Tuesday, January 05, 2021



'His Biggest—And Likely Most Disastrous—Stunt Yet'? Experts Warn a Desperate Trump May Attack Iran

"It may be the case that his most erratic, most reckless lashing out is yet to come."


by

Published on Monday, January 04, 2021

The aircraft carrier USS Nimitz, one of the world's largest battleships, will remain in the Persian Gulf, the Pentagon announced on Sunday, January 3, 2021. (Photo: Photo 12/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Foreign policy experts are sounding the alarm that U.S. President Donald Trump could launch an assault on Iran in the final weeks of his administration, potentially provoking a full-blown war just days before President-elect Joe Biden's inauguration.

Fears of a military confrontation are mounting in the wake of the Pentagon's announcement Sunday that the USS Nimitz would remain in the Middle East—a reversal of Friday's decision to signal a de-escalation of hostility toward Tehran by redeploying the aircraft carrier out of the region prior to this past weekend's one-year anniversary of the Trump-ordered assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani.

"There is no reason to believe such a gambit would work, yet the insanity of the idea is not a convincing reason as to why a desperate Trump wouldn't try it."
—Trita Parsi, Quincy Institute

The intensification of tensions between the U.S. and Iran also coincides with Trump's efforts to retain power despite losing his reelection bid in November 2020.

The right-wing coup attempt has grown increasingly desperate ahead of Wednesday's expected certification of Biden's victory by Congress, with many observers calling for Trump to be criminally prosecuted following the emergence of evidence that the president on Saturday tried to intimidate Georgia's top election official into overturning the results.

"Trump may be planning his biggest—and likely most disastrous—stunt yet," Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote late last week. "Whatever his calculation may be, there is clearly a risk that the last three weeks of Trump's presidency may be the most perilous."

Parsi's concerns are shared by Danny Postel, assistant director of the Center for International and Area Studies at Northwestern University. "Trump is a very wounded and very cornered animal in an end-game scenario. He's got a few weeks left, and we know that he is capable of extremely erratic behavior," Postel told Al Jazeera in an interview this past weekend. "It may be the case that his most erratic, most reckless lashing out is yet to come."

Parsi said Sunday night that a former U.S. military official told him that Trump starting a war with Iran is "probable."

According to what the former official told Parsi, "It will relieve the pressure from the Georgia recording leaks." Trump's aggression also comes amid what Parsi called "a showdown in the Senate on Jan. 6 with demonstrations and potential for violence in Washington, D.C."

In his attempted justification of the Pentagon's about-face on redeploying the warship Nimitz, Acting Secretary of Defense Chris Miller cited alleged "threats issued by Iranian leaders against President Trump and other U.S. government officials."

"No one should doubt the resolve of the United States of America," Miller added ominously.

As Parsi explained last week, "Trump has made more threats of war against Iran than any other country during his four years as President."

"As late as last month, he ordered the military to prepare options against Iranian nuclear facilities," Parsi wrote. "Though the New York Times reported that Trump's aides derailed those plans, U.S. troop movements in the past few weeks may suggest otherwise." He continued: 

Since October, the Pentagon has deployed 2,000 additional troops as well as an extra squadron of fighter planes to Saudi Arabia. It has also sent B-52 bombers on missions in the Persian Gulf three times, kept the USS Nimitz close to Iran, and announced that it is sending a Tomahawk-firing submarine just outside of Iranian waters. Moreover, Israel—whose officials have confirmed to several U.S. newspapers that it was behind the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh last month—has sent a nuclear-equipped submarine to the Persian Gulf.

Officially, all of these military maneuvers are aimed at "deterring" Iran, even though Israel assassinated an Iranian official in Iran and not the other way around... Not surprisingly, Tehran has interpreted the measures as threats and provocations, similar to how the United States would perceive Iranian warships posturing off Florida's coast.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif claimed Thursday that he is aware of intelligence suggesting the Trump administration is engaged in a "plot to fabricate a pretext for war" during its final days in power, as Common Dreams reported last week.

