SpaceX will reap the benefits of new Dragon research opportunity

Aria Alamalhodaei
Fri, February 2, 2024 

SpaceX will become the co-owner of valuable data, biological samples, and possibly even patents and intellectual property related to human spaceflight, according to the terms and conditions of a new program inviting research on crewed Dragon missions.

The company started quietly inviting proposals "for exceptional science and research ideas that will enable life in space and on other planets," to be executed on orbit using its Dragon spacecraft capsule. Specifically, SpaceX says it's looking for research studies and experiments focused on fitness, or solutions to increase "efficiency and effectiveness," and those focused on human health during long-duration spaceflight missions.

Selected research study groups would have access to SpaceX’s crewed Dragon missions, opening up a whole new use case for one of the company’s core products.

The company has discussed using Dragon as an orbital lab, similar to the International Space Station (ISS), going back a decade. Evidently, the business case didn't make sense until recently. But by platforming on orbit research, the company would also gain access to valuable data in addition to any fees or other conditions presented to customers.

In the research collaboration terms and conditions, SpaceX states that it and the entity behind the scientific research will “jointly own” rights to all data recorded and samples obtained during the course of the research on orbit — regardless of whether this information was captured by SpaceX itself or the research institution. The document further specifies that all “technology” — which is expansively defined to include software, inventions, proprietary information and more — developed jointly by SpaceX and the research institution shall be jointly owned.

The agreement also states that the technology would be jointly owned “without accounting to the other parties,” legal language that means that each party could essentially commercialize or license the technology without any duty or obligation to the other party.

“Each party can license to anybody else, [though] they can't give an exclusive license to anyone else, because they don't have exclusive rights themselves,” Steven Wood, an attorney specializing in space law at Vela Wood, explained in a recent interview. “They can independently commercialize, and they have no duty or obligation to share any of the proceeds with the other party.”

There are clear exceptions: The document specifies that any technology developed solely using the researchers’ own equipment (defined here as equipment used “for the measurement, recording and transmission of data”) is owned solely by the researcher; however, even in this case, the data and samples would still clearly be jointly owned.

These are fairly standard terms for patents and inventions in this context, Wood explained, and shared that ownership of data and samples is also not out of bounds. But it reveals that commercializing Dragon would provide SpaceX with far more than just revenue.

“Expanding the light of consciousness”

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has always been explicit about the company’s core goal: making human life multi-planetary, starting with Mars. The company has made considerable headway toward its mission, with the most visible example being the massive Starship rocket, which is being designed with deep space travel in mind. SpaceX has conducted two orbital flight tests of Starship and is poised to conduct a third sometime this month.

But getting to Mars is just one half of the problem. As NASA pointed out earlier this month — and SpaceX leadership no doubt understands — astronauts going to the Red Planet will face serious physical and psychological risks. As NASA most recently summarized in a white paper released last week, dangers of interplanetary travel can include exposure to high levels of radiation, the physiological effects of differing gravity environments, and long-term exposure to isolation and confining environments.

Twin astronaut study suggests interplanetary travel may not be a health risk

NASA has spent years studying the effects of microgravity on the human body. But the agency is clear that the risks are very different for astronauts who stay on the ISS for six months or even a year (which may not be so bad after all) versus those who may embark on a multi-year roundtrip to Mars.

Given SpaceX’s ambitions, it only makes sense that the company wants to platform even more research into solutions that could reduce these risks — and better set up their own mission to Mars for success.

Wife Sues SpaceX After Rocket Test Leaves Husband in Coma

Frank Landymore
Thu, February 1, 2024 



Expendable Employees

SpaceX is being sued for negligence by the wife of an employee who was critically injured during a botched rocket engine test that left him in a coma, Reuters reports, as concerns over the workplace safety of the Elon Musk-led company continue to mount.

The employee, Francisco Cabada, was one of over 600 SpaceX injuries that were revealed in a Reuters investigation in November of last year.

Cabada was injured in January 2022, when a piece of a V2 Raptor engine, which powers SpaceX's Starship, broke off during pressure testing. It was sent flying into Cabada's head, fracturing his skull. Over two years later, the father of three is still in a coma.

The lawsuit was filed on his behalf by his wife, Ydy Cabada, in a state court in Los Angeles last week.

"It would have been nice to get a call from Elon Musk," Ydy told Reuters in November. "But I guess workers are just disposable to them."

Rush Job

According to anonymous SpaceX employees who spoke to Reuters, the part that struck Cabada, a fuel-controller assembly cover, had a known flaw that was not addressed before the test was carried out.

Just as damning, the investigation also revealed that senior managers at the Hawthorne California site where Cabada was injured were repeatedly warned about the dangers of rushing the engine's development.

The sheer tally of injuries suggests that there's a systemic problem at work — one that's already led to the death an employee of which SpaceX tried to keep under wraps. Many more have suffered broken or dislocated bones, crushed hands, lacerations, and even injuries that resulted in amputations, according to Reuters.

Breaking Point

Per the news agency's investigation, both current and former employees have blamed the unsafe environment on Musk's extremely demanding deadlines — a trademark of his leadership.

SpaceX, after all, is known to embrace the Silicon Valley ethos of "move fast and break things," which holds that with more failures comes quicker improvements.

Sometimes, though, things can "break" quite catastrophically, and you end up with an exploded Starship — or, far more tragically, injured employees.

It's worth noting that this isn't the only Musk-led venture with workplace safety concerns. For years, the EV automaker Tesla has come under fire for gruesome injuries that have occurred at its factories, amidst consistently re-emerging reports that workers are forced to sleep at the assembly line.

What will come of the lawsuit is unclear, but it seems that as long as a quick turnaround is the bottom line at these companies, workers will continue to pay the price.

More on SpaceX: SpaceX Buys Mysterious Aircraft


US military eyes SpaceX Starship for 'sensitive and potentially dangerous missions': report

Brett Tingley
Wed, January 31, 2024 

A large silver rocket on a launch pad fires its engines, creating a massive plume of fire and smoke.


The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) has reached out to SpaceX to inquire about using Starship on its own, flying the massive rocket as a "government-owned, government-operated" asset on "sensitive and potentially dangerous missions," according to a recent report in Aviation Week.

Currently, the DOD contracts SpaceX as a launch services provider; in this new proposed arrangement the Pentagon would actually take control of the vehicle on its own.

