CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Gupta Brothers Accused of Defrauding South Africa Arrested in UAE



Antony Sguazzin and Renee Bonorchis
Mon, June 6, 2022

(Bloomberg) -- Two members of the Gupta family have been arrested in the United Arab Emirates, the biggest step yet in South Africa’s fight to bring to account the kingpins accused of orchestrating the looting of its state companies.

Rajesh and Atul Gupta were detained by UAE law-enforcement authorities and discussions are taking place on the way forward, South Africa’s Justice Ministry said in a statement on Monday.

A judicial inquiry into state graft spanning more than three years detailed close links between the brothers and former President Jacob Zuma, with numerous witnesses alleging that they worked hand-in-hand to siphon money out of state transport, power and arms companies and jointly decided who was appointed to the cabinet. The government has said at least 500 billion rand ($32 billion) was stolen during Zuma’s nine-year rule.

The Gupta brothers and Zuma have always denied the allegations.

The arrests come a year after the UAE ratified an extradition treaty with South Africa. President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration first asked the Emirati authorities to extradite members of the Gupta family in 2018, and the US imposed restrictions ranging from visa bans to asset freezes on them the following year. The UK followed suit last year and Interpol placed the two brothers on its most-wanted list in February.

Corruption scandals involving the Guptas and people linked to them are blamed for damaging indebted state power utility Eskom Holdings SOC Ltd. and rail and ports company Transnet SOC Ltd. McKinsey & Co. has paid back money to both companies after working on contracts with Gupta-linked companies. The US-based consultancy has denied intentional wrongdoing.

South African authorities filed charges against the Guptas in 2018 in connection with a questionable tender to undertake a feasibility survey on a dairy project in the central Free State province, in which a company they controlled was paid 21 million rand.

In December 2015, the Guptas were accused of playing a part in Zuma sacking then-Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene, and replacing him with little-known lawmaker Des Van Rooyen, a move that caused the rand to crash. Van Rooyen was removed four days later and replaced by Pravin Gordhan, who had formerly served in the post, after an outcry from business, the public and members of the ruling African National Congress.

Ramaphosa won’t comment on the arrests, his spokesman Vincent Magwenya said by text message.

“We’ve always said that fighting corruption in SA requires resilience, that if the rule of law is allowed to take its course, those implicated will eventually get their day in court,” said Stefanie Fick, executive head of accountability for the non-profit Organization Undoing tax Abuse. “It seems like that day is around the corner for the Gupta kingpins.”

CDC raises monkeypox alert to level 2, recommends masks during travel

Anders Hagstrom
Mon, June 6, 2022
The CDC raised its alert level for monkeypox to level 2 on Monday, recommending that travelers wear masks, among other health measures.

While not on the level of COVID-19, monkeypox has spread across the globe out of Africa since March. Monkeypox symptoms begin as relatively flu-like but soon expand to the swelling of lymph nodes and a rash across the body and face. Ultimately, painful lesions form on rash areas, leaving severe scarring.

"Cases of monkeypox have been reported in Europe, North America, South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia," the CDC wrote in its alert.

"Some cases were reported among men who have sex with men. Some cases were also reported in people who live in the same household as an infected person," it added.

MONKEYPOX CONTINUES TO PUZZLE SCIENTISTS AS IT SPREADS TO MORE COUNTRIES

As of June 3, there have been 21 recorded monkeypox cases in the U.S. connected to the current outbreak, according to the CDC.

Test tubes labeled 'Monkeypox Virus Positive' are seen in this illustration taken on May 22, 2022. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration

The disease may have gone undetected in Western countries under the guise of an STI, according to Dr. Amesh Adalja. There are a number of STIs that have similar symptoms to monkeypox.

"What's likely happened is an endemic infectious disease from Africa found its way into a social and sexual network and then was greatly aided by major amplification events, like raves in Belgium, to disseminate around the world," Adalja told NBC News.

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gives an opening statement during a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing to examine the federal response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and new emerging variants at Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S. January 11, 2022. Greg Nash/Pool via REUTERS

Exclusive-Biden to waive tariffs for 24 mths on solar panels hit by probe -sources


U.S. President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden return to the White House in Washington

Sun, June 5, 2022
By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -President Joe Biden will declare a 24-month tariff exemption on Monday for solar panels from four Southeast Asian nations after an investigation froze imports and stalled projects in the United States, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The move comes amid concern about the impact of the Commerce Department's months-long investigation into whether imports of solar panels from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam are circumventing tariffs on goods made in China.

Biden's action would allay companies' concerns about having to hold billions of dollars in reserves to pay potential tariffs, one source familiar with the White House's plans said.

"There is going to be this safe harbor timeout on the ... collection of duties, and that's at the heart of what's going to save all of these solar projects and ensure that they are going forward," the source said.

Biden also will invoke the Defense Production Act to drive U.S. manufacturing of solar panels and other clean energy technologies in the future, with the support of loans and grants, the sources said.

State governors, lawmakers, industry officials and environmentalists have expressed concern over the investigation, which could have led to retroactive tariffs of up to 250 percent.

The issue created a unique dilemma for the White House, which is eager to show U.S. leadership on climate change, in part by encouraging use of renewable energy, while respecting and keeping its distance from the investigation proceedings.

Using executive action and invoking the DPA, which gives presidents some authority over domestic industries, allows Biden to take advantage of the tools available to him without stepping on the Commerce Department inquiry.

A second source said Biden's proclamation, relying on authority from a 1930 trade law, would apply only to the four countries and run in parallel with the investigation.

Depending on its outcome, tariffs could be levied on panels imported after the 24-month period, but the threat of retroactive payments would be off the table, the source added.

"If you bring the stuff in during that 24-month period, regardless of the outcome of the investigation, there will not be those additional duties," the second source said.

The investigation essentially halted the flow of solar panels that make up more than half of U.S. supplies and 80 percent of imports.