In an apparent reflection of the seriousness of the president's threats to democracy in the U.S. as well as to diplomacy with Iran, all 10 living former defense secretaries—including former Trump officials James Mattis and Mark Esper, along with Iraq War architects Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld—on Sunday penned an op-ed rebuking Trump.

"Could Trump seek to start a military confrontation with Iran in hopes of creating enough chaos as to prevent Joe Biden from taking office in January?" asked Parsi. "There is no reason to believe such a gambit would work, yet the insanity of the idea is not a convincing reason as to why a desperate Trump wouldn't try it."

Posted by at No comments:

Despite 'Meager Numbers,' Trump Administration Removes Gray Wolves From Endangered Species List

"The delisting of gray wolves is the latest causality of the Trump administration's willful ignorance of the biodiversity crisis and scientific facts."


by
Published on
by

A family of gray wolves tends to their pups. After 45 years, gray wolves were delisted from the Endangered Species Act by the Trump administration on January 4, 2021. (Photo: Chad Horwedel/Flickr/cc)

Wildlife advocates on Monday accused the Trump administration of "willful ignorance" after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service delisted gray wolves from the Endangered Species Act after 45 years of protection, even though experts say the animals are far from out of the proverbial woods. 

"Even with Trump's days in office dwindling, the long-term impact of illegitimate decisions like the wolf delisting will take years to correct."
—Lindsay Larris,
WildEarth Guardians

USFWS announced the rule change—one of over 100 regulatory rollbacks recently pushed through by the Trump administration—in October. The move will allow state authorities to treat the canines as predators and kill or protect them according to their respective laws. 

In South Dakota, for example, hunters, trappers, landowners, and livestock producers are now permitted to kill gray wolves after obtaining the necessary paperwork, which includes a predator/varmint, furbearer, or hunting license. Landowners on their own property and minors under the age of 16 are exempt from licensing requirements.

In neighboring Minnesota, gray wolves will retain a higher level of protection in the northern part of the state—owners of livestock and other animals can kill wolves that pose an "immediate threat"—while in the southern two-thirds of the state people can shoot wolves that they believe pose any threat to livestock, as long as they surrender the carcass.

In Oregon, on the other hand, "wolves remain protected throughout the state," according to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. "Hunting and trapping of wolves remains prohibited statewide."

Last September, Common Dreams reported that an analysis of deregulation in some Western states revealed that a record-breaking 570 wolves, including dozens of pups, were brutally killed in Idaho over a recent one-year period.

"Tragically, we know how this will play out when states 'manage' wolves, as we have seen in the northern Rocky Mountain region in which they were previously delisted," Samantha Bruegger, wildlife coexistence campaigner for WildEarth Guardians, said in reaction to Monday's delisting.

Bruegger cited the Idaho killings, as well as the situation in Washington, where last year "the state slaughtered an entire pack of wolves due to supposed conflicts with ranching interests," as proof that "without federal protections, wolves are vulnerable to the whims and politics of state management."

Monday's delisting comes despite the enduring precarity of wolf populations throughout much of the country. According to the most recent USFWS data, there are only 108 wolves in Washington state, 158 in Oregon, and 15 in California, while wolves are "functionally extinct" in Nevada, Utah, and Colorado.

"These meager numbers lay the groundwork for a legal challenge planned by WildEarth Guardians with a coalition of conservation groups to be filed later this month," said Bruegger. 

Lindsay Larris, wildlife program director at WildEarth Guardians, said in a statement that "the delisting of gray wolves is the latest causality of the Trump administration's willful ignorance of the biodiversity crisis and scientific facts."

"Even with [President Donald] Trump's days in office dwindling, the long-term impact of illegitimate decisions like the wolf delisting will take years to correct," Larris added. "Guardians is committed to challenging this decision in court, while working across political channels to ensure wolves receive as much protection as possible at the state level in the interim


 

For Immediate Release

Organization Profile: 
Contact: 

Samantha Bruegger, WildEarth Guardians, 970-363-4191, sbruegger@wildearthguardians.org
Lindsay Larris, WildEarth Guardians, 310-923-1465, llarris@wildearthguardians.org










Gray Wolves Lose Federal Endangered Species Act Protections

WildEarth Guardians mourns loss of protections for all gray wolves across the lower 48 and vows legal action.

