Back to school: Belarusian students and school children clash with police  

OMON and Belarusian students clashed in Minsk during an unscheduled rally on the first day of term


By Ben Aris in Berlin September 2, 2020 BNE INTELLINEWS

September 1 and all of Eastern Europe goes back to school at the end of the long summer holiday. Usually it is an exciting day, where the whole family puts on their best, but this year in Minsk students and even school children clashed with OMON riot police as Belarus' self-appointed President Alexander Lukashenko's renewed crackdown on his own population gathers momentum.

Thousands of students showed up for the first day of term, but many chose not to go to lectures but began an impromptu rally that marched into the centre of Minsk, only to be met with lines of OMON trying to prevent the unorganised demonstration.

While the young protestors were entirely peaceful, clashes broke out after OMON moved in and started detaining the demonstrators, dragging them off to awaiting paddy wagons.

The worst of the violence came in the first three days following the elections on August 9. Human rights organisations have documented over 450 cases of torture since the protests began, according to the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR).

“The prohibition against torture is absolute under international human rights law,” the OHCHR said in a statement. “It cannot be justified for any reason. Similarly, no circumstances whatsoever, whether internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked to practise, tolerate or justify enforced disappearances. Authorities in Belarus must immediately put an end to all human rights violations and combat impunity.”

Six people have died, and at least two of these appear to have been beaten to death and there are numerous reports of women being raped by police batons. More than 50 remain missing, according to the NGOs.

The OMON presence was beefed up and sent to campuses, where in one incident a tightly packed crowd of female students faced off against the OMON and began to sing Kupalinka, an old Belarusian folk song.


Shockingly the OMON also raided schools. At an elite state school OMON officers entered the school territory and arrested at least three teenagers, frogmarching them off the school grounds to awaiting vans.

A history teacher at the school bravely intervened to rescue a group of students who were carrying the red and white Belarusian flag that has become a symbol of the opposition, only to be detained in their place.

In another incident a crowd of protesters passing a school were greeted with shouts of “Long live Belarus!” by the children in the playground, some of whom were as young as eight, which were met with roars of approval.


Lukashenko has  emboldened after Russian President Vladimir Putin commented that he was prepared to send a security force to Belarus to quell unrest “if necessary.”

The Kremlin had been sitting on the fence, but has now come out decisively in Lukashenko’s defence, as it is keen to prevent an uncontrolled change of power that it can’t influence. The Kremlin has now confirmed it regards the massively falsified August 9 presidential elections as valid and Lukashenko as the legitimate president.

Moreover, the Kremlin also said in a statement on September 1 that it concurs with the Belarusian authorities that the newly established Coordinating Council that represents the opposition movement is unconstitutional. The authorities have opened some 50 criminal cases against the Coordinating Council, accusing it of trying to organise a coup d'état.

For their part the protesters show no sign of fatigue and indeed the increasing, but selective, violence of the OMON has only tempered the resolve to protest.

The Nexta Telegram channel that is the de facto organiser of the protests has called for a renewed general strike from September 1 in an effort to cripple the economy and force the government to the negotiating table.

Anecdotal evidence from reports on social media suggest that so far the strike is widespread and holding, despite factor managers' best efforts to cajole and intimidate works back to work.

Union State moving ahead

Lukashenko is due in Moscow in the near future, where it seems increasingly likely he will sign off on documents to finalise setting up a Union state – a sort of Eurozone of the east.

A general agreement to create the Union state, that will nix borders between Belarus and Russia and create a single currency, was signed in 1999, but Lukasheno has been resisting putting the deal into place.

Belarus is already a member of the Eurasia Economic Union (EEU), which is based on the idea of the European Union (EU) and harmonises trade, tax and financial regulations amongst the members. However, the Union State would significantly deepen the economic integration between the two states.

In comments on the upcoming meeting in Moscow Lukashenko mentioned that the goal was to create a market that stretched from Brest in western Belarus to Vladivostok on Russia’s eastern seaboard.

This is an echo of Putin’s oft repeated long-term foreign policy goal of creating a single market that spans the entire Eurasian continent from “Lisbon to Vladivostok.”

Rather than annex Belarus like Russia did with the Crimea, it seems more likely that Putin’s goal is to use Lukashenko’s weakness to create a single market structure with Belarus that is a step towards his goal of creating the Eurasian single market that the Kremlin feels is necessary to counter the rise of China as a global power. That means the Union State deal will be more sophisticated than a simple annexation, but will bring the two countries a lot closer together, both politically and economically.

At the same time Lukashenko gave some more details of the constitutional changes he is proposing as a peace offering to the protesters.

“Lukashenko openly admits that the entire political-judicial system is in his hands. The courts are subservient, but he interferes in an open manner, not from the back door. His control of the justice is overwhelming. Even the criminal cases are traced by him,” tweeted Dionis Cenusa, a PhD candidate that follows Belarus.

However, the text of the new constitution will not be drawn up in co-operation with the opposition and while it may devolve some more power away from the president it is unlikely to make Belarus any more democratic.

“It seems that Lukashenko doesn’t exclude a certain degree of democratisation, though a controlled one through “checks and balances” of non-democratic nature,” Cenusa commented.


VIDEOS

 

U.S. Troops in Syria Stuck Fighting 'Forgotten War' for Oil as Russia Advances Around Them

Trump Says It's Time U.S. Passes War On ISIS To Russia, Iran, Iraq And Syria, Focuses On Oil Instead

BY TOM O'CONNOR AND NAVEED JAMALI 9/3/20 NEWSWEEK

A Growing number of incidents involving U.S. and Russian forces in Syria has highlighted yet another strategic blindspot in the Middle East for Washington, as its shifting politics leave U.S. troops essentially stranded to guard oil and gas resources while Moscow presses on with a five-year effort to stabilize the war-torn nation.

With no clear path forward, a range of voices within the U.S., Russian and Syrian governments, and on the ground in areas under the control of a Pentagon-backed autonomous administration in the country, have expressed doubts to Newsweek over the current approach.

"It's a clusterf**k in Syria," one senior U.S. intelligence official, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, told Newsweek. "We don't have a strategy."

The frustrations come as the U.S. nears an election in which both candidates vow to end the "endless wars" waged by their predecessors. Come January, either former Vice President Joe Biden—who oversaw U.S. support for insurgents fighting to overthrow the Syrian government under former President Barack Obama—or President Donald Trump—who inherited a campaign then focused on fighting the Islamic State militant group (ISIS)—will steer a U.S. policy on Syria that is currently presented with mixed messages, even among the government's own agencies.

Officially, the Pentagon's mission remains "to ensure an enduring defeat" of ISIS, according to the most recent press releases sent to Newsweek by the U.S.-led coalition. The State Department additionally calls for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to negotiate his departure, and for the withdrawal of Iran and Iran-backed forces supporting him.

