Tuesday, July 19, 2022

School police didn’t stop Parkland or Uvalde shootings, and often discriminate against students. Why did Biden give them $300m?


Campus police officers are often cited as an effective tool against gun violence. But the data shows they do little to stop school shootings — and often discriminate against students of colour. Josh Marcus reports



The scene of the Parkland shooting in 2018: campus police have been present for
 – but unable to stop – a number of school shootings
(Getty Images)

When it comes to gun violence in America, the clock seems stuck.

The same horrific tragedies occur. The same debates are had. The same solutions are proposed. The same actions are taken. The same tragedies occur once more.

That sense of deja vu is especially palpable when it comes to one of the thorniest parts of the school safety debate: on-campus police.

On Monday, the penalty phase began in the trial of Nikolas Cruz, who shot and killed 17 people and injured numerous others in the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas school massacre in Parkland, Florida.

That shooting prompted Florida to require every public school in the state to have armed security personnel on campus to stop mass shootings, even though such security was present and failed at Parkland.

Scot Peterson, then an armed deputy with the Broward Sheriff’s Office, was stationed at the school, and is now facing neglect and negligence charges for failing to enter the school building and confront Cruz. (Mr Peterson has defended his actions, saying he thought the school may have been under sniper fire, and that he followed his training.)

People are brought out of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School after the February 14, 2018, Parkland shooting.
(Getty Images)

But that wasn’t a new idea. The same solution had been proposed two decades earlier, after the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, where an armed school resource officers was present at the time of the shooting and didn’t stop gunmen from killing 15 people.


And it’s the same fix being put into place now, after the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. That’s despite the fact that months of active shooter training, tens of thousands of dollars in security investments, and multiple armed police officers failed to stop gunman Salvador Ramos from entering Robb Elementary School and killing 21 people, and hundreds of officers failed to engage the 18-year-old for more than an hour as he continued shooting students inside.

The much-touted bipartisan gun deal President Joe Biden signed in June doubles funding for school police and other school security measures, investing $300m more in federal anti-violence grants.


US President Joe Biden, joined Attorney General Merrick Garland, speaks on gun crime prevention measures at the White House on June 23, 2021 in Washington DC
(Getty Images)

School resource officers are often one of the only politically acceptable, publicly popular solutions to school shootings that receive new investments.

However, even as the use of so-called “school resource officers” (SROs) has exploded in recent years, data shows the added boots on the ground have done little to stop more mass shootings on campus. Instead, by connecting schools directly to agents of the criminal justice system, school officials seem to have inadvertently imported all the racial biases of mass incarceration along with them.

Police respond to the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, Tuesday, May 24, 2022
((Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District/Austin American-Statesman via AP, File))

Few if any schools in the 1960s and 1970s had a large police presence, according to Professor F Chris Curran, director of the Education Policy Research Center at the University of Florida.

The 1980 and ‘90s changed that, with the rise of “Tough on Crime” politics and mass shootings like Columbine rocking the national consciousness. Officers were brought in to stop crime on campus, and increasingly, to protect children from gun violence.

“Following Columbine, and as we’ve seen a number of tragic school shootings, some of that narrative and reason for law enforcement has shifted to one of protecting students from external threats, more focused on the mass school shootings as opposed to the more day-to-day violence that might be present in some schools,” he told The Independent.


The Parkland shooting inspired a state law requiring armed security on all public school grounds, a first nationwide
(AFP via Getty Images)

Police are increasingly being deployed even in grade schools.

“It’s not that they’re being brought in because there’s high levels of crime in elementary schools. It’s to be there as an essential protector, to try to prevent something like Sandy Hook or like the tragedy in Uvalde.”

As of 2018, at least 58 per cent of schools had one law enforcement officer, with school police forces distributed roughly evenly between rural and urban schools, and those with and without large populations of students of colour. Since 1998, the US has spent over $1bn on school police.

It’s a trend that looks set to grow, as America once again searches for solutions after a string of mass school shootings.

Polls indicate that parents are extremely supportive of school police, with one survey finding 80 per cent backed SROs, 4 per cent more than those who wanted mental health screenings for all students.

Politicians across the political spectrum support them, too.

