Tuesday, October 08, 2024

Biggest Kashmir party opposed to India's stripping of region's autonomy wins most seats in election



AIJAZ HUSSAIN
Updated Tue, October 8, 2024

SRINAGAR, India (AP) — Kashmir’s biggest political party opposed to India's stripping of the region's semi-autonomy won the most seats in a local election, according to official data on Tuesday, following a vote seen as a referendum against the move by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government five years ago.

National Conference, or NC, won 42 seats, mainly from the Kashmir Valley, the heartland of the anti-India rebellion, according to the data. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party secured 29 seats, all from the Hindu-dominated areas of Jammu.

India’s main opposition Congress party, which fought the election in alliance with the NC, succeeded in six constituencies.

“People have supported us more than our expectations. Now our efforts will be to prove that we are worth these votes,” Omar Abdullah, the NC leader and the region’s former chief minister who won from two seats, told reporters in the main city of Srinagar.

His father and president of the party, Farooq Abdullah, said that the mandate was to run the region without “police raj (rule)” and try freeing people from jails. “Media will be free,” he said.

Late Tuesday, Modi in an address to his party workers in New Delhi said the peaceful election in the region was “the victory of the Indian Constitution and democracy.”

“The people of Jammu and Kashmir gave the mandate to the NC alliance, I congratulate them too. If we look at the vote share percentage, BJP has emerged as the biggest party” in the region, he said.

The vote will allow Kashmir to have its own truncated government and a regional legislature, called an assembly, rather than being directly under New Delhi’s rule.

However, there will be a limited transition of power from New Delhi to the assembly as Kashmir will remain a “union territory” — directly controlled by the federal government — with India’s Parliament as its main legislator. Kashmir’s statehood must be restored for the new government to have powers similar to other states of India. But it will not have the special powers it enjoyed before the 2019 changes.

“People have given their mandate,” Farooq Abdullah said. “They have proven that they don’t accept the decision that was taken on August 5,” he added referring to India’s move in Aug. 2019.

Hundreds of the NC workers gathered outside counting centers and at the homes of the winning candidates to celebrate the party’s victory. Waving the party flags, they danced and burst firecrackers while chanting pro-Kashmir and pro-party slogans.

It was the first such vote in a decade and the first since Modi’s Hindu nationalist government scrapped the Muslim-majority region’s long-held semi-autonomy in 2019.

The unprecedented move downgraded and divided the former state into two centrally governed union territories, Ladakh and Jammu-Kashmir. Both are ruled directly by New Delhi through its appointed administrators along with unelected bureaucrats and security setup. The move — which largely resonated in India and among Modi supporters — was mostly opposed in Kashmir as an assault on its identity and autonomy amid fears that it would pave the way for demographic changes in the region.

The region has since been on edge with civil liberties curbed and media gagged.

India and Pakistan each administer a part of Kashmir, but both claim the territory in its entirety. The nuclear-armed rivals have fought two of their three wars over the territory since they gained independence from British colonial rule in 1947.

Authorities tallied votes as thousands of additional police and paramilitary soldiers patrolled roads and guarded 28 counting centers. Nearly 8.9 million people were eligible to vote in the election, which began on Sept. 18 and concluded on Oct. 1. The overall turnout was 64% across the three phases, according to official data.

In the region’s legislature, five seats are appointed and 90 elected, so a party or coalition would need at least 48 of the 95 total seats to form a government. The alliance of the National Conference and the Congress have 48 seats combined.

Authorities have said the election will bring democracy to the region after decades of strife, but many locals viewed the vote as an opportunity not only to elect their own representatives but also to register their protest against the 2019 changes.

Except for the BJP, most parties who contested the election campaigned on promises to reverse the 2019 changes and address key issues like rising unemployment and inflation. The Congress party favored restoring the region’s statehood. The BJP has also stated that it will restore statehood, but has not told when it would do.

The BJP has vowed to block any move aimed at undoing most of the 2019 changes but promised to help in the region’s economic development.

Meanwhile, Modi’s BJP emerged victorious in the northern state of Haryana, bordering New Delhi, which it has ruled for 10 years, winning in 48 out of 90 constituencies, according to the Election Commission of India. The Congress party won 37 seats, the official data showed.

The voting trend in Haryana state is a surprise since most exit polls had predicted an easy victory for the Congress party. Indian exit polls have had a mixed record in the past in predicting election results.

The mandate is a simple majority that gives the BJP a record third five-year term in the state.

Modi in his address praised the people of Haryana for returning the BJP for a third time and said the state would witness faster development in the next five years.

“Haryana will develop, Jammu and Kashmir will develop, India will develop and we will do it,” he added.

Kashmir's last assembly election was held in 2014, after which the BJP for the first time ruled in a coalition with the local Peoples Democratic Party. But the government collapsed in 2018 after the BJP withdrew from the coalition.

Polls in the past have been marked with violence, boycotts and vote-rigging, even though India called them a victory over separatism.

