BACKGROUNDER

What Would It Mean If President-elect Trump Dismantled The US Department of Education?

US President Donald Trump speaks at a press conference with Linda McMahon, head of Small Business Administration, March 29, 2019 at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida. (Photo by Nicholas Kamm / AFP) 

By Kevin Welner
TPM
November 26, 2024 

This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis. It was originally published at The Conversation.

In her role as former chief executive of World Wrestling Entertainment, Linda McMahon oversaw an enterprise that popularized the “takedown” for millions of wrestling fans. But as President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of education, the Trump loyalist may be tasked with taking down the very department Trump has asked her to lead.

If Trump does dismantle the Department of Education as he has promised to do, he will have succeeded at something that President Ronald Reagan vowed to do in 1980. Just like Trump, Reagan campaigned on abolishing the department, which at the time was only a year old. Since then, the Republican Party platform has repeatedly called for eliminating the Education Department, which oversees a range of programs and initiatives. These include special funding for schools in low-income communities – known as Title I – and safeguarding the rights of students with disabilities.

As an education policy researcher who has studied the federal role in addressing student-equity issues, I see the path to shuttering the department as filled with political and practical obstacles. Republicans may therefore opt to instead pursue a series of proposals they see as more feasible and impactful, while still furthering their bigger-picture education agenda.

To better understand how the proposal to eliminate the Education Department would fit within the larger educational agenda of the incoming administration, I believe it’s helpful to revisit the history of the Education Department and the role it has played over the past five decades.

Department of Education history and roles

By the time Congress established the department in 1979, the federal government was already an established player in educational policy and funding.

For instance, the Higher Education Act of 1965 began the federal student loan program. In 1972, Congress created the Basic Educational Opportunity Grant, the predecessor program to today’s Pell Grants. The G.I. Bill of 1944, which, among other things, funded higher education for World War II veterans, preceded them both.

At the K-12 level, federal involvement in vocational education began with the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917. Federal attention to math, science and foreign language education began in 1958 with the National Defense Education Act.

Two laws passed during the Lyndon Johnson administration then gave the federal government its modern foothold in education: the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. The 1964 law provided antidiscrimination protections enforced by the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights. The 1965 law, which is currently reauthorized as the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, includes Title I, which sends extra funding to schools with high populations of low-income students.

In 1975, Congress added the law currently known as the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, or IDEA. The law helps schools provide special education services for students with disabilities. IDEA also sets forth rules designed to ensure that all students with disabilities receive a free and appropriate public education.

Department had early Republican support

When Congress created the Education Department, it divided the former Department of Health, Education, and Welfare into two agencies. One was the Education Department. The other was Health and Human Services, also known as HHS. Although President Jimmy Carter championed the move, it was bipartisan. The Senate bill to create the new department had 14 Republican co-sponsors.

Within a year, however, support for and opposition to the Education Department had become strongly partisan. Reagan campaigned on eliminating what he referred to as “President Carter’s new bureaucratic boondoggle.”

Those bureaucracies, however, existed before Carter and the new department. The only major addition was the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, which served primarily as the research arm of the Education Department. That office has since been replaced by the Institute of Education Sciences.

Congressional support needed

To dissolve the Education Department, both houses of Congress would have to agree, which is unlikely. In 2023, an amendment was proposed in the House to shut down the department. It failed by a vote of 161-265, with 60 Republicans joining all Democrats in opposing the measure.

Even assuming that sufficient pressure were exerted on Republicans in 2025 to garner almost complete Republican House support, the bill would likely need 60 votes in the Senate to overcome a filibuster – meaning that at least seven Democrats would have to support termination.

But what would such termination entail? The department’s functions and programs would need to be assigned to new institutional homes, since terminating a program’s department doesn’t terminate the program. That said, this shuffling process would likely be complicated and chaotic, harming important programs for K-12 and university students.

While details about what reorganization would look like remain to be seen, one option was proposed by Trump during his first term: merging the Education Department with the Labor Department.

Another approach is set forth in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a detailed policy blueprint that, among other things, specifies landing places for the Education Department’s major functions and programs. A CNN review found that over 100 people involved with Project 2025 worked in the first Trump administration.

The Project 2025 blueprint calls for the lion’s share of programs, including Title I and IDEA, to be moved to HHS – which already administers Head Start. Most vocational education programs would be moved to the Labor Department. The Office for Civil Rights would be moved to the Justice Department. And the Pell Grant program and the student loan program would be moved to the Treasury Department.

Part of a larger education agenda

In the scenario where existing Education Department programs are transferred to other agencies, those programs could continue without being closed or drastically cut. But Trump and Project 2025 have articulated a set of plans that do make radical changes. Trump has said he supports a federal voucher – or a “universal school choice” – plan, likely funded through federal tax credits. This idea is set forth in the proposed Educational Choice for Children Act, which is backed by Project 2025. Perhaps tellingly, Trump’s announcement of the McMahon nomination highlighted school-choice goals; it did not mention abolishing the department.

President Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America, right, listens as 25th Administrator of the US Small Business Administration, Linda McMahon, left, speaks during a press conference in Swannanoa, North Carolina in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene. The Washington Post via Getty Images

Project 2025 also lays out other changes and program cuts, including ending the Head Start early childhood education program and phasing out Title I over 10 years, and converting most IDEA funds into a voucher or “savings account” for eligible parents.

Beyond these initiatives, Trump’s campaign shared his plan to target a variety of culture-war issues. This includes cutting federal funding for any school or program that involves “critical race theory, gender ideology, or other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content onto our children.”

What we can expect

My expectation is that the Trump administration’s most likely and immediate changes will be in the form of executive orders that alter how laws will be implemented. For example, Trump may use an executive order to remove protections for transgender students.

Subsequently, I also expect some congressional budgetary changes to education programs. Based on past votes, I expect overwhelming but not universal Republican congressional support for Trump’s educational agenda. Using the budget reconciliation process, which circumvents the filibuster, a majority vote can make changes to revenue or spending. Accordingly, Congress may agree to program cuts and perhaps even to move some programmatic funding into education vouchers for individual parents.