New Jersey governor Phil Murphy, a Democrat, ordered an increased police presence in schools after the shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, explaining, “We will do everything in our power to ensure students, parents, and educators feel safe at school.” So did New York’s Democratic governor Kathy Hochul, ordering routine police check-ins at Empire State schools for the rest of the year.

This month, Michigan’s GOP-controlled legislature allocated $25m for school resource officers,

Days after Uvalde, US Senator for Texas Ted Cruz argued, “We know from past experience that the most effective tool for keeping kids safe is armed law enforcement on the campus.”

Periodically, such as after the 2020 mass racial justice protests, some schools like those in Milwaukee have reevaluated their relationships with police forces or cut ties, but by and large the school resource officer trend continues unabated.

SROs may have become one of America’s primary ways of stopping school shootings, but according to University of Florida’s Professor Curran, the research doesn’t actually suggest these police do much to stop school shootings from occurring.

“That’s one of the maybe disappointing takeaways and very important takeaways, given that that’s some of the justification and reason many schools are using police,” he said. “In some ways, it resonates with what we know anecdotally. You can look at Parkland right here in Florida. They had an SRO in the school and it didn’t deter and didn’t effectively stop the perpetrator from taking a lot of lives.”

Researchers analyzing school shootings between 1999 and 2018 found that the presence of SROs on campus makes no observable difference in stopping the severity of a given shooting. Another team found that the presence of school police may actually make things worse. Hamline University criminal justice professor Jillian Peterson looked at 40 years worth of school shootings, covering 133 incidents from the 20 years before and after 1999’s Columbine massacre, and found that there were three times as many people killed during these events when there was an armed office on the scene.

Explanations for these trends vary. Some suggest that school shooters arm themselves more heavily if they know they’ll face armed police. Others speculate that those in a mental state to carry out a school shooting simply don’t care that they could be shot by an armed officer. There’s also the fact that, according to Prof Curran, police in schools are often outgunned by school shooters, and only accurately shoot back about a third of the time under high stress.

“Even highly trained people may not be effective at neutralising the threat immediately,” he said.

What the research does show, however, is that school police mirror larger trends in the criminal justice system, and focus disproportionate attention, and at times violence, on students of colour.

Researchers at the University of Albany and RAND Corporate found in 2021 that SROs don’t effectively prevent school shootings or gun-related incidents, but increase the use of suspensions, expulsions, police referrals, and criminal arrests — punishments directed at Black students two times more often than white ones.

Other research indicates schools with SROs see a decrease in high school graduation and college enrollment rates, while Black students experience the largest increase in discipline.

According to the US Department of Education, Black students without disabilities made up 30 per cent of school-related arrests in 2017, twice their share of the public school population, while white students were comparatively under-represented. The Center for Public Integrity, meanwhile, has found that in 46 states, Black students are referred to law enforcement at higher rates than all students, even though no US state has a majority Black population.

Research also suggests Black girls in particular face even worse disproportionate punishment by school police.

That’s just in the aggregate. One interaction with police can change the trajectory of a young student’s life, as portrayed in the 2021 documentary On These Grounds, about a 2015 viral video of a school resource officer in Columbia, South Carolina, violently arresting a girl in class.



On 15 October, 2015, Spring Valley High School school resource officer Ben Fields was called into a math class to remove Shakara Murphy, who was supposedly misbehaving. Video captures the officer briefly asking Ms Murphy to stand up. When she remains in her chair, seconds later he flips her backward over the chair, then hurling her across the room before kneeling on top of her and arresting her, leaving her with rug burn on her face and a hairline facture in her wrist.

Another student, Niya Kenny, who filmed the encounter and challenge Mr Fields’s use of force, was also arrested and temporarily sent to an adult jail.

“I was in disbelief. I know this girl got nobody. I couldn’t believe this was happening. I’ve never seen nothing like that in my life, a man use so much force on a little girl, a big man like, 300 pounds of full muscle. I was like no way, no way, you can’t do that to a little girl,” she told local news at the time.

Both girls were booked under an archaic early 1900s “disturbing schools” law that made it a misdemeanour to disturb school in any way. The law has roots in the Jim Crow South, when it was first introduced to prevent flirting with white women at a women’s college, and was later used to quell civil rights protests in schools in the 1960s.