Militants in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir have been fighting New Delhi’s rule since 1989. Many Muslim Kashmiris support the rebels’ goal of uniting the territory, either under Pakistani rule or as an independent country.

India insists the Kashmir militancy is Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Pakistan denies the charge, and many Kashmiris consider it a legitimate freedom struggle. Tens of thousands of civilians, rebels and government forces have been killed in the conflict.
___

Associated Press writer Ashok Sharma in New Delhi contributed to this report.

___

Follow AP’s Asia-Pacific coverage at https://apnews.com/hub/asia-pacific
View comments (76)


Indian Kashmir elects first regional government in a decade

AFP
Tue, October 8, 2024 a


Map showing the parts of the Kashmir region held by India, Pakistan and China. (Nicholas SHEARMAN) (Nicholas SHEARMAN/AFP/AFP)


Indian-administered Kashmir elected Tuesday its first government since the restive Himalayan territory was brought under New Delhi's direct control, as voters backed opposition parties to lead its regional assembly.

Hindu nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government cancelled Kashmir's partial autonomy to control its affairs in 2019, a sudden decision accompanied by mass arrests and a months-long communications blackout.

Since then, the Muslim-majority territory of some 12 million people -- divided between India and Pakistan and claimed by both in full -- has not had an elected local government.


Instead, it has been ruled by a governor appointed by New Delhi.

While voters took part in national elections in June when Modi won a third term in power, these were the first local elections since 2014.

As results were announced, with an alliance of the opposition National Conference (NC) and Congress parties tipped to form a government, supporters celebrated.

By mid-afternoon, Election Commission figures showed NC and Congress had won 47 of 90 seats in the assembly, an unassailable lead over Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), with 27.

Some called the vote a de facto referendum on the federal government's decision to repeal the territory's special status.

"The people have given their judgement against what New Delhi did," social activist Iqbal Ahmad Bhat said.

Half a million Indian troops are deployed in the far northern region, battling a 35-year insurgency in which tens of thousands of civilians, soldiers and rebels have been killed, including dozens this year.

- 'Political rights' -

"We are happy with the election results, and hope that the political rights will be restored," said Jahangir Ahmad, among the cheering crowds outside the home of the territory's expected new chief minister, NC leader Omar Abdullah.

Farooq Abdullah, his father and NC president, told reporters that the results were a "verdict" against Modi's government.

Critics however say the assembly will only have nominal powers over education and culture.

New Delhi will also have the power to override legislation, and will continue to appoint the governor.

Modi's BJP says the changes to the territory's governance have delivered a new era of peace to Kashmir and rapid economic growth -- claims other parties reject.

The BJP won seats in the southern Hindu-majority Jammu region, and fought only from about a third of the seats in the Kashmir valley.

Meanwhile, results from elections in Haryana -- a state just north of New Delhi -- were also released on Tuesday.

In those polls, Modi's BJP was leading the opposition Congress.

Among the newly-elected state legislators was the recently retired star wrestler Vinesh Phogat, standing for Congress.

The 30-year-old World bronze medallist switched to politics after being disqualified from the women's 50kg competition at the Paris Olympics for being overweight ahead of the final.

Last year she took part in protests against the then-national wrestling federation chief who faced accusations of sexual harassment.

bur-abh/pjm/dhc

Kashmir and Haryana prove India exit polls wrong

Geeta Pandey - BBC News, Delhi
Tue, October 8, 2024

The northern Indian state of Haryana and Indian-administered Kashmir sprang surprises on Tuesday as votes were counted in assembly elections there.

Most exit polls had predicted a hung assembly in Kashmir but an alliance of the main opposition Congress and the National Conference Party (NCP) are on course for a landslide in the 90-member house and poised to form a government.

In Haryana, which also has 90 seats, predictions of a Congress landslide were upended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which has proved the pollsters wrong.

The BJP-led government appears on course to return for a rare third consecutive term in Haryana.

The polls in Kashmir are significant as these are first assembly elections there in a decade – and also the first since the federal government revoked the region's autonomy and changed the former state into a federally- governed territory in 2019.

Unlike Kashmir - which India and its neighbour Pakistan have fought wars over – Haryana does not often command global headlines.

But the tiny state grabs much attention in India as it is next to the capital, Delhi. Along with Punjab, it is called the bread basket of India for its large wheat and paddy farms, and the city of Gurugram is home to offices of some of the biggest global brands such as Google, Dell and Samsung.

The results are being watched keenly in India as these are the first state assembly polls since the summer parliamentary election. Analysts say Tuesday’s results will set the tone as the country heads into more regional elections, including in the state of Maharashtra and Delhi, over the next few months.

Modi's BJP is set to return for a third term in power in Haryana [PTI]


So what happened in Haryana?

Perhaps the best description of what transpired in the state has come from political scientist Sandeep Shastri.

“The Congress has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory,” he told the BBC.

For weeks, political circles had been abuzz that the BJP was facing a huge wave of anti-incumbency and analysts were confidently saying that the party’s government was on its way out.

