Sunday, March 13, 2022

JAPANESE CBW IN CHINA WWII

Devil's deal stole justice from dead

By Zhao Xu in New York | China Daily | Updated: 2022-03-12 
Wang Xuan (six from right) with Japanese lawyers and peace-lovers staging a demonstration at the Tokyo Metropolitan Hibiya Park in Sept 2003, demanding an apology and reparations from the Japanese government for conducting biological warfare in China. [Photo provided to China Daily]

LONG READ

"A bomb filled with bacteria was placed on the ground and about 20 Manchurians were tied to poles (that is, enough distance to prevent men's death) from the bomb, which were electrically exploded. By the bomb blast ... and its fragments, the plague bacilli and anthrax bacilli penetrated through the wound into human bodies."

This shocking revelation came from Major Tomio Karasawa, 35, who was captured by the Russians in September 1945, in the final days of World War II. Karasawa was an army physician who between 1939 and 1944 worked in Unit 731, a covert biological research and development unit run by the Japanese Imperial Army.

Unit 731, set up in 1932 by General Shiro Ishii, a microbiologist, in the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo in Northeast China, was responsible for some of the most notorious and little known war crimes in human history. (Manchukuo means the Empire of Manchus, for which the Japanese had installed the dethroned Qing Dynasty emperor Puyi, who was of Manchu ethnicity, as its figurehead ruler.)

The secret unity, based in Pingfang (which Western researchers often call Pinfan) just outside Harbin, the largest city of Manchukuo, and in what is today's Heilongjiang province, not only carried out human vivisections behind its high walls and produced vast quantities of germs to spread all over China, but also acted as an evil core for what the late US historian Sheldon H. Harris called "factories of death" that it had set up across Japan-occupied Asia.

The Russians, who acquired Karasawa's affidavit during their interrogations, soon brought it to the attention of the International Prosecution Section (IPS) of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), convened in April 1946 in Tokyo to try Japanese war criminals.

"We do not consider that the evidence now available is sufficient to justify an assurance that any of the accused can be associated with this activity by any of the criteria adopted by the Court with reference to atrocities and prisoners of war offenses," was the reply on Dec 13, 1946 from Frank S. Tavenner Jr, US associate prosecutor of the IPS.

Tavenner's phrase "Any of the accused" covered, among others, General Yoshijiro Umezu, who, between 1939 and 1944, was commander of the Kwantung Army that controlled Manchukuo, and a direct superior and chief supporter of Ishii. The army, together with the imperial army's military police army Kempeitai, ruled with an iron fist. The latter kept Ishii's laboratories supplied with captives-the Manchurians in Karasawa's affidavit, referred to internally as maruta, a Japanese word meaning logs, by those who performed vivisections.

 The affidavit was never produced as evidence, nor was the man allowed to testify during court proceedings of the IMTFE, ostensibly modeled on the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg that tried Nazi war criminals.

Yet the affidavit was constantly brought up in written communications not only between the Americans and the Russians, the latter pushing for its inclusion in the trials, but also among the American prosecutors of the IPS, the military intelligence officials under General Douglas MacArthur's occupation authorities and those in Washington.

One of these declassified documents, kept at the US National Archives in College Park, Maryland, was an intelligence report dated Aug 1, 1947 and circulated within the State-War-Navy Coordinating Sub Committee for the Far East. (The State-War-Navy Coordinating Committee, a precursor to the US National Security Council, was a US federal government committee created in December 1944 to look at political and military issues related to the occupation of the Axis powers once World War II ended.)

The report, titled Interrogation of certain Japanese by Russian prosecutor, includes four appendixes. The Karasawa affidavit appears in Appendix A-"facts bearing on the problem". Elsewhere, the conclusion of the report is unequivocal:"The value to the US of Japanese BW (biological warfare) data is of such importance to national security as to far outweigh the value accruing from 'war crimes' prosecution."

This document can be found in the six-volume Compilation Of Historical Documents On Japanese Biological Warfare During WWII, published in 2019 and coedited by Wang Xuan, a Chinese researcher, and her Japanese counterpart Shoji Kondo.

"Imperial Japan's employment of biological weapons in China was full-scale, and unprecedented in human history," Wang, 69, said. "Its unspeakable cruelty can be glimpsed from the devil's deal, struck between Unit 731 scientists and the Americans who coveted their information."

Ishii said that if the Americans could provide him and his associates with documentary immunity from prosecution for war crimes, much more would come their way. This would include "photomicrographs of selected examples of 8,000 slides of tissues from autopsies of human and animals subjected to BW experiments", as listed in Appendix A.

Sheldon Harris and the Chinese translation of his Factories of Death. [Photo provided to China Daily]

"Most distressing is the fact that the ultimate disclosure in the mid to late 1940s of Japanese BW human experimentation did not appall those individuals who were apprised of these criminal acts," wrote Harris in the preface of his groundbreaking book Factories Of Death: Japanese Biological Warfare, 1932-1945, and the American Cover-up. "Instead, the disclosure whetted the appetites of scientists and military planners among both the victors and the vanquished."

During Harris' research for the book in the late 1980s, he located in the Dugway Proving Ground Library three of the "20 huge autopsy reports relative to their (the Japanese's) experiment with humans". The Dugway Proving Ground, about 140 kilometers southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah, is a US Army facility established in 1942 to test biological and chemical weapons.

The Harris book, which Wang describes as "the very first comprehensive scholarly research that brings to light the American cover-up", was first published in 1994. The history professor at California State University, Northridge, would spend nearly all of his subsequent waking hours adding to it. A revised edition was published in 2002, shortly before he died in August that year.

Now, 20 years later, the Chinese version of the 2002 book is finally reaching shelves in China. Wang Xuan, who was closely involved with the translation of the 1994 book into both Japanese and Chinese, is also the chief translator of the revised 2002 edition.

Jeanne Guillemin and the Chinese translation of her Hidden Atrocities. [Photo provided to China Daily]

The Chinese translation of another book on the same subject, Hidden Atrocities: Japanese Germ Warfare and American Obstruction of Justice at the Tokyo Trial, is also coming out, five years after it was published and a little more than two years after the death of its author Jeanne Guillemin, a medical anthropologist and senior fellow in the Security Studies Program at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Wang, who met Guillemin and her husband, the renowned American molecular biologist Matthew Meselson, in China in 2005, wrote the preface for the Chinese version.

"This coincidence, coupled with the sad deaths of the two scholars, both in their mid-70s, only serves to remind me of the physical and emotional toll taken of them as they wrestled with the dark truth," Wang said.

The Tokyo trial, which opened in May 1946, seven months after Japan surrendered and six months after the Nuremberg trials opened, proceeded in what Guillemin called "a radically different geopolitical context", one in which the United States, through General Douglas MacArthur, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, "ruled securely".

Yet it was what had been going on between the surrender and the opening of the trial that set the tone for the eventual miscarriage of justice.

In an interview with the Japan Times in 1982 Ishii's eldest daughter Harumi, then 57, said the first thing MacArthur did when he arrived in Japan on Aug 30, 1945 was to "inquire about my father".

No wonder so, according to Guillemin, even back in May 1944, MacArthur had already been informed of the discovery in a captured document of "a diagram of a Japanese Mark 7 experimental bacillus bomb, likely for anthrax and similar to munitions being developed by the United States and Britain". A US intelligence report dated Dec 15, 1944 included "a detailed map of an affiliate of Unit 731 located in Nanjing, called the Tama Unit (Unit 1644)".

In fact, two days before MacArthur arrived in Japan, Colonel Murray Sanders from Camp Detrick, Maryland, was already in Japan seeking out former Unit 731 scientists.

Sanders was to be followed by another three investigators from Camp Detrick (later Fort Detrick), the center of the US biological weapons program until 1969. These included Lieutenant Colonel Arvo Thompson, Sander's immediate successor.

Their investigations, mainly from a scientific point of view as military intelligence, were carried out simultaneously with the one done by the International Prosecution Section (IPS) of the IMTFE and the one by the Legal Section under the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (General MacArthur), both focused on the Japanese BW activities as war crimes.

A conflict of agendas was to erupt between what Harris dubbed "war crimes investigators" (the IPS prosecutors) and "BW/CW investigators" (Sanders and his successors). The latter, Harris wrote, "would brook no interference" from either "the issue of war criminal responsibility" or "medical or scientific ethics".