Related: Space is now 'most essential' domain for US military, Pentagon says

Aviation Week cites comments made on Tuesday (Jan. 30) by Gary Henry, a Senior Advisor for National Security Space Solutions at SpaceX, during the 2024 Space Mobility Conference held in Orlando, Florida.

"We have had conversations … and it really came down to specific missions, where it's a very specific and sometimes elevated risk or maybe a dangerous use case for the DOD where they’re asking themselves: 'Do we need to own it as a particular asset … SpaceX, can you accommodate that?'" Henry said at the conference.

"We've been exploring all kinds of options to kind of deal with those questions," Henry added.

a massive rocket lifts off above a plume of fire

The DOD has been considering using Starship for years. As early as 2020, U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) was discussing using the giant reusable rocket — which is not yet operational — for transporting cargo or even personnel rapidly around the world.

"Think about moving the equivalent of a C-17 payload anywhere on the globe in less than an hour. Think about that speed associated with the movement of transportation of cargo and people," former commander of USTRANSCOM Gen. Stephen Lyons said in Oct. 2020. "There is a lot of potential here, and I'm really excited about the team that's working with SpaceX on an opportunity, even perhaps, as early as '21, to be conducting a proof of principle."

Col. Eric Felt, director of space architecture for the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force for Space Acquisition and Integration, added that "there might be some use cases where there needs to be a government-owned, government-operated [vehicle], and that transfer can happen on the fly," Aviation Week reports.

RELATED STORIES:

— SpaceX targeting February for Starship's 3rd flight test

— Pentagon moves to declassify some secret space programs and technologies

— What is the U.S. Space Force and what does it do?

SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk has even hinted at using Starship to send 1,000 human passengers on point-to-point flights around the world at hypersonic speeds held in place by amusement-park-like restraints. "Would feel similar to Space Mountain in a lot of ways, but you'd exit on another continent," Musk wrote on X in 2019.

Aside from potential U.S. military applications and its traditional usage as a commercial launch vehicle, Starship is being tapped for NASA's Artemis program. The agency plans to use Starship as a moon lander to ferry human crews to and from the lunar surface, beginning with the Artemis 3 mission no earlier than 2026.

A lot of development and testing has to go right before that can happen, though. SpaceX will first have to conduct a successful demonstration in which Starship will be used as an orbital refueling platform to top off a human lander after it uses most of its fuel after it leaves Earth and heads to the moon.

Starship is SpaceX's next-generation launch vehicle that the company hopes will help humanity build settlements on the moon and Mars. The massive rocket has flown on two test flights to date; one in April 2023 and again in November 2023. A third test flight could come as soon as February 2024, pending regulatory approval from the U.S. government.

UN experts decry killing, silencing of journalists in Gaza

AFP
Thu, February 1, 2024 

UN reports indicate at least 122 journalists and media workers have been killed in Gaza since the October 7 attacks by Hamas on Israel (-)

UN rights experts voiced alarm Thursday at soaring numbers of journalists killed in the Gaza war, decrying an apparent "deliberate" Israeli strategy to silence critical reporting.

"Rarely have journalists paid such a heavy price for just doing their job as those in Gaza now," the five experts said in a statement.

United Nations reports indicate that at least 122 journalists and other media workers have been killed and many others injured in the Gaza Strip since war erupted there following Hamas's deadly attacks inside Israel on October 7.

The Palestinian militants also killed four Israeli journalists on October 7, while three journalists have been killed by Israeli shelling on the Lebanese side of their border.

"We are alarmed at the extraordinarily high numbers of journalists and media workers who have been killed, attacked, injured and detained in the occupied Palestinian territory, particularly in Gaza, in recent months," the experts said.

The independent experts, who are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council but do not speak on behalf of the United Nations, said they had received "disturbing reports that, despite being clearly identifiable in jackets and helmets marked 'press' or travelling in well-marked press vehicles, journalists have come under attack".

This, they warned, "would seem to indicate that the killings, injury, and detention are a deliberate strategy by Israeli forces to obstruct the media and silence critical reporting".

"Targeted attacks and killings of journalists are war crimes."

The experts, including the special rapporteurs on freedom of expression, on rights in the Palestinian territories and on extrajudicial executions, also voiced grave concerns that Israel has refused to let media from outside Gaza to enter and report unless they are embedded with Israeli forces.

"The attacks on media in Gaza and restrictions on other journalists from accessing Gaza, combined with severe disruptions of the internet, are major impediments to the right of information of the people of Gaza as well as the outside world," they said.

They also urged international courts to pay particular attention to this "dangerous pattern of attacks and impunity for crimes against journalists".

The war was triggered by Hamas's October 7 attack on Israel, which resulted in the deaths of around 1,140 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on official figures.

Militants also seized about 250 hostages. Israel says 132 remain in Gaza including at least 29 people believed to have been killed.

Israel has responded with a withering air, land and sea offensive that has killed more than 27,000 people in Gaza, most of them women and children, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory.

AFP journalists recently held a global show of support for the agency's journalists in Gaza who have not been allowed to leave since the war started.

nl/rjm/tw

 Growing Western push emerges to recognize a Palestinian state

Mathias Hammer
Thu, February 1, 2024 



Semafor Signals

Insights from Haaretz, Foreign Affairs, and The New York Times

The News

A growing number of Western countries are reconsidering their policy on recognizing Palestinian statehood, as the war in Gaza creates a renewed push for a two-state solution to bring about lasting peace with Israel.

The U.S. State Department is reviewing options for a possible recognition of a Palestinian state, Axios reported, potentially in exchange for normalized relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

EU officials have emphasized that a two-state solution is the only credible solution to the conflict. And British Foreign Secretary David Cameron said last month that there should be “irreversible progress” towards the creation of a Palestinian state – although a government spokesperson said his comments did not represent a change in policy.