After most of the post-election exit polls predicted a Congress landslide, many said it was an election for the party to lose.

Shastri blames the Congress defeat on overconfidence and infighting within the party.

“They were confident they would win and became complacent. BJP, on the other hand, worked on issues quietly on the ground and successfully fought anti-incumbency to return to power.”

Both parties, he said, tried to form social coalitions by bringing together different caste groups – the results show the majority chose to support the BJP.

Shastri says differences between two top Congress leaders - Bhupinder Singh Hooda and Kumari Selja, who were contenders for the chief minister’s post - did not go down well with the voters.

Tuesday’s count, however, has been mired in controversy with the Congress accusing the Election Commission (EC) of delaying updating numbers on their website.

After party leader Jairam Ramesh submitted a complaint letter to the Election Commission, Selja said her party may still come out on top.

“I am telling you… there is something going on. If all goes well, Congress will form the government in Haryana,” she said.

But with numbers not on their side, that will likely remain a dream.

The EC has denied the allegations.


Analysts say the results will set the tone as the country heads into more regional elections [Reuters]

No-one thought Kashmir was going to be BJP’s

In the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley, the Hindu nationalist BJP has little support, but it enjoys tremendous goodwill in the Hindu-dominated Jammu region. And the results reflect that divide. But the Congress-NC alliance has enough seats and is headed to form a government in the state.

The Modi government’s 2019 decision to scrap Article 370 of the constitution, which granted special status to Kashmir, and carve the state into two sent shockwaves around the valley, which elects 47 assembly seats.

At his campaign rallies, Modi had promised to restore the region's “statehood”. But as the results show, that failed to placate angry voters.

The region saw a surprisingly high turnout – but as political analyst Sheikh Showkat Hussain says, they were voting against the BJP and the revocation of the region’s special status.

Article 370: What happened with Kashmir and why it matters

Modi's BJP ahead in Haryana election but trails in Kashmir

“The BJP made this election into a sort of referendum on its decision [to revoke Article 370]. However, people voted in favour of the stand taken by the regional parties,” he said.

Noor Mohammad Baba, another political analyst in Kashmir, says the results reveal that the BJP’s "policies weren’t popular” in the region.

“The result is a message to Delhi that they need to mend their policies towards Jammu and Kashmir,” he added.

One surprising outcome of the election has been the poor showing by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), led by former Kashmir chief minister Mehbooba Mufti.

Mufti, who earlier ruled in coalition with the BJP, has managed to win only three seats.

Responding to a query about her party’s poor performance, she said it was the "people's choice".

"Winning or losing is a part of politics. People feel that Congress and National Conference will give them a stable government and keep the BJP at bay. We respect their verdict," she added.

Additional reporting by Auqib Javeed in Srinagar

















 WILLIE NELSON ENDORSES KAMALA HARRIS

Elon Musk And Tucker Carlson Laugh Over Idea Of Kamala Harris Assassination

Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson shared a hearty laugh over the prospect of Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris being assassinated. (Watch the video below.)

On Carlson’s X show posted Monday, Musk revisited his widely rebuked comment on social media last month that “no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala” after the apparent second attempt on Trump.

“I made a joke which, I realize, I deleted, which is like no one is even bothering to try to kill Kamala because it’s pointless,” Musk told Carlson as the two cracked up. “What do you achieve? Nothing. Just find another puppet.

“It’s deep and true,” the fired Fox News commentator said.

“Nobody’s trying to kill Joe Biden. That would be pointless,” the X owner followed.

Carlson continued the exchange by asking about the post, “You actually put that up?”

“People interpreted it as though I was calling for people to assassinate her, but I was like … doesn’t it seem strange that no one has even bothered to try?” Musk replied, laughing. “Nobody tries to assassinate a puppet.”

“That’s hilarious,” Carlson said amid more guffaws. (The Secret Service reportedly didn’t find it as funny as these two.)

“She’s safe,” Musk snarked.

Musk, who appeared at Trump’s rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on Saturday, tried hard to play billionaire provocateur in the interview. The X owner repeated his claim from the event that “it’s the last election we’re gonna have” if Trump loses because an influx of immigrants in swing states will eventually vote Democrat. He also pondered how long his imaginary prison sentence would be.

Fast-forward to 0:40 for their conversation about Harris:


Elon Musk makes it clear he’s got no regrets over Kamala Harris assassination post

“Why they want to kill Donald Trump?” the post read.

“And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala,” 


Joe Sommerlad
Tue 8 October 2024 

Elon Musk made it clear he has no regrets over his X post pondering why no one had tried to assassinate Kamala Harris or Joe Biden, when he sat down for an interview with Tucker Carlson on Monday night.

On Sunday September 15, the CEO of X, Tesla and SpaceX sparked outrage when he responded to a social media post about the second alleged assassination attempt on Donald Trump.

“Why they want to kill Donald Trump?” the post read.

“And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala,” Musk responded, followed by the pondering face emoji.