Around early March 1946, Thomas Morrow, US associate prosecutor of the IPS who was put in charge of investigating Japanese aggression in China, met Thompson and another investigator who was with G-2, the military intelligence division under MacArthur's occupation command. Morrow's request to interview Ishii, who had faked death before being located by MacArthur's intelligence, was turned down.

Then in a memo on June 4, Joseph Keenan, a Harvard graduate who had reportedly been handpicked by President Harry Truman to fill the role of IPS chief counsel, told all his staff at the IPS that a central interrogation center had been established under the control and direction of G-2, headed by Major General Charles A. Willoughby, a die-hard anti-Communist who would become a Cold War warrior. It was merely one month after the start of the Tokyo trial on May 3, 1946.

For those familiar with the entire trajectory of events, this arrangement, which in effect placed any further war crimes investigation under the control of US military intelligence in Tokyo, would be followed, later in trial, by directives from Washington to MacArthur that declared "information obtained from Ishii and associates on BW will be retained in intelligence channels and will not be employed as 'war crime' evidence."

Daniel Barenblatt and the Chinese translation of his A Plague Upon Humanity. [Photo provided to China Daily]

In March 1946, while Morrow was being denied access to Ishii, Thompson was having extensive interviews with the man and his subordinates. In the same Japan Times interview, cited in the 2004 book A Plague Upon Humanity: The Hidden History of Japan's Biological Warfare Program by Daniel Barenblatt, Ishii's daughter Harumi recalled that Thompson "said he had come as an emissary for President Truman" and "literally begged my father for top-secret data on the germ weapons". (The Chinese translation of Barenblatt's book was published in 2016.)


Head of the Chinese Prosecution Hsiang Che-chun (Xiang Zhejun) speaking during the court proceedings at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. [Photo provided to China Daily]

For a month between March 12 and April 12, 1946, Morrow and David Nelson Sutton, US associate prosecutor and assistant to the Chinese Division of the IPS, were in China on a fact-finding mission. They were guided in this effort by Hsiang Che-chun (Xiang Zhejun), who had arrived in Tokyo in early February as head of the Chinese prosecution team and was behind Morrow's thwarted attempt to pursue the war crime.

On April 23, Sutton submitted to Keenan his final report, titled Report from China: Bacteria Warfare.

For Wang, her encounter with the Sutton report at the National Archives in Maryland in October 2010 was overpowering. "There I sat, amid the hushed quietness of the room, with tears running down my cheeks. Laid out in front of me were documents prepared by the Chinese prosecution for pursuing the Japanese BW war crime responsibility-they, and those before them, had really tried to bring those monsters to the bar. And I saw my hometown, listed in the documents as one of the places the Japanese had attacked with plague."

Among other things, enclosed in Sutton's report to Keenan is a report written by Peter Z. King (Jin Baoshan), a public health official with China's Nationalist Government, in late 1941. Citing the repeated appearances of low-flying Japanese aircraft dropping considerable quantities of "wheat grains, pieces of paper, cotton wadding and some unidentified particles" and the subsequent outbreak of bubonic plague in those areas, mostly plague-free until then, the report established a direct link between the four plague outbreaks and their subsequent spread in the provinces of Zhejiang and Hunan in 1940 and 1941 with Japan's biological warfare.

King's report was widely distributed in the spring of 1942 when China's foreign ministry notified all Allied embassies and legations that Japan's germ attacks were "ruthlessly in violation of the principles of international law and the principles of humanity". That protest fell on deaf ears.

During Sutton's trip to China, he interviewed King and, at his urging, spoke to W. I. Chen, a Chinese epidemiologist, and Robert Pullitzer, a plague prevention expert. Both were on site in Changde, Hunan province, soon after the plague started in November 1941 and wrote investigative reports corroborating King's claim. And both, like King, were more than willing to testify in court.

None was given the chance. In the last sentence of his report's covering letter to Keenan, Sutton wrote: "As the case now stands, in my opinion the evidence is not sufficient to justify the charge of bacterial warfare."

Wang was not impressed. "If this is not sufficient evidence, then the Chinese prosecution should be facilitated with access to chief suspects, instead of being withheld all information the US army investigators had been accumulating from Ishii and his associates," she said. "The Chinese prosecution had managed to come up with no less adequate proof for an indictment compared with other cases ongoing at the court. The nature of the crime deserves a thorough investigation."

It needs to be noted that Sutton, before being assigned assistant prosecutor at the IMTFE, was a civilian officer at the US Department of Defense with no background in biology, Wang said.

"I believe more information is needed if we are to interpret his actions, decisions and standpoint," said Wang, who met Hsiang, the Yale-educated Chinese prosecutor, in the late 1970s. Wang's father worked with Hsiang in the 1940s at the Shanghai High Court before the latter was appointed to the IMTFE.

By the time Wang stumbled upon the Sutton report in 2010, it had been three years since the end of a decadelong lawsuit in which she took a group of BW survivors from the attacked places in King's report to Japan, demanding compensation from the Japanese government. Wang's own paternal uncle died from bubonic plague following an airborne attack in Zhejiang in 1940."About 400 people, one-third of the population of my ancestral village, died," she said.

They died in unspeakably horrible conditions, as Patrick Tyler, a reporter for The New York Times, wrote in his 1997 story: "Their screams sundered the night from behind shuttered windows and bolted doors, and some of the most delirious victims ran or crawled down the narrow alleys to gulp putrid water from open sewers in a vain attempt to vanquish the septic fire that was consuming them."

According to Wang, the last time the Chinese prosecution appeared in Sutton's court working diary was on May 11, 1946, eight days after the start of the trial.

In this diary the assistant prosecutor said that two days earlier he found a note on his desk from Judge Hsiang. With the note, Hsiang had attached several translated pages of testimony from a Japanese soldier named Osamu Chimba (in Guillemin's book he is erroneously called C. C. H. Hataba due to a mistake from the original document), a former member of Unit 1644 (Tama Unit), a satellite of Unit 731 in Nanking (Nanjing).


The cover of one of the three human experiment autopsy reports Sheldon Harris discovered at the US Army's Dugway Proving Ground Library. They were provided to the Americans by Unit 731 scientists as a bargain for war crime immunity. "A" refers to anthrax. The report was originally kept at Fort Detrick, whose investigators conducted extensive investigations with Unit 731 scientists. [Photo provided to China Daily]

Having deserted out of revulsion of his troops' "true, inhuman mission" in 1944-the only one to do so among the Japanese BW troops' 12,000 personnel, Chimba spoke about "a great scourge" inflicted on the Chinese provinces of Zhejiang and Jiangxi in May 1942 by Ishii and his scientists, whose powerful weapons, apart from plague, cholera, typhoid and dysentery bacteria, included anthrax.

The confessions of Chimba met with a similar fate as all other incriminating evidence-Sutton focused his attention on prosecuting the Japanese for the atrocities of the Nanking Massacre and "almost nothing concerning BW surfaced at the Far East International Military Tribunal's war crimes trials", Harris said.

However, in September 1946 the highly incriminating revelations of Major Karasawa and three other Soviet captives were brought to the attention of the Americans by those from the Soviet Division of the IPS, who demanded to interview Ishii for a potential war crimes trial.

If anything, this only served to convince the Americans of the value of their prize find and the need to keep him for themselves, away from the Russians with whom the decisionmakers in Washington believed they had entered a competition to develop the most powerful biological weapons.

"Up to that point, Ishii had consistently lied about the issue of human experiments, largely denying the fact that they had ever been conducted," Wang said. "Armed with the affidavits provided by the Soviets, the Americans, believing that they could exploit Ishii's fear of the Soviets to their own advantage, confronted the sly general, who then seized this opportunity to put forward his demand for the bargain-immunity from 'war crimes' in documentary form for himself, superiors and subordinates."

On May 6, 1947 MacArthur sent a top-secret radiogram to the War Department's General Intelligence Division, requesting action by the Joint Chiefs of Staff on an immunity agreement for the Unit 731 scientists.

In it, MacArthur said the affidavits from Karasawa and his superior Major General Kyoshi Kawashima had been "confirmed tacitly by Ishii", who "claims to have extensive theoretical high-level knowledge including strategic and tactical use of BW on defense and offense, backed by some research on best BW agents to employ by geographical areas of the Far East and the use of BW in cold climates".

