usrenewnews.org/Ukraine for more coverage on the Ukraine crisis. 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.
Facial Recognition: The Worst AI Has To Offer
Facial Recognition: The Worst AI Has To Offer
Technology Policy Brief #107 | By: Mindy Spatt | January 24, 2024
Photo taken from: www.amnesty.org
__________________________________
Facial Recognition Technology uses software to evaluate similarities between face images. Computer generated filters transform images into numbers and symbols that cam be compared. It was what enables you to sign into your phone by just looking at it, and is also used to identify an individual in a database of photos or determine the similarity between two facial images
There’s no question that Facial Recognition Technology reflects and even enhances racial bias. Still, Vermont is the only state in the U.S. that has instituted a near total ban on it and only a handful of states limit its use. The technology’s earliest and most criticized applications have been in law enforcement, but other uses may be in the offing. The General Services Administration is carrying out a study to test potential racial bias in facial recognition technology systems that it is considering using as identifiers for accessing federal benefits.
Policy Analysis
The GSA’s announcement, in August 2023, describes current methods of facial recognition identity verification as “often inequitable.” These inequities have been documented by numerous advocates, academics, and critics. In an article in Scientific America titled ‘Police Facial Recognition Technology Can’t Tell Black People Apart’ in May of the same year, authors Thaddeus and Natasha Johnson said their research confirmed that inequities in policing can actually be exacerbated by the use of facial recognition, and concluded that law enforcement agencies that deploy automated facial recognition technologies over-arrest Black people. “We believe this results from factors that include the lack of Black faces in the algorithms’ training data sets, a belief that these programs are infallible and a tendency of officers’ own biases to magnify these issues.” The criticisms aren’t new, but, the authors note that despite efforts to improve the bias in facial recognition algorithms, it still mostly fails at identifying anyone other than white men.
Reading this, one might wonder: why bother? Shouldn’t the GSA and law enforcement be seeking technologies that promote rather than deny equity? How useful will it be in other fields, like healthcare? The Johnson’s research indicates that a bigger data set alone won’t cure the problem, since the ways facial recognition interacts with other racist policies and biases are the problem.
Amnesty International has criticized the way geographic racism and facial recognition technology interact, calling the technology “digital stop and frisk”. In a study of New York City, Amnesty found the that boroughs that were subject to high rates of discriminatory stop-and-frisks by law enforcement are the same areas where facial recognition is being most heavily deployed. Amnesty also correlated higher proportions of people of color with higher numbers of CCTV cameras with facial recognition components.
Gideon Christian, PhD, is a Canadian researcher who studies the racial and gender impacts of facial recognition technology. According to Christian, “There is this false notion that technology unlike humans is not biased.” In fact, he said, “technology has been shown (to) have the capacity to replicate human bias. Christian, whose research is funded by the Canadian government, found wildly disparate rates in facial recognition accuracy between white men- 99%, and black women-35%.
While states have been slow to take action, many cities have limited or banned the use of facial recognition by law enforcement including Portland (Both Maine and Oregon), San Francisco and Boston, New York city has yet to do so. Amnesty’s Matt Mahmoudi, an Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights Researcher, concluded that “Banning facial recognition for mass surveillance is a much-needed first step towards dismantling racist policing,” and Amnesty is urging New York to join the ban bandwagon.
Engagement Resources
- How Black Americans view the use of face recognition technology by police, By Emily A. Vogels and Andrew Perrin.
- Ban Facial Recognition, an interactive map that shows where facial recognition surveillance is happening, where it’s spreading to next, and where there are local and state efforts to rein it in.
- Petition: Halt Dangerous Face Recognition Technologies.
Check out usrenewnews.org/AI for more news on AI technologies and trends. 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.