What was missing from the video, and in the minds of many critics, from the whole situation, was a larger context or any sense that extreme force shouldn’t be used on a teenager simply because she wouldn’t stand up out of a desk.

The incident began when Ms Murphy, a foster child, got in a disagreement with her teacher, who was barring her from accessing her legally protected school disability assistance plan during a math test. Officer Fields, a hulking powerlifter, actually knew about Ms Murphy and her background, and had stopped other students from picking on her in the past. That didn’t stop him from tossing her across the room like a sack of trash.

“What was going on in his mind that he had to throw me like that?” Ms Murphy told filmmakers in On These Grounds. “I want other kids to be able to go to school, get their education, and be safe and feel like that’s not going to happen to them.”

Both Ms Murphy and Ms Kenny, as is typical with many students who face police discipline, never returned to Spring Valley High School.

Ben Fields, who was fired after the incident but did not face any criminal charges, argues he wasn’t being racist, and that he was actually following department use-of-force policy.

In the chaos of the arrest, Ms Murphy said she reached out to find a handhold, accidentally striking the school resource officer in the face. The former officer, who is white, interpreted it as an intentional punch, which would’ve entitled him to use a baton or an attack dog against Ms Murphy, who is Black, according to a department use-of-force memo at the time.

“If I had took out a baton and hit her with it, does that look good? If I had called a canine on her, does that look good? What is this, 1960?” Mr Fields says in the film. “I did what I thought was best in the situation, based on my training.”

He also told filmmakers the so-called “schools-to-prison pipeline,” a concept popularised by scholars like Michelle Alexander, is “one of the biggest hoaxes I’ve ever heard of.”

At the time of the viral video, according to the ACLU, 71 per cent of students in South Carolina referred to the Department of Juvenile Justice were Black, a rate nearly three times greater than their share of the overall population. Spring Valley’s arrests of students had an even higher percentage of African-Americans, an astonishing 88 per cent.

Activists like Vivian Anderson, founder of EveryBlackGirl, a group that supports young Black women in the face of police violence and other forms of discrimination, say schools should prioritize counseling and other social services over policing.

“These are two girls. What happens when we start pushing young people out of school? We know what it means to silence trauma. That’s how we get all our -isms. Our alcoholism, all our addictions,” she says in the documentary about Spring Valley. “This should never happen to any child.”

In 2019 the ACLU has estimated that millions of children in US public schools have police on school grounds, but no access to a social worker, mental health counselor, or nurse.

There are some in Washington who are trying to change this resource gap.

In June, a group of Democrats in Congress introduced the Counseling Not Criminalization in Schools Act, which would shift federal resources away from police and towards more social services.

“Since Columbine, our country has approached the problem of school shootings by funding school police,” Representative Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts said at a June hearing. “A billion dollars, thousands of school police officers — when 90% of our students can’t access a school nurse or social worker or guidance counselor — and more than two decades later, we find ourselves in the same spot as before. Only in America.”

As Professor Curran, the University of Florida researcher, points out, school police are only a recent invention in the US. If schools can shift so much to accommodate them, it follows that schools can change in other ways if people decide school policing is not living up to its promises.

“We have a history of having schools without police,” he said.

His personal view, after having worked with parents, schools, and officers themselves, is that it’s a highly nuanced issue, and one where community control is vital. That would factor in historical experiences between communities and police, he says.

“It’s perfectly possible to imagine a world in which schools have no police for many nationwide,” he said.

It’s possible, but after another summer of school shooting tragedies, it remains to be seen whether it’s likely.
How Amazon, Starbucks, And Other Companies Fight Unions – OpEd

July 20, 2022 
By Robert Reich

You as a worker have a legal right to join a union, but there are many ways big corporations are skirting the law to stop you from getting your fair share. You could be working for a union-buster and not even know it.

Here are four of the biggest union-busting tricks to look out for:

One: Anti-Union Propaganda.

Employers turn workers into a captive audience for false or misleading claims about unions. In 2019 Delta distributed pamphlets to flight attendants and ramp service workers warning that union fees would cost $700 dollars per year. But here’s what they didn’t mention: unionized workers earn $700 more per month.

Weird how they left that part out, isn’t it?