The final deliberation from Washington is laid out bluntly in the Aug 1, 1947 intelligence report for circulation inside the US State-War-Navy Coordinating Sub-Committee for the Far East.

"This Japanese information is the only known source of data from scientifically controlled experiments showing the direct effect of BW agents on man... any war crimes trial would completely reveal such data to all nations, it is felt that such publicity must be avoided in the interests of defense and national security," the report said, noting at the same time that:"Experiments on human beings similar to those conducted by the Ishii BW group have been condemned as war crimes by the International Military Tribunal for the trial of major Nazi war criminals."


Shiro Ishii, head of Unit 731. [Photo provided to China Daily]

Showered by the Americans with gifts, Ishii, who at this point was regularly entertaining his US guests at home parties, encouraged his associates to speak freely with the investigators, who for their own part were occasionally shocked but often impressed by the candor of the Ishii scientists about the use of humans-Chinese, Koreans and Russians-in their research.

In August 1945, five days before Japan's official surrender, Ishii received a hand delivered message from Tokyo ordering him to eliminate all evidence of biological warfare "from the Earth forever". Yet before his escape home via Korea, before advancing Russian and Chinese troops, Ishii "managed to load three large wicker hampers with documents and specimens", Harris said. A large cache of salvaged biological warfare data and equipment was later sent from Pingfang to Busan, Korea and eventually to Japan.

What was put to instant demise were the lives of all remaining POWs-at least 3,000 had been experimented to death at Pingfang according to the confession by Kawashima but the actual number should be doubled based on the research of the Unit 731 Museum in Pingfang.

After the war Toshimi Mizobuchi, a veteran of Unit 731, said that on Aug 12, 1945, a fellow unit member came out of the Pingfang prisons and told him that he had "finished off 404 maruta (logs)", referring to the captives. The Russians later discovered in Pingfang a burned out compound with desperate pleas still discernible from scorched prison walls.

In a 1999 story by a New York Times reporter Ralph Blumentha l, Mizobuchi is depicted as "a vigorous 76-year-old real estate manager living outside the Japanese city of Kobe" who is "organizing this year's reunion for the several hundred surviving veterans of Unit 731". Ishii, before his death in 1959 of throat cancer, attended such reunions regularly with his former subordinates, a number of whom went into medical practice after the war.

On Nov 12, 1948, the IMTFE concluded. Of all the victims of the Imperial Japanese Army's biological warfare, the Tokyo trial records only contain the name of one-Kung Tsaoshang, who died of the plague attack in Changde in late 1941 and whose autopsy report, authored by Dr W. I. Chen, was passed to Sutton by King as part of the public health record.

"The delay in justice at Tokyo led to the denial of justice," wrote Guillemin in the final chapter of her book. Wang, who first went to Japan to study in 1987 before accidentally becoming involved in the decadelong lawsuit during her trip back home in 1994, had forcefully sought belated remedy.

On Aug 27, 2002, the Tokyo District Court admitted, for the first time in Japan's judiciary, that Unit 731 scientists had "used bacteriological weapons under the order of the Imperial Japanese Army's headquarters". That was four days before Harris, who spoke to the BBC about the court victory, died of a blood infection on Aug 31 in Los Angeles aged 74.

The remains of the once sprawling compound of Unit 731 in Pingfang, after most of it was destroyed by the Japanese at the end of the war in August 1945, in an effort to hide all incriminating evidence. [Photo provided to China Daily]

Although the same court ruled that postwar Sino-Japanese treaties prevented any compensation for the victims, its verdict was upheld by the Tokyo High Court in 2005 and by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2007, by which time 24 victim-plaintiffs had died.

"In 1998 Harris flew to Tokyo at the invitation of our Japanese lawyers' group, taking with him vast quantities of photocopied documents he had collected from US archives and elsewhere that could be of use to us,"Wang said. "I last met him in March 2002 in China, when I traveled with him and two US medical scientists to Zhejiang province to conduct research on victims of Japan's anthrax/glanders attack in 1942."

The same trip, the last one of Harris' 12 trips to China, also brought the three Americans to Wang's ancestral home in Yiwu, Zhejiang province, where a Tragedy Memorial Pavilion that listed the names of more than 1,000 plague victims in the county reduced them to tears. Wang led his guests through a gray-brick Buddhist temple with bare concrete floors, where in 1942 Japanese wearing white coats and masks dissected the infected villagers lured there by the lie that these men were doctors offering treatment.

The declassification of the Tokyo Trial documents, as well as intelligence documents generated by MacArthur's occupation authority and their communications with Washington, first started in the mid-1970s, following denunciation by the administration of President Richard Nixon of the offensive biological weapons program and improved relations with China.

In the late '80s and '90s more and more world media became interest-ed in Unit 731 history as an increasing number of repentant former unit members decided to come forward. Against this backdrop Harris published the first edition of his book in 1994, painstakingly combing through all declassified information, which he then augmented with the knowledge he acquired through special contacts within the US military and government.

Among those Harris inspired was Barenblatt, who, for his 2004 book, traveled to China and Japan many times, and had many long phone conversations with Wang, whom he called "one of the primal forces of nature".

The research also took Barenblatt, Harris' and Guillemin's fellow Harvard graduate, to a New York library where he discovered "a fragile old tome" with the title Materials on the Trial of Former Servicemen of the Japanese Army Charged with Manufacturing and Employing Bacteriological Weapons. The last time the book, a partial transcript of the 1949 war crimes trial of their captured Japanese medical scientists and military officers held by the Russians in the Siberian city of Khabarovsk, was checked out by anyone before Barenblatt had been in 1979.


Death factory-an aerial view of Unit 731 in Pingfang during its full operation. [Photo provided to China Daily]

At the Khabarovsk trial, which met with derision and denial in the West-Keenan, the IPS chief of counsel, denounced it as a Russian "show trial"-12 Japanese, including Karasawa, were convicted of conducting biological warfare or performing inhuman medical experiments. Karasawa, whom Wang believed was the first to speak about human experiments, was sentenced to 18 years' imprisonment and committed suicide when it was announced that he was to be released and repatriated to Japan with the other Japanese POWs in 1956.

In the preface of his revised edition, Harris cites a bill passed by the US Congress in 2000 that "mandates all government agencies to disclose any information held concerning actions of the Japanese Imperial Army that would constitute a war crime".

That work, by a government Interagency Working Group (IWG), did not start until May 2003, nine months after Harris' death. Lasting until March 2007, the declassification yielded 100,000 pages of materials on Japan's war crimes. Yet "there were still a lot of loopholes in the name of national security or to that effect", Barenblatt said.

In an email to China Daily, Yang Daqing, a history professor at Georgetown University who had acted as an IWG consultant, said: "Involved government agencies including the CIA sent their heads of their own in-house archives. While we historians could ask them to look for documents on certain subjects, these government officials shared with us what they found.

"We never heard that there were documents that could not be declassified. In theory those documents may exist, but I had no way of knowing."

In 2006, Barenblatt traveled to Changde, Hunan province, the site of a major Japanese plague attack in 1941, which led to more than 7,000 deaths. There, he met Yoshio Shinozuka, who worked at Unit 731's headquarters in Pingfang, where the germs spread in Changde were cultured and tested on victims.

One of those who had come to their conscience, Shinozuka testified in 2000 at court on behalf of the 180 Chinese led by Wang in their compensation lawsuit. Two years earlier in 1998, while trying to attend a photo exhibit on Unit 731 held in the US, he became the first former member of the unit who was turned away from entering the country.

In Changde for a conference on Japan's biological warfare, Shinozuka told Barenblatt how he, then 20 years old, helped prepare for dissection an "intelligent-looking man" who had been "systemically infected with plague germs" and whom he knew because "I had taken his blood once for testing".

"As the disease took its toll, his face and body became totally black. Still alive, he was brought on a stretcher by the special security forces to the autopsy room," said Shinozuka, who later washed the man's body with a rubber hose and a deck brush, under the watch of the chief pathologist.

"Shinozuka told me he'd never forget the glare of hate his victim directed at him as they were cutting into him," Barenblatt said. "One can't help but think what the victim must have been thinking toward the end of his life, that the world has got to know this."