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
The Week That Was: Global News In Review
Foreign Policy Brief #114 | By: Abran C | January 22, 2024
Featured Photo taken from: www.vox.com
__________________________________
Surging violence in Ecuador
Ecuador has seen a sharp increase in violence and activity by organized crime in the last few months. The uptick in violence has taken homicide rates to unprecedented levels. Ecuador’s homicide rate surged from 13.7 per 100,000 people in 2021 to 25.9 in 2022. In 2023, it escalated further to about 45 per 100,000, placing Ecuador among the top three most violent Latin American countries, alongside Venezuela and Honduras.
Gang violence in the streets of Ecuador is related to unrest inside prisons, where overcrowding and lack of state control has enabled gang members to launch around 14 massacres that have taken the lives of more than 600 people since 2019. Ecuador’s president has declared war on gangs, many of which are responsible for the recent waves of violence that saw the storming of a TV station on-air and explosions around the nation that shocked the international community. The unrest appears to be in response to President Daniel Noboa’s efforts to tackle cocaine trafficking, in particular by putting gang leaders in new high-security prisons.
Ecuador borders cocaine-producing Colombia and Peru and has become a major shipment point. Both its neighbors have stepped up controls on their frontiers in response to the violence. President Noboa declared a 60 day state of emergency last Monday and a nationwide curfew from 11:00 pm-05:00 am every night.
Iran strikes Iraq, Pakistan, and Syria
On January 16, Iran launched missile strikes into Pakistan’s Baluchistan province, claiming to have hit two strongholds of the anti-Iran insurgent group Jaish al-Adl, what it calls an “Iranian terrorist group”, though Pakistan says it killed two children. Iran announced the attack in Pakistan at the same time as its strikes in Iraq and Syria. Pakistan stated the strikes were a clear violation of its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Less than two days later, Pakistan hit back with fighter jets in Iran’s Baluchistan province claiming to have hit hideouts of anti-Pakistan insurgents operating from Iranian soil. Iran says three women, two men and four children were killed in the strike. Iran and Pakistan share a 560 mile border and the two, which normally share good relationships, have now had relations turn sour with the back and forth missile attacks.
In Iraq, Iran claims to have targeted an operations center of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency in its strikes. Yet Iraqi and Kurdish authorities instead say the house of a well-known businessman was hit. In Syria, Iran claims to have fired missiles at Islamic State militants in response to a bombing that killed scores of people at a commemoration for the famed Iranian commander Qassem Soleimani in central Iran on Jan. 3, 2024. The strikes by Iran in addition to other ongoing conflicts are stoking fears of a wider conflict that could engulf the entire Middle East and spread to other regions.
Ethiopia-Somaliland deal
Somaliland, a breakaway region of Somalia struck a deal with Ethiopia in hopes of being recognised as an independent country. For Somalia, Somaliland is an integral part of its territory. Somaliland is still not recognised by any country, Western governments are unlikely to recognise it until African countries do. The countries on the continent have held off, following the African Union’s longstanding policy against redrawing national boundaries inherited from colonialists. Without recognition, Somaliland struggles to attract investment and is cut off from international finance. For Somalia any suggestion that it could make a deal with another country or that parts of it could be leased without the approval of Somalia is highly contentious. Somalia has stated it is prepared to go to war to stop Ethiopia recognising the breakaway territory of Somaliland and building a port there.
Check out usrenewnews.org/globalnews for more Global News coverage. 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.
Can the Law Stop Trump from Becoming President?
Can the Law Stop Trump from Becoming President?
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #117 | By: Abigail Hunt | January 23, 2024
Photo taken from: www.cnn.com
__________________________________
If there were a Guinness world record for most felony indictments by a U.S. President, Donald Trump would be the winner by a good margin. Trump faces 91 state or federal felony charges in four separate jurisdictions in New York, Georgia, Washington D.C., and Florida. In New York, Trump faces a maximum total of 136 years in prison for 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree; the trial for these charges begins March 25. The federal elections case regarding Trump’s activities during the January 6th insurrection in the Capitol is set to begin March 4th and carries a maximum possible punishment of 55 years. In Georgia, Trump faces a RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) charge. If convicted on a RICO charge, Trump must serve a minimum of five years in prison, the only charge which carries a minimum sentencing requirement; it has a maximum of 20 years. In addition, Trump faces 12 other felony charges in Georgia. Finally, in Florida, Trump faces 450 years for mishandling classified documents; the trial there begins May 20.