WASHINGTON - Today, the Trump administration’s decision to prematurely strip gray wolves of federal Endangered Species Act protections takes effect. The decision, first announced on October 29, 2020, applies to all gray wolves in the lower 48 states despite the lack of scientific evidence showing true recovery across gray wolves’ historic range. Starting today, management of wolf populations will return to individual state wildlife agencies, some of which are already reinstating hunting and trapping season on wolves.

“Tragically, we know how this will play out when states 'manage' wolves, as we have seen in the northern Rocky Mountain region in which they were previously delisted,” stated Samantha Bruegger, wildlife coexistence campaigner for WildEarth Guardians. “In Idaho, nearly 600 wolves were brutally killed in a one-year span from 2019-2020, including dozens of wolf pups. Last year in Washington, the state slaughtered an entire pack of wolves due to supposed conflicts with ranching interests.  Without federal protections, wolves are vulnerable to the whims and politics of state management.”

According to data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), there are only 108 wolves in Washington state, 158 in Oregon, and a scant 15 in California. Nevada, Utah, and Colorado have had a few wolf sightings over the past three years, but wolves remain functionally extinct in these states. These meager numbers lay the groundwork for a legal challenge planned by WildEarth Guardians with a coalition of conservation groups to be filed later this month.

“The delisting of gray wolves is the latest causality of the Trump administration’s willful ignorance of the biodiversity crisis and scientific facts,” said Lindsay Larris, wildlife program director at WildEarth Guardians. “Even with Trump’s days in office dwindling, the long-term impact of illegitimate decisions like the wolf delisting will take years to correct. Guardians is committed to challenging this decision in court, while working across political channels to ensure wolves receive as much protection as possible at the state level in the interim.”

In delisting wolves, USFWS ignores the science showing they are not recovered in the West. The USFWS concluded that because in its belief there are sufficient wolves in the Great Lakes states, it does not matter that wolves in the West are not yet recovered. The ESA demands more, including restoring the species in the ample suitable habitats afforded by the wild public lands throughout the West.  Wolves only occupy a small portion of available, suitable habitat in Oregon and Washington, and remain absent across vast swaths of their historical habitat in the West, including in Colorado and the southern Rockies.

BACKGROUND: The state of Idaho offers a perfect example of what state "management" of wolves may look like across the American West. According to an analysis of records obtained by Western Watersheds Project, hunters, trappers, and state and federal agencies killed 570 wolves in Idaho during a 12-month period from July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2020. Included in the mortality are at least 35 wolf pups, some weighing less than 16 pounds and likely only 4 to 6 weeks old. Some of the wolves shattered teeth trying to bite their way out of traps, others died of hyperthermia in traps set by the U.S.D.A. Wildlife Services, and more were gunned down in aerial control actions. The total mortality during this period represented nearly 60 percent of the 2019 year-end estimated Idaho wolf population.

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) recently announced it had awarded approximately $21,000 in “challenge grants” to the north Idaho-based Foundation 4 Wildlife Management, which reimburses wolf trappers a bounty up to $1,000 per wolf killed. The Foundation also has received funding for wolf bounties from the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation. A single individual may now kill up to 30 wolves under IDFG hunting and trapping rules—a new increase from the 20 wolves previously allowed.

Posted by at No comments:

Treat Fossil Fuels Like Nukes. Endorse a New Nonproliferation Treaty

The treaty addresses a nearly universal failing of climate change regulations, which usually attempt to curb energy demand instead of attacking the oil industry directly by limiting fossil fuel supply.

by
ts

Numerous nations—including New Zealand, France, Costa Rica, Belize and, as of November, Denmark—as well as state and local governments have announced moratoriums on new oil exploration and production. (Photo: CGP Grey/Flickr/cc)

The Los Angeles City Council is poised to endorse a call for a global Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Approval could make Los Angeles the first U.S. city — New York is also in the running — to sign on to the treaty resolution. Introduced in November by Councilman Paul Koretz, it won unanimous support in committee and awaits likely passage by the full council in the new year.