Putin suffers an embarrassing defeat in the social media war as his web of lies quickly unravels

Brian Karem, Salon
March 10, 2022

Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a meeting of the presidential rights council via a video link on December 9, 2021. Mikhail Metzel SPUTNIK/AFP

In the end, future historians may well label this the first "social media war," just as Vietnam was the first televised war and the Gulf War of 1991 was the first cable news war.

And as Vladimir Putin's "chosen war" against Ukraine enters its third week, fear and outrage continue to spread across the globe like gangrene. It's increasingly apparent that social media is driving the coverage and providing key information.

Some in the United States, including many members of the Republican Party, are trying hard to make this war about President Biden — and in doing so to spread more fear. They want to blame him for the invasion, blame him for rising gas costs and blame him for the deaths in Ukraine. These include the fact-deniers, the delusional dilettantes of destruction and devout worshippers of "alternate facts" who dwell in a shadowy world of misery, misinformation and malignancy. They're using social media to do so.

RELATED: Ignore the GOP's sudden pivot, Republicans have long worked to undermine Ukraine

The value of Biden's efforts to solve the most complicated international crisis since the end of World War II is unrecognizable to those who support the arrogant, obnoxious efforts of Putin-wannabes who thrive in the dark cesspool of American politics. These are the devotees of spreading disinformation who declare they defend democracy while cheering the insurrectionists of Jan. 6.

Biden has been crystal clear about his intentions: He means to economically strangle Putin into submission, avoid a wider conflict and strengthen our European democratic allies — leaving Russia weaker. His experience on the international stage during a lengthy career in public office has provided him with a unique perspective, and the skills to get this done.

There are many in this country who decry experience, or say it doesn't matter. Biden's experience is proving otherwise, although the amount of bile that passes for political straight talk makes it next to impossible for the average uninformed American to understand the nuances of our current international crisis.

Putin has woven a web of lies to defend his invasion of Ukraine and all of them have been unraveled by social media and American intelligence, and plainly presented to the world by Biden from the White House. This has even led to protests in Russia. Putin has tried to scare the rest of the world into giving him Ukraine by threatening nuclear war and trying to make it look like a showdown between the U.S. and Russia. He has failed. He has also failed in trying to disarm and destroy NATO — though he had a valuable ally in that effort, former President Donald Trump, before Biden entered the Oval Office.

Biden has ignored Putin's threats and refused to let the U.S. become directly involved in the conflict. Some of the very same people who support a "no fly zone" over Ukraine are those who say they most fear a nuclear confrontation based on a war with Russia. Putting American pilots in a position to shoot down Russian jets would not only play into Putin's attempts to widen the conflict, but place us even closer to a conflagration whose outcome plays out to the tune of R.E.M's "It's the End of the World as We Know It." But in reality, nobody will feel fine when nuclear winter descends.

Some in the press see this through a different lens. Joy Reid of MSNBC, focusing on the refugee issues, said: "There is a lot of soul-searching we need to do in Western media about why some wars, and lives, seem to matter more than others, and why some refugees get the welcome mat, while others get the wall."

True. I've seen refugees on our southern border treated as some would treat cattle. The empathy we show European refugees is far more than we show African or Latin American refugees. But this war waged by Putin supersedes those concerns because it is far more drastic in its potential. We cannot lose sight of the fact, for one second, that Putin's march into Ukraine brings with it the seeds of global destruction.

Some in the mainstream media don't understand this — especially in the White House press corps. Some of us there, especially those sitting in the first two rows of the Brady Briefing Room, are so self-absorbed that they believe a press briefing is an opportunity to engage the Biden White House in a one-on-one discourse while the rest of us sit or stand and watch in quiet respect for the stolid questioner. That blew up on Monday, when the 40 or 50 people in the room who don't normally get to ask press secretary Jen Psaki a question rebelled after the AP's Josh Boak pulled the plug after only 39 minutes. Steve Nelson of the New York Post criticized the front two rows for monopolizing the time, and said there were more questions from the back of the room. Others agreed. Finally White House Correspondents Association president Steve Portnoy had to stand up in the middle of the briefing room and moderate. His was an example of statesmanship many politicians could learn from.

Nelson was right, of course — and some of the stupidest questions I've ever heard have come out of the press corps since Biden took over.

RELATED: Putin's threat to the world grows — and much of our news media is not up to the challenge

It has been social media, which routinely engages in such lunacy that you have to wonder if you're watching an SNL skit, that has risen to the occasion — showing the world the scenes of destruction inside maternity hospitals and neighborhoods, and highlighting potential Russian war crimes.

Darnella Frazier, the teenager who recorded a comprehensive video of the killing of George Floyd, was recognized last year by the Pulitzer Prize board. She was 17 and awarded a special citation for "a video that spurred protests against police brutality around the world, highlighting the crucial role of citizens in journalists' quest for truth and justice."

Much the same thing is going on in Ukraine as those suffering from Putin's chosen war are recording it, posting it on social media and, like Joe Biden, exposing Russian propaganda for what it is. That has helped raise awareness and led to worldwide condemnation of the war.

Some mainstream media reporters, like former White House reporter Trey Yingst, last seen walking with fleeing refugees in Kyiv while telling the stories of tragedy and Russian hegemony, are doing the same thing. That's what covering a war is about. Show. Don't tell.

Watching this war on social media has naturally led to more stress in the world, just as we emerge from two years of stress imposed by a worldwide pandemic. All this has affected our mental health. People across the world are rightfully frightened. You can hear it in restaurant chatter, PTA meetings and social gatherings. "Is this the beginning of World War III — and how do we prevent it?"

Headlines on how to volunteer to fight in Ukraine and how to survive a nuclear war were in my news feed Saturday. Oh, and Aaron Rodgers was in the news again, getting the attention only an NFL diva can garner.

A source inside the Ukraine government told me Wednesday that more than 1.8 million people have fled the country, but also said resistance to Putin has continued to harden — and that each day "gives us all hope that the aggressor will ultimately fail."

This is where you have to give some credit to Biden. With his depth of foreign knowledge and experience, he has thus far outplayed Putin on the international chessboard. Putin has failed to widen the scope of the conflict. He has not been able to cast this as a U.S. versus Russia battle — and it has been social media that has effectively underpinned the arguments made by NATO and Biden. The scenes of destruction and the shots of President Zelenskyy broadcasting from a cell phone have galvanized the world — not the words and images of the mainstream media.

It is social media, at this point, that is making the difference. How do you keep a nuclear power from successfully invading a non-nuclear country? How do you curb a dictator's enthusiasm for greed, avarice and power? The altruists and the most naïve among us have often said, gosh, if we just stood up and held hands and refused to accept aggression, it could end today.

But it will be through the camera phones of ordinary people struggling against a violent, unprovoked invasion that we may come to understand how much we all have in common — and how much we all have to gain by standing up to aging autocrats whose only desires are greed, avarice and power. Not to mention how little their desires have to do with life, and how detrimental it is to the survival of the species.

In short, the camera phone is revolutionizing resistance by cutting through the clutter of propaganda and showing that Putin and his efforts are a "tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing," with apologies to Shakespeare.

Joe Biden is demonstrating how to lead this fight without thumping his chest and contributing to that sound and fury.
Guns, not roses – here’s the true story of penicillin’s first patient
THE CONVERSATION
March 12, 2022

Penicillin ushered in the antibiotics revolution, with amazing results during war and peace. 
Science & Society Picture Library/SSPL via Getty Images

Albert Alexander was dying. World War II was raging, and this police officer of the county of Oxford, England, had developed a severe case of sepsis after a cut on his face became badly infected. His blood was now teeming with deadly bacteria.

According to his physician, Charles Fletcher, Alexander was in tremendous pain, “desperately and pathetically ill.” The bacterial infection was eating him alive: He’d already lost one eye and had oozing abscesses all over his face and in his lungs.


Albert Alexander in uniform.
Courtesy of Linda Willason, CC BY-ND

Since all known treatment options were exhausted and death appeared imminent, Fletcher decided that Alexander was the perfect candidate to try a new, experimental therapy. On Feb. 12, 1941, Alexander became the first known person to be treated with penicillin. Within days he began to make a stunning recovery.


I am a professor of pharmacology, and Alexander’s story is the prelude to my yearly lecture on antibiotics. Like many other microbiology instructors, I’d always told students that Alexander’s septicemia arose after he scratched his cheek on a thorn while pruning rosebushes. This popular account dominates the scientific literature as well as recent articles and books.