As for closing the Education Department, which probably would not qualify for the reconciliation process, Secretary-designate McMahon may find that takedown to be a politically difficult one to achieve.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

EXCLUSIVE:

Nigerian Petroleum Company NNPCL Yet To Start New Port Harcourt Refinery, Resumed Old Refinery Built In 1965 Which Produces Only Diesel

SaharaReporters learnt that the Port Harcourt Refinery in Rivers State which was widely announced to have commenced crude oil processing, is not the new refinery built in 1989 and which is of 150,000 barrels per day.

The Port Harcourt Refinery reopened by the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) is the old refinery built in 1965 which could produce only diesel and is of 60,000 barrels' capacity, some of the top staff have revealed to SaharaReporters.

SaharaReporters learnt that the Port Harcourt Refinery in Rivers State which was widely announced to have commenced crude oil processing, is not the new refinery built in 1989 and which is of 150,000 barrels per day.

The NNPCL had announced that its Port Harcourt Refinery in Rivers State had commenced crude oil processing.

BREAKING: Port Harcourt Refinery Is Back, Begins Crude Oil Processing At 60,000bpd, Says NNPCL Nov 26, 2024

This had been disclosed by the Chief Corporate Communications Officer of the company, Femi Soneye, on Tuesday.

Soneye had revealed that the refinery would operate at 60 per cent capacity and process 60,000 bpd.

“Port Harcourt Refinery Begins Production; Truck Loading Starts Today, Tuesday,” he had announced via his X handle.

Speaking with SaharaReporters, sources revealed that the President Bola Tinubu-led government was engaging in a propaganda and the new refinery of 150,000 barrels capacity was yet to commence operations.

"The plant is running but it is the old one of 60 thousand capacity but you can’t get PMS (otherwise known as petrol) from it except diesel. The part that produces PMS is yet to start.

"The refinery is in two parts. The old refinery built 1965 of 60, 000 barrel’s capacity which when commissioned will only give you 1million litres of PMS. You have the new refinery built in 1989 which is of 150,000 barrels per stream day.

"If commissioned, it will give you 10 million litres of PMS. As of today, when they say Port Harcourt refinery is coming on stream, they are referring to the old one which we were battling with for months," another top source revealed.

"The new one is far from ready. We are looking at 2026 for the new one to be ready. If we finally commission the old one, it will be insignificant because Nigeria will not feel the impact," the source noted.

Tuesday’s move by the NNPC had come after a series of failed deadlines for the commencement of production at the refinery in Nigeria’s oil-rich Rivers State.

Inside The Last-Ditch Legislative Effort To Protect Journalists Before Trump Comes To Town

 Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., arrives to Rayburn building on Tuesday, March 12, 2024. 

(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

By Kate Riga
November 26, 2024 

TPM

In the lame duck session, the energy on Capitol Hill is busy and frazzled, as Democrats try to squeeze in any lingering priorities before they’re shut out of power for at least two years. Republicans are largely intent on blocking or slowing down those priorities, while members jockey for position in the new trifecta.

Amid the frenzy, a bipartisan group — somewhat unusual in and of itself — is quietly making a longshot, eleventh-hour attempt to pass federal protections for journalists and other critics before President-Elect Donald Trump and his famously thin-skinned coterie take over.

On the House side, the effort is being led by Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Kevin Kiley (R-CA). On the Senate side, it’s being spearheaded by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). Both sides plan to introduce their bills in early December, per spokespeople from Raskin and Wyden’s offices. TPM is first to report the existence of this legislation, and the plans to introduce it.

“I’m very interested in the whole anti-SLAPP issue,” Wyden told TPM in a Senate elevator on his way back from a vote.

The legislation, a federal anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) bill, would help journalists and other critics dismiss frivolous lawsuits in federal court. Both Trump and his close advisors, including billionaire Elon Musk, have made liberal use of the kind of suit anti-SLAPP legislation would address; plaintiffs often file these suits without any hope of winning their cases, but aim to chill criticism, bury their critics in legal fees and force them to disclose sensitive information through discovery. Trump has sued or at least sent letters threatening to sue a host of media companies, including CBS, the New York Times, the Daily Beast and the Washington Post. Musk is currently waging lawfare against Media Matters, which laid off staff, the advocacy news outlet said, in response to his legal assault.

Advocates have been pushing for a federal anti-SLAPP law because the state patchwork of laws varies in strength. Additionally, some federal appellate circuits allow state anti-SLAPP protections to be invoked in federal cases and some don’t, encouraging the often rich and powerful plaintiffs who want to file these suits to forum shop for a court in which the defendant can’t use state protections. This threat looms largest for vulnerable people including independent journalists or those at small outlets, who lack a battery of lawyers to protect them, and even low-profile critics who are dragged to court for circulating a petition or making critical comments online.

Raskin and Kiley are planning to reintroduce Raskin’s SLAPP Protection Act, which didn’t go far when he introduced it in 2022. Wyden will introduce a Senate version of the bill.

“He now has a Republican partner on the bill,” Caitlin Vogus, senior adviser for Freedom of the Press Foundation, told TPM of Raskin, who has long been pushing the issue. “That could be part of the ingredients going into making it happen now.”

The bipartisan team, an increasing rarity in Congress even on anodyne issues, stems at least in part from the men’s relationship outside of the House. Kiley took Raskin’s class at Yale Law when the latter was taking weekly trips from the Maryland Senate to give his lecture.

The two collaborated on the PRESS Act, which passed through the House in 2022. That bill, meant to protect journalists from the federal government forcing them to disclose information and identify sources, has stalled out in the Senate. The bill has bipartisan support in the upper chamber — including from Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) — but was reportedly blocked by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) at the Senate Judiciary Committee. He previously said it “would open a floodgate of leaks damaging to law enforcement and our nation’s security.” Cotton’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Trump likely ended any lingering chance that the bill would pass anyway, writing on Truth Social last week that “REPUBLICANS MUST KILL THIS BILL!” and linking to a PBS interview in which Jodie Ginsberg, the CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists, urged the Senate to pass it.