Amazon wallpapered its warehouses with anti-union ads. Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz claimed he had no choice but to exclude workers at unionizing stores from new employee benefits.

Apparently when you’re the boss you can just make stuff up.
Advertisement

‘Two: Your employer hires fancy anti-union firms, lawyers, and consultants.


The company claims it can’t afford to raise workers’ pay but spends millions on anti-union consultants. You might hear your bosses call this “Union Avoidance,” but it basically just means “Union busting, in a suit.”

Three: Delay, delay, delay.


It’s illegal for employers to cancel a vote on whether to unionize. But they skirt the law to keep that vote from happening as long as possible.

And while they’re delaying, they play dirty tricks to stop a union’s momentum. Before a recent labor election in Buffalo, Starbucks flooded stores with managers to pressure workers. One Starbucks employee reported he was told to go to a meeting, only to be greeted by six managers pressuring him to reject the union.

So that’s how many managers it takes to screw over an employee.
Four: If none of these union-busting tactics work, your employer might just break the law.

Starbucks recently fired more than twenty union leaders. Amazon fired a union leader for missing work – even though he was on leave to care for a COVID-stricken family member. U.S. employers are charged with violating federal law in over 40% of all union election campaigns.

I’m sorry, I just have to pause for a second here. 40% of the time? Really? If I broke the law 40% of the time, I’d be in jail quicker than you can say “Pinkerton!”

Are companies allowed to skirt the law like this? No! But labor laws take a long time to enforce – if they’re enforced at all. And the worst that can happen is a corporation has to rehire a worker who it illegally fired and provide back pay. No wonder some companies decide that breaking the law is cheaper than following it. It’s simply a “cost of doing business” for a giant corporation like Amazon.

But here’s some good news: A bill called “The PRO Act” would strengthen protections for union organizers and make many kinds of “union avoidance” illegal. Call your lawmakers and ask them to support it today.

They won’t just be on the right side of history. They’ll be on the right side of public opinion. A majority of Americans, including 77% of young people, support the right to join a union. Workers at Starbucks and Amazon have refused to be intimidated and have started to unionize. All over the country, American workers are growing wise to corporate union-busting tricks.

Big corporations are fighting dirty to keep their workers from organizing – and they’re still losing. Imagine what could happen if they had to fight fair.

LNG Carrier. File photo by Tennen-Gas, Wikipedia Commons.

How A Russian Natural Gas Cutoff Could Weigh On Europe’s Economies – Analysis

By  and 

The partial shutoff of gas deliveries is already affecting European growth, and a full shutdown could be substantially more severe.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has further darkened the global growth outlook, with the European economy facing a serious setback given trade, investment, and financial links with the warring countries. Now, Europe is enduring a partial cutoff of natural gas exports from Russia, its largest energy supplier.

The prospect of an unprecedented total shutoff is fueling concern about gas shortages, still higher prices, and economic impacts. While policymakers are moving swiftly, they lack a blueprint to manage and minimize impact.

Three new IMF working papers examine these important issues. They examine how fragmented markets and delayed price pass-through can aggravate impacts, the role of the global liquefied natural gas market in moderating outcomes, and how such factors could play out in Germany, Europe’s largest economy.

Our work shows that in some of the most-affected countries in Central and Eastern Europe—Hungary, the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic—there is a risk of shortages of as much as 40 percent of gas consumption and of gross domestic product shrinking by up to 6 percent. The impacts, however, could be mitigated by securing alternative supplies and energy sources, easing infrastructure bottlenecks, encouraging energy savings while protecting vulnerable households, and expanding solidarity agreements to share gas across countries.

What determines exposure?

Dependence on Russia for gas, and other energy sources, varies widely by country.

European infrastructure and global supply have coped, so far, with a 60 percent drop in Russian gas deliveries since June 2021. Total gas consumption in the first quarter was down 9 percent from a year earlier, and alternative supplies are being tapped, especially LNG from global markets.

Advertisement

Our work suggests that a reduction of up to 70 percent in Russian gas could be managed in the short term by accessing alternative supplies and energy sources and given reduced demand from previously high prices.