For his part, President Trump, as he told reporters last month, said the U.S. has simply "kept the oil."

The president has made no secret of his desire to send U.S. oil companies to operate in Syria, and to let others such as Moscow, Tehran and Damascus take on the task of preventing a resurgent ISIS. Last October, he repositioned personnel away from outposts under the control of the mostly Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces, and sent what he called a "small force" of U.S. troops to guard oil and gas fields in the northeast.

Russia, for its part, seized the opportunity to expand its presence in support of the Syrian government, taking control of former U.S. positions in some cases. Now two of the world's most powerful militaries led by geopolitical rivals operate side-by-side in northeastern Syria, with only a deconfliction channel to prevent accidents.

"The Coalition does not coordinate or share intelligence with Russia in Syria," Pentagon spokesperson Navy Commander Jessica McNulty told Newsweek. "From time-to-time we are incidentally apprised of planned Russian strikes on ISIS targets West of the Euphrates River, as part of our routine de-confliction communications."

This precarious situation has resulted in a number of international incidents involving U.S. and Russian forces apparently trying to block one another's patrols as they occupy the same roads in northern and eastern Syria.

A picture taken on June 3 shows a U.S. soldier standing guard as a Russian Mil Mi-24 military helicopter gunship flying over the northeastern Syrian town of Al-Malikiyah at the border with Turkey. Moscow backs the Syrian government based Damascus, Washington supports an autonomous and mostly Kurdish-led administration in the north and east, while Ankara sponsors an insurgency along the border and in northwestern Idlib province.DELIL SOULEIMAN/AFP/GETTY IMAGES


One high-profile instance last week saw U.S. troops injured after their vehicle collided with a vehicle of the Russian forces. The Pentagon said that the incident demonstrated "deliberately provocative and aggressive behavior" by the Russians.

"We have advised the Russians that their behavior was dangerous and unacceptable," the Pentagon said in a statement. "We expect a return to routine and professional deconfliction in Syria and reserve the right to defend our forces vigorously whenever their safety is put at risk."

The senior U.S. intelligence official who spoke to Newsweek characterized Moscow's moves as posturing.


"The Russians are and will be aggressive, that's their definition of 'strength,' and at times it's as simple as not properly deconflicting routes, patrols, etc.," the official said.

The dust-up led to a call between the top military officials of the two countries. During the discussion, Russian Chief of the General Staff Army General Valery Gerasimov told U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Army General Mark Milley that "the commanders of the International anti-terrorist coalition were notified in advance of the Russian military police convoy," according to remarks delivered by Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov and shared by the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Gen. Gerasimov proceeded to blame the U.S. military for the collision between the forces of the two countries.


"Despite this, in violation of existing agreements, U.S. military personnel attempted to block a Russian patrol," he added. "In response to this, the military police of the Russian Federation Armed Forces took the necessary measures to prevent the incident and further fulfill their task."

READ MORE
Syria Says Trump 'Stealing' Its Oil, After U.S. Company Makes Deal to Drill

Moscow's argument is based on the premise that the U.S. does not have the right to be in Syria in the first place.

"We proceed from the fact that American military presence in Syria (both in At-Tanf and in the Northeast) is illegal," Nikolay Lakhonin, a spokesperson for the Russian embassy in Washington, told Newsweek. "Neither the U.N. Security Council, nor the government in Damascus gave their approval for the U.S. to deploy troops."

Not only deeming it illegitimate, Moscow argues the presence of U.S. troops in Syria has exacerbated the suffering of its population.

"Besides the clear violation of international law, American presence in Syria has an undeniable negative impact on the lives of Syrians," he added. "By occupying major oil and gas reserves in the Northeast, the U.S. deprives the people of Syria from its own vital resources."


Lakhonin also warned of "severe humanitarian effects" such as in the Syrian Democratic Forces-run Al-Hol camp in Al-Hasakah and Al-Rukban camp in U.S.-backed insurgent-held Al-Tanf. Both refugee sites have been regular subjects of desperate U.N. appeals, which are also directed toward civilians caught in bombardments by Russia and Syrian warplanes.

While Western powers still disregard Assad over war crime accusations, Russia sees his leadership as the only path forward.

"In our contacts with the U.S. officials," Lakhonin said, "we urge them to end this illegal occupation, and let the Syrian government restore control over its legally recognized territories."

A U.S. armored vehicle drives past an oil field in the countryside of Al-Qahtaniyah town in Syria's northeastern Al-Hasakah province near the Turkish border, on August 4. "In Syria, we're down to almost nothing, except we kept the oil," President Donald Trump said last month. "We did keep a small force, and we kept the oil."DELIL SOULEIMAN/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Damascus' ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Jaafari, also condemned U.S. policy in Syria. He too took note of Trump's public enthusiasm in tying U.S. military presence in Syria to oil, and challenged the legitimacy of this deployment in remarks delivered to the U.N. Security Council and sent to Newsweek by the Syrian U.N. mission.

"The U.S. occupation forces, in full view of the United Nations and the international community, took a new step to plunder Syria's natural resources, including Syrian oil and gas," Jaafari said, through a company he called "Crescent Delta Energy."


A similar name, "Delta Crescent Energy," appeared in U.S. outlets citing sources familiar with the arrangement. The State Department later confirmed that the U.S. government had facilitated such a license, though the Treasury Department declined to offer details to Newsweek as a matter of legal protocol.

Jaafari went on to accuse the U.S. of theft, saying that it was "stealing Syrian oil and depriving the Syrian state and Syrian people of the basic revenues necessary to improve the humanitarian situation, provide for livelihood needs and reconstruction."

The vehicle crash between U.S. and Russian forces in Syria is not an isolated incident among rival forces. In another confrontation about a week earlier, a tense situation reportedly turned deadly at a Syrian military checkpoint in the same northeastern province of Al-Hasakah. The Syrian government accused the U.S. of killing one of its soldiers and wounding others, while the U.S.-led coalition troops said they had returned fire after being shot at.


Meanwhile, the ebb and flow of various armed factions have taken a toll on the local population of northern and eastern Syria, which has become increasingly suspicious of Washington's true intentions.

Mohammed Hassan, a Syrian Kurdish fixer and journalist who has witnessed and recorded a number of U.S.-Russia encounters firsthand, said the two countries' diverging strategies were readily apparent.

"The strategy for the Russian forces is to be deployed in all of north and eastern Syria," Hassan told Newsweek. "They are planning to do this, but about the Americans, they are just interested in the oil and gas fields in areas like Rmelan, like Al-Hasakah, like Al-Shaddadi, like Al-Hol and like Deir Ezzor."


Hassan said that the United States Syria policy is all about the oil.

"We all know about the American withdrawal from Kobani, from Manbij, from Ayn Issa, from Ras al-Ayn, from Tel Abyad," he said. "We know there are not any oil and gas fields there."