The treaty would do just what its name says: Signatory governments would agree to stop further expansion of the fossil fuel industry within their boundaries. A U.N. report released Dec. 2 indicates just how imperative that step is: To limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, the goal set in the 2015 Paris climate change agreement, global emissions would have to drop 6% a year between now and 2030; alarmingly, nations instead project an average annual increase of 2% a year.

Besides committing governments to ending the development of new fossil fuel resources, the treaty proposal calls for a coordinated, accelerated phaseout of existing fossil fuel production.

The treaty addresses a nearly universal failing of climate change regulations, which usually attempt to curb energy demand (by establishing, say, a cap-and-trade system or setting far-off deadlines for clean energy conversion) instead of attacking the oil industry directly by limiting fossil fuel supply. Tzeporah Berman, chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty initiative, points out that the Paris agreement is so focused on emissions and demand that it doesn’t even use the terms “coal,” “oil,” “natural gas” and “fossil fuels” — the substances that cause those emissions.

California’s failure to limit supply makes state leaders’ claims to global climate leadership questionable. The state’s most recent two governors, Jerry Brown and now Gavin Newsom, have acknowledged the gravity of the climate crisis, but their administrations have both issued new oil well permits at a rate of 1,000 to 3,000 a year, according to FracTracker Alliance. In fact, new drilling permits in the first nine months of 2020 jumped to 1,646, an increase of 137% over the same period in 2019. The governors’ disinterest in stopping new permits is attributable to the continuing power of the oil industry’s lobbying and campaign contributions, which exert a strong influence on both parties.

Still, the oil industry is dramatically weakening. Exxon lost $2.4 billion in the first nine months of 2020. In California, fossil fuel production is falling despite the issuance of new drilling permits partly because so few of those permits result in oil production, and partly because legacy fields are going dry. (The state slipped from third to seventh among states in annual oil production between 2015 and 2018, the last year for which statistics are available.) Correspondingly, the industry’s claims to its astonishingly large subsidies — globally, roughly $5 trillion, about 6% of global GDP, according to the International Monetary Fund — seem more and more unjustifiable. Of course, considering fossil fuels’ role in destabilizing global climate, those subsidies are outrageous.

Two British social scientists issued the initial call for a global fossil fuel treaty. In a 2018 Guardian op-ed, they proposed the 1970 U.N. Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which went into effect just two years after it became eligible for signature, as a model for a similar swift approach to limiting fossil fuel production.

Besides committing governments to ending the development of new fossil fuel resources, the treaty proposal calls for a coordinated, accelerated phaseout of existing fossil fuel production. It would divert money from fossil fuel subsidies to clean energy development in poor countries. The treaty’s creators are also sponsoring the creation of a global registry of fossil fuel production. Data on reserves and production exist, but they want to bring them together in a comprehensive, publicly accessible, standardized report so that supply-side progress toward climate goals can be measured.

Numerous nations — including New Zealand, France, Costa Rica, Belize and, as of November, Denmark — as well as state and local governments have announced moratoriums on new oil exploration and production. Others have phased out fracking and coal production and use. Within a month of the September launch of the treaty initiative, Vancouver, Canada, became the first city to sign on. Hundreds of civic organizations have endorsed the idea, along with nearly 8,000 individuals, including climate activists Naomi Klein and Bill McKibben

Los Angeles is a natural focus for treaty organizers because of its unusually high concentration of oil infrastructure in an urban setting: The city is home to more than 800 active wells in 26 oil and gas fields. Last month, a City Council committee called for the drafting of an ordinance that could phase out oil and gas production in L.A., but any such measure faces heavy industry resistance. By contrast, the treaty resolution, which merely tells the federal government what the city would like it to do, should attract little opposition.

“It’s a little bit like holding on to wild horses,” Berman says of the treaty’s current momentum. “After 30 years of doing this work, it feels like the first time I’m working on something that is commensurate with the scale of the problem.”

Jacques Leslie is a contributing writer to Opinion.