Even so, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has doubled down on his opposition to a fully independent Palestinian state, saying he “will not compromise on full Israeli security control” over Gaza and the West Bank.
SIGNALSSemafor Signals: Global insights on today's biggest stories.
A nascent Biden Middle East strategy may include Palestinian statehoodSources: Foreign Affairs, The New York Times, Vox

In an article for Foreign Affairs written shortly before Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks, White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan wrote that the Middle East was “quieter today than it has been in two decades.” (The words have since been removed from the online version of the article.) For critics, the words were an indictment of the Biden administration’s lack of focus on the Middle East. But there are growing signs that a new “Biden doctrine” is emerging to tackle the growing crisis, with a demilitarized Palestinian state a central strand, The New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote. Biden administration officials have been talking to experts inside and outside the U.S. government to establish how such a state might look, he wrote.
Opinions are split on impact of potential US recognitionSources: Los Angeles Times, Gregg Carlstrom on X

Josh Paul, a former State Department official who resigned in protest over U.S. arms transfers to Israel following the Hamas attack, wrote in an opinion piece for the Los Angeles Times that U.S. recognition of Palestinian statehood would create a more even playing field for negotiations, moving the focus from “the occupier and the occupied” to “two entities that are equal in the eyes of international law.” But recognition alone will have little impact unless Israel agrees to work towards a two-state solution, Gregg Carlstrom, The Economist’s Middle East correspondent, wrote on X. The only way U.S. recognition of an independent Palestine would make a real difference is if “it’s accompanied by serious pressure/punitive measures on Israel,” Carlstrom wrote on X.
Israeli opposition to an independent Palestine goes deeper than NetanyahuSources: Foreign Affairs, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Gallup, Haaretz

Netanyahu and his rightwing administration are to blame for the lack of progress towards a two-state solution, two former Israeli officials and an entrepreneur-activist argue in Foreign Affairs, stating that “partition, despite the security risks it might pose, is essential to preserve Israel’s identity as a democratic state for the Jewish people.” But even a moderate Israeli government that supported a two-state solution would find their ability to act in the short term limited by “the Israeli public’s utter lack of faith that they can live safely alongside a Palestinian state,” according to Israeli political scientist Jonathan Rynhold.

One Gallup poll conducted in the weeks after Hamas’ attack on Israel showed that only 25% of Israelis supported a two-state solution, while 65% were against it. Given the widespread fear and trauma in Israel, talk of a two-state solution is “nothing more than grand posturing,” a former Israeli official wrote in Haaretz.

 U.N. head calls UNRWA 'backbone' of Gaza aid, appeals for continued funding

Thu, February 1, 2024 

Displaced Palestinians receive flour bags at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees school in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on Sunday, amid ongoing battles between Israel and Hamas. On Wednesday, U.N. head Antonio Guterres called on donor countries to continue funding the agency. Photo by Ismael Mohamad/UPI.


Feb. 1 (UPI) -- United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called the U.N. relief agency for Palestinian refugees "the backbone of all humanitarian response in Gaza" as he appealed for continued funding for the program in the wake of allegations that a dozen of its employees were involved in Hamas' October attack on Israel.

The need for humanitarian assistance in Gaza has been a constant throughout Israel's four-month war against Iran-backed Hamas in the Palestinian enclave. And what has reached those in need has mostly gone through the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees.

However, about a dozen countries, including its largest backer, the United States, have paused funding for the agency after allegations were raised last week that 12 of its employees were involved in the Oct. 7 attack that killed some 1,200 Israelis and started the ongoing war.

Guterres told the U.N. Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People on Wednesday that he had spoken to UNRWA's donors a day prior to listen to their concerns and outline steps they were taking to address them.

"I underscored the importance of keeping UNRWA's vital work going to meet the dire needs of civilians in Gaza, and to ensure its continuity of services to Palestine refugees in the occupied West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria," he said.

Funding for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees is under threat amid allegations that a dozen of its employees participated in Hamas' Oct. 7 attack on Israel. Photo by Debbie Hill/UPI

"UNRWA is the backbone of all humanitarian response in Gaza. I appeal to all member states to guarantee the continuity of UNRWA's life-saving work."

He said the humanitarian system in Gaza was collapsing and that he is "extremely concerned" by the conditions the enclave's 2.2 million people, of which 85% have been displaced, face as they struggled to survive without basic supplies.

U.N. head Antonio Guterres on Wednesday called the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees that "backbone" of the humanitarian response in Gaza. Photo by Ismael Mohamad/UPI.

"Everyone in Gaza is hungry, while half a million grapple with catastrophic levels of food insecurity," he said. "I call for a rapid, safe, unhindered, expanded and sustained humanitarian access throughout Gaza."

Following the allegations, UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini said he launched an investigation and terminated the contracts of those implicated. Of the 12 UNRWA employees alleged to have been involved in the attack, nine were immediately identified and had their contracts terminated, one is confirmed dead and the identities of two others are being clarified, he said.

More than two dozen non-government organization warned Wednesday that the suspension of funding by donors will affect life-saving assistance at a time when a famine and a disease outbreak loom under Israel's continued bombardment of Gaza.

"We are shocked by the reckless decision to cut a lifeline for an entire population by some of the very countries that had called for aid in Gaza to be stepped up and for humanitarians to be protected while doing their job," the 28 organizations, including Oxfam and Save the Children, said in the joint statement.

"If the funding suspensions are not reversed we may see a complete collapse of the already restricted humanitarian response in Gaza."

Though some of its largest backers have suspended funding, others have said the situation is too dire to end their support for UNRWA, despite raising concerns about the allegations.

While the European Union has said no additional funding to the organization is foreseen until the end of February, its top diplomat, Josep Borrell Fontelles, said on X Wednesday that he "fully agrees" with Guterres.

"@UNRWA reacted swiftly after the allegations against some employees," he said. "Its life-saving work is the backbone of humanitarian response in Gaza.

"U.N. members must guarantee it."

He earlier said it was "critical to preserve @UNRWA's irreplaceable role" in delivering aid to Gaza.

Guterres' call came as the Hamas-controlled Palestinian Ministry of Health said that the death toll has reached 26,900, plus nearly 66,000 people have been injured in the war.

 Half in new poll say Israel has gone too far in Gaza war

Tara Suter
Fri, February 2, 2024



Exactly half of Americans say Israel has “gone too far” in its military response in Gaza, according to a new survey.

The Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs Research survey found 31 percent of Americans said Israel has “been about right” in its response, and 15 percent said it has “not gone far enough.”

The percentage of Americans who said Israel has “gone too far” in its military response is up 10 points from November, when 40 percent of respondents answered that way. At the time, 38 percent of Americans said Israel had “been about right,” in its response and 18 percent said it had “not gone far enough.”

In the AP and NORC poll, 35 percent of Americans said Israel is an “ally that shares U.S. interests and values,” down from 44 percent in November. Forty-four percent in the new poll said Israel is a “partner that the U.S. should cooperate with, but doesn’t share its interests and values,” up from 40 percent in November.

Almost two-thirds of those surveyed — 61 percent — put “a lot” of blame on Hamas for the war, with 35 percent putting “a lot” of blame on Israel. Another third of those surveyed said Iran had “a lot” of the responsibility for the war.