This explains why some countries have been able to unilaterally halt Russian imports. However, diversification would be much harder in a total shutoff. Bottlenecks could reduce the ability to re-route gas within Europe because of insufficient import capacity or transmission constraints. These factors could lead to shortages of 15 percent to 40 percent of annual consumption in some countries in Central and Eastern Europe.

Economic impact

We gauge impacts two ways. One is an integrated-market approach that assumes gas can get where it is needed, and prices adjust. Another is a fragmented-market approach that is best used when the gas cannot go where needed no matter how much prices rise. However, estimation is complicated by the fact that the hit to the European economy is already happening.

Using the integrated-market approach—as the market remains so—to estimate the direct impact to date suggests that it may have amounted to a 0.2 percent reduction for European Union economic activity in the first half of 2022.

When we consider a full Russian gas shutoff from mid-July, we focus on the impact relative to a baseline of no supply disruption this year. This simplifies the estimation and makes it comparable with other economic research.

We derive a broad range of estimates of impact over the next 12 months. Reflecting the unprecedented nature of a full Russian gas shut-off, the right modeling assumptions are highly uncertain and vary between countries.

If EU markets remain integrated both internally and with the rest of the world, our integrated-market approach suggests that the global LNG market would help buffer economic impacts. That is because reduced consumption is distributed across all countries connected to the global market. At the extreme, assuming no LNG support, the impact is magnified: soaring gas prices would have to work by depressing consumption only in the EU.

If physical constraints impede gas flows, the fragmented market approach suggests that the negative impact on economic output would be especially significant, as much as 6 percent for some countries in Central and Eastern Europe where the intensity of Russian gas use is high and alternative supplies are scarce, notably Hungary, the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic. Italy would also face significant impacts due to its high reliance on gas in electricity production.

The effects on Austria and Germany would be less severe but still significant, depending on the availability of alternative sources and the ability to lower household gas consumption. Economic impacts would be moderate, possibly under 1 percent, for other countries with sufficient access to international LNG markets.

Germany’s exposure 

We dug deeper to understand the German outlook and policy options in the event of a full shutoff. Starting with the baseline outlook in our Article IV Consultation—which already embeds the existing partial shutoff—we extended the assessment through 2027 and incorporated additional demand-side impacts that stem from the uncertainty that households and firms face, and which reduce aggregate consumption and investment.

Our estimates suggest uncertainty channels would notably add to the economic impacts from a full shutoff. Impacts would peak next year, then fade as alternative gas supplies become available.

The rise in wholesale gas prices could also increase inflation significantly which we explicitly study in our work on Germany. Simulations also illustrate that voluntary consumer conservation could reduce economic losses by one-third, and a well-designed rationing plan, which for example lets downstream users and gas-intensive industries bear more of the shortages, could reduce them by up to three-fifths.

Easing consumption

Countries that already encourage households and businesses to save energy include Italy, where the government mandates minimum and maximum levels for heating and cooling. REPowerEU, the European Commission’s plan, also contains measures to conserve energy and reduce dependence on Russian fuels.

There is still a gap, however, between ambition and reality. Forthcoming IMF research shows that many countries have chosen policies which strongly limit how wholesale prices are passed on to consumers. A better alternative would be to allow greater passthrough to incentivize conservation while offering targeted compensation to households that can’t afford higher prices.

Addressing challenges 

Our research shows that the economic fallout from a Russian gas shutoff can be partially mitigated. Beyond measures already taken, further action should focus on risk mitigation and crisis preparedness.

Governments must boost efforts to secure supplies from global LNG markets and alternative sources, continue to alleviate infrastructure bottlenecks to import and distribute gas, plan to share supplies in an emergency across the EU, act decisively to encourage energy savings while protecting vulnerable households, and prepare smart gas rationing programs.

This is a moment for Europe to build upon the decisive action and solidarity displayed during the pandemic to address the challenging moment it faces today.

*About the authors:

  • Mark Flanagan is Assistant Director of the IMF’s European Department and mission chief for the United Kingdom. He has previously led country work on Iceland and Greece
  • Alfred Kammer is the Director of the European Department at the International Monetary Fund since August 2020. In this capacity, he oversees the IMF’s work with Europe.
  • Andrea Pescatori is Chief of the Commodities Unit in the IMF Research Department and associate editor of the Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. He has written extensively on a variety of macroeconomic topics, including monetary and fiscal policy, and published in peer-reviewed journals.
  • Martin Stuermer is an economist at the Commodities Unit of the IMF’s Research Department. His research interests are macroeconomics with a focus on energy, commodities, and the energy transition. Among others, he has publications in Macroeconomic Dynamics,Journal of International Money and Finance and Energy Economics.