It had a chilling effect on the industry, according to clean energy groups, some of which asked Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo to dismiss it. Raimondo has said she had no discretion to influence it.

"The president’s action is a much-needed reprieve from this industry-crushing probe," Abigail Ross Hopper, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said in a statement.

"During the two-year tariff suspension window, the U.S. solar industry can return to rapid deployment while the Defense Production Act helps grow American solar manufacturing."

Announced at the end of March, the investigation could take 150 days or more to complete.

Biden has previously invoked the DPA to tackle a shortage of infant formula in the United States, ramp up domestic output of key minerals for electric vehicle batteries, and fight the COVID-19 pandemic through tests and vaccine production.

"It is a tool to do what we obviously desperately need to do, which is rapidly grow the domestic manufacturing capacity" of solar panels," the second source familiar with the matter said.

The administration was "very focused on making sure there's reliable and resilient supply chains at this critical moment for our energy sector, for our ability to support our consumers and to tackle the climate crisis," he added.

Ramping up renewable energy such as solar is crucial to Biden's goal of cutting U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 50% to 52% by 2030, versus 2005 levels, as well as decarbonizing the U.S. power grid by 2035.

The Commerce Department inquiry has prompted 19 state governors, 22 U.S. senators, and dozens of members of the House of Representatives to express concern in letters to Biden.

"Initiation of this investigation is already causing massive disruption in the solar industry, and it will severely harm American solar businesses and workers and increase costs for American families as long as it continues," said one letter signed by senators including Martin Heinrich, a Democrat from New Mexico, and Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina.

(Reporting by Jeff Mason; Additional reporting by Nichola Groom; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

Biden takes aggressive executive action to protect solar industry expansion

Ben Adler

·Senior Editor

Mon, June 6, 2022, 

The Biden administration announced a set of executive actions to boost the domestic deployment of solar power on Monday morning.

The White House announced it is taking steps under the Defense Production Act to increase domestic production of clean energy technologies such as solar panels and their components, as well as directing the federal government to develop plans to buy domestically produced solar products. It is also delaying for two years any imposition of tariffs on solar panels from four countries in Southeast Asia that supply the vast majority of photovoltaic cells to the United States.

“Just on the strength of the president’s vision, the clarity of his vision, and this nation’s commitment to a clean energy future, we’ve seen the private investment and private commitment to growing domestic solar manufacturing capacity triple — or be on pace to triple — by 2024,” said a senior administration official on a Monday morning press call. “But we know that’s not enough, and that’s why the president is taking bold action today.”

President Biden gestures during a speech on June 3 in Rehoboth Beach, Del. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

The overarching purpose of these moves is to build up a domestic manufacturing supply chain for solar panels without impeding the booming business of installing solar panels. Increasing U.S. installation of solar power is a key element of the president’s plan to combat climate change, but an ongoing Commerce Department investigation has been threatening to block solar deployment, as it could result in heavy tariffs being applied to solar panels and their parts imported from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam. The solar installation industry has issued dire predictions about the effect these tariffs would have on U.S. jobs, and Biden’s move has the industry breathing a sigh of relief.

Some American solar panel manufacturers have complained that they are undercut on price by imports from those countries — which they say are actually produced by Chinese companies benefiting from Chinese government subsidies that violate trade agreements. The combination of a two-year grace period for U.S. solar installers to keep importing those products while simultaneously building up the domestic solar manufacturing industry is meant to bolster the U.S. industrial sector and U.S. energy security, so that the American solar industry can keep up with growing demand without relying on products from an adversarial nation.

The Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) immediately issued a statement praising the measures on Monday.

“We applaud President Biden’s thoughtful approach to addressing the current crisis of the paralyzed solar supply chain,” said SEIA president and CEO Abigail Ross Hopper. “The president is providing improved business certainty today while harnessing the power of the Defense Production Act for tomorrow. Today’s actions protect existing solar jobs, will lead to increased employment in the solar industry and foster a robust solar manufacturing base here at home.”

Westlands Solar Park, near the town of Lemoore in the San Joaquin Valley of California, is the largest solar power plant in the U.S. and could become one of the largest in the world. (Carolyn Cole/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

The administration also garnered praise from environmental activists, who had been fretting that the impending tariffs would stop the ongoing solar expansion, though some also argued that the ambitious and aggressive use of executive authority should not be limited to just one clean energy industry. (The wind energy industry, which Biden also seeks to boost, is currently fearing a proposal in Congress that could make it more difficult to build offshore wind farms.)

“Today’s executive action by the Biden administration to help unlock the potential of clean energy is what we need more of to address the climate crisis, create a better future for our communities, support domestic manufacturers, and aid our allies abroad by weakening the fossil-fueled war in Ukraine,” said Anusha Narayanan, climate campaign director at Greenpeace USA. “This announcement demonstrates President Biden’s ability to ramp up the transition to renewable energy. Now he needs to go even further by invoking the Defense Production Act across all clean energy sectors, declaring a climate emergency, and addressing the root of the climate crisis by beginning an immediate and equitable phaseout of domestic fossil fuel production.”

Solar power is central to Biden's plan to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change by 50% by 2030 and to reach zero net emissions by 2050. The administration wants solar to go from just 4% of U.S. electricity generation currently to nearly half of the U.S. electricity portfolio by 2050. To get there, it would have to double by 2025 the rate at which solar is being installed and double it again by 2030.

Sens. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., and Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., catch an elevator to go to the Senate Chamber to vote.

 (Kent Nishimura/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

While the executive actions announced Monday may help with solar deployment, the large subsidies for rooftop solar purchases in Biden’s proposed budget reconciliation package remain stuck in the Senate due to opposition from Republicans and Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.

Auxin Solar, the San Jose, Calif.-based solar manufacturer that filed the complaint with the Commerce Department that raised the specter of new tariffs on imported solar panels, was sharply critical of the administration's delay in any potential tariffs.