And President Biden has lost some support in how he’s handling the crisis, with 31 percent in January, versus 37 percent in December, expressing approval. Among Democrats asked the same question, Biden has lost support, with 46 percent in January, down 13 points from the month prior.

The AP and NORC poll was conducted Jan. 25-29, with responses from 1,152 adults and a margin of sampling error at plus or minus 4 percent at the 95 percent confidence level.

Chicago this week became the largest U.S. city to call for a cease-fire in the war between Israel and Palestinian militant group Hamas. It is now united with other large American cities including Detroit, San Francisco and Atlanta in the call for a break in hostilities, as the death toll nears 30,000.

Over 800 Western Officials Denounce Their Governments' Pro-Israel Policies

Nik Popli
Fri, February 2, 2024 

Israeli troops and tanks are stationed along the border with the Gaza Strip on February 2, 2024, as battles continue between Israel and the Palestinian Hamas movement.

 Credit - JACK GUEZ—AFP/Getty Images

More than 800 civil servants from the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union released a statement on Friday criticizing their governments' support of Israel in its war in Gaza, warning that such policies could be contributing to war crimes and violations of international law.

As Israel’s military continues its deadly offensive in Gaza, the officials emphasized that western governments risk being complicit in “one of the worst human catastrophes of this century” by failing to hold Israel to the same international humanitarian aid and human rights standards they apply to other countries. The officials say they privately expressed concerns about Israel’s military operations to leaders of their governments and institutions but have been ignored.


“Our governments’ current policies weaken their moral standing and undermine their ability to stand up for freedom, justice and human rights globally,” the statement says. “There is a plausible risk that our governments’ policies are contributing to grave violations of international humanitarian law, war crimes and even ethnic cleansing or genocide.”

Read More: The Stakes of the Lawsuit Alleging Biden is Complicit in Palestinian Genocide

The statement marks the first display of coordinated transatlantic dissent since Israel’s war against Hamas began nearly four months ago, when the Israeli military launched an air and ground operation in Gaza after Hamas fighters killed 1,300 people in southern Israel and took more than 240 hostage. More than 27,000 people in Gaza have been killed and nearly 2 million have been displaced since the war began, according to the health ministry in Gaza and the United Nations.

The signatories called on their governments to “stop asserting to the public that there is a strategic and defensible rationale behind the Israeli operation and that supporting it is in our countries’ interests.” They also urged western governments to halt military support and secure a ceasefire that will increase aid for Palestinians and ensure the release of Israeli hostages captured by Hamas.

Read More: For Antony Blinken, the War in Gaza Is a Test of U.S. Power

The statement says that it was coordinated by civil servants in European Union institutions, the Netherlands, and the U.S. and was endorsed by civil servants in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The names of the civil servants are not listed, but the effort reveals that the current pro-Israel policies have generated dissent among some who work in government.

The statement comes a week after the International Court of Justice (ICJ)—the highest court of the United Nations—ordered Israel to do all it can to prevent death, destruction and any acts of genocide in Gaza caused by its military campaign. Israel has denied accusations of genocide in Gaza.

The signatories to the new letter demanded that Israel comply with the ICJ order. “Our governments have provided the Israeli military operation with public, diplomatic and military support,” the statement reads. The officials said they are concerned “that this support has been given without real conditions or accountability" as western governments "have failed to call for an immediate ceasefire and an end to blockages of necessary food/water/medicine in Gaza" in light of the war's death toll.

Write to Nik Popli at nik.popli@time.com.


Western officials in protest over Israel Gaza policy

Tom Bateman - BBC State Department correspondent
Fri, February 2, 2024 

A destroyed building in Gaza


More than 800 serving officials in the US and Europe have signed a statement warning that their own governments' policies on the Israel-Gaza war could amount to "grave violations of international law".

The "transatlantic statement", a copy of which was passed to the BBC, says their administrations risk being complicit in "one of the worst human catastrophes of this century" but that their expert advice has been sidelined.

It is the latest sign of significant levels of dissent within the governments of some of Israel's key Western allies.

One signatory to the statement, a US government official with more than 25 years' national security experience, told the BBC of the "continued dismissal" of their concerns.

"The voices of those who understand the region and the dynamics were not listened to," said the official.

"What's really different here is we're not failing to prevent something, we're actively complicit. That is fundamentally different from any other situation I can recall," added the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The statement is signed by civil servants from the US, the EU and 11 European countries including the UK, France and Germany.

It says Israel has shown "no boundaries" in its military operations in Gaza, "which has resulted in tens of thousands of preventable civilian deaths; and… the deliberate blocking of aid… putting thousands of civilians at risk of starvation and slow death."

"There is a plausible risk that our governments' policies are contributing to grave violations of international law, war crimes and even ethnic cleansing or genocide," it said.

The identities of those who signed or endorsed the statement have not been made public and the BBC has not seen a list of names, but understands that nearly half are officials who each have at least a decade of experience in government.

One retired US ambassador told the BBC that the coordination by dissenting civil servants in multiple governments was unprecedented.

"It's unique in my experience watching foreign policy in the last 40 years," said Robert Ford, a former American ambassador to Algeria and Syria.

He likened it to concerns within the US administration in 2003 over faulty intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq, but said this time many officials with reservations did not want to remain silent.

"[Then there were] people who knew better, who knew that intelligence was being cherry-picked, who knew that there wasn't a plan for the day after, but nobody said anything publicly. And that turned out to be a serious problem," he said.

"The problems with the Gaza war are so serious and the implications are so serious that they feel compelled to go public," he said.

The officials argue the current nature of their governments' military, political or diplomatic support for Israel "without real conditions or accountability" not only risks further Palestinian deaths, but also endangers the lives of hostages held by Hamas, as well as Israel's own security and regional stability.

"Israel's military operations have disregarded all important counterterrorism expertise gained since 9/11… the [military] operation has not contributed to Israel's goal of defeating Hamas and has instead strengthened the appeal of Hamas, Hezbollah and other negative actors".

The officials say they have expressed their professional concerns internally but have been "overruled by political and ideological considerations".

One senior British official who has endorsed the statement told the BBC of "growing disquiet" among civil servants.

The official referred to the fallout from last week's preliminary ruling by the UN's International Court of Justice in a case brought by South Africa which required Israel to do all it can to prevent acts of genocide.

"The dismissal of South Africa's case as 'unhelpful' by our Foreign Secretary puts [the international rules-based] order in peril."