Musk joined former Fox News host Carlson on X on Monday, where he was asked about the scandal.

“I made a joke that no one’s even trying to kill Kamala because it’s pointless,” he said. “What do you achieve? Nothing. They’ll just put in another puppet.”

“It’s deeply true,” conservative commentator Carlson responded.

“Some people interpreted it as I was calling for people to assassinate [Harris], but I was like… doesn’t it seem strange that no one has even bothered to try,” Musk continued, laughing. “No one tries to assassinate a puppet.”

The tech mogul’s post came after accused would-be gunman Ryan Wesley Routh was caught allegedly pointing a rifle through the fence at Trump’s Florida golf course while the Republican presidential nominee was playing a round.

Elon Musk was interviewed by Tucker Carlson on X on Monday October 7 2024 
(Tucker Carlson/X)

Authorities said that Routh was spotted by Secret Service agents who opened fire, causing him to flee the scene. The suspect was apprehended soon after.

Musk later deleted his comment following uproar.

In a follow-up post, he added: “One lesson I’ve learned is that just because I say something to a group and they laugh doesn’t mean it’s going to be all that hilarious as a post on X.

“Turns out that jokes are way less funny if people don’t know the context and the delivery is in plain text.”

Musk came out in support of Trump earlier this summer following the first attempt to kill the former president at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13.

The endorsement cemented the tech entrepreneur’s personal shift towards the right since the Covid-19 pandemic and was followed by him conducting an X Spaces interview with Trump, who has, in turn, touted Musk as a future member of his potential second administration to be tasked with cutting inefficiency in the workings of the federal government.



Musk has said he would be “willing to serve” in a prospective second Trump administration and appeared alongside the candidate at his return to Butler on Saturday, announcing himself to the crowd in excitable fashion as a member of “Dark MAGA” and warning that the future of the country is at stake if Harris and Tim Walz win in November.

Having gone all-in on Trump, Musk admitted to Carlson on Monday that he is “f***ed” if Trump does not emerge victorious on November 5.

“It does seem that way,” the pundit laughed.

“I’m like, ‘How long do you think my prison sentence is going to be? Will I see my children?’ I don’t know,” Musk responded.

“I have no plausible deniability and I’ve been trashing Kamala non-stop!”

Elon Musk’s America PAC offers bounty for contact info of millions of registered voters in battleground states
Fortune · (Jabin Botsford—The Washington Post via Getty Images)


Christiaan Hetzner
 Mon, October 7, 2024

Tesla CEO Elon Musk is paying a bounty for voter registration data with the help of a petition as he seeks to return Donald Trump to the White House this November.

The world’s wealthiest entrepreneur confirmed his political action committee, America PAC, will offer a $47 reward for the name, address, and phone number of each registered voter in battleground states who signs an online statement in favor of rights already protected by the Constitution.


The amount, symbolic for the 47th presidency to which Trump aspires, will go to the person who refers the swing state voter.

“Goal is to get 1 [million] voters in swing states to show support for free speech & right to bear arms,” Musk posted on Sunday. “Easy money.”

Under the offer, which expires on Oct. 21, only individuals in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina stand to receive a reward.

Voters in Musk’s adopted state of Texas, for example, are not eligible for the reward even if they are registered to cast a ballot in the 47th presidential election—regardless of their support for the Constitution.

Since the petition is not affiliated with Trump's Republican Party, signatories are not directed to the RNC website. Instead they must enter their personal data—including name, postal address, email address, and cell phone number—directly into the America PAC database.

Eligible voters may only list one person as their referrer, and the PAC intends to make sure the info it bought is worth the money. "Before payment is made America PAC will verify the accuracy of all information of the referrer and referree," it stipulates.


Once that is done, Musk's political vehicle has all the relevant data it needs to deploy canvassers to their neighborhood to ensure voters do show up on polling day.

Neither Musk nor America PAC responded to a request for comment from Fortune.

The 1-million-voter target may not seem like much, but campaign experts often note that Biden won the electoral college and, with it, the presidency by a margin of just 44,000 votes in a handful of states that flipped from red to blue.

Set against that number, 1 million potential new Trump voters could easily affect the election outcome.
It could cost Musk millions

On Sunday, the Tesla CEO made his first campaign appearance alongside Trump in Butler, Pa., where a would-be assassin made an attempt on the life of the former president this summer.

That day in July also marked the start of Musk’s public endorsement of the former president.

“President Trump must win to preserve the Constitution. He must win to preserve democracy in America,” he told the crowd.


Left in power, the Democrats would find a way to do away with Americans’ inalienable rights protected under law, he claimed.


Should Harris be declared the victor next month, Musk added, “this will be the last election—that’s my prediction.”

With his 200 million followers on X, Musk has become Trump’s most vocal and valuable champion. Yet his wholesale partisanship has driven a split within the Tesla community that broadly skews progressive.

“As you can see, I’m not just MAGA, I’m Dark MAGA,” Musk said at the rally, sporting a Make America Great Again baseball cap colored black instead of red.