Posted by at No comments:

Monday, January 04, 2021

Prosecution of Assange Is an Attack on Our Own Humanity

"The verdict will not only determine the life of Assange, but also the future of journalism."


by

 Published on

by

Supporters of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange protest outside London's Old Bailey court as his fight against extradition to the U.S. resumed on September 7, 2020. (Photo: Richard Baker/In Pictures/Getty Images)

On January 4, 2021 the London Court will release the hearing verdict of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange’s US extradition case. The indictment against Assange is politically motivated. Judge Vanessa Baraitser, who is presiding over hearings, has even acknowledged the political nature of this case when she decided not to rule until at least after the US Presidential election on November 3, 2020.

The verdict will not only determine the life of Assange, but also the future of journalism. The extra-territorial overreach involved in the US government charging a journalist who exposed their war crimes under the Espionage Act threatens press freedom everywhere. This is why all major media and human rights organizations have now stepped forward to oppose the extradition proceedings against Assange.

Their message is clear. Publishing documents that are verified to be authentic and are of public interest is not a crime. It is a central role of the press in a functioning democracy to defend the public’s right to know, and to help keep the government honest. WikiLeaks has done exemplary work in fulfilling this duty. This is journalism, and journalism is not a crime.

The attempted prosecution of Assange is already creating chilling effects on journalists, with a dangerous precedent having been set. One Turkish journalist has now been sentenced to more than 27 years in prison for allegedly supporting terrorism and engaging in political espionage. As we now face a critical moment for our democracy, it is important for us to think about what this war on journalism means and what WikiLeaks represents to all of us.

The collateral murder video

Since its public prominence in 2010 with the publication of the Collateral Murder video, WikiLeaks has changed the face of modern journalism. The release of this 2007 classified military footage, depicting a US Army helicopter gunship attack in Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad, created an international sensation. At the time the video was posted online, the WikiLeaks website temporarily crashed due to the massive influx of visitors, while versions popping up on YouTube reached millions.

This uncensored glimpse into a US invasion of a foreign land shocked the American public, who has been kept well insulated from the operational reality by mainstream media. Visceral images of the US army’s brutal murder of innocent civilians, including two Reuters’ journalists, brought impetus for change. It affected people profoundly, triggering anger, deep sadness, and a sense of betrayal by their own government.

The moving pictures unfolding in the 17-minute film display casual cruelty, with soldiers calling Iraq civilians “dead bastards”, and congratulating each other on the ability to kill in larger numbers. Through the transparent lens of the WikiLeaks hourglass, their savagery is further stripped bare, as the Weapons Arsenal team is seen attacking a wounded person attempting to crawl to safety.

Confronted by this bleak moral terrain, many of us were overcome with despair and hopelessness. Yet, it was not just destruction that was revealed to us. In the forbidden landscape, made available by the WikiLeaks source, a force was found that could redeem the human spirit. It was the conscience of an ordinary person which gave new life to this grotesque image of horrific death.

Awakening of heart

Former US Army analyst Chelsea Manning, through her act of whistleblowing, shed light on the Bush era’s War on Terror. In witnessing everyday life in Iraq under US military occupation, Manning was able to gain access to a perspective that had been suppressed. In the scenes shot from the gunsight of an Apache helicopter she saw another person whose life was as precious as hers, not the “enemy combatants” that she had been trained to see. In that moment, she was able to restore truth - articulated in her words, “We’re human . . . and we’re killing ourselves.”

The heart of another also responded to the life-affirming urge that gave Manning the courage to act out of what she believed to be right. Former US army specialist Ethan McCord, who was involved in the incident in New Baghdad, was captured on video rescuing the wounded children from the vehicle targeted by the Apache helicopter. He came forward after viewing the video published by WikiLeaks.

McCord recalled the moment he grabbed the little girl from amidst the carnage and ran for help. Later that day, as everyone ignored what had happened, McCord could not. This was his moment where that artificial wall between “enemy combatant” and soldier crumbled. He recounted this experience:

“I went to my room to try to clean the children’s blood from my uniform. Fighting back tears from what I’d seen, my emotions were taking over; the very thing that the army taught us not to do in war, I was doing. My humanity and love for the human race was overcoming everything they taught me.”

