New regulations on “degrading content” are part of a broader campaign to silence independent voices. Dozens of Iraqis gathered in Tahrir Square in Baghdad in January to demand that the government release relatives who disappeared during protests in 2019. © Ahmed Jalil / EPA, via Shutterstock. By Alissa J. Rubin In one social media clip, a young Iraqi woman dances at a national soccer tournament. In another, she dances at her son’s birthday party. A different post shows a Baghdad fashionista modeling clothes, including an outfit based on the Iraqi Army uniform. A fourth features a young man in a black sweatshirt and pants interviewing a young woman, also clad in black, about her private life. It is one of several clips he has made of young people dressed in close-fitting clothes that strike conservative Iraqis as provocative. A few months ago, the people featured in these clips were stars of Iraq’s booming social media scene. No longer. They have been largely silenced by being tried, convicted and sentenced to time in Iraq’s overcrowded prison system because of new Interior Ministry rules against “indecent” or “immoral” content on social media. This crackdown on social media is relatively new, but is of a piece with a broader campaign to silence, sideline or co-opt those who publicly question or criticize the government. That wider effort traces its roots to the months of demonstrations in 2019 and 2020, when young Iraqis poured into the streets demanding an end to corruption, a reduction in Iranian influence in Iraq and a new era of openness. ​Those demonstrations eventually forced the resignation of the prime minister, who was supported by Iranian-linked parties in the government. Given the comparative calm in Iraq today, the intensifying repression of social media and speech more broadly may seem unexpected. Bombings, rocket attacks and gunfights are rare in most of the country. The Islamic State cells that exist are small and seem more intent on their own survival than on widespread destruction. However, Iraq’s coalition government increasingly has been controlled by political parties with links to Iran. Human rights and democracy advocates say that to prevent any recurrence of the upheaval that occurred four years ago, the government seeks to limit independent voices in the public square, using lawsuits, detentions, online harassment, threats and occasionally kidnapping or assassination. Often it is unclear exactly which acts violate public order and morality, according to the U.S. State Department’s most recent report on human rights, as well as areport by Human Rights Watch and other free speech and human rights organizations. Um Fahad, the social media influencer who was dancing on her son’s birthday, said she still did not understand why she was arrested and imprisoned. “The judge asked me why I am dancing and showing part of my breast,” she said in an interview, after her release from jail. Dr. Ali al-Bayati, a former member of the Iraqi Human Rights Commission who now lives outside Iraq because of lawsuits and threats against him, said, “The idea is to silence any criticism, anything that can instigate the public, change the public attitude and anything that might in the future escalate public unrest.” The commission itself has been largely silenced. In 2021, the federal court stripped commissioners of their immunity, making them vulnerable to financially crippling lawsuits from any politician, government ministry or party. That curbed the commission’s efforts to hold to account Iraqi government officials or institutions for human rights violations under Iraqi and international law. With this critical watchdog neutered, politicians, parties and people connected to religious organizations have been refining their efforts to reduce public criticism of the government and government figures, creating an atmosphere that reinforces self-censorship. For its part, the Iraqi government says journalists and democracy organizations in the country have many more freedoms than was the case under Saddam Hussein, when the press was entirely government-controlled. Officials note accurately that when government critics are pursued in court, in the majority of cases they eventually prevail. However, this does not take into account that detention, even if the person is released or the case dropped, can damage a person’s livelihood or family. “Our journalists can go anywhere, and most of them have respect for our society and they have the right to speak,” said Saad Ma’an, who heads the Interior Ministry’s new committee that reviews social media for impermissible content. The new social media rules came into force in January, when the ministry set up a platform that allows Iraqis to denounce or report any content that “violates public morals, contains negative and indecent messages and undermines social stability.” So far, Mr. Ma’an said, the ministry has received more than 150,000 complaints. Of those, 14 people were charged for publishing “indecent” or “immoral” content on social media, and of those eight have been sentenced to prison terms ranging from six months to two years. Often the terms are reduced on appeal. Many complaints remain under investigation. Mr. Ma’an said the new rules aim to “protect our families.” He added: “There is a right to talk on social media, on Facebook, on Tik Tok, but there is a line. You cannot cross that line.” He used as examples two clips in which two different female social media influencers embraced their young sons and talked suggestively about love; one was the same fashionista who modeled the army uniform. Although Iraq’s popular social media influencers have received the most attention lately, the campaign has been at least as harsh against those who criticize Iraqi government officials. Among them is Mohammed Nena, a political researcher and writer who, during the prime minister’s campaign for office, said both in essays and on television that the future prime minister lacked strategic vision and would be a hostage of the Shiite parties with links to Iran who supported him. Mr. Nena was sued for defamation by the prime minister, Mohammed Shia al-Sudani, and arrested on March 25. Released on bail, he is awaiting trial. Haider Hamdani, a journalist in southern Iraq who covers corruption, has been acquitted in eight cases, but eight others are still pending. One was brought this spring by the governor of Basra, who offered to drop the case if Mr. Hamdani apologized and disavowed what he had written. Mr. Hamdani, who had written about corruption in the purchase of heavy machinery and ambulances in Basra and named those who had profited, refused. He was detained, and the judge set bail at 50 million Iraqi dinars, about $37,600. He receives threatening phone calls almost every day, he said. “I get anonymous messages saying, ‘Shut up, leave these subjects alone or your life will be in danger, and you have kids.’” Many of the legal actions rely on Iraq’s 1969 penal code, according to lawyers familiar with the cases, including a criminal ban on “insulting another person” or “hurting his feelings” as well as laws against “insulting” various government officials or entities. The Iraqi Constitution, written in 2005 with Western input, guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of the press but also says any public expression should not “violate public order and morality,” and t does not define those terms. Dissent has also been suppressed by more violent methods, including kidnappings, beatings and killings, carried out by masked men driving civilian vehicles. The government often says they are rogue groups posing as militias, while the State Department report refers to them as “paramilitary militias.” In February, Jassim al-Asadi, a well-known advocate for the Iraqi marshes, which are part of a UNESCO World Heritage site, said he was kidnapped by an armed group and tortured after saying that Turkey and Iran were withholding water needed to keep the marshes alive. “I thought I would be killed,” he said. “If it had not been for my relatives and my tribe and the people who spoke up for me, I would be dead.” The government never filed charges in his abduction. Democracy advocates who want substantial changes in the government are discouraged. They say real protest has become impossible, both because of the new threats, and because of the government’s sidelining of the political party of the Shiite nationalist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, which was the only serious challenge to the current governing coalition. “There is no leadership now,” said Shuja al-Khafaji, 33, who was one of many young people helping to lead the opposition to the government four years ago, and was kidnapped and held for a day or so by an armed group that did not identify itself. “Democracy in Iraq now is like other Arab countries,” he said, “that is, very limited. You cannot ask about certain things without somebody saying it is an insult and filing a lawsuit." © 2023 The New York Times Company