The problem is, while descriptions of the miraculous effect of penicillin in this case are accurate, the details of Alexander’s injury were muddled, likely by wartime propaganda.

Breaking the mold


Bacteriologist Alexander Fleming discovered antibiotic penicillin in 1928.


The promise of penicillin as an antibiotic was first noted in 1928, when microbiologist Alexander Fleming noticed something funny in his petri dishes at St. Mary’s Hospital in London. Fleming’s cultures of staphylococcal bacteria did not grow well on plates contaminated with a penicillium mold. Fleming discovered that the mold’s “juice” was lethal to some types of bacteria.

A decade later, a team of scientists led by Howard Florey at Oxford University began the arduous task of purifying the active substance from the “mold juice” and formally testing its antimicrobial properties. In August 1940, Florey and his colleagues published their striking findings that purified penicillin safely wiped out numerous bacterial infections in mice.

Florey then sought Fletcher’s help to try penicillin in a human patient. That patient would be Alexander, whose death seemed inevitable otherwise. As Fletcher stated, “There was all to gain for him in a trial of penicillin and nothing to lose.”

At the time, purified penicillin was extremely scarce, since the mold was slow to grow and yielded precious little of the drug. Despite recycling unprocessed penicillin from Alexander’s urine, there just wasn’t enough available to finish off the infection once and for all. After 10 days of improvement, Alexander gradually relapsed. He died on March 15, 1941, at the age of 43.

Despite the tragic outcome, Alexander’s case turbocharged interest in penicillin research. As Fletcher observed, “There was no doubt about the temporary clinical improvement, and, most importantly, there had been no sort of toxic effect during the five days of continuous administration of penicillin.”


An ad promoting penicillin and its role in the war effort.

Schenley Laboratories, Inc. advertisement, 1944

Almost exactly a year later, on March 14, 1942, doctors in Connecticut administered the antibiotic to a woman named Anne Miller who was deathly ill with streptococcal septicemia. She made a full recovery and became the first patient cured with penicillin. Mass production of penicillin became a top priority of the U.S. War Department, second only to the Manhattan Project. It is widely believed that penicillin helped the Allies during World War II, preventing wound infections and helping soldiers diagnosed with gonorrhea to return to the battlefield.

The rosebush tale has been a thorn in their sides


Albert Alexander has earned a place in history as the first known person to be treated with penicillin for a clinical condition. Almost as famous as his name is the purported cause of death: sepsis due to a scratch from rosebushes.

However, an alternative explanation was revealed in a 2010 interview with Eric Sidebottom, a historian and author of “Oxford Medicine: A Walk Through Nine Centuries.” He claimed that Alexander was injured when his police station was hit during a German bombing raid on Nov. 30, 1940. Shrapnel from this attack caused the facial lacerations that led to Alexander’s fatal blood poisoning, he said.


Sheila LeBlanc holding photo of her father, Albert Alexander, in 2012.
Courtesy of Linda Willason, CC BY-ND

Alexander’s daughter, Sheila LeBlanc, who moved to California and became an artist, confirmed Sidebottom’s account in a 2012 interview with a local newspaper. She also revealed the grim consequences Alexander’s death had on his family. Since they’d lived in a house provided by the village, for the village constable, his death forced them to move out. LeBlanc, who was seven at the time, and her older brother were sent to an orphanage, since their mother had to find work.

Michael Barrett, a professor of biochemical parasitology at the University of Glasgow, also spoke to LeBlanc about the cause of Alexander’s injury. Writing in 2018, Barrett stated that while LeBlanc recalled that the constable’s house did have a beautiful rose garden, her father’s fatal cut was sustained during the German blitz.

In February 2022, I contacted Alexander’s granddaughter, Linda Willason, who is also an artist in California, to help set the record straight. Willason validated the shrapnel account and suggested that the rosebush story was “a bit of wartime propaganda.” By downplaying bombing injuries, the government likely hoped to maintain the public’s stiff upper lip.

While the nature of Alexander’s injury may seem a trivial detail, correcting the historical record is important. Alexander died in the line of duty, and the apocryphal rosebush story obscures his honorable actions. His descendants are hopeful the true account of his injury will now eclipse the false one.


A plaque dedicated in 2021 shares the real story of Alexander’s injury.

Newbury Town Council/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA

In 2021, a plaque commemorating Alexander was installed in Newbury that reads: “On war support duty in Southampton on 30th November 1940, Albert was injured in an air raid. Contracting staphylococcal and streptococcal septicaemia, he was transferred to the Radcliffe Infirmary in Oxford, where he was selected for the first clinical application of penicillin. … His place in the history of antibiotics is secure.”

Bill Sullivan, Professor of Pharmacology & Toxicology, Indiana University School of Medicine


This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
NO SUCH THING AS ACCIDENTAL
Pakistan demands joint probe into 'accidental' India missile fire

Reuters
March 12, 2022


By Asif Shahzad

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistan on Saturday demanded a joint probe into a missile India said it accidentally fired into its territory, rejecting New Delhi's decision to hold an internal inquiry into the incident and calling on the international community to play a role.

"Such a serious matter cannot be addressed with the simplistic explanation proffered by the Indian authorities," Pakistan's foreign office said in a statement.

"Pakistan demands a joint probe to accurately establish the facts surrounding the incident," it added.

India said on Friday it had accidentally fired the missile into Pakistan this week because of a "technical malfunction" during routine maintenance, giving its version of events after Pakistan warned New Delhi of "unpleasant consequences."

The international community must play its "due role in promoting stability in a nuclearised environment", the foreign office statement from Pakistan said, warning of "dire consequences" if any misinterpretation by one of the sides lead to an escalation.

Military experts have in the past warned of the risk of

accidents or miscalculations by the nuclear-armed neighbours,

which have fought three wars and engaged in numerous smaller

armed clashes, usually over the disputed territory of Kashmir.

Tensions have eased in recent months, and the incident,

which may have been the first of its kind, immediately raised

questions about safety mechanisms.

Pakistan demanded clarifications from India over its safety mechanism to prevent accidental missile launches, and whether it was appropriately handled by its armed forces.

According to the U.S.-based Arms Control Association, the

missile's range is between 300 km (186 miles) and 500 km (310

miles), making it capable of hitting Islamabad from a northern

Indian launch pad.

(Reporting by Asif Shahzad; editing by Clelia Oziel)
Exposed: The Trump, Putin and Saudi connection to high gas prices
Thom Hartmann
March 12, 2022

U.S. President Donald Trump and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman are seen during the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina November 30, 2018. REUTERS/Marcos Brindicci

It was a double-whammy for two of then-President Donald Trump’s biggest patrons, Vladimir Putin and American fossil-fuel billionaires and their industry: the price of oil was too damn low.

Between the pandemic-induced collapse in demand for oil and the price war Saudi Arabia was then fighting with Russia — two of the world’s largest producers — Putin was being pinched badly. And in America, from Pennsylvania to Texas, oil producers were outright losing money on the oil they pumped. Gas prices were at record lows, gutting the profits even of refiners.

So, Trump acted. It seemed inexplicable at the time, but in retrospect (knowing now how tied to Putin he was) it makes perfect sense.

In the second year of his presidency, Trump had blown up the Iran nuclear deal that Obama had a hand in fashioning, letting us all think it was because he was trying to erase Obama’s legacy. But the real and immediate impact of Trump’s decision was to pull almost 3 million barrels of Iranian oil a day off the world market, boosting profits for Russia, Saudi Arabia and the US fossil fuel industry.

But that was 2018 and by 2020 prices were again sagging — and thus about 40 percent of the total revenue/income to Russia’s economy was sagging — as demand dropped because of the pandemic. Saudi Arabia was making the situation worse for Putin, keeping their oil production high to compete with Russia for worldwide market share, particularly in Chinese oil markets, and in retaliation for Russia refusing to go along with price-supporting production cuts.

Oil prices had fallen as low as $15 a barrel because Saudi Arabia had opened their spigots full-on, according to Reuters:

“Despite the agreement to cut a tenth of global production, oil prices continued to fall to historic lows. U.S. oil futures dropped below $0 last week as sellers paid buyers to avoid taking delivery of oil they had no place to store. Brent futures, the global oil benchmark, fell towards $15 per barrel - a level not seen since the 1999 oil price crash – from as high as $70 at the start of the year.”