Hassan recalls scenes last October of teary-eyed civilians throwing stones at departing U.S. military convoys, shouting as they feared an imminent Turkish invasion. The incursion was partially halted by successive U.S. and Russian deals with Turkey, but Hassan said the views of locals armed and unarmed toward the U.S. fundamentally shifted after this decision.

"All of us will remember how this relationship between the Americans and local civilians changed," Hassan told Newsweek. "I remember this moment until now. I cannot forget it ever."

U.S. Marines with 2nd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment take part in a combat marksmanship range in Syria, August 21. There are roughly 500 U.S. troops deployed to Syrian Democratic Forces-controlled northerm and eastern Syria as well as a southern garrison in the opposition-held Al-Tanf region.SERGEANT BRENDAN CUSTER/13TH MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT /U.S. MARINE CORPS

Russia has since hosted meetings with officials from Turkey, Iran, the Syrian government and its opposition, and the Syrian Democratic Forces' political wing. Each side is struggling to find common ground with the other in a conflict that will reach its deadly tenth anniversary next March.

That same month will mark two years since President Trump declared victory over ISIS, the primary goal for a mission that Washington has yet to officially replace. Still, U.S. troops linger in a country accounting for a mere .2 percent of the world's proven oil reserves and .12 percent of gas reserves.

"I think that American strategy here it's not clear enough, especially on the politics side," Hassan said. "Maybe on the military side, it's clear in some ways. I think the mission for the American forces here, it's successful, but the political mission, it's not successful."

Malcolm Nance, a former U.S. Navy intelligence and counter-terrorism specialist, put the situation in perspective, comparing it to another bloody quagmire for the Pentagon.

"A few special forces supported by artillery and armor units is very much akin to 2002 in Afghanistan," Nance said. "It is now a forgotten war."

Like Hassan, Nance saw a political game with little payoff.

"The oil fields that U.S. forces are now occupying do not produce anything that comes to North America, and has no value save either for Russia and the Assad regime or the SDF allies whom we have abandoned," he told Newsweek. "Trump is sitting on this field and risking U.S. lives to say 'we took their oil.'"

The irony, Nance says, is that while there are oil fields, little is actually produced.

"The oil remains in the ground, the fields are unworked," Nance said, "and U.S. soldiers are dying to fulfill a feeble man's pledge."

Climate change and the Russian economy
Russia is one of the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs) but with modest Paris Accord targets it can actually increase CO2 emissions in the next few years and global warming will actually improve the economy in some colder regions.


By Ben Aris in Berlin September 3, 2020


Russia has signed off on the Paris Accord this year and has joined the global fight to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. But it has only set itself modest targets and made modest progress. As one of biggest producers of emissions in the world it could do more, but with its economy so heavily geared to the production of oil and gas that change is going to be hard to effect.

A recent paper from Bank of Finland Institute for Economies in Transition (BOFIT) called “Climate change and the Russian economy” has dug into the details, looking at the issues that Russia faces and how well it is doing.

“Russia often treats climate change as a subset of issues within the spheres of foreign or security policy. Awareness and recognition of climate-related risks have increased in recent years, but climate issues still garner low policy priority. Russia only gave official acceptance to the Paris agreement in October 2019, making it one of the last of the major carbon-emitter countries to do so,” wrote Heli Simola, the author of the BOFIT paper.

Russia introduced its first national climate doctrine in 2009 that was aspirational but very general. A framework to deal with climate change was laid out but no details were given.

In spring 2020, the Ministry of Economic Development presented a draft version of "The strategy of the long-term development of the Russian Federation with low level of GHG emissions until 2050" (hereafter, Low emission strategy 2050). The strategy aligns with Russia’s modest national targets under the Paris agreement.

The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) has been more active in promoting climate issues. It joined the recently established international co-operation group, the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), and wants to stimulate public debate on climate issues through publications that discuss climate risks to the financial sector and aspects related to green financing.


The problem

The average global temperature is presently estimated to be increasing by about 0.2 °C per decade. In Russia, warming is much faster than the global rate, i.e. an estimated average of 0.45 °C per decade and 0.8 °C per decade in the Arctic region.

“Without mitigation measures, the IPCC foresees the increase in carbon emissions will raise the average global temperature by 3-4 °C compared to pre-industrial times by the end of this century. To avoid reaching a tipping point, climate experts want to constrain the increase in average global temperatures to a level 1.5-2 °C above the pre-industrial baseline. Most countries committed to this target in the framework of the 2015 Paris agreement,” Simola said.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that mankind will have to attain zero net carbon emissions globally by around 2070 to stay within the 2 °C limit. Any delays in emission cuts imply sharper and deeper cuts later as that deadline approaches.

Russia is a top CO2 emitter both in absolute and per capita terms. The country accounts for about 5% of global emissions.

As elsewhere, Russia’s GHG emissions are mainly caused by energy use. Half of energy-related emissions in Russia originate from energy-producing industries, 15% from transport and 10% from manufacturing and construction activity. Within the manufacturing sector, the metal and chemical branches account for the largest shares of emissions.


The silver lining to the collapse of the Soviet Union was that it came with a massive reduction in CO2 emissions as industry just stopped working.

The recovery of the economy since has led to an increase in CO2 emissions, but thanks to the investment and upgrading technology this has meant that the increase of CO2 emissions has been more moderate and remains below the previous peaks. This low base effect means Russia will have a much easier time of meeting the Paris Accord commitments than most other countries.

“Emissions have increased slightly in recent years, but still are only about half of the level of 1990, the base year for contributions laid down in the Paris agreement for Russia and most other countries. Russia gave formal acceptance to the Paris agreement last year and targets restricting its GHG emissions in 2030 to 70-75% of the level of 1990. Indeed, Russia’s low emission strategy 2050 allows for emissions to rise throughout the upcoming decade,” Simola said.

The risks

There are two kinds of risk. Physical risks arise from the climate-related hazards such as extreme weather or rising sea levels. Transitory risks arise from a society’s shift to a low-carbon economy and affect policy choices.

Crop destruction due to extreme weather events may even cause an increase in global food prices.

Extreme weather events also pose risks to the financial sector. Global weather-related disasters generated a record $320bn in economic damage in 2017. Insurance companies face distress from increased claims due to the higher frequency and severity of extreme weather events.

Russia has experienced an increase in the severity and frequency of extreme weather events in recent decades (Roshydromet, 2017). During the 2010s, for example, the total costs of severe extreme weather events are estimated to have amounted to around $7bn, mosty due to wild fires.

The heatwaves and droughts in 2010 and 2012 cut Russia’s grain production substantially and pushed up cereal prices on global markets.