Source: This article was published by IMF Blog


Nord Stream pipeline uncertainty leaves Germany and Europe staring down barrel of discontent and recession

Confronted by all this uncertainty over Russian gas, Germany, and much of the rest of Europe, is urgently looking for other ways of sourcing energy.


Adam Parsons
Europe correspondent @adamparsons
Wednesday 20 July 2022 

The landfall facilities of the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline in Lubmin, Germany

There is a tense day ahead for just about everyone in Germany. Europe's richest nation is counting down the hours until it finds out if Vladimir Putin has turned off its gas supply.

For the past week and a half, the Nord Stream pipeline, which brings natural gas from Russia into Germany, has been closed for annual maintenance.
Sponsored link
It was only running at 40% capacity anyway, which the operator, Gazprom, blamed on a faulty turine.

In theory, that should now be in the process of being fixed. After a lengthy diplomatic row over whether pragmatism trumped sanctions, the replacement turbine is being shipped to Russia from Canada, despite protests from the Ukrainian government.

But is maintenance really the issue here?

In reality this is about whether Russia continues selling energy to Europe at the same time as Europe is backing Ukraine's war effort.

And viewed through that prism, pragmatism works both ways.

The Russian president is well aware that if he chooses to stop supplying Europe with natural gas, he can cause a lot of pain.

And so, like an anxious householder cautiously turning on his tap to see if the plumber really has fixed the leak, Europe will wait and see what happens.

Will Nord Stream come back to life or will the Russians decide to leave it switched off, weaponising energy?

Turning off the gas tap would certainly drive up prices in Germany and beyond, causing economic damage and worsening already tight household finances.

What's more, Germany, whose gas stores are less than two-thirds full, would rapidly find itself having to choose between rationing the supply to industry, to households, or simply everyone.

At one end of the scale, that might mean limits on air conditioning; at the other, factories being forced to shut their doors.

Little wonder that Germany's mighty, and hugely influential, industrial sector, is already pressuring politicians to withdraw rules that prioritise private citizens at times of energy shortages.

That spectre of social and industrial chaos might sound tempting to many in the Kremlin.

But, then again, selling fossil fuels, including natural gas, is how Russia earns a great deal of money. Even if Europe is rapidly trying to find new supplies, cutting the supply now might just hurt the Russian economy just as much as it would wound Europe's.



The truth is that nobody seems to know what is going to happen. Germany's government seems anxious; neighbouring Austria, which is even more dependent on Russia for its gas supply, appears to be far more relaxed.

The European Commission, meanwhile, delivered a particularly downbeat assessment about the prospect of Nord Stream being turned on again.

"We don't expect that it will come back," said Johannes Hahn, the Budget Commissioner.

"We are working on the assumption that it doesn't return to operation and, in that case, certain additional measures need to be taken."

That is a hint towards the Commission's own package of proposals for reducing energy consumption - limits on heating and cooling and, perhaps, interventions in the commercial energy market.

And yet just as the EU says that, so a well-placed diplomat, from a major EU country, tells me that he is expecting Nord Stream to be turned back on, but at an even lower capacity than it is running now.

"Putin needs a break-even point between maximising the pain to Europe by pushing the gas price higher, but also earning the cash Russia needs to keep functioning," he tells me.

And, of course, this isn't just about Nord Stream. There are other pipelines bringing gas from Russia into Europe.

Of them, I'm told that diplomats are particularly concerned about the continuity of supply from the Druzhba pipeline, the longest in the world, which also supplies Germany, as well as Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Austria and the Czech Republic.

"It is a question of how much pain Putin wants to cause us, compared to how much pain he is prepared to absorb himself," according to one diplomat.

Confronted by all this uncertainty, Germany, and much of the rest of Europe, is urgently looking for other ways of sourcing energy.

In Germany, which is in the final stage of closing its last nuclear power plants, the choices are very limited so inevitably, this rich, sophisticated nation will turn back to coal to cover its needs.