Information that is freed becomes more than just facts; it becomes a story whose gentle lips tremble with urgency, aching to speak. We begin to feel for each other, and to remember our inherent obligations to one another.

Courage is contagious

The courage that awakened our sense of shared humanity became contagious. It lifted a dark cloud of apathy and inspired the hearts of the youth who grew up on the internet. Under the WikiLeaks banner, people around the world came together to engage in creative acts, harnessing the new citizen journalism which carried with it a torch of justice.

At the end of 2010, after WikiLeaks began publishing troves of sensitive US diplomatic cables, the organization came under heavy pressure by the US government and its allies. Help for the whistleblowing site swiftly emerged from deep inside the web.

When the Tunisian government blocked the release of the US diplomatic cables, benevolent hackers who were sympathetic to the whistleblowing site came and redirected Tunisian government websites to WikiLeaks and exposed the corruption of the Ben Ali regime. At the same time, distributed denial of service (DDoS), the digital equivalent of a sit-in protest, was carried out - providing some redress of grievances by temporarily disabling Tunisian government websites.

When an extrajudicial financial blockade was imposed on WikiLeaks by PayPal, Visa, MasterCard and others refusing to process donations to the organization, the loosely tied online network Anonymous sprung into action in support of WikiLeaks. They engaged in online protests to defend free speech.

The spirit of revolt moving across digital screens began to push the internet generation out onto the streets. From the Arab Spring to the Occupy Wall Street movement, WikiLeaks publications sparked global revolutionary uprisings. Empowered by information, ordinary people who had been rendered spectators in our democracy began to claim their own significance.


Power of love

Chelsea Manning, with her extraordinary courage, stood up against the military industrial complex. She risked her freedom and her life to halt the operation of the machine that turns us into commodities, fodder for extractive capitalism.

By following a tiny voice of conscience, she freed our brothers and sisters who had become faceless and nameless objects, enslaved by the subject position in US imperial supremacy. She helped to restore the primacy of the human heart. Assange used journalism as a tool to defend this sacred heart, allowing it to speak freely, and to let the world hear its voice loud and clear.

WikiLeaks publications gave dignity to the victims of the senseless wars of the US government and their allies. The release of documents concerning the US war on the Middle East revealed 15,000 previously unknown and uncounted murdered Iraqis, and showed 20,000 civilians assassinated by massacre and night raids in Afghanistan. Their commitment to provide their full document archives to the public, with a very rigorous redaction process in place, made it possible for a German citizen - kidnapped and tortured by the CIA after being mistakenly identified as a terrorist - to obtain justice.

Together, Manning and Assange gave us all a gift of seeing ourselves truthfully, to regard each other’s life as being valuable. This awakening of our hearts to our shared humanity opened a possibility for a society based on a principle of love. It is a world beyond borders, where we can relate to one another on a plane of equality, without oppressive mechanisms that separate us.

For this act of liberation, WikiLeaks has been declared an enemy by nearly every powerful state. Assange has been character assassinated, arbitrarily detained without charge for years, and his human rights have been seriously violated. He has been psychologically tortured and spied on. He is now held inside London’s maximum-security prison, alongside murderers and terrorists, facing the risk of extradition to the US, where he could receive no fair trial.

The attempt to prosecute Assange is an assault on our own humanity. As the delivery of the verdict is approaching, the PixelHELPER Gospel Choir performed in front of Belmarsh prison, calling for freedom for this award winning journalist. The empire reaches its hands over Assange trying to squash the heart of democracy forever. Yet the idea that has inspired our collective action cannot be killed. It is kept alive through our courage to stand in our own power and speak truth.

Julian Assange is a journalist, computer programmer and human rights defender. He is a son, a father of two young children and a partner of his loving fiancée. He is a hero and champion of the oppressed, who dedicated his life to crush bastards and nurture the vulnerable. He is our brother who believes in each of us, our ability to self-determine a course of our lives. He is you and me. He is all of us. History will be kind to our friend.

Nozomi Hayase

Nozomi Hayase, Ph.D., is an essayist and author of "WikiLeaks, the Global Fourth Estate: History Is Happening" (2018). Follow her on Twitter: @nozomimagine

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)