Physical gradual changes

The findings from the literature on global warming suggest that an increase in the average temperature tends to have a negative effect on the economy. There is a threshold: if the average annual temperature of a region exceeds 15 °C, an increase in the average temperature has a negative effect on the economy.

A recent survey estimates that a 3 °C increase in the global average temperature leads to a 2-10% lower level of global GDP compared to a baseline with no global warming.

“With the exception of a handful of regions in southern Russia, the average annual temperature in Russian regions is well below the 15 °C threshold. Therefore, studies that report estimates for Russia separately tend to find that at least a moderate increase in the average annual temperature would have a slightly positive effect on [the] Russian economy,” Simola said.

The uncertainty related to these estimates is extremely high, especially with respect to longer time horizons and larger temperature rises.


Transitional risks

Transition risks refer to effects arising from the shift to a low-carbon economy and the policies to achieve that goal.

Mechanically, there are three ways to reduce carbon emissions:
reduce production,
reduce energy intensity of production, or
reduce carbon intensity of energy production.

As the latter two alternatives are less costly in economic terms, so governments tend to adopt policies that concentrate on improving overall energy efficiency and reducing the use of carbon-intensive energy sources such as coal and oil.

A key policy objective is to price carbon emissions in a way that reflects the long-term costs to society. The most widely proposed economically optimal policy solution is the carbon tax. In practice, however, it is extremely difficult to estimate the appropriate level of the tax, i.e. the social cost of carbon (SCC). Estimates vary hugely across models and even within models as assumptions change.

“Despite the difficulties related to the optimal tax design, several countries and regions have developed policy measures for pricing carbon, e.g. the EU’s emission trade system (ETS). There are also several other (primarily fiscal) policy measures geared to climate change mitigation. These include subsidies and credit guarantees to support low-carbon investment, direct public spending on e.g. infrastructure that supports the shift to a low-carbon economy and regulation restricting use of carbon and carbon-intensive products,” Simola said.

There are financial risks to these changes too as the shift to low-carbon economy means that carbon-intensive assets become stranded or obsolete, Analysts estimate there are $1-4 trillion worth of assets in danger of becoming stranded.

Countries remain conflicted, as changing their source of energy is a hugely expensive and complicated process. The Polish government in September said that it would put restrictions on where utilities get their power from in an effort to bolster the Polish coal-mining industry, a big employer.

On the flip side governments have been encouraging investment into green energy or building nuclear power stations as the most viable way to reduce emissions.

Earlier this year the Italian-owned Enel Russia utility company sold its biggest coal-fired power station that accounts for a third of its generation capacity, as the company is in the vanguard of Russian power companies trying to go green. It has instead switched all its investments into developing renewable energy sources.

Green investment in Ukraine has boomed as foreign investors rushed in to take advantage of generous green tariffs, but got caught out when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s government abruptly tried to unilaterally cancel the deals earlier this year.

And as bne IntelliNews reported, Russia has become a world leader in the export of nuclear power technology, with some 40 projects under way in countries and worth around $130bn.

“[For] Russia, transition risks related to domestic policies seem quite modest for the near term. As noted above, Russia’s targets on curbing carbon emissions are unambitious and allow for emissions to rise at least through the end of this decade. Although legislation is under preparation, CO2 emissions remain unregulated by the state. Introduction of a carbon-pricing scheme is not on the agenda, but has been mentioned in the low emission strategy,” Simola said.

Btu Russia is in more danger of other countries’ efforts to add taxes to CO2 products. The EU’s new green strategy to make Europe carbon zero by 2050 could see the imposition of a tax on Russian imports of gas and oil and that will heavily affect Russia’s biggest export industry.

Russian exports are heavily focused on energy and other carbon-intensive sectors. Carbon-intensive products such as mineral fuels, metals and wood account for about 80% of Russian goods exports – and there has been little change in their composition over the past two decades.

“In 2018, the value of these exports was $360bn (22% of GDP). The literature also suggests little progress in diversification, complexity or quality improvements in Russian exports over recent decades. The average carbon intensity of Russian exports is many times higher in all industrial sectors compared to the EU average,” Simola said.

If these EU carbon taxes come into effect they will only further erode the competitiveness of Russian goods, which are amongst the most carbon intensive in the world.

According to the latest rating by the Russian journal Expert, oil, gas and coal companies accounted for a third of the combined net sales of Russia’s 400 largest companies in 2018, while metallurgical companies accounted for an additional share of almost 10%. Likewise, the banks are heavily exposed to carbon producers with a third (35%, RUB13 trillion) of the loan book of the biggest banks made up of loans to the oil and gas companies.

Russia has some easy gains it could employ to reduce its emissions. As bne IntelliNews reported in “the cost of carbon in Russia”, big gains have already been made in reducing emissions in the power and housing sectors simply by upgrading to more modern and efficient technology.

However, the energy intensity of production in Russia remains amongst the highest in the world for middle and high-income countries, and more could be done.

“The energy intensity of Russia’s most important products is 1.5 to 4 times higher than that of best-practice countries. There is much potential for energy-efficiency improvement in Russia, especially in its industrial and residential sectors,” Simola said. “Improving energy efficiency of power generation, industrial production and buildings is mentioned in Russia’s low emission strategy 2050 as the main means of restricting carbon emissions in the next decades. In 2018, investment in energy saving and energy efficiency amounted to a mere 0.2% of GDP.”

What change is happening in Russia at the moment is happening at the corporate level, where some big companies have started to invest heavily in literally cleaning up their act as part of their environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategy. What moved them was the state pension fund of Norway’s decision to ban pension funds from buying the equity of companies that are not ESG compliant. That led to massive outflows of investors at some Russian companies, goading them into action.

And in general the Kremlin also has always wanted to move away from its reliance on oil and gas as a means of reducing exposure to commodity price swings. Russia’s current national development goals for 2030 also include a target for increasing non-energy exports, but little progress has been made so far.

 Can Lebanon Rebuild Not Just Beirut, but Its Broken Political System

World Politics Review

Patricia Karam

 

The devastating explosion that tore through Beirut earlier this month exposed the elite corruption at the heart of Lebanese governance. The blast itself, which was almost certainly caused by a stockpile of highly explosive ammonium nitrate that had sat unguarded at Beirut’s port since 2013, may not have been deliberate. But it had everything to do with Lebanon’s history of conflict and the elderly politicians, many of them former warlords, who still hold power in its dysfunctional, sectarian and clientelist political system. With the public mobilizing against the country’s kleptocracy, the survival of the status quo is in question. But whether a reformist alternative can take its place remains uncertain.

Since the 1970s, Lebanon’s political elites have eschewed the hard work of governing in favor of plundering the country’s resources and concentrating power among themselves. To date, as much as $100 billion have been squandered from the country’s banking system in corrupt deals. Now, with more than 200 people dead from the blast and thousands more injured and displaced, Lebanon’s leaders are once again determined to escape blame for a disaster of their own making by rejecting an international investigation into its causes and culprits.