Politicians in several states are already attempting to remove Trump from the ballot, reasoning that he violated the 14th Amendment by his actions on January 6th, 2021, and is ineligible to run for President. The 14th Amendment provides for Equal Protection and Other Rights, and in Section 3, the Disqualification from Holding Office clause clearly states as follows:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
In Maine, the secretary of state removed Trump from the ballot, and in Colorado, the state Supreme Court did the same. Trump is appealing the decision in both cases. In other states, such as Minnesota and Michigan, the courts threw out similar lawsuits on procedural grounds. In Oregon, the state Supreme Court, largely democratic, will make a decision soon on Trump’s ballot eligibility. In Massachusetts, courts will begin hearing the case January 22nd and must have a decision a week later.
The forecast for Trump House: Part Two still looks relatively good. Trump is the GOP frontrunner by a long shot – the nearest challenger is Nikki Haley, but her predicted chances for November stand at 12 percent compared to Trump’s current 68 percent ranking. What happens if Trump is convicted? The Hill published a survey of Trump supporters which showed that a quarter of them would no longer support Trump as their Presidential nominee if he were convicted. However, almost all of those surveyed felt the charges against Trump were undeserved, politically motivated, and, if you’ll pardon the pun, trumped up.
The thing is, Trump could be convicted in every case and still become President if he got enough votes. The only way the law could prevent a second Trump term through disqualification would be through the 14th Amendment clause. There are few requirements to become President of the United States – any candidate must be a natural-born citizen, have lived in the country for at least 14 years, and be at least 35 years old. Being a felon is not a disqualifier. It seems the only hope of limiting Trump’s second climb to power lies with Supreme Courts at the state and federal levels. Ultimately, discussion and debate regarding the outcome of the various state lawsuits and felony charges is just noise – none of it prevents Trump from becoming President again.
Engagement Resources
- U.S. Department of Justice. Title 52- Voting and Elections- Subtitle I and II. Civil Rights Division.
- Ballotpedia. Ballot access for presidential candidates.
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.
Governor Abbott and “Illegal Immigrants”
Governor Abbott and “Illegal Immigrants”
Elections & Politics Policy Brief #116 | By: Abigail Hunt | January 22, 2024
Photo taken from: www.bostonglobe.com
__________________________________
In the weeks leading up to Christmas, deep in the heart of Texas, Governor Greg Abbott signed a law into effect giving state law enforcement a broader right to arrest individuals crossing into Texas illegally (set to go into effect in March 2024) and directing the setup of flotation barricades and miles of razor wire barriers along the Rio Grande River. The physical deterrents so far have not limited the flow of illegal immigrants. It is estimated that in December 2023 a record 300,000 people crossed into Texas from Mexico. Despite the criminal enhancement for lack of documentation in crossing, and the decreased acceptance for asylum seekers, the flow of humanity crossing the southern border continues. Abbott’s decrees are violations of federal law and of a recent Supreme Court decision specifically about illegal immigrants, but that was in Arizona. Abbott is hedging his bets that the current Supreme Court, historically infamous already for its conservatism, will rule in his favor on what he believes is a valid state constitutional rights violation. Abbott is now on notice from the government regarding this federal violation of law.
In Eagle Pass, Texas, the New York Times spoke to citizens facing the real costs of immigration every day. Each month, the local fire department responds to an average of seven calls a day for emergencies related to people crossing the border – the ambulance cost for just these calls is $150,000/month.
The people crossing our border are coming from somewhere. In 2023, of the 2.4 million illegal immigrants crossing the southern border, most came from Mexico (717,333), Venezuela (266,071), Guatemala (220,085), Honduras (213,686), Colombia (159,539), Cuba (142,352), and Ecuador (116,229). Estimates from the Department of Homeland Security state that 4 million of those crossing the border have been expelled back to their own countries.