"President Biden is significantly interfering in Commerce’s quasi-judicial process," Auxin Solar CEO Mamun Rashid said in a statement shared with Yahoo News. "By taking this unprecedented — and potentially illegal — action, he has opened the door wide for Chinese-funded special interests to defeat the fair application of U.S. trade law. Since filing this case, Auxin has been well under way to scaling up. If the President will follow through on his stated intent to support the U.S. domestic industry — including grants to scale and produce upstream inputs like cells and wafers — Auxin is ready, willing, and able to meet that challenge."

Don’t give me truth: The pitfalls of fighting misinformation

June 6, 2022

Michael Bröning is Director of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in New York and a member of the basic value commission of Germany’s Social Democratic Party.

Confronted with the disastrous consequences of fake news, online hatred and misleading information, governments are increasingly embracing the role of arbiters of objective reality, establishing formal rules to combat “misleading information” and the spread of inflammatory fake news.

But when authorities are in charge of objectivity, who will object to the authorities?

In Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, India, Sweden and South Africa, the fight against “hate speech” is now enshrined in law. South Korea’s parliament has called for a panel of experts to separate “truthful history” from conspiracy theories — and overly critical readings — of the country’s past. And in the United States, President Joe Biden’s administration announced the establishment of an interagency “Disinformation Governance Board,” targeting “disinformation that threatens the security of the American people.”

International organizations have followed suit. The European Union passed a new Digital Services Act, enabling members to take down political propaganda or hate speech. And in the U.N., there’s a notable shift from saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war — as pledged by the U.N. Charter — to targeting the ever-spreading info wars. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres has repeatedly warned of an “epidemic of misinformation” and has launched initiatives to “cut through the noise to deliver life-saving information and fact-based advice.”

Clearly, in times where Russian state propaganda presents naked aggression as a fight against “Nazism,” extremists distribute racist manifestos online and former President Donald Trump has returned to social media, the impulse to defend what is true is understandable.

And yet, there are good reasons to curb the enthusiasm when enlisting governments in the fight against misinformation.

Part of the problem is a simple truth — the truth is never simple.

Facts, data and even scientific consensus are frequently more multidimensional, conflicting and less static than government boards or official communiqués can allow for.

And as information requires context and interpretation, the notion of a government-sanctioned scientific truth is in fact anything but scientific. After all, the foundation of rational truth-finding is the conviction that even absolute certainties can and should be questioned. In the words of John Stuart Mill, it is only by raising questions “comprehensively, frequently and fearlessly” that “living truth” can be prevented from turning into “dead dogma.”

This abstract problem, however, has a tangible political dimension.

In a world of contesting political ideals, the line between disinformation, misinformation and merely inconvenient truths is incredibly difficult to draw; and the premise that political authorities are best positioned to draw this line and dispassionately identify reality misreads the nature of politics. This would essentially reverse the ideal of speaking truth to power which, in turn, would have the almost inevitable consequence of stifling legitimate opposition, silencing necessary criticism and ultimately emboldening authoritarian tendencies — especially given many governments’ dubious track records in permitting dissent.

Essentially, asking politics to define the demarcation line between fact and fiction all too frequently amounts to entrusting the care of the sheep to the wolf.

And democratic governments should be concerned as well, as even well-meaning attempts to bolster politics through the enlistment of ostensibly objective science can have unintended negative consequences. All too often, rather than insulating the former, they politicize and ultimately delegitimize the latter — with devastating repercussions for the political climate, social cohesion and a rational debate. For example, the blurred line between government authority and the role of science in the fight against COVID-19 is reason for pause.

In an ever-changing world, the truth won’t benefit from political ex cathedra stipulations but rather from open debate and the unhindered interplay of competing views.

Given the alarming rate at which press freedoms are shrinking around the world, guaranteeing and defending this open exchange of ideas is a more urgent task for well-meaning governments than assuming the impossible role of universal adjudicator of reality.

Freedom of opinion is the operating system of democratic societies. It’s not only the result but also a prerequisite of democracy.

In a world now steeped in misinformation, don’t give me truth. Give me debate.

The post Don’t give me truth: The pitfalls of fighting misinformation appeared first on Politico.

Russian forces left roughly 100 liters of 'high-quality vodka' at the Chernobyl nuclear plant before they retreated, Ukrainian workers say


Chernobyl, UKRAINE: A rescue worker sets flag signalling radioactivity in front of Chernobyl nuclear power plant during a drill organized by Ukraine's Emergency Ministry 08 November 2006. Employees and rescue workers improved their reactivity in case of a collapse of the sarcophagus covering the destroyed 4th power block.S

ERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP via Getty ImagesMore

Taiyler Simone Mitchell
Mon, June 6, 2022, 8:26 PM·2 min read


Russian forces seized the Chernobyl nuclear plant on the first day of the Ukrainian invasion.


Hundreds of workers were held hostage during the occupation until the pullout in March.


Workers are now left to clean up the mess Russian troops left behind — including vodka and feces.

Ukrainian workers who are cleaning up the Chernobyl nuclear plant following the Russian troop withdrawal have found "high-quality vodka," The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

Hundreds of workers were held hostage at the plant for weeks after Russian forces took over on February 24 — the start of Vladimir Putin's unprovoked war on Ukraine.

"When the invasion started, the front guards got a call to fall back because a huge flow of Russian troops were coming," said Julia Bezdizha, a spokeswoman for the plant, told The Journal. "They fled mainly because it was very dangerous to stay and engage in heavy combat because of the heavy radiation."

The Russian troops began their withdrawal in late March after having been affected by "significant doses of radiation," Ukrainian authorities previously said.

Russian soldiers were reported to have dug up trenches and navigated the plant without protective gear.