Lebanon had already been seething before the explosion. In last year’s so-called “October Revolution,” a series of protests erupted over a new tax on the popular messaging service WhatsApp, in a sign of the increasing popular frustration with the old order. At the forefront of this uprising was a new generation of activists who recognized the serious problems facing Lebanese society and the failure of the political class to address them in any meaningful way. The fact that the recent catastrophe was caused by negligence has only sharpened their resolve for an alternative.

Demands to overhaul the entire governing system have also become synonymous with calls to disarm Hezbollah, the Shiite militia and political party that has seized on the state’s weakness to become a central player in Lebanon’s kleptocracy. Despite high rates of disaffection with the political establishment, the most recent legislative election in 2018—after nine years of political paralysis—yielded a Parliament dominated by incumbents from traditional parties, with more than 70 of the total 128 seats going to Hezbollah and its allies. This came as a surprise to many reformists who had counted on higher youth participation in politics to bring genuine change.

This shows that transforming Lebanon’s political culture will not be easy. Enacting needed reforms involves overhauling a system of perverse incentives that perpetuate kleptocratic practices, such as the unchecked and opaque network of patronage that controls appointments to public offices. Lebanon’s citizens feel the injurious impacts in myriad ways. In 2015, for example, mountains of uncollected trash built up in the streets as elites wrestled over lucrative waste management contracts. Still, the recent protests have had a minimal impact on the quality of governance, which attests to the need for more structured policy advocacy that not only mobilizes a wide spectrum of the Lebanese population, but also recruits reformist candidates and influences the platforms of political parties.

 But that is a long-term project. For now, the next phase will likely involve the appointment of a new technocratic government that will not be very different from the last one, led by Prime Minister Hassan Diab, which resigned after the explosion. Without altering the rules of the game, whoever takes Diab’s place will probably agree to concessions demanded by the International Monetary Fund for the bailout package required to extend a short-term lifeline for Lebanon’s economy, and perhaps even to early elections. Yet neither of these measures are sufficient to save Lebanon from further disintegration, nor are radical changes likely to be secured by the protest movement. And despite the popular outrage at Hezbollah, it remains the only party in Lebanon that is both part of the system and above it. Its military power is superior to that of the Lebanese Armed Forces, and if threatened, Hezbollah will resort to violence.

The disastrous state of the economy also presents serious challenges to political reform. For decades, the government kept its currency pegged to the dollar at a rate of 1,500 Lebanese pounds. That system amounted to a multi-billion-dollar pyramid scheme, subsidizing imports at the expense of domestic industries, while large businesses were allowed to qualify for loans in dollars at low rates. Deposits held in Lebanese pounds earned high interest, helping to attract remittances.

But the system came to its breaking point last fall, when the central bank ran perilously low on dollars and cut back on conversions, causing the currency peg to effectively implode. The Lebanese pound sharply depreciated; it is currently trading on the black market at a rate of around 7,000 to 7,500 per dollar. Monthly inflation reached 112 percent in July, as food prices soar and imports are scarce. The banking sector no longer functions, and the economy is expected to contract this year by 25 percent. Most importantly, Lebanon’s debt, at a staggering 170 percent of GDP, exceeds $92 billion. The millions pledged in international aid are nowhere close to meeting Lebanon’s needs.

For this reason, any financial rescue plan must be tied to concrete steps to enhance transparency and governance, introduce financial stability and clamp down on institutionalized corruption. As the international community sends emergency aid to rebuild following the explosion, it should ensure that its benefits are equally distributed, and that new divisions do not emerge among communities affected by the disaster. Local initiatives need to be strengthened as drivers of civic empowerment.

However, while the international community has an important role to play in encouraging reform, the Lebanese themselves must ultimately change their political culture. Given the resilience of the existing system and the limitations on what protests can achieve, the opposition needs to play the long game, and focus on using future elections as opportunities for new, reformist politicians to gain more political power. This includes building organizational structures and get-out-the-vote apparatuses to compete with established sectarian groups who rely on deep-seated clientelist networks for support. As part of this strategy, the positive momentum and energy of citizen-led responses to the explosion offer an opportunity. New and emerging networks of solidarity are mobilizing in response to the crisis, highlighting a sharp contrast with the government’s absenteeism.

Lebanon needs a new social compact grounded in democratic principles of accountability, fair play and the rule of law. The Lebanese need to be able to imagine a sovereign and prosperous future that rejects the scourges of sectarianism, corruption, and dependency. Despite the multiple crises it has suffered over the past year, the country is endowed with a wellspring of untapped potential, including a large pool of skilled workers who are eager to put their talents to use. Now, it is up to the Lebanese—with support from the international community—to undertake the daunting task of rebuilding not just the rubble-strewn streets of Beirut, but the crumbling foundations of their polity.

Navalny case poisons ties between Germany, Russia
BY DEBORAH COLE (AFP) 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel faced mounting pressure Thursday to toughen her ambivalent stance toward Russia following her announcement that Berlin has "unequivocal" proof that Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny was poisoned with a deadly nerve agent.

The Navalny case is only the latest in what Berlin has seen as a series of bitter provocations by Russian President Vladimir Putin that have damaged ties and called future cooperation into question.

But German politicians and media said a line had been crossed with the use on Navalny of military-grade Novichok, a poison first developed by the Soviet Union towards the end of the Cold War.

Merkel was confronted with insistent calls in particular to abandon the controversial German-Russian energy project Nord Stream 2, a multi-billion-euro gas pipeline nearing completion that has drawn the ire of US and European partners alike.

"Diplomatic rituals are no longer enough," the head of the German parliament's foreign affairs committee, Norbert Roettgen, tweeted.

"After the poisoning of Navalny we need a strong European answer which Putin understands: The EU should jointly decide to stop Nord Stream 2," said Roettgen, a candidate to be the next leader of Merkel's Christian Democratic Union party.

The top-selling Bild daily issued a full-throated appeal to abandon the pipeline, saying that pursuing it was "tantamount to us financing Putin's next Novichok attack".

- 'Strategic weapon' -

Bild slammed Merkel for comments last week that Nord Stream 2 should be judged independently from Moscow's actions.

"Vladimir Putin views the gas pipeline as an important strategic weapon against Europe and as a vital source of funding for his war against his own people," it said.

Navalny fell ill after boarding a plane in Siberia last month, with aides saying they suspect he drank a cup of spiked tea at the airport.

He was initially treated in a local Russian hospital, where doctors said they were unable to find any toxic substances in his blood, before he was flown to Berlin for specialised treatment on August 22.

Navalny's poisoning comes a year after a daylight murder of a former Chechen rebel commander in a Berlin park, which German prosecutors believe was ordered by Russia.