Because our government is run by people, like Governor Abbott, who grew up in the mid-20th century, they continue to use immigration policies and tactics previously shown to be failures. The fact is, the United States is a first-world nation that borders a third-world nation. The opportunities available in the U.S. are a tempting draw for those whose lives are in real threat of violence daily. People do not leave a place where they are healthy and happy to move elsewhere. A failure to acknowledge the root causes means we will continue to struggle with an ever-expanding migration of desperate and destitute foreigners seeking solace and refuge, barriers be damned.
Engagement Resources
- The New York Times. David Firestone. Defiance Tries to Usurp Washington’s Role, Jan. 1, 2024.
- PBS. Timeline: Guatemala’s Brutal Civil War, March 7, 2011.
- Reuters. Julia Symmes Cobb. What is happening in Ecuador? January 10, 2024.
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.
America’s Declining Global Leadership Role
America’s Declining Global Leadership Role
OP ED | By: U.S. Resist News | January 17, 2024
Photo taken from: www.lowyinstitute.org
__________________________________
As the world transitions into a complex geopolitical era marked by the rise of new powers and diffuse threats, the United States stands at a crossroads of influence and strategy. Since the end of World War II, it has wielded considerable influence through its military might, economic prowess, and cultural appeal. However, the emergence of multipolar dynamics, cybersecurity threats, and shifting economic landscapes necessitates a reevaluation of its global strategy. This Op Ed aims to delve into the nuanced aspects of American foreign policy, reflecting on its historical leadership and envisaging its path forward amidst these evolving challenges.
Before we evaluate America’s role in the world, it’s crucial to broaden our definition of leadership. Global leadership in today’s world must extend beyond military might and economic leverage to include strong moral character. This entails championing democratic governance, respecting human rights, ensuring equality of opportunity, and uniformly advocating for essential services like education and health care for all. Such leadership also involves fostering collaborative relationships among nations, adhering to the rule of law, and seeking peaceful resolutions to conflicts. We are no longer just a collection of sovereign states, although some might think and pretend we are. We lie in an inter-dependent inter-connected world.
As we look at current global and foreign policy issues, it appears as if tragically the moral character of America’s leadership status in the world has begun to slip, as the following what have we done wrong examples illustrate.
Analysis—What Have We Done Wrong
Failing to do more to address the rise of autocracies: Over the past twenty years the world has witnessed the rise of autocratic governments. China and Russia are perhaps the largest autocratic powers but many other countries are following suit, challenging the moral character of America and other democracies. Quite often these autocracies are built on the strength of charismatic personalities, such as Trump, Bolsonaro or Milei who have little political knowledge and experience but are able to generate a tidal wave of populist support. The United States has been trying to stand up to these autocratic powers, mainly by exercising its military strength and economic might. While this seems to be a bottom line needed approach to deal with issues such as Ukraine and Taiwan, it needs to be coupled with support for democratization in these countries, and the building of democratic alliances as the US has been doing recently with NATO.
Inconsistent human rights policies: Most people, even non-Americans understand that the United States has long positioned itself as a champion of human rights and democracy. Yet, this stance is often juxtaposed against geopolitical realities. For example, in navigating relations with strategic partners like Saudi Arabia, the U.S. faces the challenge of balancing its advocacy for human rights with pragmatic considerations of security and economic interests. Global events, such as the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the recent suppression of democratic movements in Hong Kong, further test the U.S.’s resolve and approach. It is imperative that U.S. policy not only addresses these issues but also reflects a consistent and committed stance on promoting human rights universally.
Turning our backs on immigration: A strong pro-immigration policy used to be one of America’s strengths. We are known as a land of immigrants. But no longer. In recent years the US has seen a movement towards more restrictive immigration policies, marked by tightened regulations and a heated public discourse. This shift represents a larger trend of nationalism and skepticism towards globalization. The tightening of U.S. borders, the controversial debates over DACA and the travel ban, and the overall portrayal of immigrants in political rhetoric have raised questions about the nation’s historical identity as a melting pot. The implications of these policies extend beyond domestic politics, affecting international relations, and the U.S.’s reputation as a land of opportunity and refuge.