The killing of an Arizona tribal member by border agents has stirred up long-running resentments. The fence at the U.S. and Mexico Border on the Tohono O’odham Nation near Sells, Arizona. The nation straddles the U.S.-Mexico border, and some tribal members complain about their treatment by border agents. © Rebecca Noble for The New York Times It was pitch black when the Border Patrol rolled up to Raymond Mattia’s home on a remote corner of the Tohono O’odham reservation in southern Arizona, investigating a report of gunshots. Border agents, smugglers and migrants were a familiar sight in the tiny desert village a mile from the southern border where the Mattia family had lived for decades. Mr. Mattia often patrolled his property with a flashlight, his family said. That night in May, Mr. Mattia told an older sister over the phone that he was heading outside to meet the agents, she said. But in a chaotic instant in May, three Border Patrol agents fatally shot Mr. Mattia as they came upon him in the desert, hitting him nine times, according to an autopsy. A Border Patrol report says he had tossed a sheathed machete toward an officer and then “abruptly extended his right arm.” His family said he was unarmed and posed no threat. His death has touched off an outcry on the Tohono O’odham (pronounced Toh-HO-noh AW-tham) Nation, which lies along 62 miles of the southern border, and stirred up long-running resentments over the federal agency’s presence on the Native American territory. Tribal members pass through border-security checkpoints stationed just outside the reservation on their way to Tucson, the nearest big city, and say they are regularly pulled over and questioned — encounters that have left a film of fear and distrust. “I’m always on guard, always scared, nervous,” said Vivian Manuel, who lives near Mr. Mattia’s village. “They’ll harass you: What are you doing out here? Are you a tribal member?” Yet Tohono O’odham leaders have called the Border Patrol an ally in confronting drug and human smuggling on a 13,000-person reservation the size of Connecticut. More than 600 migrants have died there over the past decade trying to cross the deserts and ragged mountains, according to the migrant-aid group Humane Borders. The tribe says trafficking has damaged its land and cost the tribe millions in extra work for its roughly 60-member police force. John R. Modlin, the Border Patrol’s Tucson sector chief patrol agent who oversees the area, has described tribal partnerships as “essential to our national security mission.” The Border Patrol’s social-media feed is filled with posts showing agents helping the tribe fight wildfires, planting saguaro cactuses and stopping traffickers who cross the reservation with migrants packed into car trunks. The Border Patrol released a lengthy account of Mr. Mattia’s killing as well as body-camera footage. An investigation is being conducted by the F.B.I. and the Tohono O’odham Police Department. The agencies declined to discuss the shooting, citing the investigation. Ned Norris Jr., the Tohono O’odham chairman, said in a statement that he had “serious concerns” about Mr. Mattia’s killing but was reserving judgment. He did not respond to a request for comment. News of the shooting has rippled through other tribes near the border, forcing some leaders to grapple with their own mixed feelings about the federal presence around their lands. “We always worry about both sides, whether it’s the cartels or some of the agents who man these border patrols who have guns,” said Peter Yucupicio, chairman of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, whose headquarters are in Tucson. “You start wondering as a tribal member: If I do something wrong, am I going to get all shot up.” United States Customs and Border Protection, the umbrella agency of the Border Patrol, has reported an average of roughly 15 use-of-force incidents involving guns each year since 2020. Many of those occurred after vehicle pursuits or other attempts to apprehend smugglers and migrants, according to news reports and accounts from the agency. But the shooting of a tribal member on tribal lands sets this case apart. The Tohono O’odham, whose name means “desert people,” ranged across the Sonoran desert for centuries before there was a border, following seasonal water flows, hunting deer and harvesting fruit from cactuses, according to tribal histories. Their traditional lands were split in two when the 1853 Gadsden Purchase set the boundary between the United States and Mexico. In the decades that followed, the Border Patrol has built surveillance towers and substations on the reservation, and its white pickups roam highways and sandy back roads. The tribe has about 33,000 members, most of whom live off the reservation. Many try to honor their cross-border heritage by visiting family and graveyards on the Mexican side, or by crossing to hold religious ceremonies or tend to ranching stock. They must present tribal identification cards to pass into the United States at dedicated gates, and tribal leaders say that Tohono O’odham trying to travel back and forth have been detained and had ceremonial items like pine leaves and sweet grass confiscated. The tribe resisted the Trump administration’s campaign to build a border wall as an infringement on its freedoms, so instead of a 30-foot-high line of steel columns, the border is marked mostly by X-shaped vehicle barriers and a gap-toothed bollard fence. Some in the tribe said they were not bothered by the Border Patrol’s presence. But others said a history of run-ins had left them leery, such as a 2014 incident in which a Border Patrol agent shot and wounded two joyriding Tohono O’odham men after they accidentally clipped the agent’s parked pickup truck one moonless night. A federal judge later found the shooting was not justified and awarded the men more than $250,000. “They need to look at us as people and not like we’re all criminals,” said Angelita Reino Ramon, whose 18-year-old son was fatally struck by a Border Patrol truck 20 years ago in what a judge later called an unavoidable accident. “They need to have more respect.” The exact circumstances that led to Mr. Mattia’s death the night of May 18 are still hazy. The call began around 9 p.m. when tribal police asked the Border Patrol for help responding to a report of two gunshots heard in Mr. Mattia’s village, Menagers Dam, according to a statement from Customs and Border Protection. In radio recordings and body-camera videos, dispatchers and officers said it was unclear where the shots had come from. Before heading out, they cautioned that someone in the area might have a rifle. At 9:37 p.m., the agents and at least one tribal police officer pulled up to the village and spread out around Mr. Mattia’s dark cinder-block house. There was just a sliver of moon that night, and in the video, their flashlights barely penetrate a ghostly landscape of outdoor furniture, creosote bushes and cactuses. “I thought somebody just ran this way,” an agent said, jogging into the brush. The tribal officer and agents found Mr. Mattia near a wooden structure about 100 yards away from his house. They ordered him to come out with his hands up. “I am,” he said and tossed a sheathed machete through the air, which landed near an officer’s