So Trump took decisive action.

He called up his buddy, Prince Mohammed Bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, and essentially threatened that if MBS didn’t cut production (and thus raise worldwide oil prices, which would help out Putin and US petrobillionaires) the United States would reconsider its seven-decade-long military support for the kingdom.

As Reuters reported on April 30, 2020, in an article titled Special Report: Trump told Saudi: Cut Oil Supply or Lose U.S. Military Support:

“Trump delivered the message to the crown prince 1
0 days before the announcement of production cuts. The kingdom’s de facto leader was so taken aback by the threat that he ordered his aides out of the room so he could continue the discussion in private, according to a U.S. source who was briefed on the discussion by senior administration officials.”

Oil-drenched Republican Senators Kevin Cramer and Dan Sullivan had drafted legislation to pull US troops out of Saudi Arabia, giving Trump the club he could wield against the Saudis to help out both Putin and the US oil industry that was seeing bankruptcies spread across the country.

As Reuters noted, “Support for the measure was gaining momentum amid Congressional anger over the ill-timed Saudi-Russia oil price war.”

Thus, in the last year of his presidency, Trump oversaw the worldwide cuts in oil production that would lead to today’s prices soaring well past $130 a barrel.

Which brings us to today, with oil prices soaring. When President Biden tried to reach out to our allies, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to ask them to restore the production they’d cut under threat from Trump, both refused to take his call, according to press reports.

Meteor Blades reports at Daily Kos that The Wall Street Journal laid it out:
“The Saudis have signaled that their relationship with Washington has deteriorated under the Biden administration, and they want more support for their intervention in Yemen’s civil war, help with their own civilian nuclear program as Iran’s moves ahead, and legal immunity for Prince Mohammed in the U.S., Saudi officials said. The crown prince faces multiple lawsuits in the U.S., including over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.

“The Emiratis share Saudi concerns about the restrained U.S. response to recent missile strikes by Iran-backed Houthi militants in Yemen against the U.A.E. and Saudi Arabia, officials said. Both governments are also concerned about the revival of the Iran nuclear deal, which doesn’t address other security concerns of theirs and has entered the final stages of negotiations in recent weeks.”

The outcome is predictable. Saudi Arabia and Russia keep oil production tight to keep oil prices and profits high, while President Biden is attacked from every direction in the US for high prices at the pump.

Republican politicians grandstand on the issue and hammer it daily into the news, blaming the increased price of gasoline on a president who’s trying to both get Iranian oil back on the market and increase Saudi production. The high price of gas and diesel, meanwhile, keep jacking up US inflation, giving the GOP another lead pipe to hit Democrats over the head with.

Neither of Biden’s efforts to lower oil prices are working, though, as the result of Trump’s two gutless actions on behalf of his patrons.

The Iranian talks are bogged down (the Iranians can see what happens to a country that gives up its nukes just by turning on the news and looking at Ukraine) and Saudi Arabia wants Biden to come on bended knee and approve of their slaughter in Yemen, something that would be very costly to American moral standing in the world.

The result is more money for Putin’s war machine and the Saudi crown prince, and a significant increase in the chances an oil-industry-friendly Republican Congress will be installed next year and a Putin/Saudi-friendly Republican President will win election in 2024.

Trump may be long out of power, but the impact of his corrupt treachery lives on.

How Christians enabled Putin

By Josiah Reedy, Op-ed contributor| Saturday, March 12, 2022

Most evangelical Christians denounce Putin’s actions in Ukraine. A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken February 20-24, 2022, as the Russians invaded Ukraine, “found that White evangelical Christians were just as negative toward Russia and supportive of sanctions as Americans overall."

"Among White evangelicals, 47% said Russia is an enemy of the United States and another 33% said it is unfriendly. Similarly, 68% supported sanctions and 51% said they would still support them if energy prices went up.”

Franklin Graham has said, “This is a war. I don’t support war and I don’t know of any Christian that supports war. We pray for peace, not war. We pray for peace, not war. I don’t support this at all.”

As evangelical Christians, together with the whole Western world, praise Ukrainian resistance against Russian invasion, it is prudent to recall the unfortunate praise previously lavished on Vladimir Putin’s authoritarian regime.

The Russian Orthodox church has taken on a foundational cultural role in Putin’s Russia by mustering pro-Putin sentiment and channeling absurd propaganda. Patriarch Krill has said (apparently with a straight face), “Listen carefully: Russia is now leader of the free world and can offer an example to other countries.”

Moreover, an Orthodox cathedral dedicated to the Russian military will feature mosaics of Putin and Stalin, among others. In a particularly deplorable showing of state loyalty, the Russian Orthodox church granted its tacit support to the infamous Yarovaya laws, meant to stamp out any and all proselytization. According to Paul Goble, writing for the Religious Freedom Institute, the Moscow Patriarchate’s leadership “clearly expected to benefit if the state punishes and closes down its religious competitors.”

Less well-known are overtures made, embraces offered, and long-standing connections developed between some American evangelicals and the Russian Orthodox church.

The chairman of the Russian Orthodox Church’s Department of External Relations, Metropolitan Hilarion, visited the U.S. and was welcomed into the pulpit in 2011 by Highland Park Presbyterian Church in Dallas, as well as visiting Dallas Theological Seminary and other evangelical leaders and institutions.

More concerning still was the relationship between the Russian Orthodox church and the World Congress of Families. This article treats the subject in further detail, but the important matters to note are that the WCF worked with the Russian Orthodox church on various events, had financial backing from Russian oligarchs, was welcomed by the Russian government, and sought to portray Russia as a leader of the pro-family movement. The WCF arranged for its 2014 conference to take place in Moscow, and then was forced to suspend those plans as the situation in Crimea unfolded.

As further proof that Putin was seeking to capture the attention of American Christians, Russian agent Mariina Butina sought to exploit the 2017 National Prayer Breakfast in order to build connections between attendees and various Russian officials and businessmen.

Sadly, some American Christians were eager to express positive views of Putin, allowing his public stance on homosexuality and gender issues to cover over his multitude of glaring faults.

“I can’t point to any country of the world today that is a model for the rest of the world, except perhaps for Russia, which has just taken the very important and frankly necessary step of criminalizing homosexual propaganda,” said a 2013 post by Abiding Truth Ministries Founder Scott Lively, an activist engaged in advocacy for traditional marriage.

Franklin Graham also spoke highly of Putin. In the leadup to the 2014 Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia, Graham called Russia’s standard on morality “higher than our own,” saying, “In my opinion, Putin is right on these issues. Obviously, he may be wrong about many things, but he has taken a stand to protect his nation’s children from the damaging effects of any gay and lesbian agenda.”

Graham later visited Russia and gave an interview on Russian television, more than a year after Russia’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula. In this interview, Graham stated, “Democracy is not for all people. In some parts of the world, it just doesn’t work.” He also lauded Putin’s protection of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. Finally, when asked about international sanctions against Russia, he declared, “I have never been a supporter of sanctions.”

In 2016, Graham had planned for the World Summit in Defense of Persecuted Christians to convene in Moscow. The event was eventually held in Washington, D.C. in 2017. Ironically, the change in venue was necessitated by Russia’s imposition of the anti-proselytization Yarovaya laws.

Andrey Shirin states the obvious — that Putin’s high ratings in 2019 among Republicans could be attributed to “those who perceive Putin as a protector of traditional Christian values and a bulwark against the onslaught of secular political correctness.”

But before his invasion of Ukraine, Putin was sometimes successful in a concerted effort to become more popular with some conservative Christians, establishing an image of himself as a guardian of their values. It’s not hard to imagine that the pro-Russia posture of Graham and some evangelicals played a crucial role in this phenomenon. Putin wanted to be perceived, both in Russia and around the globe, as an influential moral and even spiritual leader, and notable Christian voices helped him achieve that goal.

Most distressing of all is the support for Putin and his policies within Russia itself. Mark Elliott writes for Christianity Today, “Evangelicals in Russia have become ardent fans of President Vladimir Putin because of Russia’s efforts to maintain its influence in Ukraine, its takeover of Crimea in 2014, and the widespread Russian belief that the West is to blame for the present economic woes on the home front.”