“Based on the feedback we’ve received from Senators and President Trump, it’s clear we have work to do to achieve consensus on this issue,” Kiley said in a statement. “I’m looking forward to working with the new Administration on a great many areas of common ground as we begin a new era of American prosperity.”

After at least the moral victory of House passage for the PRESS Act, Raskin and Kiley are teaming up again — a notable collaboration, as recruiting Republicans to support the bills has proven difficult.

“This was a bipartisan issue historically,” Vogus said. “But we’ve seen an uptick in SLAPP cases filed by conservatives, or at least very high-profile cases filed by conservatives.”

Republican opposition will make the bills difficult to pass, particularly through the Senate — even though, as advocates point out, Republicans too have benefitted from anti-SLAPP protections in the past.

Trump himself has used state level anti-SLAPP laws in his defense at least twice. He invoked the Texas anti-SLAPP law when Stormy Daniels sued him for tweets in which he accused her of lying about their affair. That case was dismissed.

And just last week, Trump’s lawyers indicated that they may rely on Pennsylvania’s anti-SLAPP law in a case where the exonerated Central Park Five sued him for defamation.

“President-Elect Trump’s statements about the Central Park Five, made in the context of responding to accusations during a nationally televised debate, squarely fall within the protections afforded by Pennsylvania’s anti-SLAPP statute,” his lawyer wrote in a letter to the U.S. District judge.

Still, passing bipartisan legislation at all, much less in the graveyard of the lame duck, will prove daunting.

“Frankly, getting the bill passed during the lame duck shouldn’t be the goal — it’s very difficult to get anything passed during the lame duck when there’s so much going on,” Vogus said. “Getting the bill introduced puts down a marker that Congress cares about this and can tackle it right away in the next Congress.”

That would require a come-to-Jesus moment from Republican majorities in both chambers, and from their leader, who, in between touting his Cabinet nominees at midnight on Tuesday, was busy railing against the New York Times’ “Magot Hagerman, a third rate writer and fourth rate intellect,” for failing to write flattering stories about him.


Kate Riga (@Kate_Riga24) is a D.C. reporter for TPM and cohost of the Josh Marshall  Project

Mayors, Journalists, Trade Union activists among 231 detained in anti-terror raids across Turkey

ByTurkish Minute
November 26, 2024

Turkish authorities have detained 231 individuals including mayors, journalists, activists allegedly linked to the terrorist organizations as part of a series of coordinated raids across 30 provinces, the Stockholm Center for Freedom reported, citing Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya on Tuesday.

Authorities have accused the detainees of conducting political and media activities on behalf of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK), the Democratic Union Party (PYD) or the People’s Defense Units (YPG); financing terrorism; spreading propaganda on social media and participating in illegal protests causing damage to public property. Officials also reported confiscating unlicensed firearms, hunting rifles, blank-firing guns and digital material.

The PKK has been designated a terrorist organization by Turkey and its Western allies. It has conducted an armed insurgency since the 1980s, advocating for Kurdish rights and autonomy. The KCK is an umbrella group associated with the PKK, overseeing its political and military structures. The PYD is the PKK’s Syrian affiliate, while the YPG serves as its armed wing and has been a key player in the Syrian civil war. Turkish authorities have long targeted these groups in domestic and cross-border operations.

Among those detained were journalists, activists, and labor union leaders. The list of journalists includes Erdoğan Alayumat, Tuğçe Yılmaz, Bilge Aksu, Ahmet Sünbül, Roza Metina (president of the Mesopotamian Women Journalists Association), Bilal Seçkin, Mehmet Ücar and Suzan Demir. Others detained include translator-director Ardin Diren, cartoonist Doğan Güzel, poet and writer Hicri İzgören, translator and writer Ömer Barasi and publishing coordinator Baver Yoldaş.

The Mezopotamya Women Journalists Association confirmed the detention of its president, Roza Metina, in Diyarbakır. Authorities also detained Kayapınar district co-mayor Cengiz Dündar and Nimet Tanrıkulu, a founding member of the Human Rights Association.

In Adana, police detained Remzi Çalışkan, deputy chair of the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DİSK) and Kemal Göksoy, its regional representative, during pre-dawn raids.

 WAR IS RAPE

Sudan Media Forum: ‘Women forced to trade sex for survival’

 26/11/2024 17:10 KHARTOUM

Displaced women and children in Zamzam camp near El Fasher, North Darfur (File photo: UNAMID)

Sudan Media Forum*: Joint Editorial Room

Prepared and edited by Sudan Tribune

---

As Sudan’s war continues to devastate lives, women are resorting to extreme measures to survive. Displacement, poverty, and the collapse of protective mechanisms have left many with no choice but to use their bodies to feed their families.

Salma El Taher, a pseudonym for a 20-year-old woman, fled South Kordofan with her family only to face further hardship in Khartoum. Her father was killed during the conflict in Kadugli in 2011. Years later, an airstrike in 2023 claimed her mother’s life as she worked selling tea to sustain the family.

“After my mother was killed, I found myself responsible for supporting and securing the lives of my brother and sister, without the ability to work that my mother did to feed us. I could only have sex with rapid support soldiers and other residents for money,” she continued.

Salma added that she earns little but persists to deter her 15-year-old brother from joining the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). “I tell him I work in my mother’s place selling tea in the Central Market.”

Reports indicate the destruction of livelihoods in rural and urban areas has pushed families to extreme measures. These include marrying off girls to fighters in conflict zones and children joining armed groups in exchange for food.

‘Married off’

In El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, aid workers from eight international organisations confirmed cases of girls being forced to marry fighters to survive.

Khaled Ibrahim, also using a pseudonym, shared his experience. After losing his job due to the conflict and fleeing to the Zamzam camp, he married off his 16-year-old daughter to a fighter.