"We have heard ministers dismiss allegations against the Israeli Government seemingly without having received proper and well-evidenced legal advice. Our current approach does not appear to be in the best interests of the UK, the region or the global order," said the official who also spoke on condition of anonymity.

An effigy of Joe Biden with a sign saying 'Genocide Joe' at a protest

In response to the statement, the UK Foreign Office said it wanted to see an end to the fighting in Gaza as soon as possible.

"As the Foreign Secretary says, Israel has committed to act within international humanitarian law and has the ability to do so, but we are also deeply concerned about the impact on the civilian population in Gaza," said a spokesperson.

The European Union Commission said it was "looking into" the statement. The US State Department has been approached for comment.

The statement suggests that while Israel's military operation has caused unprecedented destruction of lives and property in Gaza, there appears to be no workable strategy to effectively remove Hamas as a threat, nor for a political solution to ensure Israel's security in the longer term.

It calls for the US and European governments to "stop asserting to the public that there is a strategic and defensible rationale behind the Israeli operation".

Israeli officials have consistently rejected such criticism. In response to the new statement, the Israeli embassy in London said it was bound by international law.

It added: "Israel continues to act against a genocidal terrorist organisation which commits war crimes as well as crimes against humanity."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has claimed that only full military pressure on Hamas will secure the further release of hostages, while the army says it has destroyed significant underground infrastructure used by the group, including command centres, weapons sites and facilities for holding hostages.

On Saturday, the Israeli military said: "Throughout [the city of] Khan Yunis, we have eliminated over 2,000 terrorists above and below ground."

Israel has repeatedly rejected claims it deliberately targets civilians, accusing Hamas of hiding in and around civilian infrastructure.

Since the start of the war, more than 26,750 Palestinians have been killed and at least 65,000 injured, according to health officials in the Gaza Strip, which has been governed by Hamas and blockaded by Israel and Egypt since 2007.

Israeli officials say that 9,000 of those killed were Hamas militants but have not provided evidence for the figure. More than 1,200 people were killed in Israel during the Hamas attacks of October 7th, and a further 100 died of their injuries according to Israeli officials. More than 250 people were taken as hostages into Gaza.

The US administration has repeatedly said that "far too many Palestinians have been killed" in Gaza, and that Israel has the right to ensure October 7th "can never happen again".


More than 800 Western officials sign scathing criticism of Gaza policy

Mick Krever, CNN
Fri, February 2, 2024 


More than 800 officials from the United States and Europe have signed a scathing criticism of Western policy towards Israel and Gaza, accusing their governments of possible complicity in war crimes.

In a statement obtained by CNN, the officials say there is a “plausible risk that our governments’ policies are contributing to grave violations of international humanitarian law, war crimes and even ethnic cleansing or genocide.”

They accuse their governments of failing to hold Israel to the same standards they apply to other countries and weakening their own “moral standing” in the world.

Among them are around 80 United States officials and diplomats, a source told CNN.

In an unprecedented display of coordinated dissent since Israel’s war against Hamas began nearly four months ago, the signatories call on their governments to “use all leverage” to secure a ceasefire and to stop saying that there is a “a strategic and defensible rationale behind the Israeli operation.”

The public letter, released Friday, comes a week after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found South Africa’s claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza to be “plausible,” and ordered Israel to “take all measures” to limit the death and destruction caused by its military campaign, prevent and punish incitement to genocide, and ensure access to humanitarian aid.

The statement “shows the depths of concerns and outrage and just horror that all of us are witnessing,” a US official with more than 25 years’ experience, who signed the letter, told CNN on Friday.

“The talking points that keep being delivered day after day are not cutting it.”

The US official told CNN that the signatories were motivated by their shared experience of having their concerns be ignored by their governments and by “the appropriateness” of public dissent by civil servants when ignored internally.

The official added that the ICJ’s decision to hear a genocide case lodged against Israel was validation for the authors’ concerns. Israel has strenuously denied accusations of genocide in Gaza.

“What was really important for those of us on the US side was to link arms with the people in Europe who believe their governments are following the US lead, and feel constrained by that,” the official said. “So we thought it was important that US officials continue to make clear their concerns with government policy on this.”

People bury Palestinians, including those killed in Israeli strikes and fire, at a mass grave in Rafah, January 30, 2024. - Mohammed Salem/Reuters

The statement, which does not list its signatories, says that it was “coordinated” by civil servants in European Union institutions, The Netherlands, and the United States, and endorsed by civil servants in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

Despite the letter not listing its authors, the US official told CNN many colleagues feared losing their jobs, and that the lower number of US signatories reflected stronger protections for official dissents in Europe.

CNN has asked the U.S. State Department, the European Union, and the Dutch Foreign Ministry for a response to the statement. CNN has also reached out to the Israeli government for a response.

A senior British civil servant told CNN of the letter: “We feel that politicians have responded to the evolving situation, evinced by the Foreign Secretary’s words this week.”

The Dutch Foreign Ministry, in a statement to CNN, said that while civil servants are entitled to freedom of expression, they are subject to some limitations under Dutch law.

“It is only natural that the debate in society about the conflict between Israel and Hamas also exists within our ministry. We feel that there should be scope for this debate and we encourage staff to enter into dialogues internally. And these dialogues are taking place.”
‘We are obliged to do everything in our power’

In the letter, the officials say that they raised concerns internally within their governments and institutions, but their professional concerns have often been overruled “by political and ideological considerations.”

“We are obliged to do everything in our power on behalf of our countries and ourselves to not be complicit in one of the worst human catastrophes of this century,” they write.

Israel’s policies, they argue, are counterproductive to its own national security goals.

“Israel’s military operations have disregarded all important counterterrorism expertise gained since 9/11; and that the operation has not contributed to Israel’s goal of defeating Hamas and instead has strengthened the appeal of Hamas, Hezbollah and other negative actors.”

They say that Western support for Israel has come “without real conditions or accountability.”

“Our governments’ current policies weaken their moral standing and undermine their ability to stand up for freedom, justice, and human rights globally and weaken our efforts to rally international support for Ukraine and to counter malign actions by Russia, China and Iran,” they say.

Finally, they call on their governments to “develop a strategy for lasting peace that includes a secure Palestinian state and guarantees for Israel’s security, so that an attack like 7 October and an offensive on Gaza never happen again.”

CNN’s Luke McGee contributed reporting.