Radiation exposure can lead to varying short and long-term health effects — including acute radiation syndrome, cancer, and mental distress — according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

"We believe very soon [the Russians] will feel the consequences of radiation that they have received. Some of them will feel it in months, some of them in years," Yevhen Kramarenko, head of the State Agency of Ukraine on Exclusion Zone Management, said at a press conference in April. "But anyway, all of the servicemen who were there will feel it at some point."

He added that it's unclear how radiation levels have changed nearby after the site — including its radioactive soil — was tampered with.

In addition to leaving behind around 100 liters of high-quality vodka, the Russian troops left a large mess at the plant, per The Journal.

Ukrainian workers found human feces, smashed computer screens, and spray-painted walls throughout the plant, according to The Journal.

"The poop was the icing on the cake," Aleksandr Barsukov, the deputy director of the Chernobyl Ecocenter, told The Journal.

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

Russian forces left piles of excrement in every office of the Chernobyl nuclear plant before they retreated, Ukrainian workers say

Chernobyl nuclear plant

Taiyler Simone Mitchell
Mon, June 6, 2022


Ukrainian soldiers sit on top of a military vehicle parked outside the hotel in Prypiat, Ukraine on February 4.

Volodymyr Tarasov/Ukrinform/Future Publishing via Getty Image

Russian forces began their withdrawal from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster site in March.


But Ukrainian workers are now discovering what they left behind — including human feces.


"The poop was the icing on the cake," the deputy director of the Chernobyl Ecocenter, said.

Russian forces may have evacuated the Chernobyl nuclear plant, but they destroyed the premises leaving behind mounds of defecation in each office, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday.

Hundreds of Ukrainian workers were held hostage for weeks throughout the Russian occupation. Now workers are moving to clean up the site following the Russian troops' withdrawal in late March after being affected by "significant doses of radiation."

Aleksandr Barsukov, the deputy director of the Chernobyl Ecocenter, told The Journal that they have found spray-painted conference rooms, smashed computer screens, and 100 liters of high-quality vodka.

"The poop was the icing on the cake," Barsukov said.

Chernobyl, the site of the 1986 Soviet nuclear disaster, was seized on the first day of the war for a total of five weeks.

After disturbing the soil, soldiers "panicked at the first sign" of radiation illness, which "showed up very quickly," Ukrainian state power company Energoatom told The Guardian. The outlet reported that the panic led to the troops pulling out of the region.

"When the invasion started, the front guards got a call to fall back because a huge flow of Russian troops were coming," said Julia Bezdizha, a spokeswoman for the plant, told WSJ. "They fled mainly because it was very dangerous to stay and engage in heavy combat because of the heavy radiation."

Russian forces had also seized Europe's largest nuclear plant, Zaporizhzhia, at the start of the war. The occupation of the plants had some concerned about a nuclear reaction and increased radiation levels.

The exact impact on Russian soldiers is currently unknown, but troops were reported to have dug trenches in radioactive soil and moved about the plant without protective gear.

Radiation exposure can impact an individual's health in many different ways — including acute radiation syndrome, cancer, and mental distress — according to The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Yevhen Kramarenko, head of the State Agency of Ukraine on Exclusion Zone Management, said at a press conference in April that it's unclear how radiation levels in the area have been impacted by the Russian forces.

But, he adds, "we believe very soon [the Russians] will feel the consequences of radiation that they have received. Some of them will feel it in months, some of them in years."

"But anyway, all of the servicemen who were there will feel it at some point," Kramarenko continued.

Russian President Vladimir Putin's unprovoked war against Ukraine began on February 24 and is ongoing.

The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Fact check: Abortion-related deaths continued after Roe v. Wade, but occurred less often

Sudiksha Kochi, USA TODAY

Mon, June 6, 2022, 

The claim: Roe v. Wade marked the end of women dying from abortions

After a Supreme Court draft opinion leaked that signaled a potential reversal of Roe v. Wade, debates about the future of abortion access ignited nationwide.

Some online claim that the watershed ruling did more than just establish a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.

"Roe wasn't the beginning of women having abortions," reads text in an image left-wing page Occupy Democrats shared to Facebook May 9. "Roe was the end of women dying from abortion."

The post generated over 30,000 interactions and 20,000 shares in less than a week. Similar posts amassed thousands more interactions on Facebook and Instagram.

But the claim is false.

Experts told USA TODAY abortion-related deaths still occurred after Roe v. Wade was decided, though such outcomes are rare. This declining trend in abortion mortality began before the 1970s, but the Roe decision was a key contributor to that trend.

Follow us on Facebook! Like our page to get updates throughout the day on our latest debunks

USA TODAY reached out to Occupy Democrats and other social media users who shared the claim for comment.

Abortion-related deaths still occurred after Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973. Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows abortion-related deaths still occurred in subsequent years but in low numbers.

The CDC defines legal induced abortions as those a licensed clinician performs within state law and illegal abortions as those performed in any other cirumstances.

Fact check:Photo of Ginni Thomas with expensive wine is from 2018, not after Roe v. Wade leak

Abortion deaths for both categories dropped sharply in the mid-1970s and have remained low since, but they still occur, according to CDC data. From 2011 to 2018, the CDC reported two to six deaths per year in legal abortions and one total death in an illegal abortion.

In terms of rate, the latest data showed 0.41 deaths per 100,000 abortions from 2013 to 2018.

The Roe decision was a key driver in this decrease, said Mary Faith Marshall, director of biomedical ethics at the University of Virginia, told USA TODAY.

"Abortion became part of care provided under an accredited health care system with safety standards," Marshall said. "Clinicians had to be trained to perform abortion procedures in a formal way."

Women were also protected in their right to get abortions during the first trimester of pregnancy, which reduced their risk of mortality, Marshall said.

A very small number of abortion-related deaths still occur today due to rare complications and demographics who can't afford medical care, Amanda Jean Stevenson, a sociologist at the University of Colorado, told USA TODAY in an email.