feet. Several officers started yelling, ordering Mr. Mattia to take his hands out of his pocket and get on the ground. Seconds later, they fired the fatal burst of shots. As the agents handcuffed and flipped Mr. Mattia onto his back, one yelled out to “secure the gun” that they said was beneath his limp body. Instead, they found a cellphone and its case. The case is already testing parallel efforts by the Biden administration both to strengthen ties and trust with tribes, and overhaul how Border Patrol shootings are investigated. Last year, the administration disbanded secretive “critical incident teams” within the Border Patrol that had been criticized for effectively allowing the organization to investigate itself after events like Mr. Mattia’s killing. The administration also ordered federal law-enforcement agencies, including the Border Patrol, to wear body cameras and promptly release footage after shootings. The administration’s Covid rescue package contained $1.75 billion for American Indians and Alaska Natives, and the administration also created a Homeland Security advisory council focused on tribal issues. Its 15 members include the Tohono O’odham tribal chairman. Mr. Mattia’s relatives say they have little faith in the investigations, and have struggled to get answers from both the tribal government and the Border Patrol. Frustrated, a dozen relatives and supporters put on matching red T-shirts bearing Mr. Mattia’s photo and held a small protest across the highway from a Border Patrol station, just outside the reservation boundaries. They burned sprigs of creosote bushes and took turns waving posters that called for justice and huddling under umbrellas to get out of the sun. Mr. Mattia’s family described him as a ceremonial leader in their community who made wood carvings and loved hunting deer. His sister, Annette Mattia, said the family had lived in the same area for generations, but that the shooting had shattered their sense of home. “We don’t even want to be here anymore,” she said. © 2023 The New York Times Company

Iranian lawmakers attend an open session of the parliament in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, Aug. 6, 2023. © AP Photo / Vahid Salemi DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran on Monday began registering candidates for parliamentary elections in March, which will be the first since nationwide protests rocked the country last year. Iran has held regular presidential and parliamentary elections since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. But a clerical body vets candidates — disqualifying any seen as disloyal to the Islamic Republic — and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has the final say on all major policies. Iran saw months of nationwide protests sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman who was being held by the morality police for allegedly violating the country’s strict dress code. The protests escalated into calls for the overthrow of the ruling clerics, marking one of the biggest challenges to their four-decade rule. The protests largely died down after authorities launched a fierce crackdown in which more than 500 protesters were killed and nearly 20,000 were detained. Last month, the morality police returned to the streets in a renewed campaign to force women to wear the mandatory headscarf, known as the hijab. Candidates for the 290-seat parliament have a week to pre-register online, the first step in a monthslong process. But each will eventually have to be approved by the Guardian Council, a 12-member clerical body, half of whom are directly appointed by the supreme leader. Over 7,000 candidates were disqualified ahead of the last elections in 2020 — about half of those who had tried to run. The turnout for that election was the lowest since 1979, with just over 42% of eligible voters casting ballots. Iran has been mired in a severe economic crisis since then-President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from a nuclear deal with world powers and restored crushing sanctions. The currency’s value has plummeted, erasing many Iranians’ life savings and driving up prices. With so many struggling to meet basic needs, analysts say there is little energy left over for protests or politics. Iran’s government, which had abided by the 2015 nuclear deal before the U.S. withdrew, is now galloping ahead with its nuclear program. It is openly exceeding the deal’s limits on uranium enrichment and stockpiling, and it is building a new nuclear facility so far underground as to likely be impervious to U.S. weapons. © 2023 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

At least 4 Syrian soldiers killed in suspected Israeli airstrikes around Damascus. BY ASSOCIATED PRESS Israeli soldiers reposition military vehicles, including self-propelled artillery, during a drill in the annexed Golan Heights on July 17, 2023. © Jalaa Mary/AFP BEIRUT (AP) — Israeli airstrikes hit areas around Damascus early Monday, killing at least four Syrian soldiers, Syrian state media reported. Syrian state television, citing a military source, said four other soldiers were also wounded while the strikes caused “some material damage.” Israeli authorities did not immediately comment. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, an opposition-linked war monitor, said the strikes targeted weapons and munitions warehouses and positions of Iran-backed militias around Damascus. They say at least six were killed and seven others wounded. The Observatory said the strikes mark 22nd time Israel has struck Syria this year. Israel, which has vowed to stop Iranian entrenchment next door, has carried out hundreds of strikes on targets in government-controlled parts of neighboring Syria in recent years, but it rarely acknowledges them. Israel has also targeted the international airports in Damascus and the northern Syrian city of Aleppo several times over the past few years, often putting it out of commission. © 2023 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

click on image to view YouTube video Kabul Under Siege TOLO News 21 December 2020 By Professor William Maley Professor William Maley says the Afghan "peace process" is fatally flawed. Kabul is a city under siege. It may not be besieged in the way that Berlin was in April 1945, but the daily lives of its residents are overshadowed by a pervasive sense of fear as car bombs and magnetic mines are detonated on what seems a daily basis, some indiscriminate in their impact, others directly targeting proponents of pluralism, human rights and democracy. The ‘new Afghanistan’ that has developed over the last two decades is facing an unprecedented attack. These atrocities have come in the midst of a so-called ‘peace process’. Yet if the aim of the process was to bring peace and security, something has plainly gone horribly wrong. To find agreements as flawed as the 29 February US-Taliban deal, one has to go to the Munich Agreement of September 1938, the January 1973 Paris Agreement on Vietnam, or the Arusha Accords on Rwanda of August 1993, which were hailed as triumphs at the time but now have few if any defenders. With the Afghan process paused, it pays to reflect on why the process has unravelled, and what other steps might best be pursued from this point. A number of defects in the ‘peace agreement’ have already been widely noted and require little further attention – the exclusion from the negotiation process of the Afghan government; the absence of any reference to the Afghan government in the agreement; the lack of provision for a ceasefire of any kind; the lack of any Taliban commitment to human rights or democracy; and the provision for the release of up to 5000 Taliban combat and political prisoners without the consent of the sovereign government holding them in custody. From these very facts, it was patently obvious that for Washington the agreement was an exit agreement rather than a peace agreement. In the period after 29 February, however, very serious problems of implementation also emerged. The most obvious related to the prisoner release issue, an ill-conceived ‘confidence-building measure’ which