‘Overruled’: Over 800 U.S. And Allied Officials Issue Public Call For Shift In Gaza Policy

Akbar Shahid Ahmed
Updated Fri, February 2, 2024 

Scroll back up to restore default view.


A group of more than 800 government officials in the U.S., Britain and major European countries ― as well as European Union institutions ― has signed a letter urging Western countries to reconsider their policy of near-total support for Israel’s devastating offensive in Gaza.

The letter, released Friday, urges those governments to use all possible leverage, including potentially cutting off military support for Israel, to secure a cease-fire in Gaza that will increase aid for Palestinians and bring the release of Israeli hostages captured by Hamas and other militants on Oct. 7. It’s the latest sign of deep alarm among foreign policy professionals about the path President Joe Biden and other world leaders have chosen since the attack and Israel’s retaliation began.

“We are expected as civil servants to respect, serve and uphold the law while implementing policies, regardless of the political parties in power… we have done so for our entire careers,” says the letter, also signed by people working for the French, German and Swiss governments, among others. “We have internally expressed our concerns that the policies of our governments/institutions do not serve our interests and called for alternatives that would better serve national and international security, democracy and freedom; reflect the core principles of western foreign policy; and incorporate lessons learned. Our professional concerns were overruled by political and ideological considerations.”

Frustration among national security experts inside the governments that Israel counts as its key international supporters is at an all-time high.

Earlier this week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken held a town hall-style meeting with State Department employees, a significant group of whom have signed so-called dissent cables challenging Biden’s Gaza policy. At the meeting, one staffer told Blinken that State Department employees are receiving messages daily from people in Gaza who have previously been involved in U.S. government programs and are asking what more the U.S. could do to end the conflict ― winning huge applause from attendees of the session, a State Department official told HuffPost.

State Department spokespeople did not respond to a HuffPost request for comment on the incident.

Josh Paul, a veteran State Department official whose resignation over the U.S. Gaza policy was first reported by HuffPost, helped organize the Friday letter, whose signatories are anonymous for fear of professional retaliation. In a statement regarding the message, Paul argued: “One-sided support for Israel’s atrocities in Gaza, and a blindness to Palestinian humanity, is both a moral failure, and, for the harm it does to Western interests around the globe, a policy failure.”

“This is a remarkable statement from hundreds of individuals who have devoted their lives to building a better world, and, at a time where our politicians seem to have forgotten them, it is a much-needed reminder of the core values that bind the transatlantic relationship, and a proof that they endure,” he continued.

The letter is expected to continue to attract signatures in the coming days.

Government workers in the Netherlands take part in a silent sit-in outside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Dec. 21 to show their dissatisfaction with the attitude of the outgoing cabinet toward Israeli's assault on Gaza.

The Netherlands, one of the wealthiest countries in Europe and the host of significant global institutions, such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), has seen a significant uproar, with civil servants last month demonstrating outside the Foreign Ministry building.

“The Netherlands pretends to be the international rule-of-law and human-rights capital of the world, and look at us,” said Berber van der Woude, a former Dutch diplomat who was stationed in the occupied West Bank.

She argued that the message “shows that people who are experts, who have diplomatic experience… who have been serving the country for ages and have been doing that very loyally are so worried.”

“They would never choose to do this if it were not something very serious. It is a very exceptional situation, especially after the ICJ order,” said van der Woude, referring to the court’s ruling last week that there is a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza and that the Israeli offensive there must change course.

Angélique Eijpe, a 21-year veteran of the Dutch foreign ministry, resigned over her government’s approach in November. She said that signing the Friday letter was “an extraordinary thing for all involved to do.”

She told HuffPost that following the Oct. 7 attack, she tried to warn the foreign minister against Israel’s response, noting comments from Israeli ministers that demonstrated “genocidal intent.”

“I warned that I saw a parallel with our decision-making in the context of the Iraq War, where we also put all critical assessments of the situation aside because there was already a political decision made,” Eijpe said.

The government responded with “minimal expressions of concern for our well-being,” she said ― an echo of the listening sessions and town halls the Biden administration has offered to U.S. officials deeply disturbed by the moral and strategic implications of Washington’s choices.

“This type of concern is nice, but it also cast doubt on the professionalism of our concerns,” Eijpe said. American officials internally challenging the policy have cited national security arguments in doing so, and in November, HuffPost revealed that dozens of U.S. counterterrorism experts had privately written to the head of their agency saying Biden’s approach risked fueling blowback and undermining cooperation with other countries.

In her resignation note, Eijpe noted she is the breadwinner for her children and her decision to resign was difficult. But she compared it to the toll of the choices of her ancestors amid the Holocaust in the 1940s and Palestinians dying daily in Gaza today.

“Ultimately, I have the immense privilege of paying a relatively insignificant price to be on the right side of history,” Eijpe wrote.

Opinion

From Water to Uranium, the US Government Continues to Fail the Navajo Nation

Kianna Pete
Fri, February 2, 2024 

Guest Opinion. The Navajo Nation is the largest land reservation held by the Diné (Navajo People) in the United States–larger than ten states. Despite this, 30% of the families in the Navajo Nation live without running water, and the opening of a uranium mine poses more risks for Native communities surrounding the Grand Canyon area. The Navajo Nation, who experience the hardships of limited access to water and uranium contamination, are advocating for change. Yet, the US government is doing little to help. 

In 2023, the US Supreme Court ruled in Arizona v. Navajo Nation that according to the 1868 treaty establishing the Navajo Nation reservation, the United States is not obligated to provide access to water for the tribe. According to the opinion of the court delivered by Justice Kavanaugh, “In the Tribe’s view, the 1868 treaty imposed a duty on the United States to take affirmative steps to secure water for the Navajos. With respect, the Tribe is incorrect. The 1868 treaty “set apart” a reservation for the “use and occupation of the Navajo tribe.” But it contained no “rights-creating or duty-imposing” language that imposed a duty on the United States to take affirmative steps to secure water for the Tribe.”

This decision was anything but respectful. It reversed the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which sided with the Navajo Nation’s claim to urge the Secretary of the US Department of Interior, Deb Haaland, to develop a plan meeting the water needs of the Navajo Nation and ensure shared tribal water rights in the Colorado River.

Moreover, the ruling based its decision on the 1868 treaty but failed to acknowledge the centuries of settler colonialism and scorched earth campaigns that destroyed the water resources of the Navajo people. Instead, the treaty history accounted for by the court omits the violent acts committed by the US government and utilizes language from the treaty that blames the Diné peoples for their condition.