Trying to have it both ways on climate change: Global warming, climate change, and the loss of biological diversity are issues that affect the quality of life in all countries. The United States was one of the countries originally responsible for raising global awareness about these issues, and bringing countries together to sign the landmark Paris Agreement. However, under President Trump the US ceded its leadership role in global environmental policy. The Biden Administration has sought to reverse this trend and passed a major piece of legislation aimed at bringing the US in line with the global goal of creating a carbon neutral world by 2050 and restoring biodiversity
However, domestic challenges remain, particularly in balancing environmental policies with economic interests. The debate over energy policy, especially in the context of the shale gas revolution and the Keystone XL pipeline, underscores the complex interplay between economic growth and environmental stewardship; they highlight the challenges the U.S. faces in balancing these two critical aspects.
Failing to address the global challenges of technology: The world currently is facing unprecedented global leadership policy challenges related to seemingly ever-growing use of technology. The role of artificial intelligence, the threat to people’s privacy and security, the use of misinformation and fake news are but a few of the technology issues that all countries are facing. The United States, the European Union and others are making initial attempts to develop regulations to deal with these issues; but ultimately they need to be addressed at a global level. America has an opportunity to provide the leadership that’s needed to bring countries together and develop a set of regulations that can protect privacy, dispel fake news, and guard against the abuses of AI.
The U.S. should develop a comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy. This strategy should prioritize public-private partnerships and international collaboration, focusing on safeguarding critical infrastructure and setting even higher global standards for cyber conduct.
The Root Cause: Political Divisiveness and A Failure to Address the Importance of Global Engagement
Internal political divisiveness is a major reason America’s global leadership role is in decline. The ‘America First’ doctrine, characterized by skepticism towards multilateral agreements and an emphasis on national interests, has led to a reevaluation of international commitments. While it is essential for the U.S. to protect its sovereignty and security, excessive America firstness challenges our role as a global leader. Retreating from international accords and institutions not only affects global governance but also raises questions about the future of international cooperation and American leadership in the world. We are living in a highly connected inter-dependent world, and American foreign policy needs to do more to reflect this.
Internal policy factors seem to be propelling a noticeable drift towards authoritarianism and a retreat from cooperative internationalism. Countries that once looked to the U.S. as a model for democracy are now witnessing its internal struggles and questioning its commitment to global democratic ideals. The U.S. must navigate this era of rising autocrats and declining democratic norms by reaffirming its commitment to democratic values and strengthening its alliances. This includes addressing domestic issues of polarization and governance that undermine its international credibility and leadership.
In redefining its role for a complex future, the United States must consolidate its historical influence with a renewed commitment to moral and ethical leadership. This entails not only advocating for human rights and strengthening international institutions, but also proactively addressing the challenges of a multipolar world and the domestic implications of global policies. Recognizing the need for a dynamic and responsive foreign policy, the U.S. should prioritize diplomatic engagement, technological innovation, and a steadfast adherence to global cooperation and responsibility.
By embracing flexibility alongside a firm commitment to its foundational values, the U.S. can navigate the evolving geopolitical landscape, fostering stability, and prosperity in an interconnected world. As it stands at the crossroads of tradition and transformation, the U.S.’s pursuit of a balanced, principled, and forward-looking strategy will be imperative in shaping a more peaceful and sustainable planet.
Engagement Resources
- Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org): Offers in-depth analysis and resources on U.S. foreign policy and international affairs.
- Brookings Institution (brookings.edu): Provides research and policy recommendations on various aspects of U.S. foreign policy and global economic issues.
- The Aspen Institute (aspeninstitute.org): Engages in policy discussions on various global issues, including U.S. leadership and international relations.
- The Atlantic Council (atlanticcouncil.org): Focuses on international affairs, providing analysis and policy solutions for U.S. engagement in global challenges.
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.