Merkel had also revealed in May that Russia had targeted her in hacking attacks, saying she had concrete proof of the "outrageous" spying attempts.

Moscow has denied involvement in the string of allegations, with the Kremlin saying Thursday "there is no reason to accuse the Russian state" over Navalny's poisoning.

Russia has long been a divisive issue in German politics, and a deterioration in transatlantic ties under US President Donald Trump had revived sentiment that Berlin couldn't afford to alienate Moscow.

Wolfgang Ischinger, the head of the Munich Security Conference, often a forum for airing Russian-Western tensions, warned against cutting ties too abruptly.

"We can't put up a wall between us and Russia," he told public broadcaster ARD.

- 'Dark clouds' -

Foreign Minister Heiko Maas of the Social Democrats, junior partners in Merkel's government and typically strong advocates of maintaining close ties with Russia, said Berlin would now consult with EU and NATO allies about an "appropriate reaction" to the Navalny case.

In a speech earlier this week in Paris, Maas acknowledged that while "constructive ties" remained essential, "dark clouds" now hung over relations between the EU and Russia.

ARD commentator Michael Strempel noted that Merkel's statement Wednesday that "Navalny was meant to be silenced and I condemn this in the strongest possible terms" marked an unprecedented hardening of her tone.

"I have never seen the chancellor so determined on foreign policy," Strempel said. "Nor have I ever experienced her this critical and demanding of Russia."

Now Merkel's credibility is on the line, he said, calling for new economic and political sanctions against Moscow.

The EU has had sanctions targeting whole sectors of the Russian economy in place since 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea.

The conservative Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung said the time had come to go further.

"A European response is vital, but if the usual suspects refuse to play ball then Germany will have to react bilaterally, too. We are talking about attempted murder after all."

 

Asphalt is a Major Summertime Source of Reactive Air Pollutants in Cities

2 September 2020

by: Shannon Kelleher

Asphalt rarely figures into urban air quality management plans, although it is a significant source of air pollutants in urban areas. | Steven Geringer

Asphalt rarely figures into urban air quality management plans, although it is a significant source of air pollutants in urban areas. | Steven Geringer

Emissions from asphalt produce greater quantities of small particles with public health effects under summertime conditions in California's South Coast Air Basin than on-road gasoline and diesel motor vehicles combined, according to a new study published in the September 2 issue of Science Advances.

Peeyush Khare, a Ph.D. candidate in chemical and environmental engineering at Yale University and colleagues found that the emissions, called secondary organic aerosols, are at their worst during hot, sunny weather, indicating that asphalt releases more secondary organic aerosol precursors into the air in the summer months. Secondary organic aerosols make up a large portion of fine particle pollution in the air, which has been shown to trigger lung and heart problems.

"We were surprised by how substantially solar exposure increased emissions from asphalt and changed their chemical composition, including large increases even after 46 hours of prolonged heating, which suggested both temperature-dependent and solar exposure-dependent emissions pathways," said Drew Gentner, an associate professor of chemical and environmental engineering at Yale University and an author of the study.

The findings point to asphalt as a significant contributor to some types of air pollution — although one that generally flies under the radar. The asphalt industry states that emissions after application at ambient temperature are negligible due to the manufacturing process, and emissions from asphalt binder (which holds the material together) are not typically included in pollution inventories since the emissions themselves, factors that impact their emissions, and changes in their emissions over time are not well understood. While scientists and policy-makers use inventories to keep track of emissions from other products, such as paint, emissions from asphalt are not part of the product formulation itself and also result from interactions between the material and the environment, making them trickier to account for.

"The emissions we observed from asphalt were primarily intermediate- and semi-volatile organic compounds, which are larger molecules that emit over longer timescales, and have historically been more challenging to measure, and fall largely outside of regulatory frameworks compared to smaller volatile organic compounds such as benzene," said Gentner. "The importance of intermediate- and semi-volatile organic compound emissions from motor vehicles, for secondary organic aerosol formation, only became apparent within the last 15 years or so."

Intermediate and semi-volatile organic compounds, which form secondary organic aerosols, are types of volatile organic compounds or VOCs. As stricter air pollution controls have caused car and truck emissions to decline, the relative importance of VOCs found in solvents and chemicals from other sources, including home cleaning agents, personal care products, pesticides, and printing inks, has increased. A 2018 study published in Science found that such volatile chemical products now account for half of all fossil fuel VOC emissions produced by industrialized cities.

Khare and his colleagues decided to investigate emissions from asphalt, which they had identified as a source of interest during previous research. They chose California's South Coast Air Basin, which covers much of the Greater Los Angeles Area where about 18 million people live, as their study site since California maintains detailed emissions inventories and the region has evolved as a key case study site for megacity air pollution research.

The researchers heated commonly used road asphalt to a range of temperatures between 40°Celsius and 200°Celsius (104°Fahrenheit and 392°Fahrenheit) in a temperature-controlled tube furnace. They observed that asphalt emissions doubled when the temperature increased from 40°Celsius to 60°Celsius (104°Fahrenheit to 140°Fahrenheit) — temperatures the material typically reaches in the summertime — then climbed by an average of 70% per 20°Celsius (68°Fahrenheit) increase.

Since asphalt is mainly used outdoors, the researchers tested the impact of sunlight on asphalt-related emissions, subjecting the samples to UVA and UVB wavelengths of light within the same tube chamber. Artificial sunlight led to an almost 300% increase in total emissions, with sulfur-containing compounds skyrocketing by 700%.

In addition to collecting lab-based results, the researchers gathered three nighttime air samples at a site where road asphalt had been freshly applied, finding that the distribution of smaller compounds in emissions was consistent with those observed at 140°C after several hours of heating in the lab. The relative abundances of large compounds matched those at lab tests between 80° and 120°C. They also collected daytime samples at another roadway site, finding that emissions decreased after the first day after application but were sustained at similar levels two and three days later.

"A goal of this research is to help improve our understanding of the mix of urban sources of intermediate- and semi-volatile organic compounds, and ultimately emissions inventories," said Gentner. "This is important as the field tries to constrain the full, diverse range of non-combustion-related sources that are increasingly important for urban air quality, including volatile chemical products, which are also known to produce large quantities of secondary organic aerosols in urban areas."

The researchers suggest future studies may employ different methods to more fully capture the extent of the emissions released from a broader range of asphalt products over longer periods of time and under different conditions

Signs of life detected under rubble a month after Beirut blast, says rescuer

Reuters Sep 03, 2020 •

A view shows the damage at the site of the blast in Beirut's port area, Lebanon August 7, 2020. PHOTO BY HANNAH MCKAY /Reuters

BEIRUT — Lebanese rescue workers detected signs of life on Thursday in the rubble of a building in a residential area of Beirut that had collapsed after a huge Aug. 4 explosion at the nearby port, a rescue worker said.