In theory, America PAC’s move to buy voter data could get expensive for Musk.

Pennsylvania—the biggest battleground state prize on the electoral map with 19 electoral votes up for grabs—has nearly 8.7 million registered voters as of the start of this year, according to the latest official data.

Of that total, 40% are Republicans with another 15% unaffiliated with either of the two main parties. Musk could even end up paying for the contact info of registered Democrats.

If he only got 1% of the state’s total, it would cost him $4 million.

Should his PAC achieve the full 1 million to sign the petition in support of rights already guaranteed by the Constitution, that would be $47 million right there, assuming each signatory was claimed as a referral.
Musk stands to wield heavy influence in Trump White House

For Musk, it would nonetheless be a shrewd investment.

Biden’s administration has taken a robust approach to regulation in a number of areas, enraging Silicon Valley billionaires like Musk and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen.

By comparison, Trump has a record of weakening federal regulators, like the EPA, that bind businesses in red tape.

Not only has he praised Musk’s culling of the workforce at Twitter, he’s also considering granting Musk’s wish for widespread authority to cut the federal workforce as part of a potential new “Department of Government Efficiency.”

It’s possible that the entrepreneur would first target agencies that have vexed him and his business interests.

For example, Musk threatened last month to sue the Federal Aviation Administration over what he called “regulatory overreach,” and he’s already sued the National Labor Relations Board.

But with a relatively paltry amount of cash, Musk’s various companies stand to gain significantly from a second Trump administration.

Regulations mean little if they are not actively enforced—and Musk could wield considerable influence over agency resources like personnel.

Trump, who got elected in part thanks to a claim that he was rich enough not to be bought, is facing high legal costs and is now heavily dependent on Musk’s backing to mobilize voters.

Earlier this year, Trump installed his daughter-in-law as chair of the Republican Party, and ever since, he has pioneered the use of outsourcing—a common business practice—in political campaigning.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Trump Would Take a Chainsaw to Planned Parenthood, Vance Confirms

Will Neal
Mon, October 7, 2024 at 4:59 a.m. MDT·2 min read

Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images


Donald Trump would slash funding for Planned Parenthood if he wins the election next month, according to his running mate.

“On the question of defunding Planned Parenthood, look, I mean our view is we don’t think that taxpayers should fund late-term abortions,” JD Vance said on Saturday, according to NBC News. “That has been a consistent view of the Trump campaign the first time around. It will remain a consistent view.”

Vance has said before that he believes that the organization should be partially defunded, citing his belief that taxpayers should not front late-term abortions.

Figures this year from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show 93.5 percent of abortions in 2021 were carried out either at or before 13 weeks, with less than 6 percent performed between 13 and 20 weeks, and less than 1 percent either at or after 21 weeks.

This Is What Vance Really Meant When He Spoke About Friend’s Abortion

Vance’s comments Saturday quickly provoked condemnation from Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign, with spokesperson Lauren Hitt saying his statement showed “a second Trump term is too big a risk for American women and their families.”

“The only way to stop an unchecked Trump and his MAGA allies from ripping away freedoms from American women is to elect Vice President Harris, who will defend women’s access to health care and reproductive freedom,” she added.

Vance’s remarks came ahead of the publication of a new book from Trump’s wife, Melania, in which the former first lady reportedly outlines a passionate pro-choice argument, having previously remained largely silent on a question considered one of the most controversial tenets of her husband’s political outlook.

Trump Throws JD Vance Under the Bus on Abortion During Presidential Debate

“Why should anyone other than the woman herself have the power to determine what she does with her own body,” an extract from that book, obtained by The Guardian, reportedly reads. “A woman’s fundamental right of individual liberty, to her own life, grants her the authority to terminate her pregnancy if she wishes.”

Trump has previously taken credit for having been able to “kill” Roe v. Wade, which ended the constitutional right to abortion, having appointed three Supreme Court judges at the heart of the decision.

The former president has more recently made attempts to appear to soften his rhetoric on the contentious issue, even claiming in an X post last Tuesday that, if re-elected, he would veto a national abortion ban despite Democratic accusations to the contrary.

The Daily Beast.

Analysis: Hamas regenerates in Gaza, recruiting fighters despite Israeli defeat claims

Isabel Marques da Silva
EURONEWS
Mon, October 7, 2024

The Palestinian militant group Hamas, which carried out the attack on Israel on 7 October last year, is regenerating to continue the fight in the Gaza Strip, experts claim.

In addition to recruiting more fighters, the group which controls Gaza will continue to stake its claim over shaping the future of the territory.

"It is said, for example, that Hamas has lost 6,000 fighters, but it seems to be recruiting, or rather mobilising, around 6,000 members from its reserves," Hugh Lovatt, a political analyst at the European Council for Foreign Relations (ECFR) think tank, told Euronews.

"They certainly won't be as well trained as the initial group, but they're still capable of holding a gun and firing rocket launchers at Israeli tanks," the analyst added.