delayed the commencement of discussions between Afghan sides until 12 September. The main problem flowing from this was not, however, the return to combat activity of released Taliban, troubling though that was; it was rather that the disposition of the US consistently to give in to the Taliban’s interpretation of the agreement (for example, by treating the 5000 figure as a target rather than a ceiling, and supporting the release of war criminals as well as combat and political prisoners) sent the signal that the US was an enfeebled player that could be taken for granted. That this would be a problem was clear from 1 March when US Secretary of State Pompeo in an interview on CBS ‘Face the Nation’ described the 29 February text as ‘the complete agreement’, immediately freeing the Taliban from any commitments that they might have made in other unpublished documents. In this context, the sharp escalation of attacks against civil society activists, journalists, and Afghanistan’s educated new generation is not at all surprising. With the Trump Administration focused on managing its own departure, the Taliban have had little or nothing to fear from President Trump or US envoy Dr Zalmay Khalilzad. The 29 February prohibition on attacks on US forces virtually invited an increase in attacks on Afghan targets. The Taliban have no interest in claiming responsibility for such attacks – knowing that their new American friends are uninterested in holding them to account, but the Americans might find such claims somewhat embarrassing. At the same time, they have a strong incentive to mount such attacks, in order to destabilise a government already vulnerable because of the looming US exit, and to keep their own combatants and networks on their toes for even-fiercer action once all US and allied personnel are gone. This is why Dr Khalilzad’s supine failure to insist on a ceasefire in exchange for a US withdrawal timetable was such a catastrophic error, and his comments since then, typically not even calling out the Taliban for their recalcitrance, have been just as supine. Thus, on 16 October, Dr Khalilzad tweeted that ‘At present too many Afghans are dying. With the re-set, we expect that number to drop significantly’. This ‘warning’ was followed by a string of massive car bombings and major attacks, demonstrating either that the Taliban negotiators did not care a whit about the commitments that Dr Khalilzad thought they had made, or that the negotiators had no ability to control what the real power-holders were doing. Similarly, when Dr Khalilzad claimed that ‘Continued high levels of violence can threaten the peace process and the agreement and the core understanding that there is no military solution’, he begged the obvious question of whether the Taliban shared a ‘core understanding that there is no military solution’, a conviction which seemed increasingly delusional. Where does this leave the ‘peace process’? To be blunt, it is increasingly clear that it has exhausted any potential it ever had to bring peace or security to Afghanistan. With hindsight, it veered off the rails at the point where Khalilzad abandoned the (defensible) ‘nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’ formula in favour of a two-stage process which gave the Taliban everything they really wanted – status, prisoner releases, and a US withdrawal timetable – at the first stage, creating no incentive for them to make any concessions during ‘intra-Afghan negotiations’. The Taliban have never shown the slightest disposition to be power-sharers, and there is no prospect that they will adopt such a position now, not least because their values are radically at odds with those of the supporters of a modernist, republican vision of Afghanistan’s future. US diplomacy has left them with the feeling that time is on their side and they are on a roll. What we are likely to see instead is strategic stalling on the Taliban’s part, and the illusion of active diplomacy. Delegations may bustle around, consulting with their principals, issuing statements, giving off-the-record briefings. But it will all be for show, and it is important for observers not to be deluded into mistaking this for progress. No Afghan government is likely to pull the plug on this process, illusory though it may be. This would give a free-kick to Washington, which would undoubtedly hasten to blame the Afghan government for the collapse of the process, rather than accept any responsibility itself. But explicitly reframing the process as a marginal activity, peripheral rather than central to Afghanistan’s interests, would create space for more effective foreign policy settings, in terms both of the deployment of resources and the choice of issues to pursue. In respect of the former, foreign-policy resources are probably better devoted to working directly with sympathetic European governments, with international organisations, and with the incoming Biden administration. And in respect of the latter, a key issue to pursue – the real elephant in the room – remains the critical support that the Afghan Taliban receive from Pakistan and specifically from the Pakistan military. Meaningful peace and security will not come to Afghanistan until the issue of Pakistan’s relentless disposition to meddle in Afghanistan’s affairs is properly addressed, and it is wishful thinking to believe otherwise. William Maley is Professor of Diplomacy at The Australian National University, and author of Transition in Afghanistan: Hope, Despair and the Limits of Statebuilding (2018), The Afghanistan Wars (3rd edition, 2021), and Diplomacy, Communication and Peace: Selected Essays (2021). Copyright 2020 TOLO News

A Canadian law that will require tech companies to compensate domestic publishers has led Meta to start blocking news articles on its social networks. Meta has followed through with a threat to restrict access to news content in protest of a new Canadian law. © Jim Wilson/The New York Times By Vjosa Isai It could be months before an escalating fight between Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, and the Canadian government gets resolved, but Matthew DiMera, publisher of a Canadian news organization, is already feeling the pain. Mr. DiMera tried to create an Instagram post featuring a news article by his outlet, The Resolve — something news organizations do routinely to promote their work. Instead, he said, he was greeted by the message: “People in Canada can’t see your content.” Meta this week began blocking news from appearing on its platforms in Canada, the latest twist in its standoff with the government over a new law that will require technology companies to compensate domestic publishers for using their content. The law comes at a time when the news industry in Canada, as in much of the world, is shrinking under the pressure of lower advertising revenues, and depends on social networks for much of its readership. “Instagram has been a really great platform for us to connect with people, so losing that is really a huge concern for us,” said Mr. DiMera, who started The Resolve in 2021 to report stories on Black, Indigenous and racially diverse communities. The new law will not go into effect until December, but Meta has launched something of a pre-emptive strike with a news blockade that it said will roll out over a few weeks. Facebook and Instagram users in Canada will be unable to share links to news articles from local or international outlets anywhere on their accounts, including in short video posts called “reels” or in the comment sections of other posts. The law, called the Online News Act, was passed in June and will require technology companies to license news content through agreements with individual publishers, or groups of publishers, and then pay news outlets for linking to their articles. Canadian news outlets and publishers reacted angrily to Meta’s decision to block news access. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the country’s public broadcaster, accused Meta of “an abuse of their market power” that would especially affect communities that rely on Facebook to access news articles, including those in northern Canada, rural areas and users from Francophone or multilingual backgrounds. Some of those communities have limited access to print publications. “It’s another blow to democracy and to the opportunity for us to access fair and balanced, well-sourced journalism,” said Megan Boler, a professor of media and communication studies at the University of Toronto. Meta defended its actions in a blog post this week, rejecting the notion that it unfairly benefits from news content on its platforms and arguing that it has generated significant revenue for publishers. The implementation of the online law is still being negotiated between the government and tech platforms. Details to be worked out include establishing thresholds on payments to news organizations based on a platform’s revenues and what kind of alternative compensation or in-kind services, such as training, a tech company could provide as part of the agreements with news outlets. Google has threatened to block news access, but for now it is participating in discussions with the government over the law’s regulations. Meta, however, is not taking part, said Pascale St-Onge, Canada’s heritage minister, whose agency helps oversee tech regulation. “Facebook knows they have no obligations under the Act right now,” because it is not yet in effect, Ms. St-Onge said in a statement on Twitter. She added, “They would rather block their users from accessing good quality and local news instead of paying their fair share to news organizations.” The standoff in Canada is a near-repeat of the approach Meta, then called Facebook, took two years ago in Australia, when its government also adopted a law seeking to force tech platforms to compensate publishers. The Canadian law is modeled after Australia’s. The company blocked users in Australia from viewing news articles across its platforms for one week, before negotiating a deal that gave it more time to create agreements with news organizations. Australia’s former competition chief, Rod Sims, has said that agreements through the deal have led to more than 200 million Australian dollars, or $130 million, in annual payments to publishers since that country’s law took effect. At the time, Canadian officials, then in the early days of crafting their own legislation, condemned Facebook’s hard-line stance in Australia. Since then, the government, Canadian news organizations and Meta have been exchanging angry volleys. In June, the federal government, which spends about 10 million Canadian dollars per year, about $7.5 million, to advertise on Meta platforms, pulled its ads. The province of Quebec did the same, as have the province of British Columbia, a handful of municipalities, and other organizations and media companies, including the owner of the Toronto Star, Canada’s largest newspaper. Meta’s revenue from Canadian advertising, so far this year, is about 1.9 billion Canadian dollars, according to Jean-Hugues Roy, a journalism professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal. Canada’s news outlets have imposed mass layoffs in recent years in the face of cratering advertising revenue, much of which has flowed toward tech platforms like Meta. Most recently, Bell Media, the news subsidiary of a Canadian telecommunications company, slashed its work force by 1,300 people and shut down six of its radio stations in June. Some larger Canadian news outlets have criticized the new law, arguing that it interferes with free market forces that will largely determine what news business models are able to survive. “Among our own ranks, there is a range of views” over the online law, said Paul Deegan, president and chief executive officer of News Media Canada, an industry lobbying group. “But the consensus is that this is a good path.” © 2023 The New York Times Company

Ankara’s recent interest in improving EU access seen as window of opportunity to restart diplomatic process. By Patrick Wintour A gate marking the United Nations buffer zone that cuts across the northern third of Cyprus. Photograph: Angus McComiskey/Alamy Cypriot diplomats are seeking to revive peace talks on the divided island with proposed appointments of UN and EU envoys in a bid to find a federal solution five decades after occupation of the north of the island by Turkish troops. A small window of diplomatic opportunity may have opened due to Turkey’s recent interest in negotiating its relations with the European Union, especially on visa-free travel and the customs union. Furthermore, the Cypriot foreign minister, Constantinos Kombos, is hoping to restart the process, the Guardian understands. Cyprus – a former British colony – has been split since Ankara sent in troops in 1974, seizing its northern third in response to a coup orchestrated by the junta then in power in Athens aimed at uniting the country with Greece. In the intervening years reunification efforts on the island have repeatedly failed. However, the recent completion of elections in Greece, Turkey, and Cyprus gives politicians greater room for manoeuvre if they wish to revive talks after a poorly prepared UN-led conference in Switerzland failed in 2017. Since then Turkey has become even more committed to a two-state solution for the island, but Turkish-occupied northern Cyprus (the self-styled “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus”) is recognised only by Turkey, leaving it dependent on Ankara both economically and in terms of security. There are up to 30,000 Turkish troops on the island. The Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, is due to visit the island on Thursday to mark the occupation and to open a new airport in the north. Some argue that Turkey’s desire to reopen talks on its relationship with the EU might give Brussels some leverage to persuade Erdoğan to re-examine a Cyprus strategy that is probably draining Ankara of badly needed funds. The last EU council in June called “for the speedy resumption of negotiations” and said it was “ready to play an active role in supporting all stages of the UN-led process, with all appropriate means at its disposal”. Although the UN will remain the ultimate venue for any talks on the future of Cyprus, diplomats have been encouraging the EU to appoint a special envoy who would have the clout to look for solutions. Kombos is hoping a UN special envoy might be appointed around the time of the UN general assembly in September. There are also some tentative signs that Erdoğan – who has always played a balancing act between Russia and the west – may be tilting towards the US camp after securing re-election, and therefore might be more amenable to talks on Cyprus. To Washington’s relief, Erdoğan has in principle lifted his veto on Sweden joining Nato, but appears to be waiting on confirmation from Washington that the US Senate is willing to supply F-16 jets to Turkey. The sale of the jets is supported by the Biden administration but requires the agreement of the chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, Bob Menendez. He wants written undertakings that Turkey will not use the F-16s to continue overflights of Greek islands, creating an elaborate piece of choreography that affects not only Turkey, Sweden and Nato, but also Cyprus. The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, is due to address the EU foreign affairs council where he is likely to update EU foreign ministers on US relations with Turkey. Ersin Tatar, the elected Turkish Cypriot leader, has opposed unifying the island and wants the north of Cyprus to be recognised as an independent country. Tatar told the Guardian earlier this year there were “two states and two people on the island” and that “reversing the clock” by reunifying the island would be “absolutely impossible”. But there are hints at change. Tatar’s influential special representative, Ergün Olgun, recently resigned citing health reasons at the age of 80. He denied any differences over the preconditions for future talks, but at a recent conference he suggested the requirement that the other side recognise northern Cyprus as a precondition for talks had been dropped. © 2023 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies.