But even that may not be enough to avert an energy shortage that could push Europe towards discontent and recession.
Pakistan's Exiled Balochs Face Severe Security Threat: Report

 The safety of Pakistani dissidents is a major concern even in well-governed democracies as they are pursued by local killers and conspirators, mainly with roots in Islamabad.

Agency News ANI| Jul 20, 2022 

Representative image

Islamabad [Pakistan], July 20 (ANI): The safety of Pakistani dissidents is a major concern even in well-governed democracies as they are pursued by local killers and conspirators, mainly with roots in Islamabad.

The recent killing of Saqib Karim, a young dissident from Balochistan, under mysterious circumstances in distant Azerbaijan in Central Asia, is a fit example of political exiles being hunted down. He was reportedly being targeted by Pakistan's intel agencies, Islam Khabar reported.

Baloch National Movement (BNM) has urged the Azerbaijan government to investigate the Saqib case.

Pakistani dissidents have been targeted in various countries including the US, the UK, the Netherlands and France, Islam Khabar reported.

Is it to be noted that in 2020, the body of Banuk Karima Baloch, a political refugee and a BNM leader was found in Ontario Lake Toronto harbour front in Canada.

Amnesty International had called for a thorough investigation into Karima Baloch's suspicious death. She was strong-spirited, and her determination was to apprise the world about Baloch human rights abuses carried out by the Pakistan army.

She moved to Canada to save her life but death threats chased her all along and finally, she met a mysterious death fate what her family and friends believe is a heinous act of murder.

Baloch has publicly stated that she was critical of Pakistan's intelligence agency which is notorious for abducting human rights activists inside Pakistan.

Meanwhile, there are reports that missing Baloch people are being executed in the custody of Pakistani security forces in the country.

A statement was issued by Baloch human rights activist Mama Qadeeroch against the genocide of Baloch people which stated that the missing people are being killed in the custody of Pakistani security forces, local media reported.

With a spike in the number of enforced disappearances in Balochistan in the past few months, there is not even a single family in the province whose member or a relative has not been forcibly disappeared, reported a Canada-based think tank, International Forum for Rights and Security (IFFRAS) earlier this month.

Enforced disappearances are used as a tool by Pakistani authorities to terrorize people who question the all-powerful army establishment of the country or seek individual or social rights. (ANI)

Islamic veil: Why fewer women in North Africa are wearing it

By Magdi Abdelhadi
North Africa analyst

  • PublishedShae
IMAGE SOURCE,SOCIAL MEDIA

Photos of women in full Islamic attire - faces covered and in long dresses - next to old pictures of women in short skirts from the 1950s and 1960s in North Africa and the Middle East are often put together on social media to make a point.

The underlying message is: "Look what has become of Arab societies during the past 50 years or so."

To those who share such photos, it is the most visible sign of how their countries have regressed and abandoned the ideals of progress and modernity, exemplified by adopting a Western lifestyle.

But for the conservative forces that have shaped the region in the past few decades, it is quite the opposite: it is a positive act of asserting Muslim identity in societies that had for long been colonised and had a Western lifestyle imposed upon them first by colonial rulers, and then by Westernised elites out of touch with local culture.

From Morocco to Egypt and beyond, the issue of "Islamic dress code", in particular the veil or hijab, has been one of the most controversial piece of clothing.

By all accounts, its spread within the region has been down primarily to one factor: the emergence and eventual success of political Islam, the phenomenon also known as Islamism.

The whole of North Africa has powerful Islamist movements that either came to power or nearly did as in the case of Algeria in the early 1990s.

Even after they were removed from power, their influence over societies has remained considerable.

But that is beginning to change, according to many observers. And one of the most obvious ways to assess that is by looking at the most potent symbol of the impact of Islamism: the hijab.

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
Image caption,
Different views exist within Islam over whether women are required to cover their faces

Many observers have noted that the past few years have seen a steady decline in the phenomenon in North Africa.

In Moroccan news website Al-Yaoum 24, columnist Said El-Zaghouti recently wrote: "It's not hard to notice that the extent to which the hijab was worn in our Arab world, and in particular in Morocco, has gone down relatively, and that retreat and decline is to a large extent due to the decline and ebb of what is known as the Islamic current."