“I used to sell vegetables in the El Fasher Market, but after the outbreak of war in the city as of May 10, 2024, I became unemployed.”, he states. With the continued artillery shelling, Ibrahim was forced to move to the Zamzam camp next to the city.

He explained that he married off his youngest daughter out of desperation. He said that he married the youngest of his girls to a fighter, due to his “inability to protect and feed her”.

Lack of protection

The director of Sudan’s Women and Child Protection Unit, Salimi Ishaq, acknowledged the exploitation linked to the ongoing conflict. “We expect this to happen in the war,” Salimi said. She explained that her unit is working to document cases of sexual exploitation and abuse, even in areas deemed safe.

She said that the Ministry of Interior issued decisions to establish offices in the states of Kassala, El Gedaref and White Nile, to increase protection mechanisms, stressing that women “do not report cases of exploitation in the absence of a mechanism to help them.”

Efforts are underway to form protection committees in shelters, train workers, and document violations.

The unit refrains from disclosing information about violations in RSF-controlled areas to protect residents from retaliation.

The United Nations and human rights organisations have accused the RSF of widespread sexual violence and exploitation, with numerous reports of rape and abuse emerging.

Volunteers in active conflict zones, including Khartoum and Darfur, are trying to provide food. However, restrictions by warring parties and limited resources leave many without help.

For millions trapped by the war, hunger, malnutrition, and exploitation are becoming daily realities as Sudan’s conflict grinds on.

UN Under-Secretary-General ‘ashamed of fellow men’ for sexual violence in Sudan

 26/11/2024 18:54 PORT SUDAN

International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, November 25 (Image: UNWomen)

“As a representative of the world coming to join you today and being welcomed by you today, I feel ashamed that we have not been able to protect you, and I feel ashamed of my fellow men for what they have done,” said Tom Fletcher, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, yesterday.

At a launch event at Algharbya School in Port Sudan for 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence (GBV), which began yesterday on the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, Fletcher lamented an “epidemic” of violence against girls and women in Sudan. He said it is “completely unacceptable” that one in three women worldwide has experienced sexual violence.

Fletcher is a former ambassador of the United Kingdom and policy adviser to three British Prime Ministers. He was appointed Under-Secretary-General last month and began his official duties on November 18. He is the 12th person to assume this role since the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) was created.

“We must make sure that these words, ‘you are not alone,’ are not just words that people say into a microphone when they visit you, but they become the core of our work,” he said.

The Under-Secretary-General promised the crowd at the school that their voices would be the focus of the UN’s work, local organisations would receive more support in leading the response to GBV, and the UN would tell their stories to find more funding to respond to GBV in Sudan.

Fletcher ended his speech by calling upon his fellow men. “So for those men who are here supporting [victims of GBV], I salute that, and I say, where are the rest? Come and join us in this effort to support women and girls in standing up against sexual violence.

“For the men who are carrying out the sexual violence, I say: If you think you are doing this because you are strong, you are wrong. You are doing this because you are weak.”

As Sudan’s war continues to devastate lives, women are resorting to extreme measures to survive. Yesterday, Radio Dabanga reported that displacement, poverty, and the collapse of protective mechanisms have left many with no choice but to use their bodies to feed their families.

On Sunday, Swedish Ambassador and Special Envoy to Sudan, Anna Block Mazoyer, affirmed Sweden’s solidarity with Sudanese women who have been bearing the brunt of the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe. “The reports on Sudan indicate that sexual violence is being used systematically as a weapon of war,” she said.

As reported by Radio Dabanga in September, UN human rights experts expressed “their grave concern for the many documented cases of sexual abuse, rape (including gang rape), enforced prostitution, sexual slavery, kidnapping, enforced disappearances, and unlawful killings by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and other armed groups.

A report by the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa in late July documented over 250 cases of sexual violence across the country since the outbreak of the war, including 75 cases in El Gezira between December and April.

Both the Sudanese Army and the RSF have repeatedly denied that there is any structural campaign of GBV. While both belligerents have acknowledged the occurrence of “incidents”, the warring parties insist that these are isolated crimes attributable to “rogue individual elements”.

Consistent testimony from victims on the ground paints an entirely different picture. A recent report by the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies amply corroborates “a pattern of harmful actions targeting Sudanese people based on gender, with women’s organisations documenting over 120 verified cases of rape as of October 2023, and fears that the actual number may be higher.”

Sudan Media Forum

This report was prepared in partnership with the Sudanese Media Forum’s member organisations.

RAPE IS RAPE. IT'S ABOUT DOMINATION


Men in detention face sexual torture amid war in Ukraine

Although the vast majority of victims of conflict-related sexual violence are women and girls, it is also all too common – and severely underreported – among men and boys. 

Credit: UNFPA Ukraine

26 November 2024


KYIV, Ukraine – In the early hours of the morning, at a location in Ukraine not far from the front line of the war, Antonina* found herself staring at a disturbing message on her phone. It was a video recording of her cousin, Maksym*, being brutally raped.

“She was scared and didn’t know what to do,” recalled Olena*, a psychologist who later worked with Antonina.

Olena spoke with UNFPA, the United Nations sexual and reproductive health agency, with permission from Antonina, to emphasize the wave of sexual violence against men, and the wider societal impacts of that violence, that she and her colleagues are grappling with.

“We’ve worked with other cases where similar videos were sent, with demands or blackmail following,” Olena said. “In this case, there was no blackmail or demands. It was simply humiliation and cruelty.”

Sexual violence as torture

The world is seeing “heightened levels of conflict-related sexual violence, fuelled by arms proliferation and increased militarization,” a recent United Nations report notes. Although the vast majority of victims of this crime are women and girls, this kind of violence is also all too common – and severely underreported – among men, boys and people of diverse gender identities.

“Most of the reported incidents against men and boys occurred in detention settings,” the UN report states.

This was the case for Maksym. Antonina reached out to friends and family to find out where he was, only to learn that he had gone missing days earlier. The Russian authorities later said that Maksym was being held in the basement of a police station; his captors shared the video of his torture with people in his contact list.