One year ago, Hamas militants killed 1,200 people and took 250 hostages in Israel a year ago, sparking a new war in the Gaza Strip.

The Chief of Staff of the Israel Defence Forces, Herzi Halevi, said in a letter sent to soldiers Monday on the occasion of the first anniversary of the attack that the Israeli army had "defeated the military wing of Hamas" and was continuing to fight in a bid to wreck its capabilities to instil terror.

However, analysts interviewed by Euronews explain that not only has Hamas not been defeated, but it still has the capacity to regenerate itself in terms of recruiting fighters and rehabilitating underground infrastructure.

"I think it's very easy, in fact, to recruit and regenerate, simply because there are many orphans and groups like Hamas have always recruited those orphaned in previous Israeli attacks," Joost Hiltermann, a political analyst at Crisis Group, told Euronews.

"I think we can safely say that Hamas has been working to restore some of the damaged tunnels," Lovatt remarked.

Ismail Haniyeh, left, who was assassinated, and the new Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, Yahya Sinwar, at an event in 2019 - Khalil Hamra/Copyright 2019 The AP. All rights reserved.
New Hamas leadership is even more hardline

On the other hand, the assassination of Hamas' political leader Ismail Haniyeh on 31 July, while he was visiting Iran, might have been seen as a major blow to the movement.

Exiled in Qatar, Haniyeh was seen as pragmatic and relatively moderate in negotiations. But the new leader, Yahya Sinwar, the mastermind of the 7 October attack, is understood to be a hardliner who will want to maintain the armed struggle at any price.

"Decisions are taken by consensus in the Shura Council. Of course, Sinwar would always have a strong voice because of what happened on 7 October and the way he is seen within Hamas, and perhaps outside Hamas, as a strong leader," Hiltermann explained.

"And since he's holding Israeli hostages, that gives him a strong card."

Sinwar has no regrets about the 7 October attacks and believes that it is only possible to create a Palestinian state "by armed means", according to a Reuters report citing six political sources: four in Palestinian organisations and two in Middle Eastern governments.


A former Lebanese communist militant, Nabih Awadah, who was imprisoned with Sinwar in Ashkelon between 1991 and 1995, told Reuters that the Hamas leader saw the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords between Israel and the Palestinian Authority as "disastrous" and a ploy by Israel, which would only give up Palestinian land "by force, not by negotiation".

Categorising him as "obstinate and dogmatic", Awadah said that Sinwar would light up with joy whenever he heard about attacks by Hamas or the Lebanese group Hezbollah against Israel. For Sinwar, military confrontation was the only way "to liberate Palestine" from Israeli occupation.

Diplomacy still unable to change the course of the conflict

The US and the EU classify Hamas as a terrorist group, but the movement remains crucial for negotiating a ceasefire, according to analysts.

Some Western countries could play a more important mediating role, said Hiltermann.

"Countries like Norway and Switzerland can hold talks with Hamas because they don't give them the political label of a terrorist organisation. It's a political decision," he explained.

"The lack of direct negotiating channels is a problem because Hamas is obviously a movement that fights the military occupation with violence," Hiltermann added. "But there needs to be more talk about solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which so far are not being promoted."


Destruction left by the Israeli air and ground offensive in Khan Younis, Gaza Strip - Abdel Kareem Hana/Copyright 2023, The AP. All rights reserved

A political solution to the conflict will have the Palestinian Authority (PA) as its main interlocutor under President Mahmoud Abbas.

The PA governs the West Bank and part of Jerusalem and might be called upon to govern the Gaza Strip, replacing Hamas, which has ruled there since 2007 after winning elections with its political arm.

However, analysts say that Hamas will have to be included in any decisions about the future of the territory, even though Israel's Defence Minister Yoav Gallant has promised to "wipe Hamas off the face of the Earth".

"Let's be clear, Hamas is not going anywhere, even though it has suffered so much," Lovatt.

"It will always have the possibility of opposing any external intervention in Gaza, whether it's an Israeli intervention, as is happening at the moment, or whether it's the intervention of the Palestinian Authority in the future or an international force."

Lovatt emphasised that the extension of the conflict to Lebanon and Iran's direct retaliations against Israel aggravate the crisis and are also a clear sign that Iran will continue to support Hamas on all fronts.

"Iran continues to be a major source of funding, although not the only one, but certainly the largest source of funding for Hamas. For strategic reasons, for potentially ideological reasons, but also for very pragmatic reasons, Iran will continue to do so," he explained.

"There doesn't seem to be significant room for diplomatic solutions, which always exist. But the path chosen for now is to use force to subdue the enemies, see where the chips fall and work from there," said Hiltermann.

The war in Gaza has killed more than 41,000 Palestinians and displaced almost two million, according to Gaza health authorities and UN figures.
Opinion

Granderson: Mexico's gun crisis is our fault. Victims deserve their day in U.S. court.