Declining trend in abortion mortality before Roe vs. Wade

Even before Roe v. Wade, the number of abortion-related deaths was steadily declining, Dr. Karen Meckstroth, an obstetrician and gynecologist at the University of California, San Francisco, told USA TODAY in an email.

A 1978 study found that "deaths from abortion declined more rapidly than deaths from other causes associated with pregnancy and childbirth" between 1940 and 1975. This was attributed to various factors, such as increased availability of legal abortion and more effective contraception, according to the study.

Fact check: False claim about 'domestic supply of infants' and draft Supreme Court abortion opinion

Abortion mortality decreased when antibiotics such as penicillin became widely available in 1945, which increased the safety of the procedure, Dr. Lisa Harris, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Michigan, told USA TODAY in an email.

Abortion-related deaths also declined as a result of states repealing and changing anti-abortion laws, proving wider access to safe procedures. Meckstroth said that by the end of 1970, four states had repealed their anti-abortion laws, and 11 states had changed them.

Our rating: False

Based on our research, we rate FALSE the claim that Roe vs. Wade marked the end of women dying from abortions. Abortion-related deaths still occurred after the landmark decision, though there was a sharp decline. This downward trend in abortion mortality began before 1973, and Roe contributed to it, experts said.

Our fact-check sources:

• Mary Faith Marshall, May 13, Phone interview with USA TODAY

• Lisa Harris, May 16, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Suzanne Bell, May 13, Phone interview with USA TODAY

• Carol Joffe, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Belsie Gonzalez, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Saifuddin Ahmed, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Mary Ziegler, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Amanda Jean Stevenson, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Paula Lantz, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• Karen Meckstroth, May 13, Email exchange with USA TODAY

• CDC, accessed May 16, Abortion Surveillance -- United States, 1993 and 1994

• CDC, Nov. 27, 2020, Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2018

• CDC, Nov. 26, 2021, Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2019

• Britannica, accessed May 16, Roe v. Wade

• USA TODAY, May 9, What the end of Roe v. Wade could mean in a nation without child care aid or family leave

• The Washington Post, May 29, 2019, Planned Parenthood’s false stat: ‘Thousands’ of women died every year before Roe

• Department of Health, Education and Welfare (via Glenn Kessler), September 1978, Cates Abortion Mortality1940 To1976 AJOG 1978

• USA TODAY, May 3, What happens if Roe v. Wade is overturned? What we know about Supreme Court's leaked draft

• PolitiFact, Oct. 13, 2021, Deaths from abortions still happen, but they declined sharply after Roe v. Wade

• FDA, accessed May 13, FDA's Approval of the First Oral Contraceptive, Enovid

Thank you for supporting our journalism. 

Our fact-check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Fact check: False claim abortion-related deaths ended after Roe ruling

How Mexico ensures access to safe abortion without legalizing it
June 6, 2022

When it comes to abortion, Mexico offers a glimpse of a possible future for the US.

Like its northern neighbor, the country is a federal republic of 32 states in which the legality of abortion varies. It does not have a federal law, or Roe v Wade-like constitutional decision legalizing abortion—a position the US is likely to find itself in by the end of June, when the Supreme Court is expected to officially announce its decision on Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The decision, a draft of which was leaked last month, might overturn the precedent stating that a woman has a right to obtain abortion as part of her right to privacy. If the leak is confirmed, it would end the federal protection of abortion, and making its legality dependent on the individual state

This would open the way to restrictive laws in Republican-majority states, many of which have trigger laws ready to go into effect as soon as the Supreme Court ruling is out, including ones that could lead to the arrest of women experiencing miscarriages. But in Mexico, the situation is different in a small, but very significant way: Abortion is not legal, but has been decriminalized federally. On Sept. 7, 2021, Mexico’s Supreme Court unanimously ruled that it was unconstitutional to punish abortion as a crime.

The effects of decriminalization

The 2021 Mexican supreme court decision was propelled by the so-called marea verde, or green wave, a Latin American transnational movement promoting abortion rights, which pushed for the approval of abortion laws in countries including Argentina and Columbia, and in Mexican states. While it stops short of full legalization, its effects are significant in effectively giving women, including those who don’t qualify for an abortion in their home state, broader access to safe abortion.

In Mexico no outcome of a pregnancy is criminalized—including miscarriages, no matter how they occur—so women who get abortions outside of the medical infrastructure, for instance by inducing an abortion with medication at home, can seek medical attention at any time without putting themselves in danger of being reported to the authorities.

Medical abortion in Mexico is offered in medical settings via two medications, mifepristone and misoprostol. But women who choose to have a medical abortion at home, because they don’t qualify for legal abortion in their state, or prefer to deal with it independently, typically take misoprostol only, following World Health Organization protocol (pdf). Abortions done with misoprostol alone are just as safe as those with the combination of drugs, but easier to obtain without a prescription as it’s sold over the counter as a medication to treat ulcers in every state.

The right to support women who have abortions

Veronica Cruz, a leading pro-abortion activist who founded Las Libres, an organization that provides accompaniment to women who wish to terminate unwanted pregnancies in the state of Guanajuato, says things have changed since the decision even in very anti-abortion states like her own. Las Libres has been operating for 22 years, and has developed a so-called “escuela de acompañamento“—a training for women who want to offer physical assistance as well as medical and legal information to others seeking a termination of a pregnancy.

Even prior to the 2021 decision, Las Libres didn’t shy away from providing abortion accompaniment and information despite the legal risks. “When the law restricts a right, it isn’t right, and if the law isn’t right we have to reject it,” says Cruz. The goal of the abortion movements remains to legalize abortion in all states, she says, but decriminalization has helped reduce some of the stigma around abortion and has allowed activist networks to move more freely and safely.

This includes facing fewer risks in organizing and facilitating travel for women in anti-abortion states—in both Mexico and, increasingly, from the US—end their unwanted pregnancies. Women who face significant cultural and social obstacles to abortion in their home state—for instance Guanajuato, where the stigma against abortion is strong—can seek financial, logistical, and emotional support from pro-abortion networks to travel to another state to terminate the pregnancy through surgical abortion, even after the first trimester, when misoprostol is most effective.