“The reason for this treatment was supposedly a few [anti-occupation] memes he had posted on social media,” Olena said.

As the conflict in Ukraine grinds on, mental health workers– including UNFPA staff – are increasingly stretched to capacity. 

Credit: UNFPA Ukraine / Serhii Tymofieiev


The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine has documented numerous instances of torture and abuse by Russian authorities, both in occupied regions and in the Russian Federation. The findings indicate a widespread, systematic use of violence, often in detention facilities, and “the recurrent use of sexual violence, mainly against male victims, as a form of torture.”

Digital violence amplifies reach of harm

Since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, the Prosecutor General's Office in Ukraine has documented 316 cases of conflict-related sexual violence; of these, 202 survivors were women and 114 were men.

Yet these are likely dramatic underestimates. According to estimates from UNFPA’s work in Ukraine, for every case of conflict-related sexual violence, there are between 10 and 20 cases that go unregistered. And while all forms of sexual violence are significantly underreported, male survivors have especially high rates of non-reporting because of the stigma and perceived emasculation attached to the crime.

“It’s hard to work with men because they feel ashamed of what they’ve been through,” Olena said.

She works with the UNFPA-supported Survivors Relief Centre, which provides free, confidential services, including through mobile units serving embattled communities along the front line. The centre offers specialized resources for survivors of sexual violence – even so, Olena said, she and other mental health professionals are struggling to address the profound impacts of the cases they are encountering.

UNFPA-supported counsellors and health workers are providing a range of support for survivors of conflict-related sexual violence in Ukraine – both female and male.

 Credit: UNFPA Moldova/Siegfried Modola

The shame experienced by survivors is a serious obstacle to getting help. Psychologists must work to build trust and protect anonymity – a task that has been greatly undermined by the use of digital tools to amplify footage and photographs of sexual torture.

This digital violence compounds the already serious trauma endured by survivors, and further inflicts harm onto their families and communities, counsellors tell UNFPA. Witnessing her cousin’s rape was devastating for Antonina, who had been displaced by the war and was isolated from her support system, Olena explained.

Olena has tried to help Maksym, too. “Through Antonina, I put him in touch with online psychologists,” she said. “But it’s dangerous since messages are monitored.”

Stretched to capacity

In addition to providing comprehensive, trauma-informed care, the Survivor Relief Centre offers legal advice, medical referrals and social support. Funded by Austria, Belgium, Spain and Sweden, the centres are a collaborative initiative between UNFPA, the Ukrainian government, and local organizations.

Through this project and other initiatives, such as an online psychosocial support platform and a two-week comprehensive rehabilitation programme, UNFPA is providing a range of support to survivors of conflict-related sexual violence – both female and male.

The counsellors providing this care are dedicated to the communities they serve – but they, too, are affected by the suffering they witness.

“I was trained for this,” Olena said. “My job is to take those feelings from the client that they can’t bear, and process them into something they can carry, live with and cope with.”

But the stories she hears linger long after each session ends, she admits; as the conflict grinds on, mental health workers across the country are increasingly stretched to capacity.

*Names changed for privacy and protection

UN investigates sexual exploitation allegations against aid workers in Chad following AP story

The United Nations in Chad has launched an internal investigation, following an Associated Press report on allegations of sexual exploitation of Sudanese refugees, including by aid workers

BySAM MEDNICK 

Associated Press
November 26, 2024


DAKAR, Senegal -- The United Nations in Chad has launched an internal investigation, following an Associated Press report on allegations of sexual exploitation of Sudanese refugees, which included aid workers.

The statement, written days after the AP published the story last week, was seen on Tuesday. It said the seriousness of the allegations cited in the AP's story, warranted immediate and firm measures and that those responsible should be punished.

“Refugees are already vulnerable and traumatized by the events that led them to flee their country and under no circumstances should they be the victims of abuse by those who are supposed to help them,” said Francois Batalingaya, the U.N. resident and humanitarian coordinator in Chad.

The U.N. did not immediately respond to questions about what the internal investigation entailed.

Earlier this month, the AP reported accusations by some Sudanese women and girls that men, including those meant to protect them such as humanitarian workers and local security forces, had instead sexually exploited them in Chad’s sites for displaced people. They said the men offered money, easier access to assistance, and jobs. Such sexual exploitation in Chad is a crime.

Hundreds of thousands of people, most of them women, have streamed into Chad to escape Sudan’s civil war, which has killed over 20,000 people.

Sexual exploitation during large humanitarian crises is not uncommon, especially in displacement sites. Aid groups have long struggled to combat the issue, citing a lack of reporting by women, not enough funds to respond and a focus on first providing basic necessities.

Experts say exploitation represents a deep failure by the aid community and that people seeking protection should never have to make choices driven by survival.

The U.N. said it raised the risk alert level for protection against sexual exploitation of abuse to four, which is very high, especially since Chad was already classified as a country at high risk. Raising the alert is meant to enable the U.N. to take rapid measures in the next three months, according to an internal email about the AP's article, circulated among aid groups and seen by the AP.

The UN said it's cooperating with local authorities and human rights groups to hold those responsible to account and that refugees’ trust in humanitarians is paramount.

The organization has encouraged anyone with information about exploitation to come forward.

AU CONTRAIRE

French ambassador to Armenia sparks controversy with social media posts

26 November 2024

Qabil Ashirov

AZERBAIJAN NEWS

French Ambassador to Armenia Olivier Decottignies is trying to fish in troubled waters. The ambassador shared two posts about the Blue Mosque in Yerevan and the West Azerbaijan province of Iran, sparking ambiguity and controversy, especially in light of recent military training conducted by Azerbaijan and Iran.