He was speaking after the state news agency reported a team with a rescue dog had detected movement under a destroyed building in the Gemmayze area of Beirut, one of the worst hit by the blast.


“These (signs of breathing and pulse) along with the temperature sensor means there is a possibility of life,” rescue worker Eddy Bitar told reporters at the scene.

Rescue workers in bright jackets clambered over the building that had collapsed in the blast, which killed about 190 people and injured 6,000 others.

The rescue team were setting up flood lights at the site as the sun set. One rescue worker carried a rescue dog onto the mound of smashed masonry.

Bitar said a civil defense unit had been called in to help with extra equipment to conduct the search.

Local media said any search and rescue effort, if it became clear that someone was still alive, was likely to take hours.

(Reporting by Beirut bureau; Writing by Edmund Blair; Editing by Alexandra Hudson)

Beirut: Pulse signal prompts search for blast survivor

Rescuers in Beirut have detected signals which could indicate a survivor under the rubble, a month after the massive blast ripped through the city. Even if their hopes are confirmed, the search is expected to take hours.


Beirut officials scrambled Thursday to investigate possible signs of life under the rubble caused by last month's immense port explosion, amid a surge of hope that someone might still be alive after the deadly incident.

Special sensory equipment was brought to the Gemmayze area of the city to investigate reports of a pulse signal, possibly indicating a survivor. A rescue team set up floodlights at the site as the sun set, with one rescue worker carrying a rescue dog onto the pile of debris.

Francesco Lermonda, a Chilean volunteer, said their equipment identifies breathing and heartbeats from humans, not animals. He said it was rare, but not unheard of, for someone to survive in those conditions for a month.

Every few minutes, the Chilean team would ask people surrounding the operation to turn off their cell phones and stay quiet so that it would not interfere with the sounds being detected by their instruments.

"These [signs of breathing and pulse] along with the temperature sensor means there is a possibility of life," said rescue worker Eddy Bitar at the scene.



Reporting from the scene, DW's Razan Salman said people gathered nearby "are waiting impatiently for a glimmer of hope to shimmer from the devastated area."

Read more: Will protests after Beirut blast bring reform to Lebanon?

Youssef Malah, a civil defense worker, said the rescue teams would continue searching throughout the night, but noted that the work was extremely sensitive.

"Ninety-nine percent there isn't anything, but even if there is less than 1% hope, we should keep on looking," Malah told the Associated Press.

Search dog detects possible life in Beirut rubble a month after blast

By Laura Italiano September 3, 2020 

The aftermath of the Beirut explosionJoseph Eid/Getty Images

A search-and-rescue dog detected a child’s heartbeat beneath the rubble of Beirut — a month after a massive explosion turned much of the city to ruins.

Rescue teams are gingerly sifting through the collapsed concrete in the upscale East Beirut neighborhood of Gemmayze, according to multiple reports.

“They detected a signal from a potential heartbeat for a second time – they are going in,” tweeted the BBC’s Claiure Reed shortly after noon New York time.

She also tweeted video of workers lowering a rescue worker into the rubble.

A team from Chile had been making the rounds in the neighborhood when their rescue dog alerted at one of the collapsed buildings, Beirut-based journalist Luna Safwan tweeted.

“It seems to be a small kid inside the building,” Chilean rescue worker Eddy Bitar of “Live, Love, Lebanon” told Al Jazeera. “We’ll do whatever it takes,” he said.

“This was an abandoned house but maybe some refugee or some worker was illegally inside,” he said.

The rescue dog — a five-year-old pooch named Flash” — had alerted at the building while walking by on Wednesday evening, he said.

“Yesterday when our dog just smelled that there was something under the debris we make sure in the early morning to bring all the equipment,” he said.

“We found that there was two possible corpse” in the rubble, he said. “One of them might be alive. We’re just making sure no one is in the house,” he said at 1:30 p.m New York time.

Reed said whispers of “Is it true? Could someone be alive??” wafted through a crowd that had gathered there.

Finding someone alive would be a miracle, Liz Sly, the bureau chief there for the Washington Post, tweeted Thursday.

“Rescue teams are digging. Let there be a miracle.”

Gemmayze is just a few blocks from the port where the Aug. 4 explosion at a chemicals storage warehouse killed 181 people.

Trump won't join a WHO-organized coronavirus vaccine development effort. That could leave the US in the lurch if domestic candidates fail.
Susie Neilson

President Donald Trump. REUTERS/Leah Millis

The Trump administration said the US wouldn't participate in COVAX, an international WHO-backed effort to develop and distribute coronavirus vaccines. 

Trump has pledged to withdraw the US from WHO entirely, calling the group's pandemic response "China-centric."

Health experts are concerned that the US's absence from COVAX could impede the country's access to vaccines developed in other countries.

When the World Health Organization announced COVAX last week — a major international effort to develop, manufacture, and distribute coronavirus vaccines — 172 countries had already signed on.

One was conspicuously absent: the US.

The US, historically a global leader in fighting infectious diseases like HIV and smallpox, has distanced itself from WHO since the pandemic began. In May, President Donald Trump announced the US would pull its funding and membership from the organization, an agency of the United Nations specializing in international public-health issues. Trump called WHO's coronavirus response "China-centric."

White House spokesman Judd Deere told Reuters on Tuesday that the US wouldn't join COVAX because the WHO is "corrupt." Instead, the Trump administration's focus is on funding vaccine research and development on its own, then striking deals to buy the resulting shots. In the US so far, vaccine candidates developed by AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford, Moderna, and a Pfizer-BioNTech partnership have reached phase-three trials.


But COVAX is the only global initiative working with multiple countries to develop, manufacture, and distribute a coronavirus vaccine — and to make sure it reaches vulnerable populations, like the elderly and healthcare workers. The project's larger goal is to have 2 billion vaccine doses by the end of 2021. That effort, which involves both governments and manufacturers, also aims to help wealthier countries distribute vaccines to poorer ones, thereby discouraging vaccine hoarding and ensuring all countries get access to a vaccine.

A lack of US collaboration undermines these goals, according to public-health experts.

"The US has always been a leader in global health, going back to smallpox eradication, or polio eradication, or HIV," Bill Gates, who's helping to fund the GAVI Alliance, one of the organizations that's leading COVAX, told Business Insider in July. "Without the US, the coalition to stop the disease globally just doesn't come together."

World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. Fabrice COFFRINI/Getty Images

The US also needs the international community, experts say. Opting out of COVAX is a risky gamble, since it could limit the US's access to vaccine candidates developed by other countries and manufacturing facilities abroad. If domestic vaccine candidates fail, in other words, the US could be out of luck.


Plus, even if the US does make a successful vaccine on its own, some experts think that by staying out of COVAX, the country might hurt its own economy by not helping other countries get their populations properly protected and back to work.