An illustration of this fact is the Russian Union of Evangelical Christians-Baptists (RUECB), which in 2014 condemned the uprising in Ukraine against Viktor Yanukovych’s government — an uprising in which Ukrainian Baptists supported. The RUECB also praised Putin as a “champion of civil peace and harmony in Russian society.”

Another Russian evangelical figure who has lent legitimacy to Putin’s regime is Vladimir Ryakhovsky, director of the Slavic Center for Law and Justice (SCLJ). In fairness, Ryakhovsky has provided legal defense for some persecuted Christians in Russia. However, he has also served on Putin’s Council for Civil Society and Human Rights. Additionally, the SCLJ has been an apologist for increased Russian state censorship in some areas, including anti-blasphemy regulations, about which the SCLJ said, “It is by increasing the effectiveness of legal regulation in religious matters that it is possible to prevent many such phenomena that are shaking and dividing our society, which is especially dangerous now, in a period of political change.”

The celebration and legitimization of Putin’s leadership serve as a lesson for Christians going forward.

A supposed “pro-family” ethic has no meaning under a leader who will tear young children’s homes apart as they flee their homeland, leaving fathers and grandfathers behind to fight.

Jail, assassination, and censorship are not the weaponry of the fight against secularism.

Moral laws require enforcement by people with moral compasses. No political agenda has ever been worth sacrificing basic freedoms of expression and self-governance to achieve.

Authoritarians are not messiahs and will never be trustworthy rulers.

Christians must be defenders of democracy. Christians must trust that their voice will have an impact in a free society, rather than waiting for the right strongman to revere.

Originally published at Juicy Ecumenism.

Josiah Reedy is an intern with the Institute on Religion and Democracy. He recently graduated with a degree in political science and criminal justice from George Washington University. He is also a member of Capitol Hill Baptist Church and a lifelong Washingtonian.
US Pays $2M a Month to Protect Pompeo, Aide From Iran Threat

The State Department says it's paying more than $2 million per month to provide 24-hour security to former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and a former top aide.


By Associated Press
March 12, 2022,

ormer Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, speaks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Friday, Feb. 25, 2022, in Orlando, Fla. The State Department says it's paying more than $2 million per month to provide 24-hour security to Pompeo and a former top aide, both of whom face “serious and credible” threats from Iran. That's according to a report sent to Congress last month and obtained by The AP on Saturday, March 12. (AP Photo/John Raoux, File)


By MATTHEW LEE, AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The State Department says it’s paying more than $2 million per month to provide 24-hour security to former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and a former top aide, both of whom face “serious and credible” threats from Iran

The department told Congress in a report that the cost of protecting Pompeo and former Iran envoy Brian Hook between August 2021 and February 2022 amounted to $13.1 million. The report, dated Feb. 14 and marked “sensitive but unclassified,” was obtained by The Associated Press on Saturday.

Pompeo and Hook led the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran and the report says U.S. intelligence assesses that the threats to them have remained constant since they left government and could intensify. The threats have persisted even as President Joe Biden's administration has been engaged in indirect negotiations with Iran over a U.S. return to a landmark 2015 nuclear deal.

As a former secretary of state, Pompeo was automatically given 180 days of protection by the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security after leaving office. But that protection has been repeatedly extended in 60-day increments by Secretary of State Antony Blinken due to “a serious and credible threat from a foreign power or agent of a foreign power arising from duties performed by former Secretary Pompeo while employed by the department,” the report said.

Hook, who along with Pompeo was often the public face of the Trump administration's imposition of crippling sanctions against Iran, was granted the special protection by Blinken for the same reason as Pompeo immediately after he left government service. That has also been repeatedly renewed in 60-day increments.

The latest 60-day extensions will expire soon and the State Department, in conjunction with the Director of National Intelligence, must determine by March 16 if the protection should extended again, according to the report.

The report was prepared because the special protection budget will run out in June and require a new infusion of money if extensions are deemed necessary.

Current U.S. officials say the threats have been discusses in the nuclear talks in Vienna, where Iran is demanding the removal of all Trump-era sanctions. Those sanctions include a “foreign terrorist organization” designation of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that Pompeo and Hook were instrumental in approving.

The Vienna talks had been expected to produce an agreement soon to salvage the nuclear agreement that President Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from in 2018.

But the talks have been thrown into doubt because of new demands made by Russia and a small number of unresolved U.S.-Iran issues, including the terrorism designation, according to U.S. officials.

The US Cannot Allow the UAE to Procure Chinese “Brain Control Weapons” (Part 2 of 2)


by CJ Werleman | Mar 11, 2022

The burgeoning UAE-China security alliance and the purchase of Chinese military technologies to repress and control minorities and dissidents by the United Arab Emirates should frighten every American and human rights advocate.

Abu Dhabi's Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, right, and Chinese President Xi Jinping at a welcome ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, Monday, July 22, 2019. (AP Photo/Andy Wong)

**This is the second of a two-part article series covering the UAE’s growing ties with China, and how this will severely impact the US. The first part covered how the UAE and China’s relationship is strengthening, and why this is concerning for the US.