Arizona v. Navajo Nation is not just a case about the affirmative duty to provide water but also includes other resources destroyed by the US government. Ironically, the court declares this themselves saying that “under the treaty, the United States has no duty to farm the land, mine the minerals, or harvest the timber on the reservation—or, for that matter, to build roads and bridges on the reservation.” Regardless, uranium mining and transport are still in effect on the Navajo Nation.

On December 21, 2023, Energy Fuels, a lead producer of US uranium mining, announced the production of the Pinyon Plain Mine located near the Grand Canyon and Sacred Red Butte, also known as the sacred lands of the Havasupai and cultural property of the 11 Associated Tribes of the Grand Canyon. The mine poses a threat to the main water sources of these tribes yet Energy Fuels claims to be “the highest-grade uranium mine, with “state-of-the-art groundwater protections.” Only a few weeks after this announcement, the Havasupai Tribal Council released a statement on January 12, 2024, declaring that Energy Fuels contaminated one of two aquifers and sprayed toxic water that spread to surrounding plants and animals.

The tribe also raised concerns about the dangers of uranium transport. Haul No!, an Indigenous-led community organizing group leading efforts to halt the production of the mine, confirmed that Energy Fuels plans to “haul up to 12 trucks per day, each carrying 30 tons of uranium from the mine to the mill. This violates Navajo Nation law which prohibits the transport of new uranium across Diné lands.” This law is a result of previous US mining extraction, in which over 1,000 abandoned mines remain in the Navajo Nation that contaminated water resources and even caused deaths.

The violation of tribal law and reinterpretation of treaty rights is a unilateral power only acceptable to the US government. On one hand, the Supreme Court claimed the US couldn’t break a treaty negotiation to provide water. On the other hand, the US mining industry disregards tribal law to transport uranium. What is the use of being the largest land reservation if two legal systems cannot protect you? From water to uranium, the US government ignores systems of governance that do not favor their interests. They fail to take accountability for destroying and extracting resources from the Navajo Nation. Unlike the Navajo Nation, the United States has the liberty to choose when it can or can’t be held liable for its intervention with tribal communities.

In an election year where Native voters are pivotal to key races in states like Arizona, how are voters supposed to trust a government that disregards water rights and tribal law? Additionally, who are Native voters going to vote for when the Biden Administration is not keeping their promises to tribal communities after just signing a proclamation designating a million acres of land near the Grand Canyon as a national monument to protect the sacred lands of the Navajo Nation and Havasupai Indian Reservation. Should these tribal communities continue to put their hopes in the ballot box?

As a Diné citizen working with her community from afar, this is a tricky question to answer as I think of my relatives who are unaware of these legal barriers and will be directly affected by the Pinyon Plain Mine. I do know, however, that my hope for a more sustainable future for the Navajo Nation is in the Diné organizing groups who continue to resist and advocate for the connected right to life and water. Although the US government may fail us time and time again, what has remained since the 1868 treaty is the love for our home, Diné Bikéyah. My Diné relatives and all Indigenous communities should be living in harmony with their homelands, not having to fight for their existence inside it.

Kianna Pete (Diné) is an Indigenous Education and Policy Research Associate at the American Institutes for Research and Political Education Specialist at Start Empowerment. She is a graduate student at Columbia University and part-time volunteer with NoHaul!  

About the Author: "Elyse Wild is senior editor for Native News Online and Tribal Business News. "

Contact: ewild@indiancountrymedia.com

Secret US spying program targeted top Venezuelan officials, flouting international law

JOSHUA GOODMAN and JIM MUSTIAN
Wed, January 31, 2024 

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro delivers his annual address at the National Assembly in Caracas, Venezuela, Monday, Jan. 15, 2024. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
ASSOCIATED PRESS

MIAMI (AP) — A secret memo obtained by The Associated Press details a yearslong covert operation by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration that sent undercover operatives into Venezuela to surreptitiously record and build drug-trafficking cases against the country’s leadership – a plan the U.S. acknowledged from the start was arguably a violation of international law.

“It is necessary to conduct this operation unilaterally and without notifying Venezuelan officials,” reads the 15-page 2018 memo expanding “Operation Money Badger,” an investigation that authorities say targeted dozens of people, including Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

While there's no clear mechanism to hold the United States accountable legally, the revelation threatens to roil already fraught relations with Maduro’s socialist government and could deepen resentment of the U.S. across Latin America over perceived meddling. It also offers a rare window into the lengths the DEA was willing to go to fight the drug war in a country that banned U.S. drug agents nearly two decades ago.

Some of Maduro’s closest allies were ensnared in the investigation, including Alex Saab, the businessman recently freed in a prisoner swap for 10 Americans and a fugitive defense contractor. But until now, it was not clear that U.S. probes targeting Venezuela involved legally questionable tactics.

“We don’t like to say it publicly but we are, in fact, the police of the world,” said Wes Tabor, a former DEA official who served as the agency’s country attaché in Venezuela well before the investigation described in the memo was launched.

Tabor, who would not confirm the existence of any such operations, said unilateral, covert actions can be an effective tool when conducted with proper limits and accountability, particularly in a country like Venezuela, where the blurred lines between the state and criminal underworld have made it an ideal transit point for up to 15% of the world’s cocaine.

“We’re not in the business of abiding by other countries’ laws when these countries are rogue regimes and the lives of American children are at stake,” he said. “And in the case of Venezuela, where they’re flooding us with dope, it’s worth the risk.”

The DEA and Justice Department declined to answer questions from the AP about the memo, how frequently the U.S. conducts unilateral activities and the makeup of the panel that approves such operations.

Venezuela’s communications ministry did not respond to requests for comment. But in recent days Maduro accused the DEA and the CIA — a regular target he uses to rally supporters — of undertaking efforts to destabilize the country. The CIA declined to comment.

“I don’t think President Biden is involved,” Maduro said in a televised appearance this month. “But the CIA and the DEA operate independently as imperialist criminal organizations.”

TARGETING MADURO

The never-before-seen document was authored at the cusp of Republican President Donald Trump’s “ maximum pressure ” campaign to remove the Venezuelan president.

Maduro had just taken an authoritarian turn, prevailing in what the Trump administration decried as a sham re-election in 2018. Within weeks, senior DEA officials plotted to deploy at least three undercover informants to surreptitiously record top officials suspected of converting Venezuela into a narco state.