The post about the mosque reads, "In the gardens of the Blue Mosque of Yerevan, emblematic of Armenia's Persian heritage." This statement echoes Armenian rhetoric about the mosques in the country. To erase Azerbaijani heritage in Armenia, these mosques were renamed as Persian mosques. For more detail, it is worth noting that until the Russian Empire's invasion of modern Armenia, the region was known as the Irevan Khanate. The Irevan Khanate was a semi-independent city-state affiliated with the Iranian Empire, ruled by an Azerbaijani dynasty. After the invasion in 1828, the Russian Empire settled Armenians from Iran and later from the Ottoman Empire in the region to create a Christian enclave within the Muslim community. This enclave eventually evolved into modern Armenia.

In the 1980s, during the Soviet era, over 250,000 Azerbaijanis comprised the second-largest ethnic group after Armenians in the country. However, Armenia aimed to seize additional territories, particularly Garabagh, from Azerbaijan under the guise of self-determination. Azerbaijanis in Armenia posed the biggest challenge to this objective, as they could demand the same right of self-determination. To address this, Armenia forcibly deported all Azerbaijanis, as well as Muslim Kurds, from the country between October 1987 and mid-February 1988. Following these deportations, Armenian residents of Garabagh began protests in Khankendi, which escalated into a full-scale war. From that point on, Yerevan has gone to great lengths to erase all traces of Azerbaijanis in Armenia, destroying buildings with Azerbaijani heritage. However, some prominent buildings, like the Blue Mosque in Yerevan, could not be destroyed. Instead, Armenia introduced a new notion in Islam, calling such mosques Persian Mosques. As is known, all nations have their own Churches in Christianity, like the Russian Orthodox Church, the Armenian Orthodox Church etc. Islam does not have such kind of divisions. But Armenians started to call the above-mentioned mosques Persian Mosques. It seems the French diplomat is keen to participate in this falsification, but they should remember that such attempts are short-lived. Everyone knows the true Islamic culture and history.

As for the second post about the West Azerbaijan province of Iran, it is unclear what the diplomat intended to convey. Many on social media claim that the diplomat hinted at the Western Azerbaijani Community by saying "the one and only." The Western Azerbaijani Community consists of Azerbaijanis who were expelled from Armenia 30 years ago. They rightfully call Armenia Western Azerbaijan and seek to return home. However, Iran has a province called West Azerbaijan. It seems the French diplomat aimed to sow discord between Azerbaijan and Iran, but in vain. Because even the least knowledgeable individuals in the region understand what Azerbaijanis mean when they refer to Western Azerbaijan.

Additionally, these two Muslim brother states share a common culture with a history that traces back thousands of years. In addition, over 30 million Azerbaijanis live in Iran, and both the Supreme Leader and the President of Iran are Azerbaijanis. Even during the First Garabagh War, the Iranian army hit Armenian positions to rescue civilians in Zengilan. Iran and Azerbaijan may have disagreements, but it does not mean that these two fraternal nations will not fight over Armenia. Someone should tell the diplomat that either Iran or Azerbaijan is not an Armenia that can easily become a tool for others.

MASS DEPORTATION MAKE HIM GO FIRST

Elon Musk is sharing some details about his immigration path. Experts say they still have questions

Elon Musk speaks during an America PAC town hall in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, on October 26, hours after the Washington Post reported he began his career working illegally in the US. The billionaire later posted on X denying he’d worked in the US without authorization. (Samuel Corum/Getty Images via CNN Newsource)

By CNN.com Wire Service
UPDATED: November 26, 2024 
By Catherine E. Shoichet | CNN

It’s rare to hear Elon Musk discuss the details of his own immigration journey.

But the billionaire tech tycoon opened up about some of it over the weekend in a series of posts on the platform he owns, X, hours after the Washington Post reported that Musk began his career working illegally in the US when he was building a Silicon Valley startup in the 1990s.

The newspaper’s story cited court records, company documents and former business associates, including a past CEO of the company who said investors had worried that Musk could be deported.

Musk hasn’t responded to CNN’s requests for comment on the report. He also hasn’t responded to CNN’s requests for comment about remarks he once made describing his past immigration status as a “gray area.”

RELATED: ‘We were illegal immigrants’: Elon Musk is one of illegal immigration’s harshest critics. He once described his past immigration status as a ‘gray area’

In a post on X, where video circulated of President Biden referencing the Washington Post report’s claims, Musk denied that he’d worked without authorization.

“I was in fact allowed to work in the US,” Musk wrote, accusing Biden of lying.

The newspaper’s report and Biden’s remarks circulated widely among critics of Musk, some of whom accused the world’s richest man of having a double standard given how much time he’s devoted to slamming illegal immigration in the runup to the 2024 presidential election.

Supporters of Musk, including Tesla fan accounts, also swiftly rose to his defense and criticized Biden.

In response to one such post, Musk described two visas he once had — offering more detail than he’d previously shared publicly.

“I was on a J-1 visa that transitioned to an H1-B,” Musk wrote. “They know this, as they have all my records. Losing the election is making them desperate.”

But experts told CNN those details raise additional questions Musk hasn’t answered.

The J-1 visa is for exchange visitors and can be used for foreign students to pursue academic training or research. It requires a sponsoring program, such as a university. An H-1B is a temporary employment visa for specialty occupations.

Why Musk’s student status matters

Students walk between classes at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Elon Musk graduated from the university with bachelor’s degrees in physics and economics in 1997.(Charles Mostoller/Reuters via CNN Newsource)

Musk didn’t detail what institution sponsored his J-1 visa, or which years he had the visa.

Musk was born in South Africa, obtained Canadian citizenship through his mother and came to the US to study at the University of Pennsylvania in 1992. He became a US citizen a decade later, according to biographies of the billionaire.

He has said in the past that after leaving Penn he had planned to pursue graduate studies at Stanford, but dropped out to work on founding his first company.

That’s significant, experts say, because there are strict rules about the kind of work allowed when someone is in the US on a student visa, and work authorizations tied to student visas generally require someone to be actively studying or for the sponsoring institution to allow the student to get academic or practical training after graduation.

RELATED: Trump’s mass deportation threats in his first term fizzled. Here’s how they may play out this time.