Gas-rich Turkmenistan facing worst economic crisis in 30 years, coupled with rights concerns, UK think-tank reports. By Madeline Roache Relatives of the country's ruling family have been seen to benefit from state expenditure, the report found [Alexander Vershinin/AP] Foreign governments and investors must stop courting gas-rich Turkmenistan, “a country teetering on the edge of catastrophe”, according to a new report by the London-based Foreign Policy Centre. Turkmenistan, second to North Korea in the scale of its isolation according to media watchdog Reporters Without Borders, has long attracted investment from foreign governments. But the report, which was launched in Westminster on Monday, said the country has a “Potemkin economy” as respectable official gross domestic product (GDP) figures mask a chaotic, black financial system. As the UK’s Department of International Trade wrote, “no reliable economic data are published in Turkmenistan”. Investment risks include “the whims of the president, leading to arbitrary behaviour by a sclerotic bureaucracy”, said the report. “While legislation to protect businesses is there, application isn’t. The myriad of risks can’t be exaggerated,” said Eimear O’Casey, a Central Asia researcher at a political risk consulting agency. Corruption is endemic to Turkmenistan’s economic life, with Transparency International ranking it 161 out 180 countries surveyed. Relatives of the country’s ruling family have been seen to benefit from state expenditure, the report noted. Economic crisis Turkmenistan is facing its worst economic crisis in three decades, which has led to hyperinflation and widespread food shortages, despite the country possessing an estimated 10 percent of all proven natural gas reserves. Economic turmoil in the hydrocarbon dependent country is driven in part by low gas prices, the suspension of gas exports to Russia between 2016 and 2019 and poor harvests. Professor Steven Hanke of the Cato Institute, placed the rate of inflation as experienced by consumers outside of the state sector as being as high as 294 percent as of June 2018. Government resources are strained, which has led to the end of previously free electricity, water and natural gas at the start of 2019. “At a time when thousands of people are queuing up for basic groceries, the government is spending $2.3bn on a ‘Turkmen Autobahn’ motorway,” said Luca Anceschi, senior lecturer in Central Asian Studies, University of Glasgow. The eight-lane motorway between Ashgabat and Turkmenabatis is being supported by Austrian technical advisers Vienna Consulting Engineers (VCE). Worsening rights situation The current economic woes have seen the personality cult of its leadership and the intrusion into the lives of its citizens intensify as the regime seeks to maintain its grip on society. The report highlighted the massive use of forced labour, mass repression of media freedom, and “disappeared” activists in prison. Ruslan Myatiev, founder and editor of Alternative Turkmenistan News, said: “There is no media landscape in Turkmenistan. All newspapers, radio and TV stations repeat the regime’s line. Even in North Korea and war-torn Syria, there is greater press freedom.” There’s no way of challenging human rights abuses such as the problem of forced labour in cotton harvesting, added Myatiev. “People have no choice but to submit because there’s no chance of finding another job,” he said. Push for reform Adam Hug, director of the Foreign Policy Centre and one of the report’s authors, said governments and businesses should leverage engagement and investment for vital democratic and human rights reform on a “more for more” and “less for less” basis. Hug echoed previous demands made by a number of human rights organisations, including Human Rights Watch. Last January, HRW said the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development should not expand its lending in Turkmenistan until the government shows concrete progress in improving the humanitarian situation. However last week, the European Union’s foreign policy representative, Federica Mogherini, was in Ashgabat to announce the opening of a diplomatic mission in the country, and made no mention of human rights issues. Turning to relations between the United Arab Emirates and Turkmenistan, the report stated that “Dubai has been a focus for Turkmen migrant workers and the close relations enable Ashgabat to put pressure on migrants to return.” Strong bilateral ties have seen Dragon Oil, owned by the Emirates National Oil Company, became one of the more successful players in the Turkmen energy market. O’Casey said Turkmenistan so far has not shown any concern for maintaining a positive image on the international stage. “And without this concern, there is no impetus for reform,” she said. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Turkmenistan remained isolated from the rest of the world under the brutal rule of former president Saparmurat Niyazov. Little has changed since current President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow came to power in 2006 following Niyazov’s death. “The government has to re-think its economic policy. How long can we keep going? For now, I only expect to see the population poorer, and the regime more authoritarian,” Anceschi said. © 2023 Al Jazeera Media Network

(Photo: Alessandro Rota/Getty Images) By Meghan Bodette Kurdish Peace Institute August 3, 2023 On August 3, 2014, ISIS began a systematic campaign of atrocities against the Yezidi community of Iraq’s Sinjar province, killing thousands of men and abducting thousands of women and children into slavery. The crimes have been recognized as genocide by the United Nations, the European Union, the United States, Canada, France, Armenia, Iraq, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, and, most recently, the United Kingdom. Yet nine years later, Yezidi communities have seen little concrete action from the governments and global institutions that acknowledge their suffering. For those Yezidis that have returned to their homes in Sinjar, an adequate standard of living and basic physical security are almost completely out of reach. Hundreds of thousands more cannot return at all. To many observers, the pattern of discrimination against and dehumanization of Yezidis that existed long before the 2014 genocide—and likely facilitated ISIS atrocities—appears to be at play again. In this context, recent Yezidi-led initiatives have demanded that governments and international institutions take tangible steps to address the fundamental needs of their community. Support for efforts like these should be part of a comprehensive regional strategy to build stability and prevent atrocities. On July 27, a coalition of civil society organizations, community leaders, and intellectuals launched a joint initiative calling on the Iraqi government to allocate $1.5 billion—just one percent of the most recent Iraqi federal budget— to a specialized Sinjar reconstruction fund within the next year. Pari Ibrahim is the founder and Executive Director of the Free Yezidi Foundation, which spearheaded the campaign. “Iraq has been blessed with abundant natural resources. The budget in 2023 is an impressive $153 billion. Yet Yezidis remain homeless, living in tents for 9 years. It is outrageous,” she told the Kurdish Peace Institute. “Literally 1% of one year of the Iraqi budget would be enough to rebuild Sinjar. We call upon the Iraqi Government to allocate this budget by August 3rd, 2024,” Ibrahim said. The organizations supporting the initiative identified the structural marginalization of Yezidis in Iraqi politics as one likely cause of the government’s inaction. “The larger communities in Iraq are better equipped to advocate for their share of funding in the Iraqi Parliament due to greater representation and political