LONG READ

~~~

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) caught the United States off guard when it suddenly and unexpectedly announced it was suspending talks with the US regarding the $23 billion arms package promised to Abu Dhabi by the Trump administration in 2020. The move was immediately described as a “significant shake-up” between the two countries, and evidence of the UAE’s drift away from Washington and towards Beijing.

In this part two of Inside Arabia’s analysis of the burgeoning security ties between Beijing and Abu Dhabi, we take a closer look at the potential moral and ethical consequences of this nefarious relationship, one forged between two authoritarian regimes. The alliance may soon mean more suppression of residents and visitors to the UAE, along with those in neighboring states.

Beyond the obvious economic benefits, Emirati rulers are bedazzled by China’s eminence as the world’s most sophisticated hi-tech totalitarian state. And high on their wish list is every surveillance technology they can solicit, borrow, and buy from Beijing to maintain a firm grip on power and control at home, and also expand their colonial exploits in the Middle East and North Africa.

Emirati rulers are bedazzled by China’s eminence as the world’s most sophisticated hi-tech totalitarian state.

Quite simply, China is the “poster child” for every insecure autocratic regime on the planet. “It is in the field of information technology and data exploitation that the security partnership between Abu Dhabi and Beijing is growing in strategic depth,” observes Dr. Andreas Krieg, an assistant professor at the Defense Studies Department of King’s College London.

More to the point: Beijing is willing to give to Abu Dhabi what the United States won’t, because of American voters’ concerns about democracy, human rights, and rule of law.

For instance, the US recently put China’s Academy of Military Medical Sciences, along with a dozen other affiliated biotechnology research institutes, on an export blacklist for allegedly helping the Chinese military develop “brain control weaponry” for potential offensive use.

“Brain control weaponry” is a term used by Chinese government officials to describe any tool or equipment that interferes with a person’s ability to control his own thoughts and movements during combat operations.

In December 2021, US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo told reporters that China had opted to used technologies for surveillance and tracking in an effort to “pursue control over its people.” While another US official claimed the Asian superpower is using “emerging biotechnologies to develop future military applications, including gene editing, human performance enhancement, and brain-machine interfaces,” as reported by the national security magazine Defense Post.

China has test-driven many of these biotechnologies in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Zone, where Uyghur Muslims are subjected to an array of human rights violations, including mass detention, forced family separations, forced abortions, forced sterilizations, forced marriages, torture, and worse, according to multiple reports.

The UAE has become one of the fastest adopters of China’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology.

Now, while there’s no evidence the UAE has acquired “brain control weaponry” from China – at least for now – we do know the Emirate government has not only become one of the fastest adopters of China’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology but also mimicked China’s Orwellian named “Smart and Safe Cities” infrastructure project. This project deploys hundreds of thousands of CCTV cameras and facial recognition capabilities as well as infrared technology throughout Chinese cities, in launching surveillance projects such as “Police Without Policeman” and “Oyoon” (the Arabic word for “Eyes”) in 2016.

Implemented first in Dubai, Oyoon uses facial recognition technology and auto-analysis on data captured by tens of thousands of video feeds from cameras across the city that feedback into a central command center, observes the technology magazine Wired. Each of these cameras is equipped with biometric surveillance capabilities and is deployed along roads, public transit areas, shopping centers, and popular tourist destinations.

[UAE’s Growing Ties with China Threaten US Interests and Security]

[What’s Behind the UAE’s Shifting Role in the Middle East]

[The UAE’s Dangerous Balancing Act Between the US and China]

But as noted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Public Policy Center, the Emirati government, like the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), “makes use of a charitable interpretation of the term ‘criminals’ to include not only criminals like thieves and robbers, but also political dissidents, human rights activists, and journalists potentially threatening the monarchy.” It is important to remember that the UAE has one of the highest rates of political prisoners per capita in the world.

Amnesty accused Emirati rulers of “taking measures to silence citizens and residents.”

In its most recent report on the UAE, the human rights organization Amnesty International accused Emirati rulers of “taking measures to silence citizens and residents who expressed critical opinions on Covid-19 and other social and political issues.” It also pointed to the mass arrest without trial of human rights defenders, activists, and artists under draconian anti-terrorism laws, along with the use of torture to extract false confessions.

It’s little wonder the UAE views China as its Big Brother for “Big Brother-esq” surveillance technology.

This security relationship was made even more formal in 2019 when Abu Dhabi Investment Office signed a deal with Chinese AI firm SenseTime to base its regional research and development headquarters in the Emirates. The agreement establishes the UAE as China’s hub for biotechnology in the Middle East, according to Dubai-based newspaper The National.

Bill Marczak is a senior research fellow at Citizen Lab, the research group that discovered an Israeli cyber-surveillance company had developed technology (“Pegasus”) to hack into a target’s WhatsApp account, a tool purchased by the UAE. In an interview, Marczak said that surveillance companies are “very interested in doing business in the Gulf because these governments are very likely to pay much higher prices than Western governments.”


The UAE’s has a history of weaponizing surveillance technology against the US.

Clearly, the United States must go further in pressuring the UAE to distance itself from Chinese surveillance companies. This is especially critical given the UAE’s history in weaponizing surveillance technology against the US. In fact, the UAE’s cybersecurity firm Dark Matter hired a clandestine team under the operation name “Project Raven,” which included more than a dozen former US intelligence operatives to spy on dissidents and critics of the monarchy, including US citizens.

“Technology has indeed played a role in elevating the power of autocrats, as it has in China and the UAE. To staunch the rising tide of authoritarian rule, actions taken by the United States towards China, need to be similarly applied to the UAE to conserve national security and democratic principles,” warns the Public Policy Center.

Burgeoning UAE-China security ties should concern every American because if the United States is serious about its commitment to advancing democracy and human rights, it cannot tolerate “brain control weapons” and other inexcusable hi-tech surveillance technologies falling into the hands of repressive regimes, including those considered allies.


SHARE:
PREVIOU SUS Allies in the Middle East Drag Their Heels on Russia

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

CJ Werleman is a journalist, published author, political commentator, analyst on conflict and terrorism, and activist who has dedicated his career to exposing discrimination and injustices against Muslim communities around the world. @cjwerleman

The End of Globalism

The world economic and financial system will never be the same.



BY ROBERT KUTTNER
MARCH 8, 2022

IGOR GRUSSAK/PICTURE-ALLIANCE/DPA/AP IMAGES
The logos of various payment systems appear under that of Russian bank Sberbank in the window of a store, March 6, 2022, in St. Petersburg, Russia.

I keep thinking of August 1914. Before World War I, Europe’s economy was tightly intertwined by trade and finance. Capital exports were Britain’s leading product. Imports and exports of goods were a major share of every nation’s economy. You could travel anywhere on the continent without a passport. It was as if there were already a European Union.

Norman Angell, prefiguring Tom Friedman, won a Nobel Peace Prize for his 1910 book with the unintentionally ironic title The Great Illusion. Angell condemned the arms buildup of that era, and assured the public that with this degree of economic interdependence, there should never be another major European war. Europeans, unwilling to disrupt summer vacation plans, expected that the August war would be over in a matter of weeks.


World War I not only killed 20 million people and the era of prewar prosperity. It irrevocably put an end to Globalization I. The catastrophic 1919 Treaty of Versailles failed to resurrect global commerce and finance in a sustainable way.

More from Robert Kuttner

There followed two other brands of globalization. After World War II, the Bretton Woods system created a managed form of global trade, in which countries had plenty of policy space to pursue full employment, creation of welfare states, and economic planning. Globalization II coexisted with a Cold War, in which the Soviets had no economic contact with the West.

But as capitalists recovered their normal political influence in a capitalist system, this bout of shared prosperity and mixed economy gave way to Globalization III—the attempt to resurrect something like laissez-faire. Tariffs were cut, regulations reduced, and global deals promoted by domestic policy shifts and World Trade Organization rules.

Meanwhile, the Cold War ended. Russia and China each displayed variations on dictatorship combined with elements of capitalism.

Russia’s was built heavily on exports of oil and gas, blending corrupt klepto-capitalism with deals with new Western partners. China’s was more productive, combining extensive state subsidies with market exports, and even more deals with Western corporations and banks.

Both violated supposed Western norms about both capitalism and democracy. But Western capitalists and their allies in government didn’t mind, because there was so much money to be made.

The West will not be inclined to reward Putin by reverting to the prewar economic status quo.

Now, Vladimir Putin has blown Globalism III to hell. Even if he were to suspend military operations in Ukraine tomorrow, Humpty Dumpty will not be put back together again.

In the space of a week, economic links with Russia that took decades to create have been abruptly severed. Some banks and corporations ended commercial ties because official sanctions required it, others out of concern for reputational damage.

If the war ends well, with a retreat by Putin, he will still have killed thousands of Ukrainians and destroyed billions of dollars’ worth of homes and buildings. The West will not be inclined to reward him by reverting to the prewar economic status quo. Corporations and banks will be wary of future crises and sanctions. And if an attempted Russian occupation of Ukraine drags on, the West will act to further isolate Russia’s economy.

The fact is, the Western economic system, with more than half of the world’s GDP, got along just fine without Russia before 1989, and it can get along without Russia now. Oil prices averaged $110 a barrel between 2011 and 2014, and we adjusted to it. If oil prices stay high, that will help accelerate the shift to renewables.

Putin’s war also upends pre-existing assumptions about China and the global economy. Until Putin invaded Ukraine, there was an ongoing conflict between traditional corporate free-traders and those in the Biden administration who wanted a tougher stance on China.

The goal of the hard-liners was to limit China’s violations of trade norms and its geopolitical expansion, and also to rebuild U.S. production capacity. A middle ground called for resetting the U.S.-China relationship, and establishing a new modus vivendi, allowing each nation to pursue its own domestic model but constraining predatory trade.

Now, the hard-liners win by default, because Putin is suddenly far more dependent on China. But this is far from the desired China reset.

In the short run, China can partly finance Russia and provide a market for some of Russia’s energy exports. In the medium term, as Western corporations deny Russia everything from maintenance of Boeing and Airbus planes to Apple computers and iPhones as well as Western-based credit cards and banking services, China has the means to replace all of these.

Three major Russian banks are already working with Chinese banks in the hope of replacing lost Western credit cards. But the more China bails out Putin, the more China chills its relationship with the West. Chinese banks could be vulnerable to secondary sanctions.

Cold War II could restore the pre-1989 alliance of Russia and China, but with a far more muscular China as the dominant partner, and with both nations as even more iron dictatorships. This can only chill the U.S.-China relationship even further.

“I have trouble imagining that this plays out in a way that improves China’s relationship with the U.S. unless China plays the improbable role of peacemaker,” says James Mann, author of several books on China and the newest member of the U.S.-China Commission.

The signs so far are that Xi Jinping is less than thrilled with this new role and new risk, because China’s goal is to become a larger global economic player, not a global economic pariah like Putin, and China needs the West more than it needs Russia. China abstained on the U.N. resolution calling on Russia to withdraw.

It also remains to be seen whether Xi can act as any kind of restraint on Putin. In principle, China has a lot of leverage, but using it is another matter.

It feels almost obscene to speak of silver linings in this grotesque war. However, the laissez-faire brand of globalization, relentlessly promoted since about 1990 by U.S. banks and corporations at the expense of American workers, is now caput.

The abrupt imposition and acceptance of economic sanctions makes clear that democratic governments do have the power to rein in global corporations and banks. If they can be restricted because of gross violations of human rights, maybe labor and environmental rights are next. Let’s hope that will be a core principle of Globalization IV.



ROBERT KUTTNER is co-founder and co-editor of The American Prospect, and professor at Brandeis University’s Heller School.