LZ Granderson
Tue, October 8, 2024 

When vigilantes and criminals face off in Mexico, both sides are armed with arsenals of U.S.-made military-style guns. (Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)


The Supreme Court is back at work this week, and among the more important arguments the justices are set to hear is a lawsuit filed by the government of Mexico against American gun manufacturers. A data leak from the Mexican military indicated that more than 90% of the firearms found at crime scenes in Mexico between 2018 and 2022 originated in the United States. We’re talking more than 78,000 guns seized in a country where only two stores sell firearms.

It’s clear American weaponry contributes to the migrant crisis in Central America and to the bloodshed at the U.S.-Mexico border, much in the way secondhand smoke affects the lungs of nonsmokers.

So for Mexico, this lawsuit isn’t a question of guilt but of accountability.

Read more: Granderson: 'Blame Mexico' won't solve the crises of guns and fentanyl

The gun-tracing data in the leak is so comprehensive that Mexican officials know Kentucky, a state roughly 1,300 miles away, produces one of the cartels’ favorite weapons: the Anderson Manufacturing AM-15.

Mexico is also able to identify Americans who have a bad habit of buying guns that end up in the hands of the cartel.

Read more: Opinion: The border crisis factor no one talks about: American guns

For example, of the 95 semiautomatic rifles purchased in a two-month span by one man in Texas, 66 ended up being seized in Mexico. That gun trafficker spent six months in prison for lying on his firearms forms. The families of those guns’ victims are left to spend the rest of their lives in anguish.

Mexico’s lawsuit seeks billions in damages, alleging that manufacturers knowingly supply the weapons in this ecosystem.

Read more: Guerrero: Don't shield U.S. gun makers from liability for Mexico's gun violence

Palestinian poet Mourid Barghouti famously said “it is easy to blur the truth with a simple linguistic trick: start your story from ‘Secondly.’ ” That is certainly a parlor trick modern Republicans turn to when it comes to migrants from Central America or the gun violence in Mexico. Notice, you never hear Donald Trump or his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, bring up the $30 billion in "reparations" the formerly enslaved in Haiti were forced to pay to France or the shambles created in that country by U.S. occupation.

While “the Supreme Court that Donald Trump built” has gifted the gun lobby with numerous favorable rulings, it isn’t clear whether the conservative justices will let the suit continue or not. Earlier this year, the court upheld a federal law banning domestic abusers from owning a firearm.

Read more: Op-Ed: For Mexico, taking a stand against gun trafficking is a moral imperative

Hopefully that display of common sense isn’t a one-off.

Allowing Mexico to sue manufacturers not only potentially helps victims and their families, but also provides the United States an opportunity to revisit the series of gun laws pushed through after Sept. 11 — a series that opened the floodgates to mass shootings right here at home.

Starting with the Patriot Act in 2001 — which allowed the federal government to collect personal information about just about anything except buying guns and ammo — the George W. Bush administration used our lingering fear of terrorism to shield the gun industry from accountability under the guise of national security.

In 2003, the Tiahrt Amendment made it illegal to share gun crime tracing data with the public and shielded gun shop owners from scrutiny. In 2004, a 10-year federal ban on assault rifles expired. In 2005, the Republican-controlled Congress and then-President George W. Bush shielded the industry from liability lawsuits. In 2006, Bush introduced Operation Wide Receiver, which allowed hundreds of American guns to “walk” into Mexico in hopes of catching traffickers.

It didn’t work.

And today — more than a decade later — Mexican law enforcement is still recovering weapons from that program, as well as a similar gun-walking program President Obama greenlighted called Fast and Furious.

As I said earlier, this case is about accountability.

U.S. active shooter data going back to 2000 found that shooters with a semiautomatic weapon wound and kill twice as many people as those with non-automatic weapons. Seems like common sense, but then again common sense would have led Congress to extend the 10-year ban on assault weapons. Instead, elected officials listened to the National Rifle Assn.

Today, many point to the ban expiring in 2004 as the turning point in gun violence in America. I agree with the year but not for the same reason. For me, it’s the $2.5 million that Bushmaster Firearms International was ordered in 2004 to pay to relatives of the 2002 sniper attacks in the Washington, D.C., area. It was one of the largest settlements up to that point. Following the Columbine massacre in 1999, lawsuits against gun manufacturers became more common. The NRA had been lobbying Congress for shielding gunmakers from such lawsuits for years — arguing the payouts would bankrupt manufacturers — to no avail. However, with Bush in office, the manufacturers were finally able to get immunity. Though surely no one else feels immune to the harms of gun violence.

If the Supreme Court wants to make America great again, it could start by allowing Mexico its day in court.

@LZGranderso

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

WTF

Self-identifying Indigenous group got $74M in federal cash, Inuit leader wants change

Alessia Passafiume and Sarah Smellie
Mon, October 7, 2024 

As millions in federal funding flow into a Labrador group whose claims of Inuit identity have been rejected by Indigenous organizations across Canada, a national Inuit leader worries the Liberal government is putting the rights of Indigenous Peoples at risk.