power…Sinjar district’s reconstruction should have been prioritized at least as much as other districts, if not more. Instead, because the community has lacked political clout, Sinjar and its residents have been forgotten,” their joint statement said. As they struggle to rebuild what ISIS destroyed, Yezidis have been forced to deal with a new military threat: Turkey. Every year since 2017, Turkey has carried out airstrikes and drone strikes against Yezidis in Sinjar. It claims to target the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)—which, along with the Syrian Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), intervened in the area in August 2014 to fight ISIS and rescue Yezidi IDPs trapped on Sinjar mountain. In reality, Turkey has assassinated Yezidi community leaders and members of the Sinjar Resistance Units (YBS), a local armed group made up of Iraqi Yezidi genocide survivors that was established to fight ISIS and that has never targeted Turkey. A 2021 dataset published by The New Statesman found that 60% of the attacks harmed civilians. Dr. Leyla Ferman, director of the Yezidi NGO Women for Justice, told the Kurdish Peace Institute that Turkish strikes exacerbate existing challenges to reconstruction and IDP returns. “Who will—and who can—go back to an area where they are not sure if they will be targeted, or if they will be killed because people or buildings close by are targeted?” she asked. “These airstrikes are carried out by day and by night. No one knows what or who will be targeted next. Without any security, people cannot go back to Sinjar. And how can you support rebuilding projects when you are not sure that Turkey will not target these buildings?” Despite years of outcry from Yezidi communities, the Iraqi government, the Kurdistan Regional Government, and the international community have largely turned a blind eye to Turkey’s aggressive behavior. Many Yezidis and international observers alike attribute this lack of protection to the same political marginalization that is slowing the pace of Sinjar’s reconstruction. “What is especially worrying has been the silence from Baghdad and Erbil in the aftermath of the Turkish airstrikes in Sinjar – airstrikes that targeted and killed Yezidis who are Iraqi citizens and defended Sinjar against ISIS. One cannot help but suspect that part of the Sinjar Agreement may have included a green light for Turkey to conduct airstrikes in Sinjar, which we and the entire Yezidi community wholeheartedly reject. This is part of a pattern of exclusion from decision-making that has plagued minorities in our part of the world for many years,” Pari Ibrahim warned in a 2022 speech to the U.N. Human Rights Council. Dr. Amy Austin Homes, who created the first-ever dataset tracking Turkish strikes in Sinjar in August 2021, told the Kurdish Peace Institute that the Sinjar Agreement “should have been called the ‘Erbil-Baghdad Agreement’ because there was no meaningful consultation or inclusion of local Sinjaris or Yezidis in the diaspora.” “This only further alienated an already traumatized community. The only way for the Yezidi community to recover is to fully include them in decision-making processes about Sinjar, and to provide the resources they need to rebuild,” she said. Yet despite these obstacles, Turkey’s impunity for strikes in Sinjar may not last for long. On July 31, Women for Justice and the Accountability Unit, a U.K. based human rights NGO, brought a formal complaint before the U.N. Human Rights Committee regarding Turkish airstrikes that allegedly targeted a hospital in the village of Sikeniye in August 2021, killing and injuring several Yezidi civilians. “The complainants’ case is that Türkiye conducted the airstrikes against Sikeniye Medical Clinic, that resulted in the killing and serious injury to civilians, in violation of their right to life under international law, as guaranteed by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 (ICCPR),” stated an Accountability Unit press release on the case. “Further, Türkiye failed to investigate the killing of civilians resulting from the airstrikes, and failed to provide victims with effective remedies, constituting a violation of their rights to a prompt, independent and effective investigation, and to effective remedy, as guaranteed by Articles 2 and 6, ICCPR,” it continued. Since abandoning peace talks with the PKK in 2015, Turkey has carried out a series of ever-escalating ground and air operations ostensibly targeting Kurdish groups in Iraq and Syria. These operations have killed and injured thousands of civilians and displaced hundreds of thousands. Many more live in constant fear of indiscriminate Turkish strikes and extremist militia violence. Ethnic and religious minorities like Kurds, Yezidis, and Syriac-Assyrians have suffered the most. If this case is successful, it will mark the first time that Turkey has been held accountable for these violations—opening a path for other victims. Dr. Ferman believes that this is just the beginning. She called for a no-fly zone for Sinjar—a demand put forward by Yezidi NGOs and activists as well as the Sinjar Democratic Autonomous Administration, a local governing body affiliated with the YBS—and an end to military support for Turkey until it ceases its targeting of genocide survivors. She also urged other communities impacted by Turkish operations in Iraq and Syria to take legal action: “This complaint is not the only tool for justice. There is a lot of work still to do to reach international courts.” Ultimately, Turkey’s cross-border attacks are also the symptom of deeper political and social problems. “If Turkey could become a strong democracy, they would find solutions to the Kurdish question, and would also have a different regional policy,” Dr. Ferman said. In Turkey, as in Iraq, the marginalization of minority communities has led to instability and human suffering on a massive scale. These dynamics prove that, in order to promote stability and guarantee that atrocities like those committed by ISIS are not repeated, pluralist, democratic, inclusive governance is not an afterthought—it is a non-negotiable. Communities in the region that have been marginalized and disempowered in the past should have the greatest possible degree of control over their political destiny. In Sinjar, states that have recognized the genocide have a particular moral obligation to act. These states should immediately support specific Yezidi demands for action, including recent calls to fund reconstruction and hold Turkey accountable for attacks. In the long term, they should offer impartial support for a locally-driven agreement on the status of Sinjar that—unlike the existing Sinjar Agreement—helps the community build political power and security capabilities on its own terms, does not pick and choose which Yezidi groups to include and which foreign powers to exclude, and does not require any Yezidi group to disarm. A strategic shift is also necessary at the regional level. Governments should address the interlocking conflicts in Turkey, Iraq and Syria—including Turkey’s Kurdish conflict and the status of Syria’s northeast—from a nuanced perspective that tackles the root causes of violence and insecurity. In the long term, political solutions based on principles of ethnic and religious pluralism and democratic governance will allow the millions impacted by recent conflicts to rebuild their lives, create conditions under which perpetrators can be held accountable, and prevent groups like ISIS from rising again. About the author: MEGHAN BODETTE Director of Research Meghan Bodette is the Director of Research at the Kurdish Peace Institute. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Foreign Service from Georgetown University, where she concentrated in international law, institutions, and ethics.