But because the plan appeared to run roughshod over Venezuelan and international law, it required the approval of what is known as the Sensitive Activity Review Committee, or SARC, a secretive panel of senior State and Justice Department officials that is reserved for the most sensitive DEA cases involving tricky ethical, legal or foreign policy considerations.

It marked an aggressive expansion of “Money Badger," which the DEA and prosecutors in Miami created in 2013 and would go on to investigate around 100 Venezuelan insiders, according to two people familiar with the operation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss law enforcement details.

By authorizing otherwise illicit wire transfers through U.S.-based front companies and bank accounts, the DEA aimed to unmask the Colombian drug traffickers and corrupt officials leveraging Venezuela’s tightly controlled foreign currency exchange system to launder ill-gotten gains. But it expanded over time, homing in on Maduro’s family and top allies, although the president would end up being indicted elsewhere, by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan, on drug trafficking charges.

None of the indictments of Venezuelans either before or after the 2018 memo made any mention of U.S. spying. And “to limit or mitigate the exposure of the unilateral activities,” the document advised DEA officials to protect their informants and curtail in-person meetings with targets.

It is not clear if ”Money Badger" is still ongoing.

Since Democratic President Joe Biden took office in 2021, his administration has rolled back sanctions and brought few new prosecutions of Maduro insiders as the Justice Department’s attention has turned to Russia, China and the Middle East. The Biden administration has also sought to lure Maduro back into negotiations with the U.S.-backed opposition, threatening to re-impose crippling oil sanctions if the OPEC nation doesn't abide by an agreement to hold fair and free elections this year.

The operation targeting Maduro’s inner circle is not the first time the United States has conducted law enforcement operations overseas without notifying a host country.

In 1998, Mexico castigated the United States for keeping it in the dark about a three-year money laundering sting known as “Operation Casablanca” — partly conducted on Mexican soil — that implicated some 160 people, including several bank executives.

Notably, legal experts say no international court or tribunal has jurisdiction to hold the United States or its agents accountable for covert law enforcement actions in other countries, and the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld arrests and evidence collected on such missions.

Evan Criddle, a law professor at William & Mary in Virginia, said international law forbids undercover operations such as those described in the memo that take place in another country’s territory without consent. He expects the release of the memo to “cause some embarrassment to the United States, prompt Venezuelan diplomats to register their objections and potentially inhibit future cooperation."

Several current and former DEA officials who examined the memo told the AP they were surprised less by the brazenness of the plan than the agency’s acknowledgement of it in internal documents.

“It’s very rarely done simply because there’s always that potential of it blowing up in the U.S. government’s face,” said Mike Vigil, the DEA’s former chief of international operations. “But Venezuela had already become a rogue state. I think they figured they had nothing to lose.”

RELEASED BY ACCIDENT

The Operation Money Badger memo was never intended to be made public.

It was inadvertently uploaded among dozens of government exhibits to a file share website by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan during the bribery conspiracy trial late last year of two former DEA supervisors who helped spearhead the agency’s offensive against the Maduro government. It would be removed hours after an AP reporter started asking about it.

A few days later, over the AP’s objections, the federal judge presiding over the bribery trial took the highly unusual step of sealing the courtroom while the document was discussed, saying that doing so in open court would have “serious diplomatic repercussions.” Neither he nor prosecutors explained what those might be.

Former DEA supervisors Manny Recio and John Costanzo Jr. were eventually convicted of leaking sensitive law enforcement information to Miami defense attorneys as part of a bribery conspiracy. One case they discussed was that of Saab, a Colombian-born businessman who himself would be targeted by “Money Badger” for the alleged siphoning of $350 million from state contracts.

Recio, who later worked as a private investigator recruiting new clients for the defense attorneys, emailed the Venezuelan plans to his personal email account days before his 2018 retirement. He approved the plans as an assistant special agent in charge, while Costanzo, an expert on Venezuela, oversaw the covert sting. Both men are expected to serve federal prison time, joining a growing list of DEA agents behind bars.

“Information like this should never leave government servers,” Michael Nadler, a former federal prosecutor in Miami who also helped coordinate the overseas sting, testified behind closed doors, according to a redacted transcript. “It contains information that provides identifying information regarding people who have agreed to cooperate with the United States in pretty dangerous situations.”

The AP is not publishing the actual memo or identifying the informants to avoid putting them in danger.

‘A SPECIAL RISK’

The memo harkens back to an earlier era of rising hostilities between the U.S. and Venezuela when ambitious federal investigators in several districts – New York, Miami, Houston and Washington – were competing to see who could penetrate deepest into Venezuela’s criminal underworld.

As part of that undeclared race, the DEA Miami Field Division’s Group 10 recruited a dream informant: a professional money launderer accused of fleecing $800 million from Venezuela’s foreign currency system through a fraudulent import scheme.

The informant’s illicit activity in Venezuela positioned him to help the DEA collect evidence against the chief target of the unilateral operation: Jose Vielma, an early acolyte of the late Hugo Chávez who in two decades of service to the Bolivarian revolution cycled through a number of top jobs, including trade minister and the head of Venezuela’s IRS.

Vielma’s alleged partner in crime, according to the DEA document, was another former military officer: Luis Motta, then electricity minister. The DEA memo authorized three informants to secretly record undercover meetings with the targets.

“There is a special risk that the (confidential sources) would be in danger if their cooperation with the DEA is exposed to host country officials,” the memo states. “Potential penalties include imprisonment.”

Whether the risks were worth it remains an open question.

Vielma and Motta were indicted on money laundering charges tied to bribery — not drug trafficking. Both remain in Venezuela and loyal to Maduro, with Vielma serving as a senior lawmaker and Motta’s wife the governor of a major state. But like dozens of Maduro insiders wanted in the U.S., neither is likely to be brought to justice – despite a $5 million reward for Motta’s arrest — unless they travel outside Venezuela.

Zach Margulis-Ohnuma, an attorney for retired Gen. Hugo Carvajal, a former Venezuelan spy chief awaiting trial in the U.S. on narco-terrorism charges in a separate investigation, said “the DEA’s reputation for lawlessness is well-earned.”

“A program that institutionalizes lawbreaking by authorizing DEA agents and informants to violate foreign laws,” he said, “does little to stop drugs from coming into the U.S. while undermining the integrity of the DEA and the reputation of America abroad.”

___

News Researcher Jennifer Farrar in New York contributed.

___

Contact AP’s global investigative team at Investigative@ap.org or https://www.ap.org/tips/