TikTok and Its Effects on Young People
TikTok and Its Effects on Young People
Technology Policy Brief #106 | By: Steve Piazza | January 16, 2024
Photo taken from: www.today.com
__________________________________
Policy Summary
TikTok offers a number of thoughtful, well-stated guidelines and actions that promote safe and healthy participation on the popular social media platform. Those who choose to explore the platform’s policies are given detailed suggestions on being proactive, such as how to block their own access to a particular objectionable video creator by long pressing on a video. They also have the opportunity to report questionable or offensive material.
Other safeguards include content controls and restriction modes that can be self-imposed. In fact, for users 16 and under the default social setting is private, which allows a user to approve followers. Over 16, it’s set to public, though that can be changed at any time.
TikTok even offers support on a number of topics regarding well being. Users are provided clear language on substance-abuse, eating disorders, bullying and more. In some instances, users are encouraged to speak to someone for additional support.
Nonetheless, as with other social media environments, there are no guarantees protecting young people against harmful influences while using TikTok. Even such a thorough presence of policies such as TikTok’s cannot conceal the fact that there are many negative effects on the most vulnerable users.
Policy Analysis
TikTok ranks sixth as the most used social media platform behind YouTube, Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and WeChat. As of 2022, TikTok reported 1.2 billion users, and by the fourth quarter of that year it had been downloaded over four billion times. According to Business of Apps, though it’s largest demographic is 25 to 34 years old, 44.1% of its total users are under 24 and of those under 17 the percentage is just over 20%
TikTok has a number of benefits for young users. Besides the entertainment value, the platform offers the opportunity for teenagers to feel part of a community of users, It also serves as a means to help them understand the world they live in. It can serve as a resource for everything from providing insights on a wide array of emotional and mental health issues, as well as perspectives on many current events.
The main problem with TikTok is that it is also simply a social media platform, which means that like its competitors, it employs algorithms designed to influence choices to keep users engaged. That might not be so bad if a kitten popping out of a cardboard box results in similar content being offered. It’s when a user chooses a video more serious in nature that is of concern.
Without notice, the recommendations can end up leading to a series of videos that are inappropriate or dangerous. It’s possible that an unsuspecting viewer witnesses a barrage of negative content ranging from disinformation to cyber bullying. In some instances, users are even provided links/passwords to private portals of videos displaying violence or pornography.
Though not unique to TikTok, the mere convenience of endless swiping through countless videos of any kind that can leave younger users spellbound for large amounts of time is bad enough. But succumbing to the platform’s seemingly endless journey down a rabbit hole of adverse content can lead to serious issues, such as a negative self-esteem and/or body image, and eventually alienation. It’s unsettling to think that something as simple as curiosity can lead to feelings of isolation, which sadly puts some on the path to loneliness, depression, and possibly suicide.
According to Statista, despite the fact that over 70% of individuals considered Gen Z, Millennial, and Gen X believe that TikTok is addictive, only an average of just under 25% of these three groups feel the platform has negative mental health effects. Such dissonance is not atypical for active users participating voluntarily in social activities, cyber or not.
Of course, it doesn’t help that users are easily drawn to the content they find appealing, and for youngsters even more so. Neither does the large amount of screen time that makes their experience increasingly open to hazards. Minimizing usage might have some effect, but nothing short of abstinence is 100% protected. Of course this is not realistic, particularly for current returning users. Therefore, it’s up to the platforms themselves to continue to develop a way to stand behind the integrity of their products and protect children.
With an unwieldy number of users, TikTok already faces an uphill battle employing a security system that works effectively to protect its users. But with all the protections in place, workarounds still exist and savvy youngsters know how to exploit the loopholes. Perhaps AI designed safeguards are necessary to correct this. The caveat, of course, is that it’s the manipulated algorithms, something that’s at the very core of artificial intelligence, that got us here in the first place.
Engagement Resources
- Click on the following link to visit the TikTok Safety Center and review the guidelines firsthand: https://www.tiktok.com/safety/en/
- The Child Rescue Coalition has a concise list of ways to help keep users safe located here.
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.