Immigration attorney Greg Siskind, who’s co-authored multiple editions of a guide to J-1 visas, says transitioning from a J-1 visa to an H-1B visa is a possible path. But he says a J-1 visa wouldn’t provide work authorization to someone who dropped out of a degree program. The moment Musk dropped out, he would have lost his status and been unauthorized to work, Siskind says.

“Musk would have needed to be engaged in a full course of study (at least 12 academic hours a semester) in order to qualify for work while being a J-1 student,” Siskind wrote on X.

A Stanford spokeswoman told CNN last month that the university had no record Musk had ever enrolled there, but that he had been accepted into the school’s Materials Science and Engineering graduate program. Asked if Musk ever had a student visa connected with the university, the spokeswoman said she did not know because further documentation was unavailable.

What if Musk’s visa was obtained through the University of Pennsylvania, where he studied as an undergraduate?

The same criteria would apply, Siskind says.

And given Musk’s background, Siskind says it’s unlikely he would have been eligible for humanitarian exceptions sometimes granted to allow off-campus work due to economic hardship.

Atlanta immigration attorney Charles Kuck says Musk stating that he had a J-1 visa makes it clear he worked illegally, given the restrictions that would have only allowed work in connection with his academic program.

“So clearly, he’s admitting now that in fact, he did work illegally and violate his status. The only question is at that point, what did he do to fix his status violation?” Kuck says.

Working illegally isn’t a crime, Kuck says, but having done so would require certain steps to be taken to return to a legal immigration status.

Key unanswered questions, Kuck says, are what steps Musk took to get his H-1B visa, and when that occurred.

Musk graduated from Penn in May 1997, according to a university spokesman. Biographies of the SpaceX and Tesla CEO indicate he finished his studies there in 1995.

According to the Post’s report, a 1996 funding agreement with venture capitalists who’d agreed to contribute $3 million to Musk’s first company “stated that the Musk brothers and an associate had 45 days to obtain legal work status. Otherwise, the firm could reclaim its investment.” Musk had told coworkers that he was in the country on a student visa, six former associates and shareholders in the company told the Post.

“Student visas are some of the most complicated visas out there, and work related to them is also extraordinarily complicated. And to dismiss it in a in a two-line tweet, ‘Well I had a J-1 and it went to H-1B,’ yeah, trust me, there’s always a lot more to it than that,” Kuck says.
What the world’s richest man has said about his immigration journey

Elon Musk, left, and his brother Kimbal Musk, right, have repeatedly described the humble origins of their startup, including sleeping in their office in Palo Alto, California, before securing funding from investors.

(AP/Reuters via CNN Newsource)

Related Articles

Tesla excluded From EV buyer credits in Gov. Newsom’s proposal
Opinion: Elon Musk hopes to make federal budget cutting cool
PRO/CON: Could Elon Musk’s efficiency department really work?
Opinion: How Musk’s efficiency department can actually do some good
Opinion: Elon Musk’s efficiency department is highly inefficient

Musk is an increasingly powerful force shaping and amplifying conversations around immigration — especially since his 2022 takeover of Twitter, now known as X, and given his huge audience on the platform.

His more than 200 million followers on X frequently see him sharing posts endorsing conspiracy theories that claim the Biden administration has deliberately allowed undocumented immigrants to cross the border to gain political advantage. It’s also common to see posts referring to his own background as an immigrant and advocating for increased legal immigration to the US.

In response to details his mother, Maye Musk, has shared on X about her own immigration journey, Elon Musk has called legal immigration to the US “a laborious Kafkaesque nightmare” and noted that becoming a US citizen “was extremely difficult and took over a decade.”

But he’s offered few specifics about his immigration status in the early days of his career, when he and his brother were founding their early online city guide and mapping tool that was later dubbed Zip2.

His brother, Kimbal Musk, has repeatedly stated that early investors in their company soon learned they were “illegal immigrants,” but Elon Musk has disputed his brother’s characterization.

“I’d say it was a gray area,” Elon Musk said at a 2013 event.

And in a 2020 podcast interview, Elon Musk said he had a “student work visa” at the time.

“Student work visa” is not an official term, and experts told CNN last month that it’s impossible to know Musk’s immigration path without access to the paper trail in his government file.

It’s likely regulations weren’t enforced as strictly during Musk’s time as a student, according to Hunter Swanson, associate director of the Center for International Education at Washington and Lee University in Virginia. Enforcement of student visa restrictions, and the systems officials use to monitor compliance, intensified dramatically after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, Swanson told CNN earlier this year. Some of the hijackers involved in the attacks were in the U.S. on student visas, according to the official 9/11 Commission Report.

“It definitely wouldn’t be possible to do academic training now on a J-1 Visa if you dropped out in your first term,” Swanson said in an email Sunday.

What’s the importance of digging into Musk’s own immigration history?

“For me, it’s the hypocrisy,” Siskind says. ”He’s been fixated on illegal immigration in the last year. And you know, he should be empathetic to the people who are struggling with the immigration system.”

The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

Japan's PM Urges Biden to Approve Nippon Steel Deal Amid National Security Concerns

The CFIUS is reviewing Nippon Steel's $15 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel

Faizan Farooque 

Nov 26, 2024
GURU FOCUS

Summary

CFIUS previously flagged the acquisition as a potential risk to the U.S. steel supply chain critical to national security.


Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has formally urged U.S. President Joe Biden to approve Nippon Steel's (NISTF, Financials) $15 billion acquisition of U.S. Steel (X, Financials), highlighting the deal's importance to bilateral relations, according to sources familiar with the matter.

Biden has voiced opposition to the purchase, citing possible hazards to national security, along with a major U.S. labor organization. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States is reviewing the deal; next month it has a deadline to provide a recommendation before President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Jan. 20.

Government agency CFIUS, which evaluates foreign investments for security concerns, might accept the agreement with restrictions, prolong the assessment process, or suggest its rejection. The panel had already raised concerns about the vulnerability of the steel supply chain resulting from the proposed deal.