Natan Obed, president of an organization representing about 70,000 Inuit across Canada, said he wrote to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over a year ago to express his concern about the NunatuKavut Community Council's ability to receive federal grants and fisheries allocations based on a "simple self-declaration of Inuit identity."

He said he has not received a response.

"The conversation is a defining feature of the future of Canada," the president of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami said in a recent interview. "Unless we revert to rights-holding First Nations, Inuit and Métis governments, and the decisions they make about citizenship … we're just in for another wave of dispossession based on non-Indigenous Canadians choosing to be Indigenous, to take what they feel is theirs."

The NunatuKavut Community Council has received nearly $74 million in federal funding for Indigenous programs or projects related to their claims of Indigenous identity since 2010, according to government data. The money includes more than $20.4 million for grants and contributions in which they were identified as an "Aboriginal recipient" and $29.2 million in "mandated or core funding" from Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.

The latest amount — $161,108 — was approved last month by Environment and Climate Change Canada for a project on conservation and species at risk that came from the department's Aboriginal Fund for Species at Risk program.

"NunatuKavut is not Indigenous," Nunavut NDP MP Lori Idlout wrote on the X social media platform Wednesday in response to a tweet about the funding.

In June, the council received a "special allocation" in the newly reopened northern cod fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador, allowing its harvesters a portion of this year's total catch.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada said in a statement it has a "well-established relationship" with the council "as an Indigenous organization." It also said the group has historically received various licenses and Indigenous program funding.

The NunatuKavut council says it represents some 6,000 self-identifying Inuit in southern and central Labrador. They aren’t recognized as Inuit by any other federally recognized, rights-holding Inuit collective, including the Nunatsiavut government in northern Labrador.

The council previously called itself the Labrador Métis Nation and the Labrador Métis Association. A 2006 provincial Supreme Court ruling said the Labrador Métis Nation had a "credible but unproven claim" to rights and recognition under the Constitution, and thus governments were obligated to accommodate those rights in some circumstances.

The ruling was upheld by the province's Appeal Court.

Until February, the group offered "alliance" memberships alongside its regular and non-resident memberships. According to a document that has since been removed from the council's website, an alliance membership could be granted to "an aboriginal person, ordinarily a resident in Labrador, who supports the objectives of NunatuKavut but who does not qualify for full membership."

Such members "may benefit from aboriginal representation, affirmative action" and "various government-sponsored services and programs," the document said.

NunatuKavut President Todd Russell said the council offered alliance memberships as a gesture of inclusivity to "non-Inuit" Indigenous people to give them supports and services. When the memberships became a source of confusion during rights and recognition negotiations with the federal government, the council got rid of them, he said in an interview.

All Indigenous groups have such discussions about who belongs and who doesn't, he said.

It is "lunacy" to oppose recognizing, funding and allocating resources to NunatuKavut as an Indigenous group, Russell added.

"We have always been an Indigenous organization … we have always represented Indigenous Peoples that otherwise had not found representation in other Indigenous groups within Labrador," he said. "Why would you want to take food out of the mouths of our people? Why would you want to hurt our people and our communities?"

Obed said his organization rejects the idea that a group can claim to be Métis and then "reconstitute themselves" as an Inuit collective.

Russell said Obed is not in charge of determining who is and is not Inuit.

"We know who our grandfathers are. We know where we come from," he said.

The Métis National Council said last year that it supports Obed's efforts to draw attention to what it called NunatuKavut's "fraudulent claims" of an Inuit identity. It also called on the federal government to end support for the group.

Russell said the Métis council holds that position because of a sustained "political campaign" waged by Obed.

The NunatuKavut council has long pointed to a 2019 memorandum of understanding it signed with the federal government which said the group is an “Indigenous collective capable of holding Section 35 Aboriginal rights."

In June, the Federal Court ruled the agreement doesn’t affect legal rights and does not recognize the NunatuKavut Community Council as an “Aboriginal people of Canada.”

The Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations said the agreement reflects the government's intention "to resolve pending questions" about any rights NunatuKavut may hold, and who may receive them.

The government has not entered into "substantive" negotiations with the group about whether it should have rights under the Constitution, spokesperson Pascal Laplante said in an email.

Laplante said NunatuKavut receives department funding under two programs: one for recognized Indigenous organizations, and one for "non-Indigenous organizations" currently in talks with the department.

Obed worries a risk-averse federal government does not want to be seen as judging who is and is not Indigenous. Instead, he said, it has been overly inclusive and seems unwilling to correct course.

"This new form of colonization where non-Indigenous Canadians become Indigenous and then take material advantage from Indigenous people is now a new and normalized thing," Obed said.

He also worries the current Liberal government cannot resolve the issue with Inuit "in good faith and expediently" because Russell was a Liberal member of Parliament from 2005 to 2011.

Russell dismissed the allegation, saying Obed enjoys "a very good, open relationship" with Ottawa.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 7, 2024.

Alessia Passafiume and Sarah Smellie, The Canadian Press