"It's a double edged sword," Jennifer Huang Bouey, an epidemiologist and senior policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, told Business Insider. "It hurts the US, and it also probably hurts COVAX."
The US is betting on new, less-established types of vaccines

Globally, vaccine developers are testing at least eight different types of vaccine. The most established kind involves injections of weakened or inactivated virus to generate an immune response.

The two strongest candidates in this traditional vein so far are from Chinese companies SinoPharm and SinoVac. (China also hasn't signed on to COVAX, but gave the WHO a "positive signal" this week, according to Reuters.)


By refusing to participate in COVAX, Buoey said, the US "basically let go of the most traditional, most mature technology — that's a risk."

The US's two strongest candidates so far, from Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech collaboration, are mRNA vaccines, a type that's never been approved by the FDA before. These vaccines use a technology called messenger RNA to create doses using only a virus' genetic code.

A volunteer receives an injection of a COVID-19 vaccine candidate developed by the NIH and Moderna on July 27 in Binghamton, New York. AP Photo/Hans Pennink

If successful, mRNA vaccines could be easier to produce and more effective than traditional ones, since they may prompt a stronger immune response and don't need to be incubated the way traditional vaccines do. But that's a big if — there's still a possibility the mRNA vaccines will trigger inadequate immune responses or come with harmful side effects.
The US could lose access to international manufacturing

A big question authorities around the world are still tackling is how a vaccine will be manufactured and distributed after it's proven to be safe and effective. The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation (CEPI) — a foundation that funds vaccine research and is one of COVAX's main backers — announced in June that it had identified enough vaccine manufacturers to produce 4 billion doses in a year.


The US's refusal to participate in COVAX means it could lack access to that infrastructure, though the country is working to expand its own manufacturing capacity.

"It's really just US versus all these other countries," Buoey said. "The US will be left on its own."

Fujifilm received a $265 million grant to help expand US vaccine-manufacturing capacity. Reuters

The US's absence could limit COVAX's potential manufacturing capacity as well — the initiative could distribute more vaccines if it had early access to successful candidates and facilities in the US.
The US's economy and reputation could suffer

Even if the US does create a successful vaccine, it could suffer economic repercussions if it hoards all the doses to itself, or if its supply chain can't effectively distribute extra doses worldwide.

That's because countries without a vaccine would continue to struggle with the economic impacts of COVID-19, and their economic fates are intertwined with the US's.

"We will continue to suffer the economic consequences — lost US jobs — if the pandemic rages unabated in allies and trading partners," Thomas J. Bollyky, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Washington Post.

Then there are larger, long-term questions about the US's global reputation as a public-health leader, Buoey said, if the country stays out of international collaboration efforts.

"Even during the height of the Cold War, US and Soviet Union scientists were working collaboratively with WHO on eradicating polio in 1950s to 1980s," she said. "Right now, in the middle of the COVID pandemic, the US is really changing the track."


Hilary Brueck contributed reporting.

A Lawless Attorney General Hits New Lows
In a CNN interview, William Barr showed total willingness to bend, break, or deny the law on behalf of his boss.

By Joan WalshTwitter
TODAY 11:07 AM


Attorney General William Barr. (Charlie Riedel / AP Photo)

It’s tough to choose the worst thing Attorney General William Barr said in a shocking Wednesday interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. He claimed that Jacob Blake, shot seven times in the back by Kenosha police last month, was armed; he was not. He appeared to back up Donald Trump’s demented claim that thugs in black boarded planes headed to Washington bent on mayhem, and then dissolved in “I don’t know what the president was specifically referring to.” When Blitzer asked if Trump’s outrageous suggestion that North Carolina supporters vote twice—ostensibly to check whether voting by mail made it possible—was illegal, Barr repeatedly averred, insisting, “I don’t know what the law in the particular state says.”

I do, and I don’t have a law degree. In none of our 50 states, nor the District of Columbia, is it legal to vote or attempt to vote twice. (That’s actually federal law.) You’re welcome.

To his credit, Blitzer debunked all of those false claims and more. When Barr insisted voting by mail and other reforms make voter fraud rampant, Blitzer asked how many instances of voter fraud had he prosecuted in his 10 years as attorney general; Barr had to admit “I don’t know.” He wouldn’t rule out sending federal agents to polling places in November “if there was a specific investigative danger.” But even acting Homeland Security director Chad Wolf, no paragon of independence or integrity, said last month he has no authority to deploy federal law enforcement officers that way.

A sinister arrogance, the smirking sense that he’s above the law, pervaded Barr’s replies. As well as brazen racism. Like Trump, he refused to admit the country, or law enforcement particularly, suffers from “systemic racism.” Cops don’t treat black men differently from white men because of “discrimination,” he insisted. “If anything’s been baked in, it’s a bias toward non-discrimination.” Citing a comment the Rev. Jesse Jackson made 30 years ago about how even he sometimes feared young black men, Barr seemed to make the case that the disparity in their treatment by police stems from their own criminality, not police bias. Never mind that research shows that whether they’re obeying the law or breaking it, black men are much more likely than white men to suffer violence and abuse at the hands of police.

None of this should be shocking: Barr has been Trump’s toady, and not America’s lawyer, since his first hours on the job. From lying about the conclusions of Robert Mueller’s investigation to personally supervising the crackdown on peaceful protest in June, just so Trump could get a photo op with an upside-down Bible, Barr has been Trump’s Roy Cohn. Just last week, his Department of Justice took initial steps to investigate whether the Democratic governors of just four states—New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Michigan—violated the civil rights of nursing home residents with their handling of Covid. Of course, nursing home residents, tragically, have borne the brunt of the disease in most states (along with prisoners, whose rights Barr seems strangely uninterested in representing). Two prominent disability rights lawyers pronounced the investigation “transparently political and plainly not undertaken in good faith” in Slate.

Though it’s hard to identify Barr’s worst moment in the Blitzer interview, his apparent willingness to back up Trump’s lies about voter fraud, and to use federal agents to investigate false claims on Election Day and after, was the most alarming. If Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can prevail in November despite Trump and Barr’s attempts to thwart them, and to thwart democracy, I’d really like to see President Biden put Vice President Harris in charge of assembling some kind of Trump-Barr Crimes Commission (backed by Attorney General Sally Yates or Preet Bharara). There must be accountability for all the lawbreaking in this administration, including by the nation’s top law enforcement official.

Until then, we can’t get numb to Barr’s repeated willingness to bend, break, or deny the law on behalf of his boss. This election is going to require us to vote in record-breaking numbers. Use your outrage—“good outrage,” to paraphrase the late John Lewis—to get in “good trouble”: organizing energetically to put an end to the lawless Trump-Barr era.




Joan WalshTWITTER

Joan Walsh, a national affairs correspondent for The Nation, is the author of What’s the Matter With White People? Finding Our Way in the Next America.