Young Moroccan women have spoken to local media about the social pressure, even harassment, they have to endure when they take off the hijab. But that has apparently not deterred them.

In Tunisia, where wearing the hijab was once an act of defiance because it was banned by successive autocratic regimes, it became popular for a brief period following the 2011 Arab Spring, but has started to fall off again recently.

Writing in the Arabic Independent, Tunisian journalist Huda Al-Trabulis highlights the complex motives for the appearance of the hijab in the country and its subsequent decline.

The hijab was once an act of resistance and opposition to secularism imposed from above during the rule of the post-independence autocrats, Habib Bourguiba and Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali.

It then became popular in the short period after the revolution in 2011 that saw the rise to power of the Islamist Ennahda movement, to the extent that the veiled woman was promoted as the model to follow for the Tunisian public.

But then it fell out of favour as successive Islamist-dominated parliaments failed to solve the country's many problems and Tunisia plunged into a deep economic and political crisis.

IMAGE SOURCE,AFP
Image caption,
Tunisia is heavily divided between those who advocate secularism and political Islam

In Egypt too, arguably the birthplace of the hijab as we know it today, the appearance and relative decline is tied up with the political fortunes of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Egyptian women began throwing off traditional face coverings nearly a century ago and by the mid-twentieth century the veil had almost completely disappeared.

But the hijab made its first re-emergence in the mid-seventies when then-President Anwar Sadat gave a green light to the Muslim Brotherhood to operate on university campuses to fight off political rivals from the secular left who had developed considerable influence over society in the previous decades.

The spread of the hijab continued almost unabated until 2013 when the Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi was removed from power.

Hostility to Islamist symbols - the hijab foremost amongst them - was palpable.

There were persistent reports of restaurants denying access to women wearing the hijab, or swimming pools refusing entry to women wearing the burkini, the supposedly Sharia-compliant swimsuit.

Today there is palpable decline that is hard to quantify due to a lack of objective surveys. The evidence is largely anecdotal.

Still, the hijab remains one of the country most divisive issues - a cultural and political fault-line not dissimilar to the one surrounding abortion in the US, with cultural and political rows breaking out at regular intervals on the matter.

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
Image caption,
The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt but has spread around the world

Most recently in Egypt reactions to the stabbing to death of a young university student in broad daylight by her suitor after she refused to marry him were as shocking as the crime itself.

To everyone the crime was abhorrent and duly condemned. But as soon as it emerged that the victim was unveiled, reactions began to diversify.

A famous tele-preacher urged women to cover their bodies properly to avoid meeting a similar fate. He actually said: "Cover your face with a basket."

And when her university sought to pay tribute to her, it produced a poster of her with her photo apparently doctored so it appeared as though she was wearing the hijab.

Both reactions triggered a barrage of angry responses from the secularised sectors of society.

The young man has been sentenced to death by hanging. But a campaign has swung into action to defend the convicted murderer.

No-one knows for sure who is behind it, but many suspect wealthy Islamists in exile have hired the highest paid lawyer in the country to defend the culprit in the appeal proceedings.

An intervention by al-Azhar - the highest religious institution in Egypt - to calm tension has ironically poured more oil on the fire.

The Grand Imam of al-Azhar, Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb, has said that not wearing the hijab does not make the woman a renegade, but simply a woman who disobeyed God.

IMAGE SOURCE,GETTY IMAGES
Image caption,
Egypt's Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb is a fierce critic of the Muslim Brotherhood

The statement that was meant to assuage secular sectors of society enraged women's rights and other secular groups even more.

Once again, social media were full of impassioned pleas for the hijab as an inalienable part of the faith and equally vociferous condemnation of the cloth.

Although support for the hijab appear to be waning in the region, especially among the young, the perception that it is inseparable from Muslim identity has become entrenched far and wide.

So much so that whenever any government - especially in Europe - introduces restrictions on wearing it in public institutions, that is usually denounced as a war on Islam itself.

Merely criticising the hijab in Western democracies has also become almost synonymous with "Islamophobia" or attacks on minority rights.

But in Muslim-majority societies it is still regarded as part of a legitimate campaign for the liberation of women from stifling tradition.