Believe women, by law

This works alongside an instrumental legal provision, introduced in 2013 to actualize the right to abortion for victims of rape, who have a right to end their pregnancy in every state in the country.

The decision states that in order to obtain an abortion under the rape exception a woman doesn’t need to provide a police report of the assault—as was the case in several states prior to the decision. Instead, her word that it happened is sufficient.

A linked provision, upheld by the supreme court late this past May, confirmed that for minor victims of rape, defined as those between the ages of 12 and 18, there is no need of for parental consent to obtain an abortion, freeing many teenagers to seek abortions despite familial opposition or incest.

“Sometimes the patient doesn’t want to present the report to the police, and we respect that,” says José Luis Flores Madrigal, a doctor and director of the maternal and infant health hospital Esperanza López Mateos, in Guadalajara, in the state of Jalisco. “I simply have to believe her.”

“That really struck me in the hospital, when we were learning about the rape exception, when […] I asked if [women] needed to prove anything and [the doctor] just said, ‘no, we just believe women,’” says Julie von Haefen, a North Carolina state representative who was present at a meeting with Mateos. “I will remember that forever probably, just the matter-of-factness of that statement was just so revealing, because not everyone in the United States believes women.”

The post How Mexico ensures access to safe abortion without legalizing it appeared first on Quartz.

UPDATED

Mexico snub throws Americas' summit into disarray

Shaun TANDON
Mon, June 6, 2022

President Joe Biden's plans to reboot US engagement with Latin America -- especially on critical topics like migration -- took a major hit after key partner Mexico snubbed a regional summit opening Monday in Los Angeles to protest Washington's exclusion of three far-left countries.

What was meant to be a week-long showcase of cooperation looks more likely to become a display of division that reflects diminishing clout over a region where long-time US economic and diplomatic influence faces a growing Chinese challenge.

Confirming it was not inviting Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela to the Summit of the Americas, a senior White House official cited "reservations regarding the lack of democratic space and the human rights situations."

In response, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said he would stay away.

"You cannot have a Summit of the Americas if you do not have all the countries of the Americas attending," Lopez Obrador announced, complaining of US "hegemony" and "lack of respect for nations."

Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard will represent Mexico instead, but the leftist populist leader's absence will diminish the impact of a summit where US-Mexico relations are at the heart of major immigration and trade issues.


The senior US official did not directly respond to Lopez Obrador's boycott, saying only that "the United States recognizes and respects the position of allies in support of inclusive dialogue." The official also said non-governmental representatives from Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela would be present.

In Havana, the communist Cuban government issued a statement calling Biden's decision "anti-democratic and arbitrary."

Biden is expected to make announcements at the summit on economic cooperation and fighting Covid-19 and climate change, said Juan Gonzalez, the top White House adviser on Latin America.

The US president, who flies to Los Angeles on Wednesday, also hopes to secure an agreement to help regulate surges of migration from the region's poorer and violent countries to the United States -- a major concern for US voters and an area where Republican opponents see Biden as vulnerable in upcoming midterm elections.

- Playing down Mexico spat -

State Department spokesman Ned Price played down the seriousness of the spat with Lopez Obrador, saying "we understand his position" and that the US-Mexican relationship is "broad and deep."

"Mexico is an important hemispheric player. We are very gratified that... Foreign Secretary Ebrard will be in attendance. We will have a number of opportunities to engage with our Mexican counterparts."

The Biden administration also notes it has secured the presence of other key regional players, including Argentina's left-leaning Alberto Fernandez and Brazil's far-right Jair Bolsonaro.

Benjamin Gedan, who heads the Latin America program at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, said Lopez Obrador's absence would mark a "significant void" and said Mexico's leader seemed more focused on domestic political gain.

The boycott has been "a really unfortunate subplot in the run-up to the summit because it has drained an enormous amount of US diplomatic energy for a bizarre cause celebre," Gedan said.

Biden has crafted a positive agenda, avoiding simply summoning Latin American leaders to lecture them on democracy, corruption and China, he said.

But, he added, it was unclear whether Biden will bring substantial resources to the table, in contrast to China's lavish infrastructure spending and trade privileges.

"I think, inevitably, the United States will disappoint," Gedan said.

- 'Progressively less ambitious' -

The Summit of the Americas is the first held by the United States since the inaugural 1994 meeting in Miami, where then-US president Bill Clinton sought the creation of a trade area to cover the whole continent except communist Cuba.

The United States has since soured on free trade, with Biden following the lead of his predecessor Donald Trump, who said such pacts hurt US workers.

Trump championed a hard line on Venezuela and Cuba, and did not attend the last Summit of the Americas, in Peru in 2018.

Eric Farnsworth, vice president of the Council of the Americas, recently told a congressional hearing that each summit has become "progressively less ambitious."

Los Angeles, he said, "offers the perfect opportunity for Washington to announce a commitment to regional growth and recovery."

Michael Shifter, a senior fellow at the Inter-American Dialogue, said the drama over summit attendance showed Washington's waning hold over the region as China muscles in.

The United States "still has a lot of soft power," Shifter said. "As for political and diplomatic influence, it is diminishing by the day."

bur-sms/sw

Mexico president's summit snub shows limits of U.S. reach in Latin America

Americas Summit in Los Angeles

Mon, June 6, 2022, 
By David Alire Garcia

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - The Mexican president's refusal to attend a U.S.-hosted summit because of disputes over the guest list highlights how Latin America's leftists are pursuing an increasingly independent foreign policy from Washington.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador had said he would not go to the Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles this week led by U.S. President Joe Biden unless all governments in the region were asked.

On Monday, he followed through as Washington said it was not inviting its antagonists Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua on the grounds of human rights and democratic shortcomings.

Lopez Obrador's firm line over the past few weeks won backing from other left-leaning governments across Latin America eager to stand up to Uncle Sam, fanning diplomatic tensions just as Washington tries to re-engage with its southern neighbors.

Luis Guillermo Solis, a center-left former Costa Rican president, said Lopez Obrador's determination to clamor for an inclusive discussion showed off his anti-imperialist credentials, striking a tone with centuries of resonance in the region.

"The easiest way to do it is to symbolically fight with the United States," Solis said. "It's a well-known play in our neighborhood."

The summit aims to promote democratic unity, but the dispute exposed divisions between Washington and governments sympathetic to Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel, Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega and Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro, self-styled leftists who have long been reviled by the U.S. foreign policy establishment.

Leftist leaders in Argentina, Chile, Honduras, and Bolivia have echoed Lopez Obrador's sentiments, taking U.S. officials by surprise and leaving them scrambling to ensure Biden is not left talking to empty chairs when he arrives on Wednesday.{nL1N2XM1B8]

Biden is under domestic pressure from Republicans as well as some fellow Democrats not to look soft on Cuba and Venezuela with the approach of elections in November that will determine whether his party keeps control of Congress.

The controversy risks overshadowing Washington's desire to prevent democratic backsliding in the region, said John Feeley, a retired U.S. ambassador and veteran Latin America diplomat who helped organize previous regional summits.

Feeley also flagged concerns about Brazil's far-right President Jair Bolsonaro undermining confidence in his country's October election and Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele's push to seek re-election despite constitutional term limits.

"Choppy waters is going to be the reality," said Feeley.

CUBA'S PULL

In March, Cuba began handing down jail sentences of up to 30 years to dozens of people arrested last year at the biggest anti-government protests since the island's 1959 revolution.

That month Citlalli Hernandez, secretary general of Lopez Obrador's ruling party, led a delegation to the communist-run island before he himself went in May, lauding the government and inking a deal to bring Cuban doctors to Mexico.

Hernandez hailed what she called Cuba's own version of participatory democracy, its achievements in health and education, and rejected any suggestion it was a dictatorship.

"We deeply respect the process of Cuban revolution," the 32-year-old senator said.

Her support points to the enduring appeal of Cuba's one-party model among a swath of Latin America's left, underlining a sharp split with Biden's center-left Democratic Party.

While Biden partly rolled back some of his Republican predecessor Donald Trump's toughest sanctions, he and most Democrats remain stern critics of Cuba's record on democracy and human rights.

Costa Rica's Solis believes the region's real political fault lines are not between left and right.

"It's a problem between democracy and authoritarianism," he said, describing Maduro's government as "criminal left" and Ortega's Nicaragua as "more like a monarchy".

Venezuela and Nicaragua have criticized the summit as exclusionary, and Cuba's Diaz-Canel said he would not attend regardless of whether he was invited.

Biden is well placed to warn about the risks of weakening democracy, given the false claims of widespread voter fraud and other misinformation pushed by Trump, said ex-diplomat Feeley.

But even the most successful bilateral talks in Los Angeles will unlikely shake the broader trend, he said.

"The overall panorama will continue to be difficult, confused and confusing."

(Reporting by David Alire Garcia; Additional reporting by Matt Spetalnick in Washington; Editing by Dave Graham and Grant McCool)

U.S. 'understands' Mexican position on Americas summit after boycott -State Dept

WASHINGTON, June 6 (Reuters) - The United States "understands" Mexico's position on the Summit of the Americas, State Department spokesperson Ned Price said on Monday after Mexico's president made good on a threat to skip the event because all countries in the Western Hemisphere were not invited.

Price said U.S. officials including Secretary of State Antony Blinken were in discussions with officials from U.S. neighbors including Mexico in very recent hours over participation in the summit.

"Certainly there are a diversity of opinions when it comes to who should be invited to the Summit of the Americas," Price said. "We have done our best to incorporate the viewpoints of the hemisphere."

Although Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador would not be attending, Mexico would still participate and would be represented by Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard, Price said.

The boycott of Lopez Obrador and possibly some other leaders could diminish the relevance of the summit in Los Angeles, where the United States aims to address regional migration and economic issues.

Price defended Washington's decision to exclude Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua from the meeting, taking place in Los Angeles this week, saying the convener of the meeting has broad discretion over who participates.

"It is unfortunately notable that one of the key elements of this summit is democratic governance, and these countries are not exemplars, to put it mildly, of democratic governance," Price said, citing the recent jailing of artists in Cuba, shrinking space for civil society in Nicaragua and President Nicolas Maduro's leadership of Venezuela that is not recognized by the United States.

Representatives of Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido, who Washington recognizes as the country's legitimate leader, as well as non-governmental delegates from the three barred countries, would participate in the summit, Price said.

 (Reporting by Humeyra Pamuk, Simon Lewis and Daphne Psaledakis Editing by Chris Reese and Alistair Bell)

Mexico leader to skip Biden's Americas Summit

AFP - 

Mexico President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador announced Monday he would skip the regional Summit of the Americas in the United States due to Washington's failure to invite countries it views as undemocratic.

© PEDRO PARDO

Mexico's President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador says he will not attend the Americas Summit in Los Angeles

The White House confirmed that President Joe Biden would not be inviting Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua to this week's summit in Los Angeles.

"I'm not going to the summit because they are not inviting all the countries of America and I think it is necessary to change the policy that has been imposed on us for centuries: exclusion," said Lopez Obrador in his daily press conference.

Lopez Obrador said Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard would be representing Mexico in his place.

The leftist populist had threatened last month to stay away from the summit unless all countries were invited.

Cuba's President Miguel Diaz-Canel announced he would not attend even if invited, while Guatemala's conservative leader Alejandro Giammattei pulled out after Washington sanctioned his top prosecutor.

The White House had said last week that Biden was eager for Lopez Obrador to attend.

"You cannot have a Summit of the Americas if you do not have all the countries of the Americas attending," said Lopez Obrador, who has also urged the US to end sanctions against Cuba.

"Or you can have it, but we see that as the old policy of interventionism, lack of respect for nations and their people."

A senior US official told AFP that "the US continues to maintain reservations regarding the lack of democratic space and the human rights situations" in the three barred countries.

"As a result, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela will not be invited to participate in this summit."

Lopez Obrador said his snub would not affect his "very good relations" with Biden, whom he said was under "pressure from the Republicans" to keep out the three countries.

"I'm really disappointed about this situation, but I do not accept that anyone puts themselves above the countries, I don't accept hegemony, not from China, not from Russia, not from any country," he said.

The Mexican president said that he would still visit the White House in July where he would look to discuss pan-American "integration."

"That's how they created the European Community and then that became the European Union. That's what we need to do in America," he said.

The summit is due to focus on migration, climate change, the Covid-19 pandemic and "the fight for freedom and democracy," the White House has said.

The United States has stepped up criticism of Cuban authorities following the arrest of hundreds of people for taking part in anti-government protests last July.

The Biden administration refuses to recognize Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro or Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega due to alleged election irregularities.

jg/dga/bc/bgs

Mexico's president boycotts US-hosted summit in snub to Biden

Mexico's president has announced that he will not travel to the U.S. this week to attend the Summit of the Americas -- another snub that has distracted from the Biden administration's efforts to use the tri-annual meetings to reassert U.S. leadership in the Western Hemisphere.

President Andrés Manuel López Obrador called President Joe Biden a "good man" on Monday, but blamed U.S. domestic political pressure for Biden's decision to exclude Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua from the summit.

"I believe in the need to change the policy... of exclusion, of the desire to dominate for no reason and not respect the sovereignty of countries, the independence of each country, and it will not be a summit of the Americas without the participation of all countries in the America's," said López Obrador, often known by his initials as AMLO, during a press conference.MORE: Amid boycotts, US scrambling to make Summit of the Americas a success

AMLO is not the only head of government to boycott the meetings over the invitation list. The leaders of Bolivia, Antigua and Barbuda, Guatemala, and Honduras have said they will not attend, while others -- including left-wing leaders in Chile and Argentina -- have criticized the U.S. decision while still confirming their attendance.

Biden will travel to Los Angeles later this week with first lady Dr. Jill Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff to host the summit, with plans to announce agreements on migration, economic development, public health, climate change, democracy, and more.


© Pedro Pardo/AFP via Getty ImagesMexico's President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is seen during his daily morning press conference in Mexico City on June 6, 2022.

But the boycotts have dominated talk around the summit, with some critics saying the administration has not done enough to rally participation around common objectives.

"A lack of robust agenda that speaks to the region has opened the door to distractions in the form of ideological & political theater," tweeted Ryan Berg, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

It's unclear how much of an effect AMLO's absence will have, especially as he announced he would dispatch his Foreign Secretary Marcelo Ebrard in his place. The populist, nationalist president also said he would meet with Biden in July at the White House.

But losing the leader of the world's 15th largest economy and the second most populous country in Latin America is a blow, especially after Biden sent his friend and former Senate colleague Chris Dodd as a special adviser for the summit to Mexico and other countries to shore up attendance.

Biden also "incredibly values personal engagement," according to his top White House official for the region Juan Gonzalez, perhaps making any snubs more insulting. Months ago, the administration publicly floated the idea of inviting AMLO to an LA Dodgers baseball game -- a warm gesture toward a leader who has rhetorically challenged the U.S. and who, some critics say, has undermined Mexican democracy.

Some analysts say, however, that over a year into his administration, Biden has not put enough energy into his stated goal of reasserting U.S. leadership in its hemisphere and promoting democracy in a region that has seen significant backsliding and political upheaval.


President Joe Biden meets with Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in the Oval Office of the White House, Nov. 18, 2021 in Washington, D.C.

"Unfortunately, the Biden administration did not put all the political capital needed to address more than 10 political problems" from Haiti to Venezuela and to make the summit a success, said Manuel Orozco, the director of the Inter-American Dialogue's migration, remittances, and development program in Washington.

"The quantity of problems that are mounting in Latin America and the Caribbean vis-à-vis the United States is just overwhelming... The political capital wasn't there," he added.

Dodd had more success elsewhere, especially in Brazil. President Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right leader of Latin America's largest country, announced last week he would attend the summit and have his first one-on-one meeting with Biden, with whom he's had frosty relations because of his environmental policies, attacks on Brazilian democracy, and close ties to former President Donald Trump.

In addition to Dodd, the administration deployed Jill Biden on a goodwill tour in May to Ecuador, Panama, and Costa Rica, where she was warmly received by heads of states and fellow first ladies and visited hospitals and schools supported with U.S. funding.


© Erin Schaff/APHonduran President Xiomara Castro and Vice President Kamala Harris walk through the presidential palace in Tegucigalpa, Honduras on Jan. 27, 2022.

Vice President Harris also called Honduras's left-wing President Xiomara Castro last month, but less than 24 hours later, she announced she would not participate if there were exclusions.

Harris has been tasked with stemming migration from Honduras and other Central American countries and attended Castro's inauguration in January, trying to secure an ally in the country's first female leader. But she's been criticized for visiting the region for three days in the 15 months since Biden announced her role -- keeping the politically fraught issue at times at an arm's length away.

U.S. officials have said they could not invite the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua because of their crackdowns on civil society and democracy, arguing that the region's countries agreed in the 2001 Inter-American Democratic Charter that any "interruption of the democratic order" in one country "constitutes an insurmountable obstacle" to its participation in the summit.

Instead of attending, AMLO announced he would travel on Thursday or Friday to the Mexican state Oaxaca, which was hit by Hurricane Agatha last week, to survey the damage and the reconstruction efforts.