A jury has decided the gunman will receive the death penalty for killing 11 people at the Tree of Life Congregation in 2018. People at a memorial outside the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, in 2019. © Gene J. Puskar / AP file By Emily Berk, David K. Li and Carolina Gonzalez PITTSBURGH — The gunman who opened fire on a Pittsburgh synagogue, killing 11 and wounding seven others, will be sentenced to death, federal jurors decided Wednesday. The tragedy, nearly five years ago, was the most heinous antisemitic attack in U.S. history. For months before the attack, the gunman, Robert Bowers, posted incessantly on social media about his hatred of Jewish people and immigrants. Armed with an AR-15 and other weapons, he then barged into the Tree of Life Congregation in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh on Oct. 27, 2018 and surrendered only when he ran out of ammunition. The jury will now deliver its verdict to U.S. District Court Judge Robert Colville, who is bound to impose the death penalty against the gunman. The judge is expected to deliver the official sentence Thursday morning. Jurors had to reach a unanimous decision to impose the death penalty or else the gunman would have received life without the possibility of parole. Despite the sentence, it could be years before an execution takes places in light of the Department of Justice’s moratorium on capital punishment. Executions are relatively rare in the federal system. Just 50 have been carried out since 1927, the last one on Jan. 16, 2021, when triple murderer Dustin John Higgs died by lethal injection at U.S. Penitentiary, Terre Haute, a maximum security federal prison in Indiana. Last month, the same jury that recommended Bowers be executed found the shooter guilty on 63 criminal counts stemming from the attack. The panel had also deemed him to be eligible for the death penalty. During the lengthy trial, the prosecution heavily referred to the gunman's long history of antisemitism to prove he had the requisite intent to kill, while the defense unsuccessfully argued that mental illness and delusional beliefs caused the massacre. Family members of the victims also took the stand to give emotional statements on how the gunman's rampage impacted their lives. The victims of Bower’s attack were Joyce Fienberg, 75; Richard Gottfried, 65; Rose Mallinger, 97; Jerry Rabinowitz, 66; Cecil Rosenthal, 59; David Rosenthal, 54; Bernice Simon, 84; Sylvan Simon, 86; Daniel Stein, 71; Irving Younger, 69; and Melvin Wax, 87. © 2023 NBC UNIVERSAL

U.S. will provide weapons to Taiwan from existing military stockpiles. By Luis Martinez Tanks during the Han Kuang military exercise in Taoyuan, Taiwan, July 26, 2023. I-Hwa Cheng/Bloomberg via Getty Images Brisbane, Australia -- The United States has announced a historic $345 million military aid package for Taiwan which for the first time will come from existing U.S. military stockpiles instead of purchases through the foreign military sales program, the White House announced Friday. The announcement is a lesson learned from the U.S. military assistance to Ukraine where U.S.-made weapons are quickly getting to the battleground, but it will also likely rile China -- which considers Taiwan to be a breakaway province. The Pentagon has signaled for much of the year that it intended to prepare such a passage after Congress authorized $1 billion for military aid to be provided to Taiwan under what is known as a Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA). The $345 million aid package was announced by the White House in a brief statement issued late Friday afternoon. "By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 621 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA), I hereby delegate to the Secretary of State the authority under section 506(a)(3) of the FAA to direct the drawdown of up to $345 million in defense articles and services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training, to provide assistance to Taiwan," said the statement. "The drawdown includes self-defense capabilities that Taiwan will be able to use to build to bolster deterrence now and in the future," said Lt. Col. Martin Meiners. "Systems included in the $345 million package address critical defensive stockpiles, multi-domain awareness, anti-armor, and air defense capabilities." The Associated Press reported Friday, that according to U.S. officials, the aid package includes portable air defense systems, intelligence and surveillance capabilities, firearms and missiles. Reuters was first to report on Thursday that the new aid package could be announced as early as Friday. Meiners said the Pentagon would move "expeditiously" to deliver the aid package to Taiwan but would not provide a timeline. The announcement will likely draw criticism from China which considers Taiwan to be a breakaway province and which has escalated tensions around the island in recent years. That includes demonstrations of its maritime and airborne capabilities as it edged closer to Taiwan territory beyond the Taiwan Strait. While not a new authority for the U.S. in weapons transactions, the Presidential Drawdown Authority has drawn significant attention after more than $40 billion worth of existing weapons in U.S. stockpiles have been provided to Ukraine since the start of the war. U.S. officials stressed what they noted was an important distinction in that the Taiwan PDA package is not being done under emergency authorities unlike the aid packages taking place for Ukraine. That difference likely is intended to play down any concerns that the aid package is being prompted by some sort of an emergency situation with regards to Taiwan. The difference from existing arms sales agreements with Taiwan is that the weapons systems will arrive there in quick order as opposed to having to wait years for them to be built from scratch. U.S. officials have said previously that a Presidential Drawdown Authority would be in line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the six assurances and the three communiques that guide U.S. policy towards Taiwan and reinforced that on Friday saying the announcement was not a change in policy. The concept drew the attention of lawmakers who earlier this year authorized the transfer of up to $1 billion in PDA transfers, a move that drew Pentagon support. "My team is working diligently to make sure that we have the right capabilities in that particular drawdown," Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March. The $1 billion authority is only valid through the end of this fiscal year on September 30. Asked what would happen to the additional funding that remains in the congressional authority Lt. Col. Meiners said the Biden administration continues "to review Taiwan self-defense requirements, and we will continue to assess the best authority to meet these requirements going forward." Meiners said the aid package announcement had not been delayed by recent outreach efforts to China with the high-profile visits by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. Instead, he said it took time to prepare the first-of-its-kind aid package to Taiwan required a large amount of coordination with multiple U.S. government agencies. "The administration conducted an intensive review to ensure the package met Taiwan's critical defense needs," said Meiners. © 2023ABC News Internet Ventures.

MODERN-DAY SLAVERY: The market is controlled by brokerage firms and workers are treated as merchandise with no say, an advocacy group said By Staff Writer, CNA People attending a news conference hosted by the Garden of Hope Foundation in Taipei on Friday pose for a photograph. Photo; CNA The Garden of Hope Foundation on Friday unveiled a report highlighting problems in the government’s enforcement of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), leading to difficulties faced by migrant workers in Taiwan. The country ratified ICERD in 1970. The report was compiled by the foundation and three other non-governmental organizations concerned with protecting the rights of foreign residents in Taiwan and interviewed 77 anonymous migrant workers. Taiwan currently has about 960,000 foreign residents in Taiwan, of which about 80 percent are migrant workers, Kaili Lee (李凱莉), a director at Garden of Hope, told a news conference in Taipei. Although Taiwan’s government has introduced policies such as the Long-term Retention of Skilled Foreign Workers Program to attract foreign talent, underlying discrimination in society could hamper that goal, she said. In an overview of the report, Lee said one example of discrimination against migrant workers is the way in which they are often vilified by the media in Taiwan. From July 1 to 26, the foundation gathered 240 news reports, of which 135 bore headlines showing migrant workers in “a very negative light,” she said. In addition, the direct employment joint services center established by the Ministry of Labor allows prospective employers to choose on a form the nationality of workers they would like to hire, which is in itself a form of discrimination, Lee said. Furthermore, there is a lack of interpreters at police stations who speak the native tongue of migrant workers, making it difficult for them to file a police report, she said. Jasmin Ruas from the Philippines, a director at the Domestic Caretaker Union, said migrant caregivers are often denied the right to take sick or maternal leave. Employers of migrant caregivers often threaten to fire them when they want to take a leave, Ruas said. In addition, police in Taiwan tend to randomly stop migrant workers on the street to check their identity documents, but never do so with Caucasians, she added. Fajar, a member of the Ganas Community — an advocacy group concerned with the betterment of migrant workers’ rights — said the migrant worker brokerage system in Taiwan is “modern-day slavery.” Under this system, the market is controlled by brokerage firms and workers are treated as merchandise with no say as to which employer they work for, Fajar said. In addition, the high brokerage fees charged even before finding a job have become a common nightmare for migrant workers, Fajar said. Meanwhile, the minimum wage for migrant caregivers is lower than that of Taiwanese workers or migrant factory workers, and the Ganas Community will continue to push for fair wages for migrant caregivers, for legislation to protect their labor rights, and the abolition of the brokerage system, Fajar said. © 1999-2023 The Taipei Times.