Emphasizing the geopolitical and financial advantages of the purchase, Ishiba stressed in a letter dated Nov. 20, the reflection of Japan's position as the biggest foreign investor in the United States. He noted that enhancing the economic cooperation fits the "unprecedented strength" of the Japan-U.S. relationship under Biden's leadership.

Nippon Steel has promised to invest in modern technologies and safeguard employment in line with American concerns. In the letter, Ishiba said, "The proposed acquisition will enable Japanese and U.S. steel companies to combine advanced technologies and increase competitiveness, and will contribute to enhancing steel production capacity and employment in the United States."

While Ishiba's office sent inquiries to the foreign ministry, which had no response, the U.S. Embassy in Japan refused to comment. Both Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel ignored calls for comments.

Under former Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who separated his government from the agreement and presented it as a private commercial affair, this direct appeal marks a change from the posture taken by the Japanese government before.

Particularly in swing states crucial to the next U.S. presidential contest, the purchase has become politically contentious. As the next government gets ready to assume office, Biden's choice might influence opinions on foreign investment policy.

Following the election, CFIUS expanded its investigation to evaluate the deal's ramifications more fully. Ishiba has expressed worries about the possible consequences of a refusal of the purchase. The prime minister reportedly brought up the matter at his most recent meeting with Biden at an international forum, stressing its significance for Japan-U.S. economic ties.

U.S. Steel review targeted by Republicans for potential probe

Four House Republicans wrote to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo on Friday, saying that recent developments related to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) "have called into question the integrity of its decision-making process,” and demanding the preservation of records related to a potential sale of U.S. Steel to Japan's Nippon Steel. | REUTERS

By Josh Wingrove
BLOOMBERG
Nov 26, 2024

Republican lawmakers are calling on U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration to preserve documents related to the proposed sale of United States Steel to Japan-based Nippon Steel, expressing "serious concerns” that politics have tainted an ongoing national security review of the deal and raising the prospect of a congressional probe.

Four House Republicans wrote to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo on Friday, saying that recent developments related to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) "have called into question the integrity of its decision-making process,” and demanding the preservation of records related to the steel transaction.

The matter raises "broader issues about whether the statutory mandate of CFIUS to prioritize national security considerations has been subordinated to political interests,” the lawmakers wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by Bloomberg News. The documents should "remain intact and available for any forthcoming oversight needs,” the letter, from some members of the House Financial Services Committee, adds.

The Treasury Department declined to comment. The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

"I don’t have a comment on the process, and we are careful to follow all rules and regulations when it comes to the preservation of records,” White House spokesman Andrew Bates said Monday.

The GOP letter suggests that the political firestorm over the proposed sale of an iconic American firm — a transaction which became a flash point during the 2024 presidential campaign — is unlikely to subside even with Biden signaling opposition to the deal and Republican President-elect Donald Trump pledging to block it. Trump’s opposition to the deal could complicate Republican attempts to make political hay of Biden’s efforts to block its consummation, with the current and incoming president politically aligned.

The deal has faced heightened scrutiny, touching on questions about union jobs and wages, which were at the centerpiece of an election that largely revolved around voter anxiety about the economy. U.S. Steel is based in Pennsylvania, a state that was fiercely contested by Trump and his general election opponent Vice President Kamala Harris.

Biden has opposed the deal for months but deferred to a review by the secretive CFIUS panel, which scrutinizes proposals by foreign entities to buy companies or property in the U.S. The transaction is barreling toward another deadline in December when the panel must present a recommendation and can refer the case back to the president for a decision. Even as he has awaited the review, Biden has pledged that U.S. Steel will remain domestically owned.

The letter was signed by Republican Reps. Bill Huizenga, Andy Barr, Dan Meuser and John Rose. Huizenga chairs the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Financial Services Committee. Republicans will also control the House in the next Congress.

The lawmakers are demanding the preservation of communications between the White House and CFIUS, as well as communications between federal agencies and other stakeholders, such as the United Steelworkers, who oppose the sale, and Cleveland-Cliffs, a rival domestic bidder.

Rose, in a statement, alleged that the Biden administration had "politicized CFIUS in an attempt to score cheap political points.”

"It is important to national security that during the transition CFIUS keeps all records,” he added.

The high-profile case is unusual, with CFIUS reviews more commonly reserved for acquisitions by adversarial nations, like China, and not allied ones, like Japan. They also typically are aimed at technology companies or other sensitive sectors.

Biden’s administration has argued that steel is a strategically important industry. The CFIUS panel granted a request in September to refile the submission, effectively approving a delay.

Trump’s Treasury and Commerce nominations + Nippon Steel’s bid for U.S. Steel



NOVEMBER 26, 2024
By: Emily Kilcrease and Geoffrey Gertz

Emily and Geoff react to the nominations of Scott Bessent for U.S. Treasury Secretary and Howard Lutnick for U.S. Commerce Secretary and overall point man for trade and tariffs. Then Evan Robinson-Johnson, business reporter from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, joins to talk about the national security review of Nippon Steel’s bid to buy U.S. Steel - which both President Biden and President-elect Trump have vowed to block. Complicated labor union dynamics, the companies’ threat to sue, and election-year politics have kept this deal in purgatory, but an impending government deadline could force action in the coming weeks.

“Editorial: Time for post-election sanity: Approve Nippon-U.S. Steel deal” by the Pittsburgh Post Gazette editorial board

“Japanese steelmaker Nippon says it will not accept presidential block of U.S. Steel deal” by Evan Robinson-Johnson, Pittsburgh Post Gazette

“Arbitration board signals support for U.S. Steel’s sale to Nippon in a blow to United Steelworkers union” by Evan Robinson-Johnson, Pittsburgh Post Gazette

"US Steel Review Targeted by Republicans for Potential Probe" by Josh Wingrove, Bloomberg

“Under Pressure, Dubai Company Drops Ports Deal” by David E. Sanger, The New York Times

Ralls V. CFIUS decision by U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit